Thanks to the 2 cowards who negged me in this thread. If I hurt a couple of New Orleans fans feelings for cracking a joke, so sorry And for those two cowards, I would never wish a hurricane on anyone, and I thought it was an appropriate name, since the city has become accustomed to them...I copped a "I hope Australia gets hit by a tsunami and kills everyone that you know" to go with the neg :clap:
Going by the resounding consensus, the Pelicans name is a FAIL. They should put it to a fans vote, even a survey in the New Orleans area on what the team name should be.
Why are so mad about a thing so useless such as reps?
More intimidating than freakin Lakes that have nothing to do with the state of California. Pelicans actually has a meaning to the state of Louisiana.
I hate the Lakers.
No, seriously, I hate the Lakers. Growing up in Northern California, I learned two things: (1) Los Angeles sucks, and (2) someday, the big one will come, and Southern California will fall off the continent into the ocean, so get under your desks, it’s time for another earthquake drill.
Then, in my early twenties, I moved to Boston, which only allowed my natal hatred of Los Angeles sports teams to flourish and grow. So for my contribution to The NBA Logo Ranking Project, I was prepared to offer a couple hundred words of seething Laker hatred directed at their logo with some type of joke about the number of great lakes v. great sex offenders currently located in Los Angeles.
But I have studied the Lakers logo for the last couple days, and it has grudgingly earned my respect.
As you probably already know, the Lakers played their first twelve years in Minneapolis. If you were unclear about this, the Minneapolis Lakers logo is very illustrative. See, there’s the state of Minnesota, and there’s a star right where Minneapolis is located. And then it says “MINNEAPOLIS,” just in case you didn’t understand the placement of the star. I’m surprised the artist did not painstakingly draw ten thousand lakes, lest we didn’t catch the clever pun that was the team’s nickname.
Then the Lakers moved to Los Angeles where their nickname made no sense. Some half-wit designed a logo with streaky lines and a swooping watery ‘R’ and then kicked back to wait for the Jazz to move to Utah so that people would forget how nonsensical the Laker name was by comparison. Objectively, this logo is lame. But the longer they use it, unchanged with only minor alterations, the more vastly superior it becomes.
When I look at the Lakers logo, it says: “This is our logo. We’re the Lakers. What’s that in our logo? It’s a basketball. Why? Because we’re the basketball team from Los Angeles. What’s our mascot? What do you mean? You think we’re concerned that our team name has no obvious personification, and we’re going to have some kind of Steeley McBeam debacle? Please. Our mascot is Kobe Bryant’s middle finger. What’s that? You’ve noticed that some idiot named Bob Short decided that one of our primary colors should be purple? You think that’s kind of gay? Let me refer you to our mascot. We’re the Lakers. **** you.”
You have to respect that. Or, you know, if you’re the Clippers, you rip it off and make it suck.
I remember when people though OKC "Thunder" was a bad name. Now its become common place, and most people would be shocked if it were anything else.
Pelicans will become natural if they start a winning culture over there. The only name people really still have an issue with is "Bobcats", and that's simply because they never were successful. Same way if Charlotte get back "Hornets" people won't mind, since they associate it with a once proud franchise, that actually used to win...