Comments on: My Mind Muddle: Back and Forth on Rebranding.

By: MLS fan Dave

MLS fan Dave — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 04:42:14 +0000

I’m ecstatic that KCW has hit it’s heyday now in the summer of 2010, especially with the new arena opening next year. The timing could not be better!

But as a fan of MLS generally I have to say that the ‘Wizards’ is probably the worst team name in the league, if not in all of professional sports (along with the Toronto Raptors). It has neither character, nor does it evoke a sense of competitive respect. I know there will be many people offended by this comment but honestly if you were to start fresh would you really re-name them the Wizards? I thought not.

So at a time when it will be closer to starting fresh then ever before with a new stadium it would also seem the most logical time to re-name the team. After all, KC may never get another legitimate opportunity to alter the name so that when you look back on it 40 years from now you will say gee, I’m really glad we changed that to…

The suggestion that I have heard and liked is the Kansas City 96. But it still lacks a bit of verve. I would like to see the ‘Kansas City 96ers’. It would be a minor change but also endearing in the way that the Philadelphia 76ers and SF 49ers are. I can hear the chant now “Nine-tee-six-ers!”. Hopefully I will also hear that echoing in the stadium soon, instead of just in my head.

By: James Starritt

James Starritt — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 20:06:34 +0000

@Tony — appreciate the detail, I was going for a brief and illustrative pseudo history of Arsenal rather than a something truly accurate, mere to show the change. Your comment did get me thinking, I am not sure there is truly any teams but Chelsea and maybe Fulham that were founded within the ‘City of London’ itself. The County of London which evolved into Greater London did include both Islington and Woolwich – even in 1913 so we both win

@szazzy — Appreciate the feedback as always. Sporting Kansas City just seems blah to me even if I would have chosen it over the Kansas City Wizards if we were awarded a new MLS team today. Could go for SC Kansas City and just ignore the SC quite happily, but a large part of me wants to stay right were we are.

By: szazzy

szazzy — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 19:21:56 +0000

James, just letting you know I appreciate the work you put into your posts. Even with something currently in the works, I can rarely bring myself to debate this topic anymore after all these years. I feel like I’ve written a novella worth of thoughts on the subject, going back and forth and contradicting myself. I’m just going to wait and see what happens.

Sporting Club Kansas City grows on me by the day, so that’s a good sign, but it’s hard to have clear and rational perspectives on what’s good for the club long term when we’re so close.

By: Tony Attwood

Tony Attwood — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 08:14:23 +0000

I think there are different situations behind each name change. If we take Woolwich Arsenal’s move in 1913, they were named Woolwich Arsenal, not because they played in Woolwich, (they were in Plumstead) but because the work force and many of the players were at the Woolwich Arsenal armaments factory.

And to be pedantic – while the club was there, that location was not in London, anymore than Tottenham was in London when Arsenal moved.

Woolwich Arsenal played in a minor town in Kent, and indeed each year they played a game against “the rest of Kent”. Tottenham H were in Middlesex – their part of the city did not become part of London until a much later reorganisation of the city.

When Woolwich Arsenal moved in 1913 they became “The Arsenal” which was how they were already known by many supporters in the Plumstead – Woolwich area. They didn’t become Arsenal until 1925.

There’s details of the life and times of Woolwich Arsenal in the book “Making the Arsenal” – it tells the story of Woolwich Arsenal in 1910 when the club went into administration and was taken over by Henry Norris, through the eyes of a football journalist working for the Chronicle.

Tony Attwood