Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Apparently, No Name Change Coming


TylerDurden

Recommended Posts

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/12/30/1942865/observations-research-shows-little.html

This is all that was written about it, so I guess that's all that needs to be said?

As much as some of you would prefer a name change from the Bobcats, that isn't a widespread concern, based on the team's recent market research. Pete Guelli, who heads the Bobcats' marketing, told me the team's recent market study showed no groundswell for a name change.

Read more: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/12/30/1942865/observations-research-shows-little.html#ixzz19bITangU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, guys no name change. But if you're feeling nostalgic, the Hornets are still around and are being led by David Stern now. With concerns over them having to move from NO, Im sure the "name change" folks would be welcomed with open arms in that fanbase. Then you could pull for a b-ball team named the HORNETS! Muggsy Bogues and Kelly Tripucka might even walk thru that door.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As i said in another name change thread, I would have liked to see the Hornets name again just for the historical significance of it. When i see the name Bobcats i don't think of Bob Johnson. I never have. I'm glad they researched the possibility of it. At least they are showing responsiveness to the fans.

Go Bobcats!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yep. I was hoping for and calling for a day three guy. But I didn’t research the position to say if we should or should‘t have jumped at a particular guy at a particular spot.    And everything I read said it was a poor draft for RBs depth wise. I guess when Seattle takes a backup RB in the 1st, that kind of backs that up.    I definitely think we should keep 4 running backs and if King can play well enough then keep him too.    I believe I heard Canales say we are a running team (talking about drafting a WR he will be needing to block as well as catch). Well if we are gonna be a running team by identity we don’t need to stock the WR room to overflowing. If one room has to sacrifice, it should not be the RB room given our circumstances. 
    • If there's a pattern I'm definitely picking up from Dan and company is a philosophy of making trades where we try not to sacrifice the number of draft picks we have by day's end. In other words, we're not giving up three picks for one, or giving up a future pick to make a pick today. And even if we give up something at the start, we make trades later to make up for that initial loss. Here's how it stacked up for 2026: How we started: 19, 51, 83, 119, 158, 159, 200 How we ended: 19, 49, 83, 129, 144, 151, 227 (no future picks sacrificed) Ultimately, we moved up two spots in the second to ensure we got someone we coveted, gave up a few spots for our fourth round pick, but then had better picks in the 5th (and got really good value out of them), and had a worse 7th rounder which isn't that big of a loss anyways.  At this point, we can question who they draft, but they're pretty good maneuvering across the draft board.
    • I just saw the funniest thing...or very disappointing, depending how you handle misery. A guy on YouTube did a 2027 'way too early' mock draft.  If I told you the simulator has the Panthers selecting in the top 10 , what would you say?  If I told you it was pick #8 and only two QBs were taken in the top 7, what would you say?  If I told you this dude had us taking a defensive player, what would you say?
×
×
  • Create New...