OT: City vs. State Names for Pro Teams
I'm relatively new to Denver after living in Michigan for most of my life, and have been thinking about why Denver has two sports teams with Colorado in their name (Rockies, and Avs) and two with Denver in their name (Nuggets and Broncos). I thought this was odd, because I grew up being a fan of only teams with Detroit in their name.
So, I did a little research, and came up with a list of the sports teams from the big 4 sports that DON'T have their city/metropolitan area in their name, plus what the closest major city is:
State Names:
- Arizona—Diamondbacks, Cardinals, Coyotes (Phoenix)
- Colorado—Rockies, Avalanche (Denver)
- Florida—Panthers (Miami)
- Indiana—Pacers (Indianapolis)
- Minnesota—Twins, Vikings, Wild, Timberwolves (Minneapolis)
- New Jersey—Devils (Newark or NYC)
- Tennessee—Titans (Nashville)
- Texas—Rangers (Dallas)
- Utah—Jazz (SLC)
Region Names:
- New England—Patriots (Boston)
- Carolina—Panthers (Charlotte), Hurricanes (Raleigh)
- Golden State—Warriors (Oakland)
I'd prefer if cities were consistent--it doesn't make any sense to me when cities have multiple teams and some go by the city and some by the state/region. In my opinion, the only city that has multiple cities and successfully uses their state name is Minneapolis.
Do you think the trend toward city names will continue—who might be next? Would you prefer all/more city names?
I will not root for a pro team that has a non-city name. I just won't do it. (Unless their QB is a Michigan grad, but I'll stop rooting for them the minute he retires.)
Non-city pro names have always bugged me. The only one I grudgingly cut a little slack for is the Twins, which I tolerate since the name is a clever reference to the Twin Cities and therefore doesn't refer to the state, per se. They were the first pro team I can think of with a state name though (1961), so I guess if I were consistent I'd loathe that name too.
I do not know why I have this pet peeve, and I do not have a lot to back up this undoubtedly irrational bigotry. I just think real teams represent cities. Exhibits A, B and C are named Tigers, Red Wings and Lions.
April 27th, 2015 at 11:59 PM ^
April 28th, 2015 at 12:28 PM ^
80% is a very conservative estimate - I'd say at least 95% are from outside the city proper. The "Hockeytown" nickname really applies to the suburbs.
Current teams changing names:
Florida>Miami Marlins
California>LA>Anaheim>LA Angels of Anaheim
New teams (since 2001)
Memphis Grizzlies
New Orleans Hornets/Pelicans
Oklahoma City Thunder
Winnipeg Jets (not so new)
Washington Nationals
Houston Texans
The only change I can find that goes the other direction since 2000 is Phoenix>Arizona Coyotes, and i don't see any team since the Minnesota Wild in 2000 that began with a state name.
Maybe not a "trend," per se, but it's something.
Miami was specifically part of a deal to get the city to pay for a new stadium, though.
April 27th, 2015 at 10:48 PM ^
What are the New York teams considered?
Are the Mets, Yankees, Knicks, Jets, Giants Islanders, etc...representing a city or state?
call themselves "New York," play in New Jersey.
I used to be that many more stadiums were in the burbs, but there has been a revival in moving them back downtown (as in from the Silverdome to Ford Field). Have there ever been any other major sports teams that played in a different state from the one suggested by their name, though?
April 27th, 2015 at 11:06 PM ^
That's more teams than I thought you were going to come back with.
I'm not sure the new teams are much more than a coincidence, though. Are those names departures from what teams in the cities were previously called when they'd existed before? Not in the case of New Orleans (Saints, Zephyrs) or Houston (Oilers, Rockets) at least, and I doubt if the others are any different. (Also, Washington DC doesn't count, since it's not in a state.)
Incidentally, didn't the California Angels start changing their name like 20 years ago? I feel like I was a kid.
April 28th, 2015 at 11:16 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Not a big hockey guy, but I'm pretty sure they're called the Phoneix Coyotes, not the Arizona Coyotes.
As far as the topic, being a youngster in northern Michigan, I always sort of wished the pro teams in Michigan were "Michigan" teams just so that I would be included. But as I grew up, despite not being from the Detroit area, I now have a sense of pride in the city of Detroit and the teams that call the city home. Let's go wings and tigers tonight!
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Apparently it was one vote from becoming the Seattle Coyotes. Still disappoints me that Seattle lost the Sonics and only has MLB and NFL. Although driving to Vancouver to see the Wings is a pretty fun overnight trip.
As someone who grew up in GR, I agree with this. I always cheered for the Detroit teams, and still do, but I never felt the need to rep Detroit, since I was from 3 hours away. This is why I think the state name is a good idea because it's more inclusive. If you're the only team in the state, why not include everyone? You might get more of the SW MI folks to cheer for the "Michigan" teams instead of Chicago, for example.
April 28th, 2015 at 12:24 PM ^
The flipside: a lot of people in the Detroit area would consider it a slap in the face to have their franchises rechristened as "Michigan" teams. It would be seen as de-emphasizing their connection with the city.
For some of them, the answer to this is simple - they represent more than one "city" so rather than picking one of them, they pick the whole state/area. Should the Twins be the Minneapolis Twins or the St. Paul Twins? This is one where using the state makes a lot of sense. New Jersey is similar since NJ doesn't really have just one big city, it's all just a mash of NY (or Philly) suburbs and then a collection of smaller cities. Why pick one? Just do the whole state. For others, it just sounds better (Colorado Rockies sounds better than Denver Rockies, same with Texas Rangers).
You also missed one - Tamba Bay isn't a city, it is a region that includes two large cities (Tampa and St. Petersburg, and their surrounding suburbs). This one is similar to Minneapolis/St. Paul in that there are two large cities. Unlike the Twin Cities, they can't claim the whole state, so they claim the Tampa Bay area.
the Michigan Panthers. But even then I thought the name was bush league.
the Michigan Panthers
too, but admittedly it was more because of their skinny little star wide receiver
than because of the team itself. And that despite the fact that in 1983 the Panthers won the only professional football championship in the lifetime of most football fans in this state. Go Panthers!
(I still do like their logo, even though it didn't look quite as cool on their helmets)
Y U NO LOVE NOVO BOJOVIC????!
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Yes, it would be dumb to change it for existing teams. But if Michigan didn't have one of the major teams, I would be in favor of them going with Michigan instead of Detroit. Again, this might have to do with the fact that I'm not from SE Michigan, so I've never identified with Detroit.
I was writing a football story in 3rd grade and didn't know how many teams there were in the NCAA, so I did some quick maths. Because Michigan and Michigan State were obviously the only two programs in Michigan worth considering, I figured every other state must be the same - one flagship school and one with "state" added to it. Then I remembered that some, like Virginia Tech, didn't fit into that mold, so I added some random number to the total and came up with 116, which ironically was the exact number of schools playing Division 1-A football in 2000.
It took a very long time to shake my belief in my foolproof system after that.
April 28th, 2015 at 12:23 AM ^
Love me some Rhode Island State football--especially when they play Vermont State or Maine State in the Division iv playoffs...
Sponsored by Shazaam Random Calculation Theories
April 28th, 2015 at 10:55 AM ^
I used to writhe in excitement for the annual California State-Alaska State showdown. Thrilling, it was.
I was going to post a snarky comment along the lines of "You are a huge Coyotes fan? - How's that going for yah?"
Then I realized I'm a huge Detroit Lions fan.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
....and it is this unknown which has me apprehensive and distracted this week so far. I may need to stop by the store on Thursday and get some supplies which contain a certain amount of alcohol just in case I don't like the answer to this mystery.
April 27th, 2015 at 10:05 PM ^
I made the same decision the year the Pistons drafted Mateen Cleaves. I didn't know I was a fan of Tequila until that night.
April 27th, 2015 at 10:22 PM ^
The new owner changed it to Arizona because the lack of attendance plus he wanted the whole state to be mentioned not just Phoenix.It also just so happens the city of Glendale stuck a clause in the arena lease requiring the team to be called the Arizona Coyotes as a condition of basically having financially propped the team up and finding ownership that would keep the team in the area. The rest of the explanation is just the ownership trying to pander to the local fanbase. http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/eye-on-hockey/21190314/phoenix-coyotes-cou…
i think that name is > oakland
I wonder if the New York Islanders considered a name change at all.
Two obvious and probably more glaring examples of names not making sense has stuck in the NBA for a long time (Lakers and Jazz) and the Islanders do have some great history, but Brooklyn isn't Long Island in any real sense.
Well, I do generally think city names are better, but it's also pretty lame when a team is named after a city but actually plays like an hour outside of town. So the Pistons should definitely be the Fort Wayne Pistons. :)
I great up a NY Giants fan and people were constantly complaining that they were "New York, but in New Jersey." I always thought this was silly, because they're clearly representing the NY metro region. Teams can be seen as doing it wrong either way.