False Advertising

If you read an ad offering bananas at 79 cents a pound and when you get to the store they give you head lettuce at 79 cents each...If you purchase a vacation package to Aruba but when you look at the plane ticket it says "Panama"...If you buy an Ipod and when you get home and open the box you find a pea pod... Well, you would feel ripped off. Blatant false advertising, no? Since this is not a blog about consumerism, where am I going? Glad you wondered. Its time for my rant, inspired by recent proposed moves by my beloved A's and 49ers, about sports teams calling themselves whatever they want. And getting away with it.

To my dismay, it seems that the A's are practically in Fremont already. Taking a page from the insanity that is the Angels, they propose calling the team "The San Jose A's of Fremont" and at the very least "of Fremont" will be part of the name. The Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim are not in Los Angeles. The "Anything" A's of Fremont will be in Fremont, no where else. If you want to move to Fremont, you lose the marketing edge of the "big" city. Call yourself the Fremont A's. If they were to retain the Oakland name, the city of Oakland should sue for copyright infringement or something. Ditto for San Jose if they try that trick. Since I'm whining about it, here's a quote about wine labels from winebrats.org

"Appellation of Origin
If a wine says "California" on the label it must be 100% from California. If a wine is labeled with a specific county name, i.e. Sonoma, Mendocino, Santa Barbara, etc., it must be 75% from that county. As you get more specific, the standards go up. If the bottle is labeled with an "American Viticultural Area," or AVA, such as Napa Valley, Dry Creek, or Central Coast, then 85% of the grapes in that wine must be from that area. If the label mentions a specific vineyard, then it must be 95% from that vineyard. Generally, the more specific the label, the more consistent and more expensive the wine is going to be."

The rules for wine are exactly what I'm trying to talk about here. The New York Giants and New York Jets play in New Jersey. I believe that neither team even has offices or practice facilities in the state of New York anymore. If the 49ers offices and practice facilities are in Santa Clara but they play in San Francisco, could they refer to themselves as from either location? What's more important?

As one example from the college ranks, UCLA plays its games in Pasadena at the Rose Bowl. But college teams "represent" the college as the players all attend it. I suppose if all the players on the New York Giants lived in New York, they could call themselves New York all they wanted. But I don't think a pro team really can represent a place in the same way a college does.

The Lions used to play in Detroit, then moved to Pontiac, and are now back in Detroit. They always used "Detroit". The Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Devil Rays don't represent Tampa Bay. Close, but they don't actually play in the water, they play on dry land. The Dallas Cowboys play in Irving, yes Irving. Say it a few times, then imagine how intimidated the opposition would be having to face the "Irving Cowboys". Sounds like a sequel to Brokeback Mountain.

There are numerous other examples of this false advertising in sports and there are laws against false and misleading advertising, so when your team name is a large part of your marketing, why should you be allowed to get away with it? Why do I wonder why a city has not "sued" over the use of its name for a team that does not play there? Simple, they still get the benefit of the advertising, and the status as a "major league" city. So why don't the actual home cities of these teams do something? Could it because they are still reaping the direct benefits of the team's location? Hey, people come to pump money Irving's tax base whether the team name is the Irving Cowboys, Dallas Cowboys, or The Southwestern US/Northeast-ish Texas Cowboys. Someone needs to remind me that its all about money. Silly me sometimes forgets that.

On another team name angle, some teams cover up their exact location with wide geographic area names. The New England Patriots represent an entire region of the country, the Carolina Panthers cover two whole states, the Texas Rangers, Golden State Warriors (who ARE in Oakland, so...), Minnesota Wild (no I didn't make that up, they are a Hockey team) all claim an entire state as their home area. I have real no issue with them...except when there are other teams from the same geographic area. There are other baseball teams in Texas and other NBA teams in the "Golden State" after all. Maybe a complicated, yet more accurate designation can save me some mental anguish. How about, "The Golden State (Except for the Los Angeles and Sacramento Metropolitan Area) Warriors?

So to all the sports teams out there I say: Guys, if you're from Oakland, Detroit, New Jersey, or, yes, even Irving, PROUDLY claim it. Build your facilities in the place you call home. At least have your offices in the city you claim to represent. Otherwise go away. Look at it this way, if the BUFFALO BILLS can proudly claim to be from Buffalo, what's your excuse? What...the heck you say, the Bills play in Orchard Park? Oh my.