Jump to content

Hull to be renamed "Hull City Tigers"

Bad Wolf

By Bad Wolf,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Prince Jazzbo

Prince Jazzbo

Posted
Posted

It sounds as bad as the Echo's reporting on Wessex League games when they call Fawley the Oilmen because its near an oil refinery, Totton and Eling the Millers beacause of Eling Tide Mill, or Hamble the Planemakers because theres an a aircraft place nearby.

 

Maybe we should become the Southampton Kerb Crawlers due to the proximity of the ground. That has a ring to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted
To be honest, this does kind of put our home shirt colour change into perspective.

 

In the sense that both decisions will alienate the majority of people already invested in the product by pursuing failed attempts to attract customers from other markets who have repeatedly proven themselves only to be interested in aligning themselves with trophy-winning sides no matter what their actual name is, yes, they are two sides of the same coin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brussels Saint

Brussels Saint

Posted
Posted

Also genuinely don't see any point in changing a clubs name and I'm one of the supporters who's been around a long time and actually prefers modern football.

 

There would seem very little point to it from any business, branding or rationale standpoint. Change is constant and I have no issue with it, but something like that, whats the point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted
Look, we can't take the moral high ground and criticise another team for trampling all over its own traditions. I know the history but, as far as everyone else is concerned, our shirts have red and white stripes ...

 

We very much can take the moral high ground over it, as most of us are against Saints doing it as well. In fact, along with Cardiff (and maybe Coventry and AFC Wimbledon) we're probably one of the better placed groups to be critical of it. Now MK Dons fans complaining about something like this, THAT would be hypocrisy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted
Also genuinely don't see any point in changing a clubs name and I'm one of the supporters who's been around a long time and actually prefers modern football.

 

There would seem very little point to it from any business, branding or rationale standpoint. Change is constant and I have no issue with it, but something like that, whats the point?

 

Quite. Another random businessman with too much power and half-baked ideas buggering about with club traditions for absolutely no tangible benefit to anything other than personal ego.

 

For some reason a Saints v Leeds match programme from August 2011 sprung to my mind then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bearsy

Bearsy

Posted
Posted

I quite like it. I'd be pleased if I was hull fan cos Tigers r cool. It'll be bad for some teams tho that has soft names, like "The Norwich Canaries". Who would bet on The Norwich Canaries vs The Hull City Tigers? Tiger eats Canary for breakfast!

 

If Birmingham changed names to The Birmingham Bears i would switch teams, definitely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Colinjb

Colinjb

Posted
Posted

So, if this is the start of a trend we would have:

 

Arsenal Gunners

Aston Villa Lions

Cardiff Dragons

Chelsea Lions

Crystal Palace Eagles

Everton Toffees

Fulham Cottagers

Hull Tigers

Liverpool Reds

Manchester Blues

Manchester Devils

Newcastle Barcodes

Norwich Canaries

Southampton Saints

Stoke City Potters

Sunderland Black Cats

Swansea Swans

Tottenham Cock(eril)s

West Bromwich Throstles

West Ham Knuckle-draggers

 

Really not sure about some of those....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted

I also loved the justification that "the word City wasn't unique" and that was a reason to change it... I guess he could have always bought a club from a town, or a village, or just one which ALREADY HAD A UNIQUE NAME if it bothered him that much - the likes of Port Vale and Crewe Alexandra must be gutted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted
Hull's owners have released a back-tracking statement on their O/S saying the change is just to the limited company name and will only be used for commercial purposes.

 

Ha, i.e. "We don't know why we let that guy loose in front of a tv camera, please ignore everything he said".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smirking_Saint

Smirking_Saint

Posted
Posted
I quite like it. I'd be pleased if I was hull fan cos Tigers r cool. It'll be bad for some teams tho that has soft names, like "The Norwich Canaries". Who would bet on The Norwich Canaries vs The Hull City Tigers? Tiger eats Canary for breakfast!

 

If Birmingham changed names to The Birmingham Bears i would switch teams, definitely.

 

Thought you were already in that perticular group in one way or another ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chez

Chez

Posted
Posted
We've been called "Southampton St Mary's" before, so isn't reverting to older names "traditional"? ;)

 

something done years ago doesn't amount to tradition. Tradition needs to be something done regularly over a period of time I'd of thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ken Tone

Ken Tone

Posted
Posted
When I lived there in the mid 90s they were known as `City' by ullites. In recent times knickname `The Tigers' has gained prominence, but `Hull Tigers' seems a step too far. What next, the Sunderland Black cats? The owner points to short names being the reason but City is shorter than Tigers the last time I counted.

This name change reminds me of that Budweiser **** take advert with the Portsmouth Pirates etc. Sadly fiction seems to becoming reality

 

They've been known as the tigers much earlier than 'recent times'. I lived there in the early 70’s and it was very well established as their nickname then. I imagine it goes way back, to whenever they started playing in black and amber stripes.

 

 

However there is a huge difference between a nickname and an official name. Their fans won't be happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VectisSaint

VectisSaint

Posted
Posted

Tottenham Cock(eril)s

Did Glen (not that one before Dalek wakes up) play for them? If there is one team that does not need a new brand name its the Spuds. "Hotspur" is almost unique, even Spurs. Personally think Spuds or Yobbos would be better.

 

Man Citeh would become the Manchester Golden Eagles (or just Eagles) and surely Liverpool would become the Liver[pool] Birds or perhaps the Hubcaps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Colinjb

Colinjb

Posted
Posted
Did Glen (not that one before Dalek wakes up) play for them? If there is one team that does not need a new brand name its the Spuds. "Hotspur" is almost unique, even Spurs. Personally think Spuds or Yobbos would be better.

 

Man Citeh would become the Manchester Golden Eagles (or just Eagles) and surely Liverpool would become the Liver[pool] Birds or perhaps the Hubcaps.

 

Yep, had pondered that on the way through the list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wightman35

wightman35

Posted
Posted
But that must mean your version of the forum is only half the size the rest of us see!

 

Not really so, because everybody (well not quite everyone!) quotes him so he gets multi copies too. As "Pride of the South," we should be the Lions and have furry brown shirts and not look like Bristol City.

 

 

 

Well, perhaps not..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cascadia Saint

Cascadia Saint

Posted
Posted
Hull City with a nickname The Tigers is not the same as Hull Tigers.

 

does anyone actually think a name change to Southampton Saints would be OK? That would be a very sad day if you ask me.

 

It would be a sad day.

 

Every team has a nickname, some fit with the american style naming, some don't but they are still completely separate.. The Portsmouth Pompey, anyone?

 

Some of my american friends don't understand that we have an actual club name and a nickname, trying to get them to stop saying the Southampton Saints is next to impossible. Even the word Saints as opposed to The Saints is difficult for them...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
krissyboy31

krissyboy31

Posted
Posted
Hull Tigers are already known as the Tigers locally, as one of the city's two Rugby League sides is Hull FC (the other being Hull Kingston Rovers), otherwise known as just 'Hull'. It is no big deal. Basically they are formalising something which has already happened locally.

 

It is only news to those outside Hull.

 

Not really! Gone down like a lead balloon up here. They are known as 'City' and always have been (confusing to us from outside the area, because you wonder why they talk of this Manchester club), never referred to as the Tigers. You do have the happy clappers who think the Allam's can do no wrong though, because they 'saved' the club but most are up in arms, particularly as this broke several weeks ago up here and the club flatly denied it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
diggers

diggers

Posted
Posted
Being renamed after a random animal to sound macho and appeal to an American audience that doesn't exist will not go down well with the average fan. For us on the other hand, having been called Southampton St Mary's before, at least it's not too much of a break from tradition to be nicknamed Southampton Saints. However the christian connotations would probably put off some marketing guru and we'd end up with something like Southampton Spitfires (unless there is already a team with that name?).

I'm pretty sure thats Eastleigh FC's nickname?? (Thank god)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ericofarabia

ericofarabia

Posted
Posted
I give it two weeks.

 

Hull's owners have released a back-tracking statement on their O/S saying the change is just to the limited company name and will only be used for commercial purposes.

 

Unlucky Whitey .... 2 days LOL.

 

Be interesting to see how they appear in The Official League Table and Results section.

All the ones I've seen after a quick scan through just shows them as Hull, not even Hull City, but there again most also show Spurs as just Tottenham, not Tottenham Hotspur, but that is just presumably a space saving exercise , which can't be said about dropping City from Hull's name.

If it is a purely a branding move as they are now saying, will that fall under the same ruling as The New Saints who aren't allowed to use the name and have to be called TNS for one reason or another.

HCT, love it ...... and it would defeat the whole object of the change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...