NY NL Giants and NFL Giants.

if uniqueness is overrated then what is being just like everyone else?

 

 

question

Yes I know that...but the MLB franchise had teal in their colors.

Das, we have teal in our uni's, I think next season you may see more of it. The black uni looks like it has been shot down by the starting rotation. the teal in our uniforms and such is pathetic.

 

 

the black is overused, every damn team uses it.

 

 

 

i want this franchise to go back to being 'unique' Loria wanted to make the team look more "tough" by adding black....He got rid of the teal lettering and he changed the pinstripes to black. 1996-2002 uniform rotation was good. There was enough teal and black. Right now the Marlins are pretty much know as the men in black and white now.

 

I miss those vests too...I want to start a petition.

i dont think i want the name changing anyway.

it just gets a little confusing-bc. the FLORIDA marlins won the 97 and 03 WS-and thier the same team as the MIAMI(or whatever else they would change it to)marlins...

i forget who mentioned it...may have been cape...

 

 

one teal jersey would not be bad.

 

 

hell they even got rid of the teal jerseys in spring training for the black....

 

 

this franchise has conformed to everyone else. thats sad.

i hate the marlins in black. the uniforms are designed pretty cool, it's just so damn bland. i mean watching that World Series yankees in grey & the marlins in black made me want to turn the TV off. (rofl, ok not really)

 

how many teams have a black jersey now???

 

astros, brewers, white sox obviously, marlins, even the mets.

who else?

For MLB record keepers, a location name change is all hell. All franchise records get wiped out and cannot be continued unless the name is changed back.

 

See Los Angeles to California to Anaheim Angels or Boston to Milwaukee to Atlanta Braves.

i forget who mentioned it...may have been cape...

 

 

one teal jersey would not be bad.

 

 

hell they even got rid of the teal jerseys in spring training for the black....

 

 

this franchise has conformed to everyone else. thats sad.

that's what i say. replace the black one with a teal one.

you're telling me that the Anaheim Angels stats don't count with the California Angels???

4 pages for this? its been the Florida Marlins since the start, why change that? honestly, whats the uproar over this? if they have to change it to get the stadium than ok but if not than keep it as it is.

 

also it sounds better

you're telling me that the Anaheim Angels stats don't count with the California Angels???

That's right. The Angels AL franchise has it's own number in order of when it came into the MLB, but the Anaheim AL franchise has seperate records from the Los Angeles AL or California AL franchise.

yea-the 'F' logo looks really cool!

you're telling me that the Anaheim Angels stats don't count with the California Angels???

That's right. The Angels AL franchise has it's own number in order of when it came into the MLB, but the Anaheim AL franchise has seperate records from the Los Angeles AL or California AL franchise. that's not true. It's true that some people keep records of what they've done since they've changed to Anaheim, but it's the same franchise, just like the NY Giants and SF Giants are the same franchise.

For MLB record keepers, a location name change is all hell. All franchise records get wiped out and cannot be continued unless the name is changed back.

They're not moving the team half way across the country....TBS brings up "Braves" franchise records frequently(Boston and Milwaukee). Up here in Minnesota, they'll bring up a franchise record from the old Senators.

 

You make it sound like a change to Miami will change eveyone's perception of the team. Personally I don't feel any different about the Angels whether they're called L.A., Cal. or Anaheim. It's the same part of the country, same fan base....or should be.

For example:

 

The Washington Senators were both AL franchises, so when the first one left for Minnesota to become the Twins, the new expansion Senators got their own record book which is now part of Texas and continued to be able to set records in the Washington team record book. If Montreal moves to D.C. and picks the Washigton name, no matter whether Senators or Expos, they still can comete for Washington MLB franchise records.

 

In cities with both NL and AL, the record books are shared and have two categories, one for the AL and one for the NL.

 

i.e.

Boston Braves Hitter got 26 rbi.

Boston Red Sox Hitter got 35 rbi.

 

Both are leaders in Boston franchise(s) record book.

a case of a team changing its name and losing its history are the Baltimore Ravens (former Cleveland Browns) but thats because of an exception the NFL made for Cleveland when they promised the new Browns. but the Angels are the same franchise, they've changed names a few times but they're the same team

you're telling me that the Anaheim Angels stats don't count with the California Angels???

That's right. The Angels AL franchise has it's own number in order of when it came into the MLB, but the Anaheim AL franchise has seperate records from the Los Angeles AL or California AL franchise. that's not true. It's true that some people keep records of what they've done since they've changed to Anaheim, but it's the same franchise, just like the NY Giants and SF Giants are the same franchise. San Francisco has it's own record book, NY Giants had their own record book, the Giants franchise has it's own record book.

 

This is all catalouged by the Hall of Fame.

Broward and Palm Beach County are South Florida. Miami and Dade County are only part of South Florida, and a sorry part at that.

That's what Wayne Huizenga thought when he named the franchise Florida instead of Miami. Let's face it, relatively few people outside of SouthEAST Florida root for the Marlins.

 

I think it's stupid how petty the "regionalism within a region" that we see in South Florida can be. Here's how I see this argument:

 

1 - Miami is STILL the signature city in South Florida. When national TV crews come to South Florida to cover an sporting event, what do they show footage of? Downtown Miami, South Beach, etc. They rarely if ever show any Broward or Palm Beach footage. Miami is instantly recognizable world-wide, tell someone overseas you're from Fort Lauderdale or West Palm Beach and they'll have no idea where those cities are located.

 

2. Miami and Miami-Dade County have shown all the interest in the new stadium, and that right there entitles them to call the team whatever they want.

 

Therefore, I vote MIAMI Marlins. :thumbup

For example:

 

The Washington Senators were both AL franchises, so when the first one left for Minnesota to become the Twins, the new expansion Senators got their own record book which is now part of Texas and continued to be able to set records in the Washington team record book. If Montreal moves to D.C. and picks the Washigton name, no matter whether Senators or Expos, they still can comete for Washington MLB franchise records.

 

In cities with both NL and AL, the record books are shared and have two categories, one for the AL and one for the NL.

 

i.e.

Boston Braves Hitter got 26 rbi.

Boston Red Sox Hitter got 35 rbi.

 

Both are leaders in Boston franchise(s) record book.

those are cases of teams moving, we're just talking changing the name of the location from Florida to Miami, it'll be the same franchise with the same records.

For MLB record keepers, a location name change is all hell. All franchise records get wiped out and cannot be continued unless the name is changed back.

They're not moving the team half way across the country....TBS brings up "Braves" franchise records frequently(Boston and Milwaukee). Up here in Minnesota, they'll bring up a franchise record from the old Senators.

 

You make it sound like a change to Miami will change eveyone's perception of the team. Personally I don't feel any different about the Angels whether they're called L.A., Cal. or Anaheim. It's the same part of the country, same fan base....or should be. If it won't cahnge anyone's perception, then why change the name?

Southwest Florida is part of South Florida and we cheer for the Marlins,

You telling me I ain't in Marlins home territory because I don't live in Monroe, Dade, Broward, or Palm Beach?

 

MLB says the Marlins are my primary team and the Devil Rays are secondary just like in Miami or Broward or Palm Beach.

you're telling me that the Anaheim Angels stats don't count with the California Angels???

That's right. The Angels AL franchise has it's own number in order of when it came into the MLB, but the Anaheim AL franchise has seperate records from the Los Angeles AL or California AL franchise. that's not true. It's true that some people keep records of what they've done since they've changed to Anaheim, but it's the same franchise, just like the NY Giants and SF Giants are the same franchise. San Francisco has it's own record book, NY Giants had their own record book, the Giants franchise has it's own record book.

 

This is all catalouged by the Hall of Fame. yeah, they keep different records, but the fact of the matter is, it's still the same franchise

Another reason why the Marlins should change their team to Miami is that there's another team in the state. It's one thing to call your team the "Colorado" Rockies or "Minnesota" Twins when there are no other teams in the state. But when there are they shouldn't be known by the state name.

I think the Florida Marlins and Golden St. Warriors are the only teams to do this.

same franchise, different symbolic "location". Get your minds out of this thought. The Marlins won't change their name anyway, the owners is focusing on a regional marketing approach which means all the territory in Florida they can get. Henry marketed to Miami and Broward mostly and it has flopped, bring it back statewide like Wayne did and you will do better.

*cough* Texas Rangers. *cough*