I saw a recent Facebook posting from the Milwaukee Admirals, our AHL Hockey team and affiliate of the NHL’s Nashville Predators. It referred to the team as the “Ads” as if that was supposed to endear their fans to the team. What is an “Ad”? I’m in advertising, and we have “ads.” Should a hockey team? And what’s wrong with “Admirals”? It must be an organizational thing because the parent club is referred to locally in Nashville as the “Preds.” That might actually be worse than “Ads.”
So it got me thinking, is this coming up with nicknames for nicknames thing really necessary? In some circles, admittedly, it does work. Take the Green Bay Packers. If you’ve been to Lambeau Field and heard the “Go Pack Go” chant, you know what I mean. And “Pack” is a good nickname, inferring some kind of togetherness to opponents. Plus, other teams use it. If you’re from the south, you have your own “Pack” as in the NC State Wolfpack. And Nevada has its “Pack” as in the University of Nevada Wolfpack. Pack is good.
But as with the Ads and Preds, abbreviating nicknames or nicknaming nicknames usually isn’t good. Take the Milwaukee Brewers. Lots of folks refer to them as “the Crew,” which emanated from the term “Brew Crew,” which obviously came from trying to rhyme something with the Brew in Brewers. Obviously that hasn’t worked, since the team has only been in the playoffs twice in its 40-year history. And which strikes more fear in the hearts of opponents, “the Crew” or the “Bronx Bombers”?
The Milwaukee Bucks slogan this year is “Fear the Deer!” No one has ever “feared a deer” that I know of. A “Buck” is at least somewhat imposing because it has horns. A “deer” is sweet, loving and passive, which is what the Bucks have been to their opponents this season. Coincidence?
The Packers played the San Francisco 49ers Sunday. “49ers” is a good name and has a lot of heritage, honoring the gold prospectors who arrived in Northern California in 1849 during the California Gold Rush. Yet some people refer to them as the “Niners.” What’s a “Niner”? And how much time do you save when you eliminate the word “40” from the title? Again, not the most flattering derivation.
 |
| Yep, this is the uniform the Packers wore Sunday. |
Speaking of the Packers-49ers game Sunday, to take this one step further, I’m sure you saw the Packers “throwback” uniforms. They might be the worst uniforms ever to flop around a football field. The entire stadium was dressed in the familiar and storied “green & gold,” and the Packers were decked in navy blue & mustard uniforms with chocolate helmets. All together now, say “yuck”. Worse, coach Mike McCarthy had the name “Acme Packers” on his hat. The team was so disjointed they were only ahead 14-13 at the half, against a significantly inferior team. They just couldn’t figure out who they were, who was on their team or who to throw the ball to.
Although not relevant to Milwaukee, my favorite team in the world, the NHL’s New York Rangers, introduced a “heritage” jersey this year. It’s true they’ve been in the league 85 years, but what necessitates a third jersey is quite mysterious, other than trying to bilk their fans out of some more money. The Rangers have the best uniforms in sports. But they changed the gorgeous royal blue primary color of the jersey to navy and changed the signature “Rangers” across the front to “New York.” They wear the heritage jerseys only at home, maybe in case the fans in Madison Square Garden think they’re in Miami? And guess what? The Rangers have worn the jerseys twice this year, and they’re 0-2, including a loss Sunday night. Brilliant.
My theory here is that teams reflect the identities of their names and uniforms. Tradition is important. I wish people wouldn’t minimize the clout of a good name with another one just because it’s cool. Same goes for uniforms. If you’ve got a good thing, don’t screw it up just to make a buck.
