PDA

View Full Version : Charlotte Hornets Confusion



CubsBullsBucs
08-12-2013, 02:04 AM
1988: The Charlotte Hornets were founded.
2002: The Charlotte Hornets moved to New Orleans and became known as The New Orleans Hornets.
2004: The Charlotte Bobcats are founded as an expansion team.
2005: The New Orleans Hornets are forced to temporarily move to Oklahoma City following Hurricane Katrina, where the were officially known as The New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets.
2007: The New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets move back to New Orleans full time, changing their name back to the New Orleans Hornets.
2008: The Oklahoma City Thunder are founded, formerly the Seattle Super Sonics.
2013: The New Orleans Hornets change their name to The New Orleans Pelicans.
2014: The Charlotte Bobcats change their name to the Charlotte Hornets.

So what year were the Charlotte Hornets founded? 1988 or 2004 or 2014? I guess they were technically founded in 2004, but isn't it stupid to say that they were founded in 2004 when they were really founded in 1988? Would it be possible for the Pelicans to give the Bobcats their history from 1988-2002, when they were known as the Charlotte Hornets? I guess Seattle will face the same confusion if and when they receive a team again. Thoughts on what history belongs to which franchise?

asandhu23
08-12-2013, 02:12 AM
The new Hornets keep Bobcats history.

Pelicans keep Hornets history.


Thunder keep Thunder history.


Seattle keeps their own.

asandhu23
08-12-2013, 02:16 AM
Old Hornets / Pelicans founded in 1988.

Bobcats / New Hornets founded in 2004.

Thunder founded in 2008

Seattle in whatever year they were founded in.

asandhu23
08-12-2013, 02:21 AM
Back when Philadelphia Warriors moved to SF and Syracuse Nats because Philadelphia 76ers, they should have given Warriors history to Warriors and Nats history to 76ers.


There's a confusion there too. Do Warriors get to have Wilt's records? Do Warriors get to have the old Phila Warriors jersey as theirs while 76ers get to have the iconic Nats jerseys?

pd7631
08-12-2013, 02:53 AM
Back when Philadelphia Warriors moved to SF and Syracuse Nats because Philadelphia 76ers, they should have given Warriors history to Warriors and Nats history to 76ers.


There's a confusion there too. Do Warriors get to have Wilt's records? Do Warriors get to have the old Phila Warriors jersey as theirs while 76ers get to have the iconic Nats jerseys?

We get Wilt and the Nats. It's all ours.

sunsfan88
08-12-2013, 07:31 AM
The new Hornets keep Bobcats history.

Pelicans keep Hornets history.


Thunder keep Thunder history.


Seattle keeps their own.
So the Thunder have never won a championship then in their record books?

And if some new owner wants to start a team in Seattle with a different name than Super Sonics, he will be forced to accept that Sonics history as his new team's?

Goose17
08-12-2013, 07:46 AM
So the Thunder have never won a championship then in their record books?

And if some new owner wants to start a team in Seattle with a different name than Super Sonics, he will be forced to accept that Sonics history as his new team's?

This^

Pretty sure Seattle history remains in OKC.

tmacsc2
08-12-2013, 07:53 AM
No seattle remains seattle. They are the sonics. It has already been said when they get a team back everything goes back to them.

tmacsc2
08-12-2013, 07:54 AM
If an owner gets an expansion team he won't change it. The fans would go nuts.

IndyRealist
08-12-2013, 08:48 AM
This^

Pretty sure Seattle history remains in OKC.

Nope. It was part of the deal when they left that the Sonics name and history stay in Seattle.

bholly
08-12-2013, 09:41 AM
This is one of the weirdest and funniest parts of American sports. Negotiating over who 'gets' history. It's insane.

kobe4thewinbang
08-12-2013, 09:51 AM
Just think, guys, the frickin' Sonics almost won a ring against Miami. Imagine if they still had Ray Allen in the finals.

king4day
08-12-2013, 10:35 AM
Nope. It was part of the deal when they left that the Sonics name and history stay in Seattle.

I thought Seattle had 5 years to get a team back, and if they did, they would be given their history back. If not, it goes to OKC.
I could be wrong but I thought I remember hearing something like that (which would have been why getting the Kings would have been important as this was year 5).

EDIT: Nevermind, just read this on Wiki:


On July 2, 2008, a settlement was reached that allowed the team to move under certain conditions, including the ownership group's payment of $45 million to Seattle and the possibility of an additional $30 million by 2013 if a new team had not been given to the city. It was agreed that the SuperSonics' name would not be used by Oklahoma City and that team's history could be shared between Oklahoma City and any future NBA team in Seattle

CubsBullsBucs
08-12-2013, 11:18 AM
So lets say the Sonics return as an expansion team in 2016. What year were they founded? 1967 or 2016? I feel like people would say 1967, as opposed to people saying the opposite in the Hornets case, simply because they don't have any real history like the Sonics do. Ridiculous.

topdog
08-12-2013, 07:55 PM
People need to remember that it's "franchise history" i.e. wherever that organization goes, it takes its history with them. Alternately, we can also talk about a city or state's sports history. For instance, the Timberwolves debuted a "throwback" of the Minnesota Muskies a couple years ago which was a nod to a former Minnesota basketball team (which no one had heard of because they only played for 2 years but Lakers throwbacks belong to that franchise...)

abe_froman
08-12-2013, 07:59 PM
So lets say the Sonics return as an expansion team in 2016. What year were they founded? 1967 or 2016? I feel like people would say 1967, as opposed to people saying the opposite in the Hornets case, simply because they don't have any real history like the Sonics do. Ridiculous.

2016.sure its taking a name of a team that once existed..but its not that team ,its a new team

asandhu23
08-12-2013, 09:23 PM
So the Thunder have never won a championship then in their record books?

And if some new owner wants to start a team in Seattle with a different name than Super Sonics, he will be forced to accept that Sonics history as his new team's?

No. Thunder haven't. They don't get a free championship.

asandhu23
08-12-2013, 09:24 PM
2016.sure its taking a name of a team that once existed..but its not that team ,its a new team

No. Sonics get their history. Foundation stays 1967.

Trueblue2
08-12-2013, 09:33 PM
The supersonics are a unique circumstance because one of the conditions of the team being allowed to relocate was that the supersonics name, colors, and history stays with the city of seatle and a whole new franchise histort was to be started in okc. Cha/NO had no such agreement so the old hornets history belongs to the pelicans while the bobcats history belongs to the new hornets.

Kinda like how in the nfl the browns own their history even though they were an expansion team after the original franchise became the ravens, but the titans own the oilers history even though houston has a new team.

LeperMessiah
08-12-2013, 09:37 PM
This is one of the weirdest and funniest parts of American sports. Negotiating over who 'gets' history. It's insane.

I know, it's baffling that it's debated on.