BIG Hypothetical Question

Post #1 » by **Hawk Eye** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 3:42 am

Hypothetically speaking, if the new owner were to "re-brand" the Hawks, would you guys be for it or against it?

I'd like to get some feedback about what you guys think of the Atlanta Hawks. Would you be up for keeping the name or changing it?

Personally if it were my decision, I'd like to change it. Both sport franchises in the city of Atlanta have to do with birds.

NFL= Atlanta Falcons
NBA= Atlanta Hawks

I really like the Warriors title of "Golden State".. Maybe something a long the lines of this?

The Peach State ________?

Any ideas?

PandaKidd · Post #2 » by **PandaKidd** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:16 am

I love the name. No need to change it unless they relocate. With the old logo and new court they have already kind of tried to rebrand that hawks.

Sent from my VS980 4G using RealGM Forums mobile app

MaceCase · Post #3 » by **MaceCase** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:28 am

Entirely unnecessary, the Hawks are identified more with Atlanta than any of their previous locations so you're not going to run into a Hornet/Bobcats/Pelicans situation. Certainly no need to use a ridiculous name such as "Peach State" to emulate Golden State. Golden State goes by that name because it's hard to claim being "California's" team when there are 3 other teams in the state and they won't claim Oakland out of fear of alienating patrons from San Francisco so they settled on some pseudo moniker gimmick. Perhaps changing to Georgia Hawks would make sense but again, entirely unnecessary. Think of half the arguments that Dan Snyder has used NOT to change an inflammatory name like the Redkskins and you can apply that to the Hawks.

bee4ever · Post #4 » by **bee4ever** » Tue Oct 14, 2014 1:28 am

No charging. That name is who we are. Our identity. No need to follow suite of another team just because it sounds cool.