Who Owns The Team Name? (1 Viewer)

[Joe Bryant]

Not sure if this is FFA or Shark Pool material so I'll go with both.

Fred Dryer was on NFL Network last night talking about the LA Rams. Said something that was interesting.

He said (and I think he's right) that the huge problem for Los Angeles was that the city let Frontiere take the team name with her to St. Louis. If the team had held onto the name (like Cleveland did) it would have been much more attractive for a team to move into Los Angeles and start back up as the Los Angeles Rams.

You younger guys may not remember, but the Rams in LA were a high profile team.

But it made me think, what right would the city have had to keep that name? That's a team / league decision, right? When the Colts stole away in the middle of the night to Indy, they got to keep the Colts.

What's the scoop on this?

And for you Cleveland fans, refresh my memory on how that worked exactly with the Browns.

J

 

[Workhorse]

I'm by no means an expert on the Browns-Ravens thing but from what I remember, Modell was prohibited from using the Browns name and colors based on the ruling of a lawsuit that the city filed against him.

 

[code]

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Funny that Cleveland didnt keep the Rams name, but kept the Browns name

 

[Joe Bryant]

Funny that Cleveland didnt keep the Rams name, but kept the Browns name

Wasn't it Rosenbloom in LA and Irsay in Baltimore that swapped back in the 70's? J

 

[JoeSteeler]

I'm by no means an expert on the Browns-Ravens thing but from what I remember, Modell was prohibited from using the Browns name and colors based on the ruling of a lawsuit that the city filed against him.

Yes this is correct. The lawsuit let Cleveland keep the Browns' name, colors, history, records, awards and archives.

 

[phthalatemagic]

I think the major difference between the two situations is that when the Browns moved to Baltimore, they stopped using the name, they never played as the Baltimore Browns. When the Rams moved to STL, they kept the name and have been playing for years under it. It was be strange to take the name now, after they've established the name. Heck, I bet 20% of the NFL fan population don't even remember the LA Rams.

 

[GroveDiesel]

I may be wrong, but I think the Browns name may have been left behind as part of an agreement having to do with the stadium. Modell had a lease maybe that he broke? That seems to be rattling around in my head.

 

[Sweet Love]

I also think the league steps in for special cases where a team may return to that market and it was just the ownership (and not terrible revenue) that prompted the move. Obviously, this was the case with the Browns...although I have to admit, I am surprised that the name traveled with the team to St. Louis...same with the Utah Jazz in the NBA.

I think it is determined on a case-by-case basis as to who owns the team name.

 

[JoeSteeler]

I also think the league steps in for special cases where a team may return to that market and it was just the ownership (and not terrible revenue) that prompted the move. Obviously, this was the case with the Browns...although I have to admit, I am surprised that the name traveled with the team to St. Louis...same with the Utah Jazz in the NBA.I think it is determined on a case-by-case basis as to who owns the team name.

If I remember correctly, the league didn't step in until the city filed the lawsuit. The fans pushed so hard for this and were in such an uproar I don't think the league had much choice. I think the NFL was afraid the matter would be tied up in the courts (speculation) so came up with the aggrement to appease both sides. I remember watching Modell's initial press conference in Baltimore and kept thinking a crazed Browns fan was going to shoot him.

 

[Ted Lange as your Bartender]

Not an expert either, but I don't remember Modell being "prohibited" from taking the name Browns - I thought part of the final settlement to allow the team out of their lease early to move to Baltimore was that the name and history would stay in Cleveland.

But if push came to shove in court strictly on the name issue, I'm sure Modell could've taken the Browns name to Baltimore if he wanted to. What right does the city have to the team's name? I looked at it as a courtesy/concession by Modell more than anything.

 

[Phurfur]

The team name goes with the franchise. I beleive the Browns are the only exception. The Cardinals went from Chicago to St. Louis to Arizona.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Funny that Cleveland didnt keep the Rams name, but kept the Browns name

Wasn't it Rosenbloom in LA and Irsay in Baltimore that swapped back in the 70's? J

I dunnoI thought the Cleveland Rams moved to LA and Kept the Rams name Then the AAFL came along with the BRowns and they joined the NFL in the 50's

 

[Ted Lange as your Bartender]

Funny that Cleveland didnt keep the Rams name, but kept the Browns name

Wasn't it Rosenbloom in LA and Irsay in Baltimore that swapped back in the 70's? J

That is correct - 1972, the two owners traded teams - the players stayed with their respective teams

 

[code]

In the AFL the Kansas City Chiefs were once the Dallas Texans...didn't take that name with them...Edit to add Wikipedia supporting blurb:

Hunt, with a roster replete with players who had played college football in Texas, wanted to maintain a lineage to the team’s roots and wanted to call the club the "Kansas City Texans". "The Lakers stayed the Lakers when they moved from Minnesota to California," he reasoned. "But Jack Steadman convinced me that wasn’t too smart. It wouldn’t sell." The team was renamed the Kansas City Chiefs—one of the most popular suggestions Hunt received in a name-the-team contest, along with "Kansas City Mules" — and began playing in Kansas City’s Municipal Stadium in 1963

 

[Phurfur]

In the AFL the Kansas City Chiefs were once the Dallas Texans...didn't take that name with them...

In MLB the Brewers were once the Seatle Pilots but ownership changed too.

 

[Ted Lange as your Bartender]

In the AFL the Kansas City Chiefs were once the Dallas Texans...didn't take that name with them...

There's plenty of examples of teams choosing to retire a name rather than take it with them if it doesn't make sense geographically - a lot of examples recently in the NHL Colorado Rockies--->New Jersey Devils, Quebec Nordiques--->Colorado Avalanche, Winnipeg Jets--->Phoenix Coyotes, Hartford Whalers--->Carolina Hurricanesand recently the Expos--->Nationals in baseball.The Jazz should've followed suit when they moved from New Orleans to UtahBut I believe the owners of the respective teams still own the rights to those old names. If another NHL team wanted to move to Hartford and be called the Whalers, they would need permission from Peter Karmanos in Carolina.

 

[code]

In the AFL the Kansas City Chiefs were once the Dallas Texans...didn't take that name with them...

But I believe the owners of the respective teams still own the rights to those old names. If another NHL team wanted to move to Hartford and be called the Whalers, they would need permission from Peter Karmanos in Carolina.

Excellent point...confirmed here:

In April the list of five names is narrowed down to three: Apollos, Stallions and Texans. Before selecting "Texans", owner Bob McNair asked fellow NFL owner Lamar Hunt for his permission to use the moniker. Hunt and his franchise, the Dallas Texans (now the Kansas City Chiefs), were charter members of the American Football League.

 

[jcjets]

Lets look at it this way.

The Rams are a cool name and one of the best helmets in the NFL, I'd fight to keep that!

I would happily give up the colors the Browns wear and the bland helmet. Actually I may pay the league to let me not keep them both.

The Raiders also spent some time in LA for a short time. Would Davis have moved them there if he had to rename his team the Rams? I don't think so.

I would love the city to be able to keep the name of the team. If the Pats ever did move to St.Louis would it have made sense to still call them the Patriots? NO!

 

[Jason Wood]

Naming rights are an asset, as is the goodwill of the brand. When teams are negotiating with governments to help fund new stadiums (and get favorable leases and tax breaks to go with it), some may have to, or are willing to, put up naming rights and the brand equity as part of the collateral. Others opt not to (or negotiate that away).

 

[John Mamula]

Not sure if this is FFA or Shark Pool material so I'll go with both.Fred Dryer was on NFL Network last night talking about the LA Rams. Said something that was interesting.He said (and I think he's right) that the huge problem for Los Angeles was that the city let Frontiere take the team name with her to St. Louis. If the team had held onto the name (like Cleveland did) it would have been much more attractive for a team to move into Los Angeles and start back up as the Los Angeles Rams.You younger guys may not remember, but the Rams in LA were a high profile team. But it made me think, what right would the city have had to keep that name? That's a team / league decision, right? When the Colts stole away in the middle of the night to Indy, they got to keep the Colts. What's the scoop on this?And for you Cleveland fans, refresh my memory on how that worked exactly with the Browns.J

at the "Rams" making LA more attractive.Rams weren't even in LA for I don't even know how long before they moved to STL.People in LA would rather have an extra non blacked out game to watch on Sunday than have a team there. That is a fact. With all the transplants there, the demand isn't overwhelming for a team given the massive amount of options on a Sunday morning there is to do there.Fred is living in the past the relevance of the Rams were very much diminished before they left LA.

 

[pmcdade]

It was part of an agreement with the NFL that involved the expansion team and all with Art being allowed to leave. The NFL was very scared that the City of Cleveland might well prevail against Modell and the precedent would cripple the NFL's efforts to move teams around. Just because people don't remember how bad this was:

1) Art Modell refuses to participate in the Gund Arena/Jacobs field revitilization, stating that he would prefer to remain at Cleveland Municipal at the lakefront.

2) Gund/Jacobs is a huge success and Modell has much regret over yet another horrible business decision.

3) City and Art Modell begin negotations on plans to renovate the stadium and revitalize the area as a part of the Flats/Rock & Roll Hall of Fame/Lakefront redevelopment.

4) Training Camp starts and Art Modell puts a moratorium on talks stating that the team will be making the playoffs and he does not want off-season distractions. Art states that talks will resume after the season.

5) Browns suck but still pull in 60,000+ in crowds on a regular basis and even sometimes still sell out the 80,000+ stadium.

6) Model, out of no-where without giving the City of Cleveland any chance to respond or counter, signs contracts with Baltimore to move the city there in return for a large cash infusion. (It should be noted, that Art's continuing failures at business have rendered him nearly bankrupt and without the cash he would have had to sell the team.)

7) Model moves, lawsuit filed, NFL intervenes and comes up with settlement.

8) Model, still a lousy businessman, continues to lose money with a Superbowl caliber team in a brand new stadium with sellout crowds and eventually has to sell anyway.

And they want to put this guy in the Hall of Fame?

 

[Del Griffith]

Not sure if this is FFA or Shark Pool material so I'll go with both.Fred Dryer was on NFL Network last night talking about the LA Rams. Said something that was interesting.He said (and I think he's right) that the huge problem for Los Angeles was that the city let Frontiere take the team name with her to St. Louis. If the team had held onto the name (like Cleveland did) it would have been much more attractive for a team to move into Los Angeles and start back up as the Los Angeles Rams.You younger guys may not remember, but the Rams in LA were a high profile team. But it made me think, what right would the city have had to keep that name? That's a team / league decision, right? When the Colts stole away in the middle of the night to Indy, they got to keep the Colts. What's the scoop on this?And for you Cleveland fans, refresh my memory on how that worked exactly with the Browns.J

Rams weren't even in LA for I don't even know how long before they moved to STL.

I don't know what that sentence means, but they were in Southern CA for 49 years before they moved to StL.

 

[John Mamula]

Not sure if this is FFA or Shark Pool material so I'll go with both.Fred Dryer was on NFL Network last night talking about the LA Rams. Said something that was interesting.He said (and I think he's right) that the huge problem for Los Angeles was that the city let Frontiere take the team name with her to St. Louis. If the team had held onto the name (like Cleveland did) it would have been much more attractive for a team to move into Los Angeles and start back up as the Los Angeles Rams.You younger guys may not remember, but the Rams in LA were a high profile team. But it made me think, what right would the city have had to keep that name? That's a team / league decision, right? When the Colts stole away in the middle of the night to Indy, they got to keep the Colts. What's the scoop on this?And for you Cleveland fans, refresh my memory on how that worked exactly with the Browns.J

Rams weren't even in LA for I don't even know how long before they moved to STL.

I don't know what that sentence means, but they were in Southern CA for 49 years before they moved to StL.

Yeah, SoCal.But Anaheim is NOT LA.

 

[Del Griffith]

Not sure if this is FFA or Shark Pool material so I'll go with both.Fred Dryer was on NFL Network last night talking about the LA Rams. Said something that was interesting.He said (and I think he's right) that the huge problem for Los Angeles was that the city let Frontiere take the team name with her to St. Louis. If the team had held onto the name (like Cleveland did) it would have been much more attractive for a team to move into Los Angeles and start back up as the Los Angeles Rams.You younger guys may not remember, but the Rams in LA were a high profile team. But it made me think, what right would the city have had to keep that name? That's a team / league decision, right? When the Colts stole away in the middle of the night to Indy, they got to keep the Colts. What's the scoop on this?And for you Cleveland fans, refresh my memory on how that worked exactly with the Browns.J

Rams weren't even in LA for I don't even know how long before they moved to STL.

I don't know what that sentence means, but they were in Southern CA for 49 years before they moved to StL.

Yeah, SoCal.But Anaheim is NOT LA.

What's your point? You said "...before they moved to StL." It was 49 years before they moved to StL. For the record, they were in LA for 34 years, and Anaheim for 15.

 

[Tom Servo]

It was part of an agreement with the NFL that involved the expansion team and all with Art being allowed to leave. The NFL was very scared that the City of Cleveland might well prevail against Modell and the precedent would cripple the NFL's efforts to move teams around. Just because people don't remember how bad this was:

1) Art Modell refuses to participate in the Gund Arena/Jacobs field revitilization, stating that he would prefer to remain at Cleveland Municipal at the lakefront.

2) Gund/Jacobs is a huge success and Modell has much regret over yet another horrible business decision.

3) City and Art Modell begin negotations on plans to renovate the stadium and revitalize the area as a part of the Flats/Rock & Roll Hall of Fame/Lakefront redevelopment.

4) Training Camp starts and Art Modell puts a moratorium on talks stating that the team will be making the playoffs and he does not want off-season distractions. Art states that talks will resume after the season.

5) Browns suck but still pull in 60,000+ in crowds on a regular basis and even sometimes still sell out the 80,000+ stadium.

6) Model, out of no-where without giving the City of Cleveland any chance to respond or counter, signs contracts with Baltimore to move the city there in return for a large cash infusion. (It should be noted, that Art's continuing failures at business have rendered him nearly bankrupt and without the cash he would have had to sell the team.)

7) Model moves, lawsuit filed, NFL intervenes and comes up with settlement.

8) Model, still a lousy businessman, continues to lose money with a Superbowl caliber team in a brand new stadium with sellout crowds and eventually has to sell anyway.

And they want to put this guy in the Hall of Fame?

DING DING DING!!! We have a winner and a to boot.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Not sure if this is FFA or Shark Pool material so I'll go with both.Fred Dryer was on NFL Network last night talking about the LA Rams. Said something that was interesting.He said (and I think he's right) that the huge problem for Los Angeles was that the city let Frontiere take the team name with her to St. Louis. If the team had held onto the name (like Cleveland did) it would have been much more attractive for a team to move into Los Angeles and start back up as the Los Angeles Rams.You younger guys may not remember, but the Rams in LA were a high profile team. But it made me think, what right would the city have had to keep that name? That's a team / league decision, right? When the Colts stole away in the middle of the night to Indy, they got to keep the Colts. What's the scoop on this?And for you Cleveland fans, refresh my memory on how that worked exactly with the Browns.J

Rams weren't even in LA for I don't even know how long before they moved to STL.

I don't know what that sentence means, but they were in Southern CA for 49 years before they moved to StL.

I think the area is more what Dryer meant. The "Rams" were the important part of what I think he was saying. Anaheim and Los Angeles less so. But weren't they in the LA Coliseum from 1946 to 1980 or so?J

 

[GregR_2]

From wikipedia:

When the Indians and the City of Cleveland declined to abandon the Gateway Project and improve Municipal Stadium as Modell asked, Modell broke off negotiations with the City and County and decided, in secret, to move the team to Baltimore for the 1996 season. He was assisted in the move by Alfred Lerner, who would go on to become the owner of the new Cleveland Browns franchise in 1998. Modell's move returned the NFL to Baltimore for the first time since the Colts left for Indianapolis after the 1983 season.

The reaction in Cleveland was, not surprisingly, very hostile. Modell had promised numerous times never to move the team. The Brooklyn native mentioned numerous times how saddened and betrayed he and other Brooklynites had felt when the Dodgers moved to Los Angeles in 1957. The City of Cleveland sued Modell, the Browns, and Stadium Corp. for breach of the Browns' lease, which required the Browns to exclusively use Cleveland Stadium for their home games for several seasons after 1995. Surprisingly for Modell, many Baltimore fans sympathized with Clevelanders' outrage. Baltimore was still smarting from Colts owner Robert Irsay's behavior in the run-up to the Colts' move a decade earlier, culminating in the team being literally sneaked out of town in the middle of the night in late March 1984. Many people in Baltimore felt Irsay had stolen Baltimore's football history as well. They felt that Modell would be doing the same thing to Cleveland if he went with his initial plan to call his team the "Baltimore Browns." Ironically, Modell had loudly criticized the Colts' move in 1984, as well as the Oakland Raiders' move to Los Angeles two years earlier.

Eventually, the NFL, Modell and the two cities worked out a deal. The Browns' franchise would be placed on inactive status for three years. Modell had to leave behind the Browns' name, colors and heritage (including team records) for a replacement franchise, in the form either of a new team or another relocated franchise. In return, Modell would be allowed to take his players and organization to Baltimore as the Ravens. Cleveland received a loan from the NFL for a new stadium. The Browns were resurrected in 1999. Many sportswriters and commentators in and outside of Cleveland reviled him, saying the honorable course would have been to sell the team to local interests. It is widely believed that the acrimony from the move has kept Modell out of the Pro Football Hall of Fame (he was an also-ran in the 2006 voting). To this day, he is considered to be the most hated man in Cleveland and has not returned to the city since 1996. For example, when his longtime friend, Browns kicking legend Lou "The Toe" Groza, died in 2000, Modell didn't feel safe attending the funeral.

 

[ImTheScientist]

I think the area is more what Dryer meant. The "Rams" were the important part of what I think he was saying. Anaheim and Los Angeles less so. But weren't they in the LA Coliseum from 1946 to 1980 or so?

But really.....(Can only speak for the 80s and 90s) LA and SoCal was dominated by Raider fans and maybe LA didn't care about loosing the "Rams".