Kawshen
Liverwurst
   
   
      
 
  
Since: 2.1.02
From: Bronx, NY
Since last post: 1443 days
Last activity: 10 days
| AIM: |  |
| | |
|  #1 Posted on 21.1.04 2120.37 | Instant Rating: 6.40 | http://sports.espn.go.com/ nba/news/story?id=1714858
Sorry, Jersey. Your team started winning and you didn't support it. Now it looks like you're going to lose it in a few years.
New York Nets or Brooklyn Nets? I like the latter personally. It's more marketable.
(edited by Kawshen on 21.1.04 2223)
 | | Promote this thread! |           | Grimis
Scrapple
Since: 11.7.02
From: MD
Since last post: 753 days
Last activity: 550 days
| #2 Posted on 22.1.04 0655.32 | Instant Rating: 7.29 | New York Nets sounds better, since it was intended to rhyme with the Mets and Jets(and later rhymed with the Sets).
Brooklyn might be more apporporiate though.
Dean reminds me of the Hulk in that interim stage just before Bruce Banner turns green and starts to rip his clothes.- Jonah Goldberg | Mr. Heat Miser
Blutwurst
Since: 27.1.02
Since last post: 2029 days
Last activity: 131 days
|  #3 Posted on 22.1.04 0838.29 | Instant Rating: 4.82 | They've gotta go with Brooklyn - it would ensure a rabid following amongst Brooklynites, and to call them the New York Nets would doom them to forever being "that other New York team".
Plus, (and maybe this is just the former Brooklynite in me), I have to think that there would be more merchandising potential in the Brooklyn name. New York already has, what, seven other pro sports teams?
-MHM, winner of the 2000 Throwdown in Christmastown. |
| | |
Thread rated: 5.56