There's already been speculation of that. Michael Jordan has voiced his interest. I believe David Stern has indicated support. There's apparently a poll for fans to vote on as well and I doubt they'd vote against it/say otherwise. I think NBA teams have to wait a minimum of 3 seasons before changing uniforms, but they could find a workaround for it. If anything, we might see them keep their current sets, but replace the "CATS" on their home whites with "Hornets." Beyond that, they'd just need to tweak the logos and the rest of the uniform can remain unchanged until the moratorium is up. Charlotte Bobcats Home Uniform - National Basketball Association (NBA) - Chris Creamer's Sports Logos Page - SportsLogos.Net The Hornets logo could be the basic template that NO used from 2002-2008 (before they started giving it the New Orleans treatment), or they could dust off the old Charlotte logo and simply splash the current dark blue/light blue/orange scheme on it. The WNBA's Charlotte Sting did something similar when the Bobcats entered the league. New Orleans Hornets Logos - National Basketball Association (NBA) - Chris Creamer's Sports Logos Page - SportsLogos.Net But there's also that chance that all of this could be set aside in favor of bringing the Hornets back in their entirety (name, colors, and all).
I read about how teams moving can cause a nickname to have no meaning in it's new city. Like the Minneapolis Lakers making sense but not the LA Lakers. Same with the Utah Jazz. WTF does Jazz have to do with Utah? But before moving to Utah, they were the New Orleans Jazz. So I read some guy saying all this: Memphis Grizzleys > Memphis Kings (Elvis reference works) Sacramento Kings > Sacramento Bobcats ------->Seattle Supersonics Charlotte Bobcats > Charlotte Hornets (they get the Hornets name back) New Orleans Hornets > New Orleans Jazz (Makes sense and their original team) Utah Jazz > Utah Grizzleys (probably won't work, haha, maybe even it don't make sense, Utah Jazz is too iconic like LA Lakers) And you can't do shit about LA and the Lakers name because they're to iconic.
They were the Kansas City Kings before moving to Sacramento, by the way. Which was changed from the Royals when the team moved to KC from Cincinnati because Kansas City's baseball team was already named the Royals (teams in the same city with the same name didn't seem to bother New York's Giants' or St. Louis' Cardinals' though). I do sometimes wish that the Detroit Pistons would have been the Bears instead. Yeah, Detroit- Motor City and all... but Detroit's sports teams would have been the Lions, Tigers, and Bears.
A cool fan concept of the Supersonics logo. Seattle Sonics Concept - Concepts - Chris Creamer's Sports Logos Community - SportsLogos.Net Forums I still like what they had going for them prior to the move to OKC (2001-2008). Hell, I still love the unis they wore from 1995-2001.
The relocation committee has voted to DENY the Kings moving to Seattle! Maybe they can go after another team or have the NBA just add a team or two...Seattle deserves a team...but Sacramento doesn't deserve to lose theirs to make it happen.
They would need to make it a 32-team league, so another team in the east would have to be introduced as well. There would have to be some divisional realignment as well. But expansion kind of sucks in that it waters down the talent pool while resulting in more bad teams.
I agree, but stripping one fan base to help another isn't a good solution either, unless you can get a team where the fans and community really aren't supporting their team like the Bucs maybe... I think going after a team where the city was already trying hard to keep it in place and had the community support was a mis-step. In all honesty I think Sacramento was probbaly the ONLY smaller NBA city that could have stood against Seattle to keep their team.
Meanwhile a Vegas will forever not get a professional team. I know the gambling thing is 99% of the reason why Vegas hasn't gotten a professional team yet but that city has a pretty big sports fanbase desperate for ANY pro sports team. All we had to cheer for when I lived there was our Rebels. The XFL did have the Outlaws there but the XFL was a big failure. Only other semi-pro team out there is the Area 51's, I think.
Yeah, the gambling thing is probably what keeps the big guys from wanting to put a team there and it's unfortunate...I'd be all for new teams in Vegas and Seattle, then pretty much everybody's happy.
It's pretty much an image thing with Vegas, to be honest. The state allowed gambling on UNLV basketball and football games some years ago and there hasn't been any problems. It's mostly the commissioners of the four major sports that can't get it in their minds that you can have a team in Vegas and keep the gambling off the teams.