Just as long as they don’t bring back the “Superbas” name (genetically-engineered sheep?). Tho the Mets and esp. the Yankees would probably fight any Brooklyn expansion (or relocation) team tooth and nail tho.
The Carolinas might need to wait until there’s high-speed rail to connect all their cities to get an MLB franchise.
Puerto Rican Porpoises?
I presume you’d have a problem from whomever owns the rights to the “Cleveland Barons” name. Since the AHL franchise would all but die after that, I say call them the Admirals. The AHL already has two of them by virtue of the death of the IHL, I think that’d be a welcome change to have one “Admirals” as an NHL team!
Their AAA baseball team is the Louisville Bats.
Okay, the Bridegrooms, then.
Other than that, I agree with Rick: NBA Seattle SuperSonics. A wrong must be avenged.
any city Brutal Deluxe or Super Nashwan.
NBA: Pittsburgh Bricklayers. It works on so many levels, from the streets and buildings to what they’ll be doing for their first decade in the league.
And their coach can be Anthony Mason!
MLB: Portland Threat
Except that the Portland Threat already has a sort of pseudoexistence, although probably not for much longer. You see, whenever a city with an MLB franchise refuses to fund a new stadium or something similar, the owners almost inevitably threatens to move to Portland. The most recent example that I’m aware of was the relocation of the Expos. MLB never really had a serious interest in giving Portland a franchise, but the Portland Threat was useful as a stick to beat the DC area into submission. And it worked too. And it’s not the first time it’s been used.
But the Threat’s days are numbered. The stadium that the Portland Beavers (AAA team) uses will soon be remodelled for soccer-only. They haven’t been able to find a site to build a new baseball park, so it’s likely the Beavers are going to move to another city. So if they can’t find room for a minor league stadium, what are the chances they could find space for a major league one?
So they’re going to have to find a new city to move the Threat to. Sacramento, maybe?
And that will be the end of the last pre-expansion PCL franchise, btw.
NHL - the Wisconsin Ice Wolves
(Didn’t want to go with just wolves - too close to Chicago’s AHL Wolves; also didn’t want to go with Wolverines - too close to U of Michigan. Also, I went with Wisconsin as they could definitely be a Milwaukee/Madison regional team - think a few games in the Kohl Center each season)
MLB: Salt Lake City Saints - Works and provides some continued bizarre New Orleans symbiosis between the cities.
NBA: Seattle Supersonics - Natch.
NHL: Seattle Sounders - Let’'s move the Panthers to Seattle and give the new Sonics a tenant to share a updated Arena with.
NFL: Los Angeles Legends - Kinda works with the Hollywood stuff, both with the famous people and stories. Doubt the NFL wants to embrace the illegal immigration issue by going Spanish.
NHL: Hartford Whalers - Move the Hurricanes back there and be done with it.
MLB: Carolina Cruisers - Not a real strong link here, but I think it’s a cool name. Would have been better as a basketball name though. I suppose you could fanwank a nautical tie in for it.
NBA: Brooklyn Knights - My vote for the name after the Nets move. Just sounds awesome and Knights is an underused name in sports.
NFL: Chicago Ironmen - A bit of a cheat, but there’s been some posturing to add a second NFL team in Chicago. This isn’t a comic book reference but a reference to Chicago’s manufacturing roots and it’s architecture.
I’m gonna step in here and invoke the “appropriate for the location” rule. “Hartford Whalers” never made sense. It’s like the “Albany Sharks” or something. They can circumvent the issue by going with “Connecticut Whalers”.
Yeah, I don’t think New York has enough baseball teams either. :rolleyes:
I vote for an MLB franchise in Indianapolis called the Wasps. They’d be able to tie it in to the car Ray Harroun used to win the first Indy 500, the Marmon Wasp.
If the capital of Texas ever got a major league franchise, it’d be the new MLB team:
Austin Bats
[quote=“BomTek, post:33, topic:549396”]
No, it doesn’t.
Metropolitan New York has nineteen million people in it. The borough of Brooklyn, by itself, would be the fourth largest city in the United States if it were an independent incorporated municipality.
It’d be great if Indianapolis got a baseball team, but they’d have trouble supporting it. It would instantly be the smallest metropolitan area with a baseball team; there are under 2 million people in the census metro area, something no other city with an MLB team can say, and the entire state of Indiana has fewer people than the City of New York and a third of the people of metro New York. What you’d be doing is simply creating another small market team to get hammered by the Yankees.
Instead, why not put teams in New York, where there is a surplus of baseball fans, thereby biting into the Yankees’ market? I know everyone says bah, Yankee fans wouldn’t buy into a new team. Sure they would. They did when the Mets showed up; Yankee attendance dropped 20% despite the team winning the World Series again, and did not recover to pre-Met levels for 15 years. Why does every city have to have one or two teams? Why not put teams where fans are?
Similarly, metropolitan Toronto really should have three NHL teams (at least), not one. It is absolutely nonsensical to have even one NHL team in Raleigh, which is a nice town and all but probably doesn’t have as many hockey fans as any of Toronto’s six sub-cities, and have only one in Toronto, which could easily support three teams. A good business model puts the product where there are customers who want to buy it.
New Orleans Mardi Gras works for any sport.
Las Vegas Sevens, or Las Vegas Neons
They have one? 
I’m with you – I think it’s just a rumour.
Sure. The Buffalo Sabres. I’m being really liberal in my definition of “metropolitan area.”