Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Okay so this only goes for cities/metros that have all 4 major teams in the MLB, NBA, NHL and NFL. Out of these cities, which as a whole as all their teams' mascots represent their city/geographic location the best? Obviously some due to franchise moves from city to city are not representative, but yet they still count, as they can always change the name too.
For example, I'll do Chicago: Chicago
NBA
Bulls - I can give this to Chicago seeing as it once had a lot of meat production and stock yards within the city.
NFL
Bears - Bears do not live anywhere near the Chicago area, so very misrepresentative.
MLB
Cubs - Same deal as the Bears
White Sox - This is neutral since White Sox isn't really representative of anything that actually exists.
NHL
Blackhawks - Unless I am wrong the Black Hawk tribe and leader was located in western Illinois, so it is representative of the region.
So I would say Chicago is about 50% represented well through its teams. Which cities do you think do the best representing and the worst?
For me the BEST: Denver, runner up, Miami
MLB
Rockies - No need to explain that one
NHL
Avalanche - No need to explain that one either
NBA
Nuggets - Very representative of how the city came to be out in the Wild West days.
NFL
Broncos - Very representative of the cowboy era and broncos in Colorado.
The WORST: LA, runner up DC?
MLB
Dodgers - Neutral not representative of LA or anything that exists.
Angels - Representaitve but just because of the city's name.
NBA
Lakers - Not representative at all of LA
Clippers - Not representative either of anything related to LA
NHL
Kings - Nothing to do with LA
Ducks - Nothing to do with LA. Ducks are everywhere in the US an nothing unique to LA.
NFL
Rams - Nothing to do with LA
For at least two of the LA teams, the names ARE geographically representative, just not representative of LA, but rather the city where the team originally played. The Dodgers, of course, originally played in Brooklyn, and the nickname is short for "Trolley Dodgers" based on the large number of trollies that ran in Brooklyn at the time of the team's founding. The Lakers originally played in the Twin Cities in Minnesota (Land of 1000 Lakes), so that name was geographically representative.
Very accurate
Pittsburgh Steelers (The steel city)
Semi accurate
Pittsburgh penguins (Ice hockey team in a cold winter city)
???
Pittsburgh Pirates (guess because it's starts with P?)
Actually, Pirates came about during the early years of the franchise (which originally was known as the Pittsburgh Alleghenies - much more representative!). I don't remember his name, but the GM of the team was accused of stealing a player from another team, or pirating him, hence the new nickname.
... MLB
Dodgers - Neutral not representative of LA or anything that exists.
...
Dodgers is not a nonsense made up word. Is is a shortening of "Trolley Dodgers" which did in fact exist in Brooklyn. And if there are trolleys in LA, then it can be equally applied.
Giants always made sense to me because NY is where everything is bigger, larger than life, and gigantic.
Apparently the Giants (baseball team) used to be called the NY Gotham's when they were in NY (Gotham is a nickname for NYC). That makes sense, but it was changed to Giants because the coach called the players "his Giants". So it's not even named after NY at all. Then the NFL team just decides to be completely unoriginal and use the same name for NY football and baseball. And what makes it worse is that the baseball team is no longer in NYC. It's now in San Francisco.
I can't decide if that one is the worst, or the NY hockey team that was named after Texas
Dodgers is not a nonsense made up word. Is is a shortening of "Trolley Dodgers" which did in fact exist in Brooklyn. And if there are trolleys in LA, then it can be equally applied.
I live in Brooklyn and this is news to me. We don't even have trolleys anymore.
In addition to someone mentioning the Tampa Bay Rays (which also stands to mean Rays of sunshine now) and Lightning, the Buccaneers got there name because of the Gasparilla legend and Pirate fest in Tampa Bay every year so it fits.
Cleveland is pretty in the middle IMO. While Browns and Indians don't have something to do with them, they were both named for players/coaches on team (Louis Sockalexis and Paul Brown). Don't know how Cavaliers got their name, whether the city was taking a "Cavalier" approach to the river catching on fire ; ). But in all seriousness, I think the All For One, One For All mantra has become something that fits well in the fabric of the city.
Actually, Pirates came about during the early years of the franchise (which originally was known as the Pittsburgh Alleghenies - much more representative!). I don't remember his name, but the GM of the team was accused of stealing a player from another team, or pirating him, hence the new nickname.
Quote:
Originally Posted by That_One_Guy
Apparently the Giants (baseball team) used to be called the NY Gotham's when they were in NY (Gotham is a nickname for NYC). That makes sense, but it was changed to Giants because the coach called the players "his Giants". So it's not even named after NY at all. Then the NFL team just decides to be completely unoriginal and use the same name for NY football and baseball. And what makes it worse is that the baseball team is no longer in NYC. It's now in San Francisco.
I can't decide if that one is the worst, or the NY hockey team that was named after Texas
I always though Pittsburgh Pirates was a strange name for a Pittsburgh team. I like the Pittsburgh Steelers which is a great name IMO. Anyway, I thought Pirates had something to do with river pirates or something. What you point out is even a worse reason lol.
Strangely enough at one time the hockey team Rangers were going to be called the Giants, lol. That means New York would have had 3 Giants teams until the baseball team left.
Anyway, while the name ranger is most often associated with Texas because of their famous Texas Rangers, rangers were found all over America during the colonial and pioneer days. New York for instance, had Rogers Rangers in Upstate New York during the French and Indian War and the Queens Rangers mostly Downstate during the Revolution. I do think the name fits better with Texas though.
Dallas Stars were Minnesota North Stars. Which was actually even more reflective of Minnesota than 'Stars' is of Dallas.
The state motto for Minnesota is L'Étoile du Nord which means star of the north in French.
And Texas is The Lone Star State. Also used as the Cowboys symbol.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
