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.
How do I contradict myself? I said the Texans would have to win 3 in a row in order to match the popularity the Saints received from one. The Saints were never popular prior to 2010. And lol at superstar roster. They had Drew Brees and Reggie Bush, and an old Shockey. Stop it. People hardly cared about the Saints for those 5 seasons after Katrina but they were still gaining fans.
But I like how you brought up that NO spirit. You can do that when you name your team after something that has meaning with the city, not some generic BS name like Texans.
You're describing surface level fandom or "onlyfans" though. You were talking to WOFs (Watson Only Fans). People just liking a player then splitting once that player leaves the team. Sounds like they dont like the name afterall. So far nothing has been debunked. The Texans name has been a debate among Texans fans for over 15 years. Teams do rebrand and I gave several examples of that already. Why do they rebrand? To better connect to their city and grow a stronger fanbase.
No you said the Saints brand made it easy for people to get behind them but it coincidentally happened after they won the SB. It wasn't the name it was them winning a SB is what drew people to that franchise.
Houston Texans have had 21 seasons (shortest in NFL). Have had 6 NFL playoff appearance in their existence. In that time frame they've won 4 and lost 6. They have a W-L record of 139-182. They have 0 SB appearances and 0 AFC championship appearances. They're the youngest team in the league with the least amount accomplished.
They also had Darren Sharper( who was widely popular before the rape charges), Roman Harper and Jonathan Vilma and Marques Colston on that same roster too. Not to mention an all pro offensive line and solid D-line that same year as well. Regardless whenever your team has a superstar QB (the most important position in all of sports) it attracts a wider fanbase. I know Houston Texans wouldn't understand considering Watson was short lived and before Watson you had Schaub and Carr.
And again you really think the name is what brought out the New Orleans spirit? Maybe just maybe because they went through a traumatic experience which brought the city together more than ever and the fact the Saints were finally a good franchise. Not to mention New Orleans is a much MUCH more unique city with a unique culture than Houston will ever be. You can change the name all you want but nobody is looking at Houston as some magical place full of culture.
If you and Clutch are hanging on to this theory that it's the name that's holding the franchise back instead of all the other factors than it's no wonder Houston as a whole doesn't get respect as a sports city. Houston loves Astros but Astros are hated because of the cheating everywhere else because of he cheating scandal. Despite the cool throwbacks and cool name Astros are more hated than Texans(who is more of an afterthought than anything). Rockets are not even a respected organization. Last time you were in the playoffs, GSW sonned them. The 2 Finals they did won are looked at as flukes considering Jordan was out those years.
As a Non Texans fans, it has less to do with the name and everything to do with how incompetent and new the franchise is. Most Adult NFL fans rarely pick a new team to root for. You generally pick your team in your youth or early 20s and stick with that team. Like I stated before, I'm older than Texans franchise so why would I become a fan all of a sudden? Because I like the name? Again a child would do that not even a teenager would pick a team for that.
Also the most thing I hear Texans fans in the city complain about is not the name but the fact that the franchise kept an incompetent coach for far too long and don't treat their star players right. Also the franchise is a sh*t show. They haven't given the city anything to root for consistently. But a name change/ rebranding will get everybody excited though even if they only win 4 games next season. YAY!!!!
Lol. Look at the methodologies of those sites you linked. They are based off of things like Facebook likes. Now, that probably isn't the best or the worst metric out there, but it doesn't prove anything about the actual distribution of fans. Even, assuming that the site is 100% true, and Houston is the tenth most "popular" team in the NFL, how many of those fans are outside of Houston and Texas? Very few. Houston is the 5th largest metro in the country in a football crazy region so the 10th largest fanbase is unimpressive and doesn't really prove anything. Same with the Phillies - ridiculously historic team, top ten metro - #11 seems underwhelming and there's no discussion of the geographical distribution of their fans.
I've lived outside of Texas the majority of my adult life and still can't think of a time I've met an actual Texans fan (not a player-only fan) that had no connection to Houston or Texas, outside of trips to Mexico. Most other teams have fans from random places that jumped onto a team early in life based on a variety of reasons. Not the Texans. Our fans are nearly exclusively from Houston and Texas, because the name doesn't appeal to anyone outside of that area. Any fans that the Texans *DO* have outside of that are few and far between.
Agree 1000%, wish I could rep you again lol. Fans of players aren't fans of teams. I give my girlfriend the business over this because she's one of those player-only fans - she only likes teams when they have players on there she likes. She doesn't care about any actual team. There's a lot of fans like that in every sport. Those Watson fans aren't Texan fans and have followed him to Cleveland just like the Hopkins/Watt fans followed them to Arizona.
And the point you made about the Canadiens seemed to be ignored by those arguing that the Texans have some sort of latent marketing potential we haven't seen - the Canadiens (and Phillies) experiences seem to suggest they don't. I used to run into Phillies fans all the time in DC - and I don't recall any that didn't have some direct connection to Philly. Philly just happens to be close to DC so you would run into them. Those regional names create regional teams.
By the way, that's not a death sentence or anything - our region is so large the Texans very well may have more fans than teams like the Bengals or Bills though even though fans of those teams have fans that are better distributed. My only point is that the Texans could be super popular around here (and be very successful financially based on that alone) and still have artificially limited their growth because they nerfed themselves with the stupid, generic, goofy name that screams "regional team" in the first place.
A good team with a good name would have unlimited growth potential in a market like Houston. Unfortunately, we've gotten neither.
Wait a minute, Houston is the 4th largest city in the nation but overlooked by most smaller cities in the nation because Houston is one of the most least respected and popular cities among it's peers period. So why would size matter all of a sudden when Houston doesn't garner national respect in general? We can look on City Data and see how much national recognition the city gets compared to it's peers. It's not a lot brah. So a name change will do what exactly?
Houston has NEVER had a successful football franchise. Dallas Cowboys have been successful since the 60s. So why should Houston automatically get praised when the city has never accomplished anything professional wise or even on the collegiate level when it comes to football? Because football is KING in Texas. Exactly what does that mean to anybody outside of Texas. A few successful high school football programs don't equate to national admiration.
As far as Phillies, 11 out of 30 is impressive enough especially for a franchise who only won 2 World series.
But I can show you another stat of the most valuable MLB teams. You do realize Phillies is more than likely more popular than Astros. And especially after the cheating scandal they're definitely more popular and respected than the Astros.
As you can see Phillies are the 8th most valuable team in the league. Behind more iconic franchises as the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Dodgers, Giants, Cardinals. Matter fact I never heard a gang of people outside of Houston be fans of any Houston team.
Funny thing is I grew up in East Texas, and even after Astros won, while you saw more fans Texas Rangers is still the more popular franchise in that area than Astros. The throwback Rockets jersey is much more popular nationally than the actual franchise.
And I ignore Montreal because Hockey is nowhere that popular in this part of the country to begin with. Houston doesn't have a hockey team first of all. So I felt it silly that a city where people clearly don't have an interest in hockey discuss a Canadian team that they clearly have no idea about. Yall are just reaching for straws at this point. Should have just stayed at Texans.
For some strange reason you and Dab seem to think Houston is more popular than it actually is to begin with. Outside of Black America, Houston is not that popular despite it's size and market. So if Texans fail to generate fandom outside of it's region it's because Houston outside a few demographics fail to generate interest outside of it's region. Let's just be honest Houstonians.
Wait a minute, Houston is the 4th largest city in the nation but overlooked by most smaller cities in the nation because Houston is one of the most least respected and popular cities among it's peers period. So why would size matter all of a sudden when Houston doesn't garner national respect in general? We can look on City Data and see how much national recognition the city gets compared to it's peers. It's not a lot brah. So a name change will do what exactly?
Houston has NEVER had a successful football franchise. Dallas Cowboys have been successful since the 60s. So why should Houston automatically get praised when the city has never accomplished anything professional wise or even on the collegiate level when it comes to football? Because football is KING in Texas. Exactly what does that mean to anybody outside of Texas. A few successful high school football programs don't equate to national admiration.
As far as Phillies, 11 out of 30 is impressive enough especially for a franchise who only won 2 World series.
But I can show you another stat of the most valuable MLB teams. You do realize Phillies is more than likely more popular than Astros. And especially after the cheating scandal they're definitely more popular and respected than the Astros.
As you can see Phillies are the 8th most valuable team in the league. Behind more iconic franchises as the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Dodgers, Giants, Cardinals. Matter fact I never heard a gang of people outside of Houston be fans of any Houston team.
Funny thing is I grew up in East Texas, and even after Astros won, while you saw more fans Texas Rangers is still the more popular franchise in that area than Astros. The throwback Rockets jersey is much more popular nationally than the actual franchise.
And I ignore Montreal because Hockey is nowhere that popular in this part of the country to begin with. Houston doesn't have a hockey team first of all. So I felt it silly that a city where people clearly don't have an interest in hockey discuss a Canadian team that they clearly have no idea about. Yall are just reaching for straws at this point. Should have just stayed at Texans.
For some strange reason you and Dab seem to think Houston is more popular than it actually is to begin with. Outside of Black America, Houston is not that popular despite it's size and market. So if Texans fail to generate fandom outside of it's region it's because Houston outside a few demographics fail to generate interest outside of it's region. Let's just be honest Houstonians.
Honestly, with both of the above posts, it feels like you're arguing just to argue. I actually don't disagree with most of what you said in isolation, but it's all over the place. Literally all I'm saying is that the Texans name does hold them back. I'm not saying that its the only thing that holds them back. There's no doubt that winning would win them more fans. Most of those fans just won't be outside of Houston and Texas, because they are the Texans.
Astros and Rockets aren't even on the same radar. There are Astros fans all over the country that have nothing to do with Houston. I've met several. Hell, I was in Maine last year hiking Cadillac Mountain when the Astros were in the World Series with the Braves and met several Astros fans in freaking Bar Harbor (I was wearing my jersey for the games) including a family that was originally from New Mexico of all places. As far as the Rockets, they're an international brand that's one of the most popular teams in Asia and they have fans all over America too. They're easily a top ten NBA franchise despite your perception of their level of respect in the league. Talking about these teams are apples and oranges compared with the Texans and it has nothing to do with Houston as a city - they are far more successful and they have strong brands that don't restrict them geographically.
At the end of the day, its probably an agree to disagree. I'll believe the Texans can be a national brand when I see it. Winning would help add to the non-existent national buzz they have now, but they don't have the ceiling a better branded team would have imo, especially given Houston's appeal and size as a market in and of itself. They're top ten most valuable while being terrible at everything - that's the power of the Houston market. That's the entire reason the NFL was trying to get a team back into Houston (though secondary to LA for obvious reasons) as soon as the Oilers left. The strength of this market by itself is why the Texans don't have to reach outside of Houston to be financially successful, nor do they have to win, apparently.
I do think the Texans will have to build up a lot more brand cachet before their practice facility could be a driver for a dense mixed-use development. At this point it would be just an amenity that most wouldn't care about (at least in terms of its association with the team); its use for high school sports or whatever would be more meaningful. The rest of the development would have to carry itself. It would be most appropriate in central Fort Bend County, since Sugar Land / Missouri City have long had a close association with the homes of pro athletes.
Not that it's really relevant, but to comment on the whole branding / team name business: while bringing back the Oilers as the team name would be probably more limiting than even whatever you think of the Texans as a name (and it is a lame name) since it would be associated with an industry that generates flat-out antipathy outside of the region (probably even in other parts of Texas *coughAustincough*), I'd still love it! Apart from the Steelers, it's one of the most place-authentic names of any U.S. pro team ever.
Well this has made a bunch of left turns so I’ll sum my view up in one.
As far as a name holding a team back, I’ll never agree with that. I’m with Redlion and probably everyone else except the loudest 2 guys on that topic. Everything I’ve said on this, I’ve said already. But to clarify, I’m saying that the name has no contribution to the Texans attracting out of state fans. Not that it “doesn’t contribute as much as other things” but that “it doesn’t contribute at all”. And as far as the. “Fans of players but not fans of the team” argument, the Texans has the opportunity to make Watson fans permanent Texans fans if they managed the team better and had success. Watson fans were ready to be Texan fans for life.
On Rockets finals being considered flukes because no Jordan. I wasn’t alive during the Rockets two finals, so I don’t know how people looked at it back then. No one my age sees it that way or even thinks about it. The only people I ever hear it from is older Rockets fans that complain about it. Clearly it must’ve been a hot topic that only Rockets fans of that era still care about. The last major “finals fluke” that I witnessed alive was when the Raptors won against an injured Warriors team. It may have been the topic of the day after the championship, but a week later and no one cares about that. The Rockets also have 0 championships in my lifetime. People my age think “I haven’t seen a rockets championship in my lifetime” not “the only ones we have blah blah”.
On Astros - Only bringing up the Rangers because Redlion did. I’m not sure about East Texas because I never g that way, but Rangers territory isn’t known for being large. If anything, the controversy keeps them more relevant. The Rangers overall aren’t seen negatively or positively. They’re just there. Their fan base doesn’t extend boundaries as far as Astros. Ofcourse the difference is nothing lopsided like Cowboys over the Texans but that’s another topic
On Houston only popular for Black Americans. Sure, let’s pretend Hispanics don’t exist. Overall, the one demographic Houston isn’t considered popular is among white Americans. They control the lions share of the mass media. While, a lot of this is skewed due to economic opportunities, Houston wouldn’t be among the nations most diverse city if that was the one and only demographic. It attracts transplants in general, not just black transplants. I agree it’s not among Americas most popular cities (Chicago, LA, Miami etc etc) but I’m calling that one point out. I’m sure Redlion being black affects his view on this one (our demographics always affect our views)
Agree with Redlion on Montreal and Phillies. The Montreal Canadians have plenty of American fans. We live in Texas and Houston specifically where there’s not a hockey team. When I’m in other parts of the country. The views there are skewed because of the region we live in.
But I completely agree that the Texans name blaming seems to be a way to mask misery
there has been a rumor circulating for about a week that Tillman took bids for sites and they're settling in on an area near Memorial Park along Old Katy Road. There is already some kind of Landrys warehouse there, so makes sense.
there has been a rumor circulating for about a week that Tillman took bids for sites and they're settling in on an area near Memorial Park along Old Katy Road. There is already some kind of Landrys warehouse there, so makes sense.
Good location too. Not far from the Post Oak Hotel and towards the Toyota Center.
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.
Now, that probably isn't the best or the worst metric out there, but it doesn't prove anything about the actual distribution of fans. Even, assuming that the site is 100% true, and Houston is the tenth most "popular" team in the NFL, how many of those fans are outside of Houston and Texas? Very few. Houston is the 5th largest metro in the country in a football crazy region so the 10th largest fanbase is unimpressive and doesn't really prove anything. Same with the Phillies - ridiculously historic team, top ten metro - #11 seems underwhelming and there's no discussion of the geographical distribution of their fans.
