Grading Teams That Moved and Changed Their Names

The third article in our series about pro teams that moved and/or changed their names.

With the Washington Football Team getting set to unveil its new identity on Feb. 2, I’ve been looking at the issue of team renaming and relocations in the major top-level sports leagues. Last week we looked at teams that moved but didn’t change their names, and the week before that we looked at teams that changed their names without moving to a new city. This week, I’m going to close the circle by examining the final category: teams that changed their names when moving to a new city.

By my count, there are currently 16 teams in the Big Four pro leagues that took their current names after moving from a different location. Here they are, broken down by league, along with my assessments of the names they chose.

MLB

1954: St. Louis Browns → Baltimore Orioles

A lot of MLB fans don’t realize that St. Louis was once a two-team town, just like New York and Chicago are today. But that ended in 1954, when the Browns moved to Baltimore. They chose the perfect team name for their new home, honoring a bird species that itself had been named because its color scheme evoked comparisons to Lord Baltimore’s coat of arms. The name was already being used by several Baltimore minor league teams over the years, and the Browns’ move to Baltimore was the perfect opportunity for the name to be promoted to the big leagues. A high point in team renaming. Grade: A+

———

1961: Washington Senators → Minnesota Twins

“Senators” was a good team name for DC but not for Minnesota, so the Sens needed a new moniker when they moved west. “Twins” is the kind of name that probably wouldn’t make the cut nowadays (not intimidating or ferocious enough), but it’s perfect for a team based in the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul — which in turn led to the team’s now-familiar “TC” cap logo and also inspired the tremendous logo showing mascot characters Minnie and Paul shaking hands across the Mississippi River (see above). Well done. Grade: A

———

1970: Seattle Pilots → Milwaukee Brewers

The Pilots were a 1969 expansion team that lasted only one season before moving to Milwaukee in 1970 (famously doing so on their way back from spring training). The team was rechristened the Brewers as a nod to Milwaukee’s celebrated beer-brewing industry. Much like “Orioles” in Baltimore, the new name was already familiar to Milwaukee fans as a minor league team name, which made for an easy transition to the majors. Cheers! Grade: A

———

1972: Washington Senators → Texas Rangers

A year after the original Washington Senators decamped for Minnesota in 1961 (see above), DC was given a new expansion team, also called the Senators. But the new Sens lasted barely a decade before relocating to Texas, where they were named after the state’s famous law enforcement corps. This name has come under scrutiny recently, as some observers say it should be changed because of the police force’s racist history. I can understand that point of view, and I can also understand the people who think that’s a bit much. But here’s a simpler way of looking at it, without the culture-war angle: Why would you name a team after a law enforcement agency, even a good one? Can you imagine having a team called the State Troopers, or the Narcs, or the Bailiffs, or SVU? With so much Texas culture to draw upon, surely there were better options. Grade: B-

———

2004: Montreal Expos → Washington Nationals

After the failure of both incarnations of the Senators, Washington had to wait more than 30 years for another MLB team. They finally got their chance when the Expos left Montreal and set up shop in DC. There were lots of ideas about what the team’s new name should be (I even ran a contest at the time), with “Nationals” emerging as the eventual choice. The feeling here is that this name is fine — not special, not amazing, not exciting, but fine, in a sort of rote, predictable kind of way. They could have done better, but we should be thankful that they didn’t do worse. Grade: B+

———

NFL

1963: Dallas Texans → Kansas City Chiefs

The current defending AFC champs began as the Dallas Texans but moved to Kansas City after their third season. KC’s mayor at the time was Harold Roe Bartle, whose nickname was “Chief” — not just because he was the mayor but also because he founded the Tribe of Mic-O-Say, a Boy Scouts honor society that drew upon Native American themes and traditions. Since Bartle was the key figure in convincing team owner Lamar Hunt to move the club to KC, the team’s new moniker was a shout-out to Bartle’s nickname.

This story is often cited by apologists who say the team’s name and identity refer to Bartle and therefore have nothing to do with misappropriating Native American culture. But the Chiefs have always marketed themselves with Native-themed imagery (their own website acknowledges that “the club’s early promotional activities relied heavily on imagery and messaging depicting American Indians in a racially insensitive fashion,” presumably referring to things like the logo shown above), and Bartle sometimes leveraged his Native-based nickname into cosplay by donning a Native-style headdress. To their credit, the team has banned fans from wearing headdresses and wearing red face paint, but they didn't get around to doing that until the start of last season, and they still allow the tomahawk chop. More to the point, fans should be able to dress up like like their favorite team’s mascot and paint their faces — that’s standard fan stuff! If your team name effectively prevents your fans from doing that without running afoul of decency and good taste, maybe it wasn’t a good name to begin with. Grade: C-

———

1996: Cleveland Browns → Baltimore Ravens

I know, I know — technically speaking, this wasn’t a franchise relocation because the NFL classifies the Ravens as an expansion team and considers the current version of the Browns, which launched in 1999, to be a continuation of the original Browns. But come on — that’s just bookkeeping. In reality, all the Browns’ players, coaches, and staff packed up and moved to Baltimore in 1996, and the Browns have remained in the organization’s DNA. Hell, Browns kicker Matt Stover was still with the team in Baltimore in 2008, and former Browns player Ozzie Newsome was still Baltimore’s GM in 2018 (and remains a team exec today!). So yeah, this was definitely a franchise relocation, at least in the spirit of that term, if not the letter of it. And they picked a really solid name for their new city, too. Birds tend to make good team identities, and the name also honors former Baltimore resident Edgar Allan Poe, who wrote the classic narrative poem “The Raven.” Will poetry ever inspire another NFL team name? Nevermore, methinks. Grade: A

———

NBA

1963: Syracuse Nationals → Philadelphia 76ers

Yes, it’s true —Syracuse was once home to an NBA team. “Nationals” seems a bit incongruous, or even presumptuous, for a team based in upstate New York, but whatever — they changed it when they moved to Philly in 1963. At the time, I bet “76ers” felt gimmicky, but it’s nice reference to the spirit of ’76 and has held up really well as a team moniker. Grade: A

———

1973: Dallas Chaparrals → San Antonio Spurs

Never heard of a chaparral? It’s basically another term for a roadrunner. Now, “Roadrunners” would have been a great team name, but “Chaparrals”? Ugh. To be fair, the Chaps did have one of the all-time great team logos (see above), but it’s still for the best that they changed their name when they moved to San Antonio in 1973. Almost anything would have been an improvement, but they really nailed it by becoming the Spurs. Grade: A

———

2008: Seattle SuperSonics → Oklahoma City Thunder

Seattle fans are still bitter about the Sonics’ move to OKC, but they probably take a bit of satisfaction in the fact that the franchise chose such a stinker of a name for its new home. I mean, seriously, Thunder? For starters, it violates the sacred rule that team names should always end in the letter s (notwithstanding the Red Sox and White Sox, who were long ago granted a waiver). It’s also unpleasant to pronounce, because of the double “th” sound — ”the Thunder.” Most of all, though, it just feels ... lame-o. It doesn’t help that the team’s logo and uniforms have been so bad. Grade: D+

———

NHL

1982: Colorado Rockies → New Jersey Devils

The NHL’s New Jersey franchise has a complicated history. It began in 1974 as the Kansas City Scouts, then moved to Denver and became the Colorado Rockies in 1976, and finally moved to New Jersey in 1982. Over 10,000 fans participated in a team-naming contest, with “Devils” — a reference to the Jersey Devil, a mythical creature that supposedly lives in the South Jersey Pine Barrens — emerging as the most popular choice. It’s a great name, a great local connection, and it led to a great logo to boot! Grade: A

———

1993: Minnesota North Stars → Dallas Stars

Obviously, a team in Texas can’t be the North Stars, so the team needed a new name when it moved from Minnesota to Dallas in 1993. Some people have said that they should have chosen “Lone Stars,” because of Texas’s nickname as the Lone Star State, but that would have been a contradiction in terms — if something is lone, then it can’t be a plural! “Stars” isn't super-exciting, but it works well enough and made for a natural transition from the old team name (especially since the team’s final uniform set in Minnesota just had the word “Stars” on the jersey chest, even though the team was still officially called the North Stars at the time). Grade: A-

———

1995: Quebec Nordiques → Colorado Avalanche

Here’s another team name that commits the cardinal uni-naming sin of not ending in an s. Granted, it could have been worse — the team came dangerously close to being called the Rocky Mountain Extreme. And at least we can pluralize the Avalanche by referring to them as the Avs, which is better than nothing. Grade: C

———

1996: Winnipeg Jets → Phoenix Coyotes

When the Jets moved to Arizona, ownership considered a bunch of possible names, including “Mustangs,” “Outlaws,” “Wranglers,” “Scorpions” (the runner-up in a fan contest), and “Phreeze” (ewww), before eventually deciding to call the team the Coyotes. It’s hard to separate this team name from the club’s initial branding and uniform program, which seemed utterly bizarre at the time (but has aged surprisingly well). The name itself, though, isn’t bad. Not amazing, but not bad. Grade: B+

———

1997: Hartford Whalers → Carolina Hurricanes

Okay, so we all know that the Whalers had the best logo ever (here’s an interview I did several years ago with the guy who designed it), and that alone makes this a bad renaming, at least in some people’s eyes. But if we set that aside and just focus on the name itself, a bigger issue emerges: The team plays in Raleigh, N.C., an area so far inland that it is rarely hit by hurricanes. Obviously, “Whalers” wouldn’t have worked either, so they needed a new identity, but they could have done a lot better than this one. Grade: C+

———

2011: Atlanta Thrashers → Winnipeg Jets

Atlanta is a two-time loser in the NHL’s team-relocation sweepstakes, having lost the Flames to Calgary (that one was covered as part of last week’s article) and the Thrashers to Winnipeg. But unlike the Flames, who kept their name after moving north of the border, the Thrashers left their old identity in Atlanta. Personally, I’ve always been disappointed that they just revived the old “Jets” name (originally used by the team that moved from Winnipeg and became the Coyotes, as discussed above). It’s not a terrible name, but it seems like a lazy fallback option. Why not come up with something new? Pfeh. Grade: C-

———

And there we have it. Did I miss any teams?

Obviously, my opinions here are just that — my opinions — so feel free to quibble with them in the comments. Just like the last two articles, this one is a fun topic to debate!

• • • • • • •

Important News About This Newsletter

As I mentioned last week, this is my last Bulletin article that will be publicly available. Starting next week, you’ll need a paid subscription to read my weekly Bulletin articles (which will include my annual Season Previews for the Big Four pro sports leagues). The price will be $4 per month or $35 per year, which I hope you’ll agree is very reasonable. This revenue will also help fund operations on my daily blog.

If you’re ready to purchase a monthly or annual subscription, you can do that here. (You’ll need a Facebook account in order to pay.) For more details about how this will work and what you’ll get for your money, look here.

If you’re already subscribed via email but don’t want to pay, you’ll no longer receive the articles on a weekly basis, but I may occasionally send out non-paywalled articles, so you’ll still receive those.

Obviously, I hope most of you will opt in for a paid subscription. But even if you don’t, I appreciate you reading this far, and I hope you’ve enjoyed my Bulletin work. Take care.

Paul Lukas has been writing about uniforms for over 20 years. If you like his Bulletin articles, you’ll probably like his daily Uni Watch Blog, plus you can follow him on Twitter and Facebook and check out his Uni Watch merchandise. Have a question for Paul? Contact him here.