<$BlogRSDURL$>

Wednesday, April 13, 2005

YOU FIRST
A comment over at the Pearly Gates points out this Murray Chass article in the East Rutherford Times, calling upon the courts to end fraud and reject "Los Angeles" from the Angels' appellation.

No matter what one thinks of the name change, I think Chass is mostly wet here. He insists that the Angels have no current link to Los Angeles, failing to note that Anaheim is very clearly in the LA media market, and that there are several life-long Angelenos (like me) who are ardent Angel fans and would like to see the Dodgers back in Brooklyn.

I didn't like the name change at first, but it doesn't really bother me at all now. Who cares what they're called? As long as I get to see the games nearly every day, I'm happy.

Comments:
I agree that he went a little far in trying to make the point that Anaheim has no relation to LA, but he did bring up how many media-types are now calling them LA or Los Angeles, rather than LAoA. This is Anaheim's strongest argument against the name change and could be what ultimately decides the issue (if the Angels were smart they would insist that media outlets call them the LA Angels of Anaheim all the time until after the case was decided...then it would show that the team was making an effort to keep Anaheim prominently featured in the name).
 
Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?