Salt Lake NHL and MLB News Thread

[ucsbgaucho]

Originally Posted by RC14

I think people don't like the "S" sound at the end. Also Yeti has the same number of letters as Utah.

I have also seen a few people try to claim that Yeti is the plural form of Yeti. I don't think that is accurate but it sounds plausible so I guess we could go with it.

Mammoths sounds weird to say, like we all have a lisp. But technically, according to the dictionary, that and Yetis are the correct plural versions. Only Seattle Kraken out of all the big-4 leagues has a singular name when they could be plural, so it's not unprecedented. And I guess Avalanche.

[Nebula3lem123]

I chose (in no particular order):

Black Diamonds
Outlaws
Mountaineers
Canyons

I prefer the names that are plural because (for example) being a "Laker" sounds better than being a "Jazz Fan" or "Jazz Player" in my head.

[Atlas]

Opinion: With SLC taxpayers on the hook, NHL team should be called ‘Salt Lake’

[ucsbgaucho]

Originally Posted by Atlas

Opinion: With SLC taxpayers on the hook, NHL team should be called ‘Salt Lake’

Ehh, name doesn't matter. All 4 Minneapolis teams are named Minnesota _____

Colorado Avalanche and Rockies, Texas Rangers, Florida Panthers, Carolina Panthers, etc etc. Many examples of the state being used. Plus, just gives them the opening to use Salt City as their "city connect" jersey... does NHL do that?!

[wrendog]

Originally Posted by ucsbgaucho

Ehh, name doesn't matter. All 4 Minneapolis teams are named Minnesota _____

Colorado Avalanche and Rockies, Texas Rangers, Florida Panthers, Carolina Panthers, etc etc. Many examples of the state being used. Plus, just gives them the opening to use Salt City as their "city connect" jersey... does NHL do that?!

Well, the Wild are in St Paul, but all true about Minnesota

[Comrade]

I don't think the point is that just because they play in Salt Lake, they should be named Salt Lake.

I think the point is that because Salt Lake taxpayers are the ones who'll pay for a bulk of this, they should at least name the team after the city - not the state.

And I agree. But I'm also a Salt Laker, so lol

[RC14]

I have probably ranted about this more then enough but I don't like it when sports teams are named after states. If that was the tradition, it would be fine. But in the United States, we name our teams after our cities.

It feels weird to me when you have a team like the San Francisco 49rs VS a team like the Carolina Panthers. One is very specific to the city (I'm going to ignore, for now, the fact that they moved the team out of SF) and the other doesn't even specify a state but two states. One team is a source of pride for San Francisco that represents the city, the other is just a team for people who happen to live in an ambiguous geographical area and that team happens to play in a certain city, and most people who don't know allot about the NFL or that specific team probably don't even know what city that is.

To me, sports, in the United States, is about cities. They provide an opportunity to rep and cheer for your city. I realize this probably isn't important to all sports fans but I feel like when the name of the city is missing from the name of the team something is lost. An opportunity is lost. The team has less of a soul IMO.

I would really like to get the law that just passed, changed to allow any future MLB team to carry the name of our city.

[bob rulz]

I don't really care about Salt Lake City vs Utah. If there was another large city in Utah that could carry their own franchise then I would advocate for Salt Lake being the name, but there isn't, so I think it's fair for the team name to represent the whole state.

I would like to veto the Black Diamonds, as it's the name of an outdoor equipment company. I don't want the team name to feel like it's representing a company, even if that isn't the intent.