The Major League Baseball team in Cleveland is changing its name to Guardians, the franchise announced Friday, dropping the controversial "Indians," by which it had been known for more than a century.
As probably the only Indians fan here, I'm not in love with the change. Guardians does have a lot of connection with the city so it was, in my mind, always the most likely change. I probably would have enjoyed the Cleveland Rocks more. I can live with Guardians, but the font and logo and absolute garbage. As Judas mentioned, it looks like an 80s rock album. I don't know who they used for a focus group, but I've seen dozens of better logo designs and fonts using the Guardians.
Originally Posted by morphius:
Oh, you are no fun. I just wanted to see what their reaction would be, they might think it is pretty cool. I've driven past their temples, they don't seem to have an issue with displaying their gods. Karna has a pretty unique lightning bow thing that could work as a logo. "no, no, that isn't a native american bow, that is an India indian god bow".
No doubt, they have some pretty cool iconography. I just.. eh. Sports team mascots turn into caricatures pretty quickly. It's best not to involve figures from religions that are actively being practiced since they can easily be seen as making a mockery of something pretty serious to a lot of people.
As a loose example, I don't think the anti-woke Christian crowd here in America would love it if they found out a soccer team in Vietnam went by the name of the Water Walkers and Jesus was their mascot. At the games, people would show up with bloody crowns of thorns and fake nails in their hands and feet.
Originally Posted by louie aguiar:
I don't like it. FWIW, I think Washington Football Team should just keep that name and not try to add a mascot.
Mascot could be a bipolar, lesbian that goes 50/50 on depression and anger for the game length with no personality other than to bitch and whine about how there's only men on the field.
Originally Posted by ThaVirus:
No doubt, they have some pretty cool iconography. I just.. eh. Sports team mascots turn into caricatures pretty quickly. It's best not to involve figures from religions that are actively being practiced since they can easily be seen as making a mockery of something pretty serious to a lot of people.
As a loose example, I don't think the anti-woke Christian crowd here in America would love it if they found out a soccer team in Vietnam went by the name of the Water Walkers and Jesus was their mascot. At the games, people would show up with bloody crowns of thorns and fake nails in their hands and feet.
Originally Posted by ThaVirus:
As a loose example, I don't think the anti-woke Christian crowd here in America would love it if they found out a soccer team in Vietnam went by the name of the Water Walkers and Jesus was their mascot. At the games, people would show up with bloody crowns of thorns and fake nails in their hands and feet.
this is awesome idea, and should have been used!
who is going to believe they can beat the son of god!!!!
Originally Posted by L.A. Chieffan:
So, Chiefs is gonna be gone soon right?
I think the team has done a decent job of minimizing the Native imagery that is more problematic than the name itself, but I won't be the least bit upset if they do go ahead and change it. Monarchs would be perfect and worth buying from the former T-Bones. Some other names that could be fun:
Burnt Ends
Smokers
Yardbirds (after Charlie Parker)
Nighthawks (after the Coon-Sanders Original Nighthawk Orchestra, which was the first KC jazz band to gain national prominence. Please do not suggest any of the other words in the band's name)
Fountaineers (okay this one is stupid but still kinda fun imho)
Steamboats (after the Arabia and also "Arabians" would not go over well)
Tornadoes (why isn't there a major pro team called the Tornadoes???)
Unions, Scouts, Kings (former KC sport team names that would work well)
Sevillians (celebrating KC's sister city, Seville, Spain)
Barbers (like The Barber of Seville??)
I dunno man, I get the appeal of Tradition and all that, but I simply don't feel threatened by the prospect of a name change. If anything, it's an opportunity for something new and fun. I think we would all get used to it a lot quicker than we think, too. Either way I'm not losing sleep over it!
Originally Posted by baitism:
Not a single Native American gave a shit.
People love to say this but it simply isn't true. If you actually cared about whether Natives are offended by the mascots and logos, you'd do ten seconds of research and find plenty of writing from Natives who explain why they are. Like this guy:
He acknowledges that he doesn't speak for all Native people and that some don't care. But his larger point is that these names and logos tend to warp people's perceptions of Native history and traditions, which contributes to their overall erasure. I personally think that's reason enough to change them, or to at least for teams to connect with local tribes to work on ways to actually "honor" their history. "You're racist if you root for the Chiefs" is not helpful or true, but it's also not what most Native people who speak on the subject are saying. They would just like a little respect, and considering our history, we owe them at least that much, imho.
(Also, the Native people who don't care about this subject tend to focus on much more pressing issues instead, and I get the feeling that most of the white people who lose their shit over sports team name changes would not love the Native solutions to those problems, either...)
.jpg){kind=link}
