I can't help but feel like there are certain cities that are in need of overhauls in the area of sports team names. Since I am an avid follower of the NBA, let's just start with the Utah Jazz. The team was founded in 1974...in New Orleans. A team called the "Jazz" makes complete sense in a place like New Orleans. Not so much in a place like Utah. So when the team moved to Utah in 1979, it would have made sense to change the name (much like recently, when the relocated Seattle Sonics became the Oklahoma City Thunder), right? Apparently, Utah didn't think so.What's even more ironic is that now New Orleans now has a team called the Hornets. Why is this ironic? Because Utah is "The Beehive State."
When some teams move, the team name is not site specific, so it still works in other places. Case in point: The Memphis Grizzlies. The team moved from Vancouver to Memphis in 2001. Maybe Memphis doesn't have many grizzly bears running around, but the Grizzly is still a fierce animal, and a good mascot. The same goes for the Oakland Raiders and the St. Louis Rams. When those teams left L.A. in 1994, there was nothing "L.A." about the names. However, there is something very "New Orleans" about "The Jazz".
So, Utah, it's time to do the right thing. Give New Orleans it's "Jazz" back.
I agree with your argument, Utah/New Orleans should change their names, however I think there's a problem with your examples. Where are the Raiders in LA? It's an interesting choice of mascots, but I would think any Somalian team deserves that name, not Oakland. "Do the right thing" Utah, change your mascot to a hornet.
ReplyDelete