By Brett McKay
November 11th 2008 @ 2:06am
Get a Roar profile
Loading ...Super 14 tipping now live for sign-ups. Join now and invite your mates..
---------------
‘Fury’ is just one of many shocking team names out there
News late last week that the A-League’s new team from Townsville will be known as North Queensland Fury prompted all sorts of response - good and bad – and generally, got people thinking, yet again, about the best and worst sporting team names kicking around.
For starters: kids, can you draw me a Fury? No? Don’t worry, neither can I.
Names, logos and mascots of sporting teams are always a great source of discussion, because obviously everyone has an opinion on what’s good and what’s less than good. One man’s Penrith Panthers is another man’s South Queensland Crushers.
Where once upon a time the norm was to use an aggressive beast, being or object. There’s been a definite move in recent years – especially in the national competitions – to move to mascots without legs, wheels or wings.
There wouldn’t be too many comps in Australia that don’t feature lions and tigers and bears (oh my …) Or magpies, come to think of it.
But these seem to be dying off, becoming extinct, if you will, in favour of Aces, Diamonds, or Thunder. Spirit seems to be everywhere, and obviously we now have Fury too.
Is this the future of naming teams? Will new clubs just watch re-runs of “Gladiators” and pick one at random?
In the A-League alone, Glory, Victory and Roar compete against Jets, Mariners, and FC, and a string of Uniteds.
How can different teams all be United?
The NRL and AFL teams aren’t too bad, I guess. Port Adelaide Power was and still is a little weird, and I used to think the same of the Melbourne Storm, until I read a Melbourne weather forecast.
In the Super 14, a Waratah hardly evokes fear, and similarly, the Western Force would still appear to have some work to do to live up to their name. Queensland’s Reds are fine, except that they play in maroon.
In fact, just to highlight this confusion, the Reds once played the Auckland Blues on a hot Brisbane day, and so we had the Reds, wearing maroon, playing the Blues, who wore white!
Hello!?
I’ve never come across anyone that can explain to me what a 36er, 49er, or 76er is, either.
Over the ditch, who knows how much lateral thinking and imagination went into All Blacks and Black Caps? And there goes my New Zealand readership again.
It seems that the best imaginations are outside our national competitions.
Growing up in country New South Wales, some cracking names immediately spring to mind: Parkes Spacemen, Junee Diesels, Young Cherrypickers, West Wyalong Mallee Men, Hay Cutters, Leeton Phantoms, and Bungendore Mudchooks.
Forbes Platypi, Orange Emus, and the Bathurst Penguins soon follow.
Fans of Rampaging Roy Slaven would be well aware of the Lithgow Shamrocks. That’s just from my immediate area: I’m sure there’s thousands more out there.
And who knows what those wacky Queenslanders have used over time?
Lovers of Hunter Valley wine would agree that there wouldn’t be too many more aptly named rugby teams floating around than the Pokolbin Reds.
So if country and district teams can embrace a local landmarks and industry for their teams, why must our national entities go for something so “out there” just to ensure marketing individuality? Is something like Fury really the foundation on which to “build the brand?”
And more’s the point, given that everyone really does have an opinion on what’s good and what’s shockingly bad, why don’t new teams ask their potential supporters whether they’d prefer to support a Tiger or a Glory?
North Queensland Fury. Was that the best they could come up with?
Super 14 tipping now live for sign-ups. Join now and invite your mates.
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(15)
Loading ...
sheek said | November 11th 2008 @ 6:00am | Report comment
Brett,
Wonderful article. I don’t know if you’re serious about 36ers, 49ers & 76ers, but here goes.
South Australia was proclaimed a state in 1836, thus 36ers. Gold miners flooded into California in 1949 after the discovery of gold, thus 49ers. Finally, I’m presuming the 76ers draw their inspiration from America’s Declaration of Independance from UK in 1776.
The Queensland Roar were forced to adopt that moniker after the AFL Brisbane Lions claimed the other. And I agree the Queensland Reds is colour blind, but it seems the leagueies beat the rah-rahs to the Maroons! There seems to be a convention that you can’t have two teams, either state or city, with the same moniker.
If that’s the case, then has anyone told the NSW Blues cricket & rugby league teams??? WA Force was dreamt up by some hot shot advertising company. Yet the black swan has always been associated with the west. WA could have killed two birds with one stone (sorry, no pun intended), calling themselves Black Swans, & also evoking imagery from the pirate movie of the same name!
Yeah, I guess we’re never going to agree. Everyone has such a different opinion. I thought the ARC did a pretty good job, especially with Sydney Fleet, West Sydney Rams & Melbourne Rebels, which all drew heavily on relevant historical past.
The Central Coast Rays was a clever combination of coast & hinterland, drawing on the marine animal stingray & rays of the sun. And Perth Spirit is better than Force, as it is more associated with Aboriginal imagery, I guess.
But Ballymore Tornadoes & East Coast Aces was pure American crassness, like the Broncos & Cowboys. And I didn’t think much of Canberra Vikings. At least Raiders is more generalised. But that’s just my opinion.
North Queensland Fury? Originally it was going to be Thunder. Then Fury followed??? What about Crushers, as related to sugar cane? Would Stormers have been better? And no national domestic team appears interested in poor old man Emu. After all, he can the pants off a kanga-roo, la la, lalala, etc.
Of course, when all else fails, as you suggest, why not ask the people affected - the fans???
Kazama said | November 11th 2008 @ 7:35am | Report comment
I’d much rather see teams simply named after their cities / areas. What is wrong with North Queensland FC? IMO leave the gimmick names and ideas for the club mascots and supporter groups.
sheek is correct regarding the 36ers, 49ers and 76ers.
“Port Adelaide Power was and still is a little weird” - A weird name is quite appropriate for such a weird team.
wallythefly said | November 11th 2008 @ 8:04am | Report comment
Good article, I can’t stand some of the names going around, sheek you’re the first person I know who liked the ARC names but I guess that’s it, somepeople will hate them and some like them no matter what.
I dont see why Soccer needs all these mascots anyway, whats wrong with United and FC and City and letting nicknames evolve over time, rather than marketing people in a room decide what it’ll be.
Brett McKay said | November 11th 2008 @ 8:12am | Report comment
Good, I’m glad it’s not just me!!
Sheek, thanks for the explanation of 36ers et al (I was quite serious!), they now don’t seem too bad once the background is known.
But you can’t be serious about the Sydney Fleet (!), you are the only person I’ve had have something positive to say about ‘Fleet’, despite the obvious historic tones. Canberra Vikings was a straight link to the Vikings group of licenced clubs down here, and who took over the running of Canberra teams playing in Sydney, Brisbane and Sydney again after the demise of the Kookaburras.
Midfielder said | November 11th 2008 @ 8:31am | Report comment
I thnink Fury was a name chosen by asking the locals to vote and in the end Fury won out …….maybe a code war with other code simply picking a crap name, no no I assume it was an OK vote TBH.
But your general theme on the names chosen, comes downIMO with new clubs wanting to be different and something that will stand out wanting to put a tag to a team. Interestingly the AFL in the Gold Coast are simply going to call themselves Gold Coast FC , very much a football type tag why they did this is unclear to me Adelaide United just called themselves AU but have been tags the Reds by their fans essentially their name has grown on them.
But I think it comes down to being noticed and different ………. BTW I also agree with Sheek the ARC had great names it was not the names that was its downfall.
Kazama said | November 11th 2008 @ 8:44am | Report comment
Actually Midfielder, Reds is our official nickname. The club ran a competition and the name “Reds” was picked.
Some of the fans had been chanting “Go you Reds” during matches before that though.
sheek said | November 11th 2008 @ 10:53am | Report comment
Yeah, I can understand the angst against Fleet. Being an amateur historian buff however, I thought it was appropriate. Although Mariners might be better???
However, Rams & Rebels was pretty spot on, especially historically. I must admit I can’t cop Platypi. Why not simplify it to Platters? As a promotion you could play ‘The Great Pretender’. No???
Some people obviously hate mascots. I like the concept, providing the monikers are appealing. But there’s the rub. Just in our little thread, there are many differences of opinion.
Ben of Phnom Penh said | November 11th 2008 @ 11:56am | Report comment
Can’t draw a Fury? You need to brush up on your Greek mythology, good sir.
I’m not terribly phased as to what teams decide to call themselves. It is a matter for the club and their fan base to decide. My club has a more traditional name and I am happy with that however I’d support them regardless of the moniker. I am far more interested in the type of football that new clubs bring to the competition.
One down side to modern naming techniques is that it appears to have sapped all of the imagination out of headline writers in the vast majority media outlets. If I read one more “Jets shot down” or “Roar silenced” I fear I shall burst into tears.
Clutch Cable said | November 11th 2008 @ 2:47pm | Report comment
For “interesting” sporting monikers, the second tier of US Football (soccer) is definitely worth a look. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USL_First_Division
I see your North Queensland Fury and raise you a Rochester Raging Rhino, Atlanta Ruckus or a Pittsburgh Riverhound.
wallythefly said | November 11th 2008 @ 3:02pm | Report comment
Acutally yes Rebels was good, but Rams and Fleet and Aces and Tornadoes made me shudder when i first read them.
James Ward said | November 11th 2008 @ 3:06pm | Report comment
Power is still the weirdest. I still don’t get what it is meant to represent
mickhs said | November 12th 2008 @ 8:41pm | Report comment
I can’t believe no one has mentioned the best team name, tag and and badge getting around… the Vincentia Van Goghs… “we will make Rugby an art form”.
http://vincentiavangoghsrugby.org/about_the_club.html
Brett McKay said | November 13th 2008 @ 8:46am | Report comment
mickhs, thanks for this, brilliant!!
md said | November 13th 2008 @ 11:49am | Report comment
I will take your “Fury” and raise you a Tobacco Monopoly FC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thailand_Tobacco_Monopoly_FC)
Kyoto Purple Sanga is another classic - although it is apparently less funny in Japan where it refers to some royal temple.
I like the Oklahoma Sooners too - really implies that southern laid-back approach to things. It’s kind of like Spurs appointing a coach whose name was pronounced One Day…
Cheers
md.
ren said | November 14th 2008 @ 10:30am | Report comment
for funny names try NCAA sport, my favourite is the Akron Zips, with a kangaroo for a mascot
midfielder - it is the norm for a footy club to be called ‘X’ football club, infact the vast majority of clubs are registered in this manner (think collingwood, melbourne, saints, essendon, freamantle, richmond, geelong, carlton and so on)
check out http://sportslogos.net/
provides a complete database of all american teams, in all sports, shows their logos an uniforms as welll as links to a brief history.