Owners rename Hull City AFC

[Surrey_Albion]

Oh dear, more owners not knowing what football really means to fans, we will soon be living in America

 

[SeagullSongs]

I think we should change our name to #BHAFC

"Hashtag bee-aitch-ay-eff-see", I can hear it now...

 

[The Large One]

It's not really that different, or that big a deal, is it? Both of our clubs chose to rebrand and focus on a nickname for commercial reasons. Hull are now doing the same.

Honestly, who cares? If they want to promote the Tiger thing let them. This santaminious "I cannot believe it" bollocks would be awful coming from any set of fans, but neither of ours really have a leg to stand on.

I can't speak for where your 'Eagles' nickname came from, but the 'Seagulls' thing came from the fans (albeit thanks to Palace), not the club.

But neither Seagulls nor Eagles are in the respective club names, nor would either chairman/owner be dumb enough to change them because they found them 'irrelevant' or 'lousy'.

 

[Paul Reids Sock]

Ludicrous idea - as bad as Cardiff Bluebirds playing in red.

We could always drop the "and Hove Albion" bit as that goes on a bit as well - and then relocate to somewhere more relevant, like Harlow or Milton Keynes

I thought one of the major objections to this was the fact that they were no longer Bluebirds at all?

Aren't they now the Cardiff City Dragons?

 

[Frutos]

I spoke to a Hull fan about this a few mins ago - there is talk of protests and boycotts if they go ahead and force this through.

 

[The Large One]

http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Alla...-City-Tigers/story-19634384-detail/story.html

HULL City Tigers will be the new name officially adopted by the club in the Premier League.

Owners Assem and Ehab Allam have confirmed their intention to re-brand Hull City by dropping the 'AFC' and putting the emphasis on 'Tigers'.

They said one of the reasons for the change is to give the club a stronger "brand identity" on the international stage.

"Hull City is irrelevant," he said.

"My dislike for the work 'City' is because it is common.

"City is also associated with Leicester, Bristol, Manchester and many other clubs.

"In the commercial world, the shorter the name, the better. The more it can spread quickly.

"It is about identity. City is a lousy identity. Hull City Association Football Club is so long."

The confirmation comes after weeks of speculation following increased club use of an amended badge without 'AFC' on the logo.

But not as long as 'Brighton & Hove Albion Football Club'.

We in Brighton like it long, I guess...

 

[Brovion]

It's not really that different, or that big a deal, is it? Both of our clubs chose to rebrand and focus on a nickname for commercial reasons. Hull are now doing the same.

Honestly, who cares? If they want to promote the Tiger thing let them. This santaminious "I cannot believe it" bollocks would be awful coming from any set of fans, but neither of ours really have a leg to stand on.

I don't care, I was just pointing out that if they want to officially call themselves the 'Hull City Tigers' as opposed to 'Hull City AFC' that isn't the same as us changing our nicknames. Also ours came spontaneously from the fans, it wasn't introduced by the owners. Not sure how yours changed to Eagles.

 

[Psalm 56:5]

I can't speak for where your 'Eagles' nickname came from, but the 'Seagulls' thing came from the fans (albeit thanks to Palace), not the club.

But neither Seagulls nor Eagles are in the respective club names, nor would either chairman/owner be dumb enough to change them because they found them 'irrelevant' or 'lousy'.

Big Mal I think. Seagulls was a response to us, but the earlier Dolphins bloody wasn't.

If the Hull fans aren't happy then of course the club should listen to them, it's just that I don't think either of our clubs are in a position to mock. We've both made changes to our clubs for commercial reasons. This looking down your noses at another club for doing the same is a bit holier-than-thou for me.

If you're going to mock something, mock Evertons new badge. Not for changing it, just for it being shit.

 

[clippedgull]

I spoke to a Hull fan about this a few mins ago - there is talk of protests and boycotts if they go ahead and force this through.

Cardiff fans tried that and got nowhere!! Money talks as we all know. If they feel they will have better commercial opportunities then the fans will always lose.

 

[The Large One]

Big Mal I think. Seagulls was a response to us, but the earlier Dolphins bloody wasn't.

Dolphins wasn't in the club name, and that's the central point being made which you're overlooking.

If the Hull fans aren't happy then of course the club should listen to them, it's just that I don't think either of our clubs are in a position to mock. We've both made changes to our clubs for commercial reasons. This looking down your noses at another club for doing the same is a bit holier-than-thou for me.

But not something as sacred as the club's name. I didn't realise Palace's 'Eagles' nickname came about on the whim of the then manager. Brighton changed their club badge in 1976 to reflect the fans' own 'new' nickname.

If you're going to mock something, mock Evertons new badge. Not for changing it, just for it being shit.

Way outside the point being made. We're mocking the Hull City chairman for changing something on a whim, because he - and he alone - found them 'irrelevant' and 'lousy'.

 

[Southern Scouse]

Can the Hull City Tigers roar into life against the Manchester Citizens? Find out next on Fox Soccerzone

That is one of my greatest nightmares coming to reality.

 

[Psalm 56:5]

Dolphins wasn't in the club name, and that's the central point being made which you're overlooking.

But not something as sacred as the club's name. I didn't realise Palace's 'Eagles' nickname came about on the whim of the then manager. Brighton changed their club badge in 1976 to reflect the fans' own 'new' nickname.

Way outside the point being made. We're mocking the Hull City chairman for changing something on a whim, because he - and he alone - found them 'irrelevant' and 'lousy'.

I'm not overlooking it, I'm just saying its not that different. Why is the end of the club name particularly more sacred than the badge say, or the shirt? Hull City will still be Hull City. We've both made commercial decisions that have changed our clubs, so I don't see that we're in any position to mock Hull for doing the same.

The press already routinely refer to clubs either through the start of their names (ignoring the FC OR AFC) or their nicknames, so it won't even sound much different. The only time you'll notice it will be when the abbreviation is used. Presumably HCTFC rather than HCAFC.

Laugh away at Hull all you want, I just think its a bit hypocritical is all.

 

[Hillian1]

I'm not overlooking it, I'm just saying its not that different. Why is the end of the club name particularly more sacred than the badge say, or the shirt? Hull City will still be Hull City. We've both made commercial decisions that have changed our clubs, so I don't see that we're in any position to mock Hull for doing the same.

The press already routinely refer to clubs either through the start of their names (ignoring the FC OR AFC) or their nicknames, so it won't even sound much different. The only time you'll notice it will be when the abbreviation is used. Presumably HCTFC rather than HCAFC.

Laugh away at Hull all you want, I just think its a bit hypocritical is all.

You are a bit dim aren't you?

 

[Psalm 56:5]

You are a bit dim aren't you?

For having an opinion?

Sure.

 

[Hillian1]

For having an opinion?

Sure.

No, for misusing the term hypocritical.

Had we changed the Clubs actual name then ok, but we, nor you actually, have done so.

 

[The Large One]

I'm not overlooking it, I'm just saying its not that different. Why is the end of the club name particularly more sacred than the badge say, or the shirt? Hull City will still be Hull City. We've both made commercial decisions that have changed our clubs, so I don't see that we're in any position to mock Hull for doing the same.

The press already routinely refer to clubs either through the start of their names (ignoring the FC OR AFC) or their nicknames, so it won't even sound much different. The only time you'll notice it will be when the abbreviation is used. Presumably HCTFC rather than HCAFC.

Laugh away at Hull all you want, I just think its a bit hypocritical is all.

Blimey, I make a point, and you completely overlook it - neither Brighton nor Palace have changed their names. Sod it, I've said it in plain English already, I can't make it plainer. This isn't a commercial decision, it's an egotistical one, based on a whim disguised as a commercial decision, benefitting... well, who knows?

Very well, if we follow your logic - 'Crystal Palace is irrelevant and lousy'. The club needs a strong identity for the Premier League, one which reflects the culture of the area.

Therefore, good luck in the Premier League this coming season, Crystal Palace Arsonists.

 

[Icy Gull]

It's not really that different, or that big a deal, is it? Both of our clubs chose to rebrand and focus on a nickname for commercial reasons. Hull are now doing the same.

Honestly, who cares? If they want to promote the Tiger thing let them. This santaminious "I cannot believe it" bollocks would be awful coming from any set of fans, but neither of ours really have a leg to stand on.

Except ours are only nicknames. You are not called the Crystal Palace Eagles and you were never the Crystal Palace Glaziers ( which would have been quite an amusing name after you burnt your town down ) and we were never the Brighton and Hove Albion Dolphins or the Brighton and Hove Albion Seagulls. It's no big deal I agree but then to suggest that City is a shit name so we'll change it is daft. How would you like it if your new Middle Eastern Owners thought Crystal Palace was a complete misnomer ( which it is ) and decided to change your name to the Croydon Eagles?

 

[Southern Toon]

How long will it be before a club owner in the ever increasing chase for money, sells off a clubs naming rights. American Express City ?. Far fetched, maybe not.They used to stand on the terraces of Llansantffraid & sing, were the famous Total Network Solutions & gonna win the league.

 

[Pinkie Brown]

I can't speak for where your 'Eagles' nickname came from, but the 'Seagulls' thing came from the fans (albeit thanks to Palace), not the club.

But neither Seagulls nor Eagles are in the respective club names, nor would either chairman/owner be dumb enough to change them because they found them 'irrelevant' or 'lousy'.

Maybe not at present. But further down the line when Mustapha El Camelspit or Billy Tai Gerbalm are the sole owners of the club?

What the Hull owners are doing is just one example of what is wrong with pro football in this country at present.

Football clubs belong to the community. They are not some 'brand'.

 

[Psalm 56:5]

No, for misusing the term hypocritical.

Had we changed the Clubs actual name then ok, but we, nor you actually, have done so.

It's not a misuse of the word, since I've explained that I see focusing on the Tigers as a commercial change, and both of our clubs have made changes to our clubs in the past for commercial reasons. I have never claimed the changes were identical, merely comparable. Therefore for us, supporters of clubs who have made changes for commercial reasons, to criticise another club for making a similar if different change is in my opinion hypocritical.

How you're free of course to argue that it isn't, but arguing that the term is wrongly used just makes you look like an idiot. All the more so since you've decided to bring intelligence into the equation. An arrogant move at the best of times, but very ill-advised if you're going to do so before saying something stupid.