Team Identity when they move

[Bing Bong]

21 minutes ago, from_dunkirk said:

 

Is it?

It's a dope name.. for New Orleans not Utah haha. Then again I can't think of a cool name for a Utah team other than some Mormon joke so.. sorry Utah guy I think most people only know Utah for one thing.. and they brought a name from one of the coolest cities in America.

 

Only thing that annoys me is they hogged the name so the New Orleans expansion team became the Pelicans for some dumb reason. So many cool names to work with and they're the damn Pelicans.

 

I suppose that'll grind my gears more than anything on this subject is teams not letting their name go if they change. I want to say the Titans wouldn't let any team name themselves the Oilers. THAT'S SUCH A COOL NAME FOR HOUSTON! Oilers and Rockets Texans is such a lame name. I like topical names that bring your city culture to the public eye and give all the more reason for pride, not random ones.. WHAT'S UP WITH ALL THOSE TIGERS IN CINCINNATI?!? 

 

Best names in NFL are 49ers, Packers, Steelers, Bills, Saints, Patriots, Ravens (NAMED AFTER EDGAR ALLEN POE!!!)

 

Oilers was a fantastic name.

Edited January 8, 2019 by BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P

[Virgil]

Great topic!

 

I don’t see why both teams can’t retire the number, put them on the wall, etc.....

 

I know it’s a different situation, but every baseball team retires Jackie Robinson and there a quite a few teams who’ve retired the same player.  

 

In terms of pride and who owns it?  I think that’s up to the fans. If the Bills moved to another city, I think I’d be pissed if they retired someone’s number in that new city.  Especially if we got an expansion team in Buffalo.  To me, that would be the new and real Bills. Not the London/Toronto whoever’s 

[from_dunkirk]

27 minutes ago, BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P said:

It's a dope name.. for New Orleans not Utah haha. Then again I can't think of a cool name for a Utah team other than some Mormon joke so.. sorry Utah guy I think most people only know Utah for one thing.. and they brought a name from one of the coolest cities in America.

 

 

The Utah Spice

[formerlyofCtown]

44 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  The Oilers had a legacy while the Titans had the appeal of an expansion team and still do.  I'd rather have the Oilers come to Buffalo to do battle with the Bills as there is an energy there given the Oilers history dating back to the beginning of the AFL.  The Titans would have to be a SB caliber team for me to want to see them as a Bills opponent.  

Agreed.  They had no business representing the AFC in their lone SB appearance.  So they really have nothing. They should have remained the Oilers.  I dont know why they changed the name whether it was legalities or whatever but they should not have.

[from_dunkirk]

21 minutes ago, Virgil said:

Great topic!

 

I don’t see why both teams can’t retire the number, put them on the wall, etc.....

 

I know it’s a different situation, but every baseball team retires Jackie Robinson and there a quite a few teams who’ve retired the same player.  

 

In terms of pride and who owns it?  I think that’s up to the fans. If the Bills moved to another city, I think I’d be pissed if they retired someone’s number in that new city.  Especially if we got an expansion team in Buffalo.  To me, that would be the new and real Bills. Not the London/Toronto whoever’s 

 

Buffalo would never ever get an expansion team after a team left us. Still waiting for a replacement for the NBA Braves.

2 minutes ago, formerlyofCtown said:

Agreed.  They had no business representing the AFC in their lone SB appearance.  So they really have nothing. They should have remained the Oilers.  I dont know why they changed the name whether it was legalities or whatever but they should not have.

 

The Bills had their chance to beat them that year (and should have), but lost in the infamous Homerun Throwback.

[Bing Bong]

23 minutes ago, from_dunkirk said:

 

The Utah Spice

Nice I like it. Only drawback is it could be interpreted as some immasculine word. Not trying to be homophobic but that's huge for marketing and players dealing with fans that don't get it haha. Just sounds like a WNBA team.

 

Then again the Orlando Magic gets by alright. Utah.. miners?

 

Screw it. Spice is cool. Super original. You need to apply for marketing jobs man you got a talent. Pretty cool thing to be known for

Edited January 8, 2019 by BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P

[from_dunkirk]

10 minutes ago, BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P said:

Nice I like it. Only drawback is it could be interpreted as some immasculine word. Not trying to be homophobic but that's huge for marketing and players dealing with fans that don't get it haha. Just sounds like a WNBA team.

 

Then again the Orlando Magic gets by alright. Utah.. miners?

 

Screw it. Spice is cool. Super original. You need to apply for marketing jobs man you got a talent. Pretty cool thing to be known for

 

Thanks, haha! I was just being stupid. I thought of Utah Salt, but that would be bizarre. But it does sound kind of WNBA'ish.

[buffalo2218]

Being from Tennessee myself, I look at it as if that’s how it is then the Titans also inherit the blown 32 point lead in 93 against the Bills. All of a sudden, their “miracle” doesn’t seem like much of a miracle any more 

[Bing Bong]

5 minutes ago, from_dunkirk said:

 

Thanks, haha! I was just being stupid. I thought of Utah Salt, but that would be bizarre. But it does sound kind of WNBA'ish.

I think Salt Lake is a cooler regional name. Salt Lake spice or most anything rolls off the tongue nicely.. except jazz. Let it go Utah 

Just now, buffalo2218 said:

Being from Tennessee myself, I look at it as if that’s how it is then the Titans also inherit the blown 32 point lead in 93 against the Bills. All of a sudden, their “miracle” doesn’t seem like much of a miracle any more 

Music City Retribution

[formerlyofCtown]

44 minutes ago, from_dunkirk said:

 

Buffalo would never ever get an expansion team after a team left us. Still waiting for a replacement for the NBA Braves.

 

The Bills had their chance to beat them that year (and should have), but lost in the infamous Homerun Throwback.

Yup the Homerun ThrowFoward.

[Jauronimo]

4 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

Nope because part of the deal when the team left Cleveland was that all team history and name was left behind in Cleveland.

 

Baltimore even though they were the same players as in Cleveland started out as a new team and a new identity in Baltimore.

 

I wish more moves were legally forced to do this.

Why the hell would Cleveland agree to that?  If you're going to take the team may as well force them to take all that ***** history off your hands too.

 

Its like giving away your house but keeping the mortgage.

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

1 hour ago, cd1 said:

 

***** - Poor St Louis has had both the Cardinals AND the Rams come and go!!!!!

Damn near as bad as Atlanta, which had two expansion NHL franchises, and lost them both.

[stuvian]

The Buffalo Braves became the San Diego Clippers. San Diego must be Uber peeved to have lost the Chargers and the Clippers

[The Real Buffalo Joe]

14 hours ago, Jauronimo said:

Why the hell would Cleveland agree to that?  If you're going to take the team may as well force them to take all that ***** history off your hands too.

 

Its like giving away your house but keeping the mortgage.

It's like "But we can still be friends."

[RochesterRob]

15 hours ago, Jauronimo said:

Why the hell would Cleveland agree to that?  If you're going to take the team may as well force them to take all that ***** history off your hands too.

 

Its like giving away your house but keeping the mortgage.

  Not really.  Up until the 1990's the Browns had a fairly good history.  Just because some guy who is 30-35 years old today did not see it happen during his grown up years does not mean that it did not happen.  Instant gratification is a stain on too many sports fans today.  

[Charles Romes]

20 hours ago, The Real Buffalo Joe said:

We played the Titans a few years back in preseason, in the Hall of Fame game. They wanted to honor AFL teams, so we wore our standing buffalo throwbacks, and they wore Houston Oilers throwbacks. I thought it was odd. I was watching with my dad, and he was talking about how much the jerseys brought back memories from when he grew up watching the Bills in those. Even if you're a die hard Titans fan, unless it's by some other coincidence, the Oilers jerseys/name/etc don't really have a nostalgic connection to you. Although to be fair, living in Houston, I have met a small handful of Titans fans that stuck with the team after they left.

 

Then you also have teams like the Utah Jazz, which is just a stupid name for a team based in a state of primarily Caucasian Mormons. 

 

The Tennessee Titans were officially the Tennessee Oilers for two years 97-98 before they decided to rename themselves.  That makes it the same as the Jets wearing their original NY Titans gear.  

[4_kidd_4]

How about the Hurricanes sporting the Whalers greens this season?

 

*barf*

[Starr Almighty]

??‍♂️

[cba fan]

On 1/7/2019 at 3:02 PM, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

This is not correct - Cleveland sued to keep the history and colors of the Browns.  This forced the Baltimore team to get a new name and they have no history of people/players that were in Cleveland before.

 

For example: Belicheck was Cleveland’s Head Coach is is not a Head Coach of record in Baltimore for the Ravens because the team history did not travel.

 

Jim Brown has no history or connection to the Ravens.

just to clarify. You are correct in spirit.

 

NFL, Modell, Browns, Dogpound fans behind lawsuit, City of Cleveland behind lawsuit, Baltimore, etc etc all agreed to keep Browns HX and colors/logos in Cleveland in return of a promise to get a new Browns team either by expansion or relocation in agreed upon time-frame.(1999 deadline) and Ravens to get Cleveland franchise moved to Baltimore and rebrand.

As part of the deal all parties agreed to stop all litigation. So courts never ruled and unsure how they would have. NFL probably did not want a court deciding precedent and decided negotiation was the best way to proceed and settled for presumably what they thought was a better and fair deal for all.

Edited January 9, 2019 by cba fan

[iinii]

On 1/7/2019 at 2:32 PM, The Real Buffalo Joe said:

I was reading the other day that the Tennesee Titans consider Earl Campbell, Warren Moon, etc members of their Hall of Fame. I find that ridiculous as none of those guys played a down in Tennessee. I know legally speaking, they're allowed to do that. But ethically speaking. Should they keep team history like the Titans, Colts, etc. Or adopt a whole new identity so a future expansion team can pick them up, a la, When the Browns became the Ravens?

I don’t care for it either. Will Stabler be on the Vegas wall of Shame?

[longtimebillsfan]

On 1/7/2019 at 12:47 PM, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

Nope because part of the deal when the team left Cleveland was that all team history and name was left behind in Cleveland.

 

Baltimore even though they were the same players as in Cleveland started out as a new team and a new identity in Baltimore.

 

I wish more moves were legally forced to do this.

Oakland has brought a law suit trying to retain the Raiders name as well.  I doubt that Mark Davis would be willing  to give up the Raiders brand without a fight.  Loosing the Raiders identity would greatly reduce the value of his franchise.  It is not that easy to accomplish. 

[VegasBills17Mafia]

I think that the Raiders history should stay in Oakland. Las Vegas should have got a new identity. I’m not used to saying Las Vegas Raiders yet 

[Rochesterfan]

7 hours ago, cba fan said:

just to clarify. You are correct in spirit.

 

NFL, Modell, Browns, Dogpound fans behind lawsuit, City of Cleveland behind lawsuit, Baltimore, etc etc all agreed to keep Browns HX and colors/logos in Cleveland in return of a promise to get a new Browns team either by expansion or relocation in agreed upon time-frame.(1999 deadline) and Ravens to get Cleveland franchise moved to Baltimore and rebrand.

As part of the deal all parties agreed to stop all litigation. So courts never ruled and unsure how they would have. NFL probably did not want a court deciding precedent and decided negotiation was the best way to proceed and settled for presumably what they thought was a better and fair deal for all.

 

 

Yes the NFL, Browns, and Cleveland reached an agreement because the city and fans sued.  This kept the Cleveland history and name intact in Cleveland.

 

I think other cities should attempt the same thing and maintain their history.  I could see Oakland losing because they already let the Raider name move to LA with the team, but Houston should have maintained the Oiler name and franchise history.  It makes little sense for Houston’s great players to be a part of Tennessee lore.

 

 

5 hours ago, longtimebillsfan said:

Oakland has brought a law suit trying to retain the Raiders name as well.  I doubt that Mark Davis would be willing  to give up the Raiders brand without a fight.  Loosing the Raiders identity would greatly reduce the value of his franchise.  It is not that easy to accomplish. 

 

Moving the team to increase the value should be offset by losing the brand and reducing the value - it would cause some additional concerns for ownerships that want to move all the time.

[longtimebillsfan]

4 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

Yes the NFL, Browns, and Cleveland reached an agreement because the city and fans sued.  This kept the Cleveland history and name intact in Cleveland.

 

I think other cities should attempt the same thing and maintain their history.  I could see Oakland losing because they already let the Raider name move to LA with the team, but Houston should have maintained the Oiler name and franchise history.  It makes little sense for Houston’s great players to be a part of Tennessee lore.

 

 

 

Moving the team to increase the value should be offset by losing the brand and reducing the value - it would cause some additional concerns for ownerships that want to move all the time.

I agree with your point, but the question remains, does the team owners own the Brand, or does the city?  This is not an easy issue to navigate.   I have read that the city of Oakland does not have a very good chance to win their lawsuit. 

[The Real Buffalo Joe]

1 hour ago, longtimebillsfan said:

I agree with your point, but the question remains, does the team owners own the Brand, or does the city?  This is not an easy issue to navigate.   I have read that the city of Oakland does not have a very good chance to win their lawsuit. 

The team owns it for sure. But ethically speaking, whether he legally can or not, is it right for Mark Davis to keep the Raiders name/logo/etc when he goes to Vegas?

 

Side note, personally, I think the best thing to have done, if the Rams and Raiders had to move anyway. Rams move to Las Vegas.  Raiders change their name to the California Raiders. They move to LA where they have a fanbase. Keep training camp, and a preseason game, and possibly one game a year in Oakland (ala, our Toronto deal, but with a city that already supports the team), as to not sell them out completely, and keep the Chargers in SD. 

[longtimebillsfan]

1 hour ago, The Real Buffalo Joe said:

The team owns it for sure. But ethically speaking, whether he legally can or not, is it right for Mark Davis to keep the Raiders name/logo/etc when he goes to Vegas?

 

Side note, personally, I think the best thing to have done, if the Rams and Raiders had to move anyway. Rams move to Las Vegas.  Raiders change their name to the California Raiders. They move to LA where they have a fanbase. Keep training camp, and a preseason game, and possibly one game a year in Oakland (ala, our Toronto deal, but with a city that already supports the team), as to not sell them out completely, and keep the Chargers in SD. 

That makes sense.   Living in Las Vegas, I do not think I will ever root for the Raiders.  The Rams would have been more tolerable. 

[cba fan]

3 hours ago, longtimebillsfan said:

I agree with your point, but the question remains, does the team owners own the Brand, or does the city?  This is not an easy issue to navigate.   I have read that the city of Oakland does not have a very good chance to win their lawsuit. 

This is a very good point. No definitive yes/no answer IMO.

 

Some leagues retain the trademark team names and logos as part of their league and have kind of a proxy ownership. Some leagues own all franchises like fast food stores.

Others like NFL seem to be on a case by case basis. Cities at times try to invoke eminent domain to take ownership of franchises and have all failed.

 

It all depends on the legal contracts signed by franchises establishing their relationship with the league when league starts or expands etc etc......and ongoing negotiations when this matter comes up. Each situation is different.

 

Arena, Indoor Football leagues, minor league BB leagues like CBA,  and some obscure hockey leagues, have many instances where teams change leagues yet stay in same town and arena and are forced to re-brand due to legalities. Then in some cases the league went into bankruptcy and the current teams bought back the rights to their brand for small amounts on court auction bidding and went on as same name.

[cba fan]

2 hours ago, The Real Buffalo Joe said:

The team owns it for sure. But ethically speaking, whether he legally can or not, is it right for Mark Davis to keep the Raiders name/logo/etc when he goes to Vegas?

 

Side note, personally, I think the best thing to have done, if the Rams and Raiders had to move anyway. Rams move to Las Vegas.  Raiders change their name to the California Raiders. They move to LA where they have a fanbase. Keep training camp, and a preseason game, and possibly one game a year in Oakland (ala, our Toronto deal, but with a city that already supports the team), as to not sell them out completely, and keep the Chargers in SD. 

lot of opinion to consider.

Davis family built up that brand and it has immense value. Why does he not own the name? And yet taxpayers and city in Oakland subsidized the team. Why do they not own it or able to eminent domain it to city?

Stan Kroenke was going to LA come hell or high water and there was nothing NFL could do to stop him. He would have proceeded using the Raider model and likely would have won a lawsuit if NFL interfered too harshly, if it came to that.

 

I do like the idea of your Raider solution. SoCal Raiders, Southern California Raiders, Golden Raiders. What about Golden State Raiders. Although since Golden State is not a city the GS Warriors could possibly object and sue.

California Raiders probably best as you suggest. Then they could move anywhere in CA. Even SD.......

Edited January 9, 2019 by cba fan

[cba fan]

13 hours ago, VegasBills17Mafia said:

I think that the Raiders history should stay in Oakland. Las Vegas should have got a new identity. I’m not used to saying Las Vegas Raiders yet 

take your time, because they have trademarked Nevada Raiders also.

[Nextmanup]

On 1/7/2019 at 4:02 PM, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

This is not correct - Cleveland sued to keep the history and colors of the Browns.  This forced the Baltimore team to get a new name and they have no history of people/players that were in Cleveland before.

 

For example: Belicheck was Cleveland’s Head Coach is is not a Head Coach of record in Baltimore for the Ravens because the team history did not travel.

 

Jim Brown has no history or connection to the Ravens.

Wrong; naming and uniform rights are individual pieces of property which can be transferred.

 

We are talking about "the team" as in legal entity.

 

The Ravens are the successor in interest to the Browns with a direct chain of title.

 

 

[longtimebillsfan]

1 hour ago, cba fan said:

This is a very good point. No definitive yes/no answer IMO.

 

Some leagues retain the trademark team names and logos as part of their league and have kind of a proxy ownership. Some leagues own all franchises like fast food stores.

Others like NFL seem to be on a case by case basis. Cities at times try to invoke eminent domain to take ownership of franchises and have all failed.

 

It all depends on the legal contracts signed by franchises establishing their relationship with the league when league starts or expands etc etc......and ongoing negotiations when this matter comes up. Each situation is different.

 

Arena, Indoor Football leagues, minor league BB leagues like CBA,  and some obscure hockey leagues, have many instances where teams change leagues yet stay in same town and arena and are forced to re-brand due to legalities. Then in some cases the league went into bankruptcy and the current teams bought back the rights to their brand for small amounts on court auction bidding and went on as same name.

You are very well informed.  Thank you.

[LSHMEAB]

The Raiders have already bounced back and forth between Oakland and L.A. They're much more of a regional/national brand and aren't exclusively tied to Oakland. I'd have much more of a sentimental issue with it if the Packers left Green Bay. The Packers ARE Green Bay and vice versa.

 

Legally, the city of Oakland has no chance to win the lawsuit.

Edited January 9, 2019 by LSHMEAB

[Rochesterfan]

1 hour ago, Nextmanup said:

Wrong; naming and uniform rights are individual pieces of property which can be transferred.

 

We are talking about "the team" as in legal entity.

 

The Ravens are the successor in interest to the Browns with a direct chain of title.

 

 

 

 

If this is the case who is the all time lading receiver in Ravens history?

 

Who is the leading receiver in Browns History?

 

Ravens you will find that it is D Mason from 2005-2010

Browns - Ozzie Newsome 1978 - 1990.

 

Try Rushing, Passing, Sacks, Coaching records, anything you want.  In the unique case of the Browns the agreement was made for the city of Cleveland to retain all property of the Browns.

 

”Subsequent legal actions by the city of Cleveland and Browns season ticket holders led the NFL to broker a compromise that saw the Browns history, records, and intellectual property remain in Cleveland. In return, Modell was permitted to move his football organization to Baltimore where he established the Baltimore Ravens. The Ravens are officially regarded by the NFL as an expansion team that began play in 1996.”

 

The Browns were unique because the NFL folded instead of fighting for the history.  Most other teams move and retain the history in the new location, but not in the Brown/Ravens case.  The Ravens were considered an expansion team with no history, but already loaded with players.

 

Now let’s try it again.

 

[Jauronimo]

On ‎1‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 11:11 AM, RochesterRob said:

  Not really.  Up until the 1990's the Browns had a fairly good history.  Just because some guy who is 30-35 years old today did not see it happen during his grown up years does not mean that it did not happen.  Instant gratification is a stain on too many sports fans today.  

Except for all the ***** years they were very good.  Wow, I never thought about it that way.  Great point.

[RochesterRob]

14 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

Except for all the ***** years they were very good.  Wow, I never thought about it that way.  Great point.

  Only three losing seasons from 1950 when they joined the NFL until 1975 which ain't bad at all.  A bunch of NFL titles until the merger took effect in 1970.  Almost made the first SB and might have made a couple of SB back in the 1980's if it were not for Elway.  

[Jauronimo]

6 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  Only three losing seasons from 1950 when they joined the NFL until 1975 which ain't bad at all.  A bunch of NFL titles until the merger took effect in 1970.  Almost made the first SB and might have made a couple of SB back in the 1980's if it were not for Elway.  

I guess the Bills have a very happy history too if you focus on pre AFL merger days and the could-have-been angle of on the Super Bowl years.   

[The Frankish Reich]

The Lakers continue to claim George Mikan, Minneapolis Laker from 1947-56.

Quick rule of thumb: if the team keeps the nickname, it keeps the history. Raiders, Lakers, Jazz ...

... some day the San Diego Bills may claim O.J. as their greatest ever running back.  Or maybe not.

Edited January 9, 2019 by The Frankish Reich

[BUFFALOKIE]

This is a very interesting topic.