• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Renaming the Cleveland baseball team (NOT FOR DEFENDING "INDIANS")

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Select a name for the Cleveland baseball team

  • Total voters
    143
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'll be furious if the Indiams org chose to poll a bunch of players over the team name over me. Hell, half of them won't even be here in two years.....but we sure will be.
 
Maybe I'm just biased against statues in general (they seem like a massive waste of space not to mention the idol worship that goes along with them). I guess the latter doesn't really apply to these statues in particular but it still seems like some sort of traffic gods which is not really what I'd want to even draw attention to. It's a kind of cool piece of history and I think the statues should be preserved but to name a team after them?

And any mascot/logo that involves the statues will either not look like the statues or look really bland color-wise.

And I still can't really shake that militia feel or whatever that goes along with that name.

The kind of people the name appeals to are more in the history buff, analytical, older crowd. It's almost like saying the team will move once the boomers die out. What kind of Gen Z/Millennial gets excited about some statues on the bridge?

When I see something like the Brooklyn Nets rebranding, and then compare it to keeping Block C and making some minor changes and some old statues, I see a stale historical relic of a team representing a stale historical relic of a city. That is what it feels like to me.

We can do better.

I like Spiders not because of the history so much but because it has a chance to make a fresh rebranding. Web has a dual meaning in baseball, all generations like Spider-Man, and honestly just use your imagination. There's a lot of ways you can draw a spider, from cute to menacing which makes for tons of merchandise possibilities.

Maybe there's something better than Spiders but with Cleveland itself hopefully going through a little revitalization, why do we want to exude the energy of stone historical relics? And honestly same with anything that draws on Cleveland's history as an industrial port.

Well I guess Guardians are the perfect team name for people who read the newspaper every day.
 
buzzdog said:
Chameleons. It's alliterative.
And, you could change the colors as often as you want.
Click to expand...
Hell I have no clue what chameleons have to do with the city of Cleveland other than being at the rainforest area at the zoo, but honestly I like it better than at least 90% of the names floated out there, from Rockers and Guardians to everything nautical.

With an animal mascot you get freshness, with chameleons you get an animal that gives no special treatment to colors so it can symbolically be anti-racist.

Animals are always good family fun, kids love chameleons, no need to dust off some old statues...
 
Derek said:
Hard disagree with every part of this.

Nothing about the current Cavs design is good, in my opinion. I also love the block C.
Click to expand...

I don't like the C block, probably cause Cincinnati also has a C.. I want something thats not a letter lol
 
sportscoach said:
I don't like the C block, probably cause Cincinnati also has a C.. I want something thats not a letter lol
Click to expand...
28/30 primary logos for the MLB are basically just letters.

Even the two that aren’t (Orioles and Blue Jays) have also used letters on their hats frequently throughout their history.
 
Last edited:
eChameleon said:
How anyone can like the block C is beyond me. Take a look at the Cavs C. That's how you make a C look good.
Click to expand...
The block C isn't flashy, but it is a fitting cap logo for a charter AL team.
 
cleveland_indians_retro_logo_house_flag_100821sma.jpg


Bring back this C.
 
KluberSociety said:
Maybe I'm just biased against statues in general (they seem like a massive waste of space not to mention the idol worship that goes along with them). I guess the latter doesn't really apply to these statues in particular but it still seems like some sort of traffic gods which is not really what I'd want to even draw attention to. It's a kind of cool piece of history and I think the statues should be preserved but to name a team after them?

And any mascot/logo that involves the statues will either not look like the statues or look really bland color-wise.

And I still can't really shake that militia feel or whatever that goes along with that name.

The kind of people the name appeals to are more in the history buff, analytical, older crowd. It's almost like saying the team will move once the boomers die out. What kind of Gen Z/Millennial gets excited about some statues on the bridge?

When I see something like the Brooklyn Nets rebranding, and then compare it to keeping Block C and making some minor changes and some old statues, I see a stale historical relic of a team representing a stale historical relic of a city. That is what it feels like to me.

We can do better.

I like Spiders not because of the history so much but because it has a chance to make a fresh rebranding. Web has a dual meaning in baseball, all generations like Spider-Man, and honestly just use your imagination. There's a lot of ways you can draw a spider, from cute to menacing which makes for tons of merchandise possibilities.

Maybe there's something better than Spiders but with Cleveland itself hopefully going through a little revitalization, why do we want to exude the energy of stone historical relics? And honestly same with anything that draws on Cleveland's history as an industrial port.

Well I guess Guardians are the perfect team name for people who read the newspaper every day.
Click to expand...

Guardians is for old people but you want to use a team name from the late 1800's? (Which, again, wasn't used by this franchise...it's not part of our history)

I think there are two camps here.

1) People who want to keep the colors, look, and feel of the current team that have been around for over 100 years

2) People who want to throw that out and start completely over.

I'm firmly in camp #1 and will be incredibly disappointed if they go with #2.
 
KluberSociety said:
Maybe I'm just biased against statues in general (they seem like a massive waste of space not to mention the idol worship that goes along with them). I guess the latter doesn't really apply to these statues in particular but it still seems like some sort of traffic gods which is not really what I'd want to even draw attention to. It's a kind of cool piece of history and I think the statues should be preserved but to name a team after them?

And any mascot/logo that involves the statues will either not look like the statues or look really bland color-wise.

And I still can't really shake that militia feel or whatever that goes along with that name.

The kind of people the name appeals to are more in the history buff, analytical, older crowd. It's almost like saying the team will move once the boomers die out. What kind of Gen Z/Millennial gets excited about some statues on the bridge?

When I see something like the Brooklyn Nets rebranding, and then compare it to keeping Block C and making some minor changes and some old statues, I see a stale historical relic of a team representing a stale historical relic of a city. That is what it feels like to me.

We can do better.

I like Spiders not because of the history so much but because it has a chance to make a fresh rebranding. Web has a dual meaning in baseball, all generations like Spider-Man, and honestly just use your imagination. There's a lot of ways you can draw a spider, from cute to menacing which makes for tons of merchandise possibilities.

Maybe there's something better than Spiders but with Cleveland itself hopefully going through a little revitalization, why do we want to exude the energy of stone historical relics? And honestly same with anything that draws on Cleveland's history as an industrial port.

Well I guess Guardians are the perfect team name for people who read the newspaper every day.
Click to expand...
I'm a millennial and I've always liked the bridge guardians.

I also think calling them "statues" is incorrect. Monuments is closer.

I still think it's going to be something like Captains or Foresters.

Steve_424 said:
Guardians is for old people but you want to use a team name from the late 1800's? (Which, again, wasn't used by this franchise...it's not part of our history)

I think there are two camps here.

1) People who want to keep the colors, look, and feel of the current team that have been around for over 100 years

2) People who want to throw that out and start completely over.

I'm firmly in camp #1 and will be incredibly disappointed if they go with #2.
Click to expand...
I genuinely don't give a shit about either 1 or 2. I think it's irrelevant. I'm still good with Guardians.
 
Probably doesn't mean much. It's prudent to block any and all choices from the keep-away trademark. Still interesting.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top