I am hoping this thread won't drift off and go back to the usual **** but I have a serious question and would like some interesting and honest opinions. I was thinking earlier about change in general. Change is a natural thing for progress. It has been present in football and no matter what it was, it has always caused controversy. Obviously, change has to have a purpose. Leaving BP wasn't easy but an increased capacity and modern facilities was arguably necessary. A change of manager can sometimes be necessary, this can be easily backed by recent results. A change of kit, seems mundane these days. Some are upset that we switch from stripes to plain kits but some will argue that we've done this for a while. Also, a kit changes every year, so a little patience is all that's needed. A logo change is common in football. We had an unpleasant experience with it but some on here would definitely be open to change the tiger on the badge. Why is that ok? Is visual recognition less important? I would like to know why, for those against the name change, is a change of name Taboo and sacrilege? I think each will have different reasons (I have my own) and I would like to know if there is a consensus. (I personally think the more reasons, the weaker the argument, I'm sure some will disagree) I'm not saying it isn't sacrilege... but I'm trying to understand the boundaries of change. What is one step too far? and why is it so. Personally, after thinking about it, if there was an ultimatum, I would choose Hull Tigers over playing in Green. For me our kit is a stronger symbol than "city". I can back this with some valid arguments but I am sure some can easily argue that the name is more important. I also think some wouldn't be able to pick and feel they shouldn't have to at all. SO... For the majority of people on this forum, a name change is crossing the line. Why? Is it because : a) There is no valid reasoning behind the change, no plan or incentive (if you answer this then move on to my BONUS question) b) Because AA has lied and given a fictitious plan for his reasoning. (a little petty/vindictive in my opinion, stooping down to AA's level in some ways) c) Because you just don't touch a club's name (would need explanation as to why though) d) all of the above e) other My BONUS question is: if AA had a sound marketing plan backed with evidence and supported by figures, would your opinion change? (Not suggesting you'd be happy with it, simply more accepting) I'm sure someone will say this is a non-question but I'm asking it and I think it's important to consider it. At least for the sake of reinforcing your convictions and argument. I suppose everyone will have their own boundaries but should one be denigrated for having different boundaries? That is all. PS: Once again, I'm not here to talk about AA and CTWD. I just want to know what makes something sacrilege for some and ok for others and how do you justify it. So please try and keep it on topic. (Can't wait for all the piss take)
You've seriously got more chance of plaitting piss than getting a serious answer out of some of these posters. But i'll go ahead and give my serious response. It's a mixture of a lot of things for me. For me, supporters come and go, players come and go, owners come and go, there is one constant throughout all of this, something everyone, even non-football fans, identify you by, and that is the name of your football club. For someone to want to change this to possibly interest the foreign market just seems a bizarre idea, kind of like a shot in the dark/kneejerk reaction to falling out with the Council. He has no sound business plan for what happens if we changed name, we would just continue as normal, and if he did have something up his sleeve, then surely releasing this information would convince the many people who are undecided, wavering between the two. I don't think he does, in fact I would be pretty safe in saying I would bet alot of money that he doesnt (not that I have it... Just a figure of speech). The way he has gone about it has alienated a lot of his customers/the clubs fans, to tell your customers that you care not of their opinion, do not care nor want your custom if they have a differing opinion about something you want to do is just ridiculous. He really needs to run everything he says past a PR team or something as some of the things he has come out with, there is little wonder Thompson is leaving soon (lets leave that can of worms closed shall we?). Besides, let's say he gets his way, a few people in the Asian market are suddenly interested in us. How long do they stick around when "Hull Tigers" are sitting in or around the relegation zone/bottom half of the table throughout the most of the season. The people willing to support someone on the basis of a namechange are the same sort of people who are willing to distance themselves from a team that does not win week in week out. Where is the magic money tree coming from if some of the Asian Market or International Market get interested in us? Sponsors are not going to jump at the chance to associate themselves with just a team name. Does he want a massive sponsor with an empty stadium or does he want a full stadium of people who are passionate about the team they are watching? Success on the pitch, league titles, coverage on the wider scale gets the bandwagonners suddenly wearing your clobber. I am 100% against the name change, and if the name change does go ahead, this season is my last, sadly, as a Hull City AFC supporter. I do not and never will support a team called Hull Tigers. This also sets a dangerous precedent if the name change is allowed through, perhaps he gets speaking to Mr Tan and believes the superstition that playing in Red does bring better luck/even more support on the international scale. Yes, he said the "logo" and the colours are for the fans, but don't for one minute believe he won't go back on his word. He builds a new stadium outside of Hull, suddenly we don't play in Hull anymore. I've not seen a single person put up a genuine thought provoking evidence/article that is in support of the name change, all they have in his defence is "it's his club, he pays for it" and "what's it matter?" are you willing to sell your soul to attain success? Then you might find yourselves better suited supporting the likes of Manchester City or Man United/Chelsea etc.
OK I've buggered this up a bit. Circa I'll change the title to whatever you wanted it to be called if you post it here.
I don't think, in and of itself, a name change is inherently bad. I think an anti-democratic, 'I know best' disregard for the community which makes up the club is bad. In this instance, it has manifested itself in the change of a name. In almost all cases, a name change for a football club would be bad, due to the inherent history which is tied into the name. Perhaps if a town becomes a city, fans would be fine with that change. Similarly, if a relatively new club fancies a different direction with the name, the fans probably wouldn't mind a name change (e.g. American clubs). The difference in those cases, is that there is a relative lack of interest, or support from the fans.
All of the above for your first question though mainly A. For a successful businessman Allam really doesn't appear to have thought this through carefully and the whole thing looks more like a petulant swipe at supporters and the council by the day. He has not reacted to criticism with a portfolio of solid evidence to support his decision, merely reminding fans who calls the shots at the club. Granted what he has been doing has never been tried before but he could at least back up his decision with research from the markets he is supposedly trying to break and also fellow club owners. He has gone into this with tunnel vision and it is hard to take seriously a business plan which has been set up in this way. There is nothing really to support the name change bringing these fortunes to the club and Allam has only weakened his own argument through a lack of extensive and meticulous research and consultation. And for the second question, no. In the top fight we are surrounded by clubs who have being successful through success on the pitch, not making a quick buck to change their name. That evidence is clear to see and I'd be more convinced of progressing with the name 'Hull City' than 'Hull Tigers'. Allam would not be getting as much stick as it would appear he had taken a more careful and considered approach to the whole thing, but that would not override feelings on the change. We are perfectly capable of establishing ourselves and progressing as a club with the title of Hull City.
Changing the name of the club is a huge gamble. I understand that actually there is little else to sell, so sell the brand. But there is an alternative, it's more expensive and would take longer to get a return but I would say that "Hull Tigers" is actually hard to market than "Hull City......The Tigers" The Tigers works across more mediums. If the club became renowned for living up to its nick name. It's hard to describe but if pundits one day say of another team, they fought back like " The Tigers of Hull City". That would enhance the brand. It does not work for Hull Tigers as a brand it isn't as strong. They fought back like Hull Tigers doesn't sound as strong. We need supporters who fear no others clubs support, players who never give up and are emotive, a stadium that teams fear to enter. Not a fortress a tigers liar. Mascots that make adults cry.
[video=youtube;NsJvugGN0As]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsJvugGN0As[/video] Unfortunately, our club like most English ones panders to the flaskers and mutes who don't buy into SUPPORTING a club. They pay, they spectate, they go home. Can you imagine the uproar if someone at the KC tried to unfurl a huge banner from the West Upper like the CABJ 12th PLAYER one in this clip?
When all of this started I said unless the flask and flat cap brigade where won other nothing would change, that's where it has to start. Get them ****ers up and chanting and you will be half way to getting investors queuing to put their money in.
What was it Nick Thompson said? "The club name remains the same, but as a business, Hull City Tigers sounds right" How can you do anything but laugh when the men in charge of running HCAFC, and making it profitable, think Hull City Tigers is a more appropriate and more professional name for a club than Hull City Association Football Club?
History documents evolution. It's there for us to see where things started, how they changed, right up to where they are now. The idea that history is there to stop change isn't true. Everyone knows we would still be living in caves if it was. Change can go too far towards any extreme and the fail-safe is us. We inevitably get the choice to reverse change if our experience of it isn't acceptable. However the key word is "experience". Without experience we can't honestly say something is better or worse than before, and who is qualified enough to deny us that experience on the grounds that they can predict the future? There you go. I've contributed my bit and now I'm off before the usual bile starts flowing.
I dread to think what the reaction would be given the hysteria which was caused by someone walking by with a banner about 10 foot long and 3 foot high at the front of the East Stand. Some people had their view blocked for one and a half seconds and would ha e had to stand up to avoid such an awful thing. And that is in the stand supposedly housing our most boisterous and fanatical fans. Hilarious, looking at those stands, to think the SAG and police think it would be dangerous to put away fans in West Upper as it is so steep and so high that people standing up could somehow end up crashing over the front into the level below. You are quite right. We have spectators not supporters. The Boca lot make themselves heard with no roof yet we use the acoustics of our stadium as an excuse. The answer is simple. An atmosphere is caused by a lot of people making a noise. A couple of sections making a noise whilst the rest of the ground sit like they they are at a theatre doesn't. Most of our fans don't care as long as they can sit in silence and watch the a team in the PL. The name is irrelevant to them as well.
I would, because it's apparent that the man is incapable of having - or at least voicing - an original thought, and thus does little other than parrot what the Pharaoh spews out each week.
