.jpg)
Rumors By Club
C.D. Chivas USA
Chicago Fire
Colorado Rapids
Columbus Crew
D.C. United
FC Dallas
Houston Dynamo
Kansas City Wizards
Los Angeles Galaxy
New England Revolution
Philadelphia Union
Portland Timbers FC
Real Salt Lake
Red Bull New York
San Jose Earthquakes
Seattle Sounders FC
Toronto FC
Vancouver Whitecaps FC
Schedules
CITY GUIDES
PAPERS
PARTNERS
CONCACAF
PUBS
Matchcenter Scores
MLSNet.com
In a move which would have ramifications for fans in Philadelphia, Seattle and Miami and possibly New York, the MLS Board Of Governors is going to look at whether new MLS clubs should reuse other names according to this LA Times story.
Our, advice, stick with the new: football(soccer) traditional names like DC United, Houston 1836, FC Dallas, Toronto FC. We really like them better than old NASL/NFL sounding names like Apollos, Atoms, Fury etc. Can you say, dated? We knew you could. And while we're at it, please stay clear of the 90s Xtream names like Clash, Burn, Fusion, etc. Those were an abomination.
Classic is well......classy. Besides, names like Philadelphia Cosmos are pure madness.
The bigger story is that we know that the Board of Governors are meeting. This is progress as usually these meetings are only rumored and we do not find out about them until after they are over. MLS keeps them as secret as whatever is inside Area 51 until they come out with some new initiative or rule change.
"So what if Seattle, Philadelphia or St. Louis chooses to be called United? It might already have happened, in fact. The investment and development group trying to land a team in St. Louis is called St. Louis Soccer United and it already has a website (stloiussoccerunited.com) and a rather swank logo.
[editors note: you can also get to it at www.stlouisunitedsc.com]
Would D.C. United object to there being another United or two in the league? Would MLS object?
Commissioner Don Garber was in Los Angeles recently and fielded the question.
"My personal view is that a team deserves to have its own identity," he said. "I don't believe that D.C. owns the name United; it's sort of ubiquitous in soccer throughout the world. [But] it's hard to imagine that they can't find a name that would be more distinctive for them and their community.
"We're still developing our league and our team identities. I do believe our brands need to be about the sport going forward. We should celebrate the past, and honor and respect the past . . . but our brands should be about where we are tomorrow, not about where we were yesterday.
"I'm hopeful that they can find a name that is more future-thinking."
In that context Emerald City Seattle Greens makes a lot of sense. Get it? Green Future? Har har.
Not liking the sound of "Future Thinking". It brings to mind the 50's retro-future and things that seem amost comical today. After all, in the futures of the past, by now we were all supposed to have robot maids and travel to work in either atomic airplanes, flying cars or by jet pack.
Philadelphia Fusion here we come.
REPORT: MLS Board Of Governrors To Meet To Discuss Recycling Old Team Names
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Mind is I use this as show material next week, guys? This is very good stuff. A great point of debate.
Go right ahead Karik, we just ask that you credit us. We like your show.
I dunno.
HRS Grahame Jones wrote, "...not high on the agenda but quite likely to be broached, even informally, is the matter of names for the new expansion teams"
You wrote, "...the MLS Board Of Governors is going to look at whether new MLS clubs should reuse other names..."
Not quite the same thing.
". . . but our brands should be about where we are tomorrow, not about where we were yesterday."
"I'm hopeful that they can find a name that is more future-thinking."
How can Garber say that, then turn around and let in the "Earthquakes"?
all NASL names and 90's MLS names should be forgotten about FOREVER.
with the exception of the chicago fire, they are meaningless (if anyone has to question the historical significance of the chicago fire, you should be shot).
i never did, still don't, and never will like the earthquakes name. sorry SJ, i just like traditional names (DC United, Toronto FC, FC Dallas) a lot better
houston is ok, because there are some other teams with that name. however, the wizards, crew and galaxy are disgraceful.
i dont like the revs either (although that has significance too. it just never clicked for me).
hey Kevin, MLS will be sure to check with you to see if any new names meet the muster ... but they gotta know they might shot or something... dork.
"all NASL names and 90's MLS names should be forgotten about FOREVER."
I would disagree there. Montreal Olympique for one would be a really classy name over Impact if Montreal come into the league. Also Chicago Spurs is better then Fire, Kansas City Spurs is better then Wizards, Los Angeles Aztecs, Boston Rovers, and to a lesser extent Boston Beacons and Miami Gatos are okay.
"with the exception of the chicago fire, they are meaningless (if anyone has to question the historical significance of the chicago fire, you should be shot)."
Again disagree. If you wanna have a team named after that historical event you name it after the rebuilding process, not the actual fire that killed hundreds of people. I just don't get that. Not to mention, it just sounds like a 6 year old came up with the name because it sounded cool. They should be named Chicago 1871 (named after the rebuilding process). Much classier, makes much more sense and doesn't sound like a WNBA name.
I agree with you on most other names sucking. Primarily Real Salt Lake, KC Wizards, Chivas USA. Followed by Crew, Revolution, Fire and Earthquakes.
Funny you should mention Chicago 1871, while we were looking into expansion team names and trademarks we found that Chicago 1871 is among 3 candidates registered for the new Women's Professional Soccer league.
The other two are Chicago Red Stars (Red Star Chicago?) and Chicago Union.
Sounds good, of course I'll credit you guys!
Let's be cautious with the word "traditional." There's a big difference between being traditional and simply riding EPL junk. There is nothing traditional about Seattle Wednesday, Seattle Juniors and Seattle United (all names I heard when trying to name the club). The club never played on Wednesdays (like Sheffield W did) and there wasn't a union of two different clubs to form a United club.
The worst (and I mean I am severely embarrassed when I hear it) is Real Salt Lake. That's like having an EPL club named Atletico London. RSL was named to be more "traditional" but is in no way a tradition to Salt Lake or English-speaking America (Real is Spanish for Royal). If the Colorado Rapids were named Arsenal Colorado (like they were trying to do) I would have given up on the MLS as an independent league. We need to stop basing our clubs against European clubs. Keep it soccer appropriate, but also have a connection to the city (Philadelphia Athletic would be a shining example).
Well we have no one to thank for Real Salt Lake but Dave Checketts. The tool of all tools. His nerve to bestow that name not only on his own team, but a team in Utah! Makes me laugh and get angry at the same time. I actually root against RSL, Wizards and Chivas USA because I don't want them to qualify for Champions Cup, Superliga or anything so their names won't appear in foreign press. Don't want the rest of the world to know how many cities in MLS don't have clue.
I'm actually surprised there hasn't been a boycott of the name in Salt Lake. I guess they just think it sounds cool. You would think they wouldn't like being the laughing stock of the league and the world for that matter.
You know whenever some guy in Argentina reads a paper about them training there he must snicker to himself.