RoxumJD Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 Hull City AFC will be renamed Hull City Tigers, says club owner Assem Allam. The "Association Football Club" part of the Yorkshire club's name, which has been in effect since their formation in 1904, will be scrapped. So how would people feel if we became Leicester City Foxes/ Leicester Foxes? Is it another case of football gone mad and owners not respecting a clubs history and heritage or is it a good idea if it makes more money for the club by attracting a global audience? Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 You know it has to be posted, it just has to... You all know what I mean... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrumFox Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 You know it has to be posted, it just has to... You all know what I mean... haha always makes me laugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bayfox Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 stupid idea both for hull and ourselves. I did quite like the idea of taking back the fosse when it was muted a few years back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobHawk Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 If we were to ever change our name from Leicester City to try and be a bit more unique i would rather we went back to Leicester Fosse! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lgfualol Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 Leicester City Elephants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simo86 Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 Crap attempt from Hull to try and make their boring club more interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicester_Numan Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 Their owner has apparently said City is associated with clubs like Leicester without realising Tigers is associated with Leicester. Foreign owners eh, always good for a laugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 Dull City it will always be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mackiepas Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 Why do we feel the need to 'Americanise' everything! No leave it as it is ffs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LCFCMickey Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 It's not that big of a deal... it's their "affectionate" name in any case... and they keep their colours? and their ground? Us changing to Leicester City Foxes, wouldn't make any sense - From LCFC to LCFFC? Talk about making more work for yourself. I'm sure both Cov and Cardiff fans are the ones either laughing or raging the most, directly at the Hull fans. Cov's actual hardship is a far worse situation and Cardiff''s rebrand was massive! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoxumJD Posted 9 August 2013 Author Share Posted 9 August 2013 Completely agree. Would never want someone changing the identity of Leicester for such daft reasons... I definitely don't want Football (an English game) to become Americanised for financial incentives!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashfosse Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 Leicester City Elephants not a bad shout. would also like the Leicester Ladyboys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cc_star Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 I was in favour of Leicester Fosse & still am, but Foxes? No ****ing way! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan LCFC Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 It would be a cringeworthy American style name done for marketing purposes rather than football, so a massive no from me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox42 Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 If we don't go up this season, we'll be renamed simply as King Power FC... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poznan34 Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 Leicester Fosse would be alright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freeman's Wharfer Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 I really don't get this whole changing of a name to become more marketable business. You really telling me that millions of people are going to look at Hull's football team and start supporting them because their name is Hull Tigers rather than Hull City?! It's nonsense. People will support a club either because they're from the place (in which case 'Hull City' is appropriate), because they have family ties to the club or because the club is successful (your glory hunters). Hell, you may even get someone support a club because a certain player plays for them, but I really don't think what comes after Hull is that big a deal. They'd be better off just going for a marquee signing than changing their name in a snub to their own history and traditions. Bless them for trying but ultimately certain football clubs have a galss ceiling that will never be broken through because they don't have the support, the history or potential. Look at Wigan, they've tried to grow for the last 10 years to something bigger than they are but it's just never going to happen. Despite an FA Cup, years in the Premier League and having had some decent players, they can still only sell 5,500 tickets for the Community Shield at Wembley. In 50 years time, Hull's football club will be very much similar to what it is now; average support, playing at an average level, with average players. A brief period of success may come but eventually the natural order will be restored and all that will be left that's different from now and before now is that they'll have 'Tigers' stuck on the end of their name. And they'll wonder why they ever even bothered changing, probably reverting back to 'City' in a vain attempt to regain the history that they're casting aside now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitesh Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 Na, always Leicester City for me please... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lestajigs Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 No Leicester city, that's that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lestajigs Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 I really don't get this whole changing of a name to become more marketable business. You really telling me that millions of people are going to look at Hull's football team and start supporting them because their name is Hull Tigers rather than Hull City?! It's nonsense. People will support a club either because they're from the place (in which case 'Hull City' is appropriate), because they have family ties to the club or because the club is successful (your glory hunters). Hell, you may even get someone support a club because a certain player plays for them, but I really don't think what comes after Hull is that big a deal. They'd be better off just going for a marquee signing than changing their name in a snub to their own history and traditions. Bless them for trying but ultimately certain football clubs have a galss ceiling that will never be broken through because they don't have the support, the history or potential. Look at Wigan, they've tried to grow for the last 10 years to something bigger than they are but it's just never going to happen. Despite an FA Cup, years in the Premier League and having had some decent players, they can still only sell 5,500 tickets for the Community Shield at Wembley. In 50 years time, Hull's football club will be very much similar to what it is now; average support, playing at an average level, with average players. A brief period of success may come but eventually the natural order will be restored and all that will be left that's different from now and before now is that they'll have 'Tigers' stuck on the end of their name. And they'll wonder why they ever even bothered changing, probably reverting back to 'City' in a vain attempt to regain the history that they're casting aside now. Good post mate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox92 Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 Always Leicester City for me as well. But not a massive deal. They've added their nickname onto the end, hardly disrespecting the history of the club is it? Plus, it's something different, there are obviously a lot of 'City' clubs like he says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XLM Posted 9 August 2013 Share Posted 9 August 2013 It's a step towards Americanisation. One which doesn't belong in the English game - Football in this country is traditional, and branding a club based on it's logo is something Americans do with their teams. I will be severely pissed off if in 20 years time our badge is a growling fox and we have a massive banner across our shirts that says FOXES. An idea almost as shit as Hull will be in the prem this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.