View Full Version : Western Sydney Huntsmen
I think it sounds pretty cool. It sounds vicious and hard like the people of western sydney are. It could represent a spider or simply a group of hunters in any form you want to take it. Either way it sounds a lot better than the Pride. The colours i would suggest would be similar to that of the charlotte bobcats. :D
Do you guys like it or not so much cheers?:thumbsu:
http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/4875/huntsmen.jpg
BarneyBent
21 Feb 2010, 20:24
Not the worst suggestion, but far from the best.
Nothing beats Wolves. Whoever came up with that hit the nail right on the head. I can't fault it, except for the fact that wolves don't tend to be found around WS, but then, when was the last time you saw a Lion in Brisbane?
ghostdog
22 Feb 2010, 16:37
'Lions' has a historical connection that extends back to Australia's connection with England.
I'm going to go against the grain.
Wolves has been bandied about this board so much that it's played out before it's even begun. The name has no connection with the region whatsoever. It sounds like a shallow American style branding exercise.
The only thing the name has in common with Western Sydney is the letter W.
Wolves sounds crappy and cheap.
'Lions' has a historical connection that extends back to Australia's connection with England.
I'm going to go against the grain.
Wolves has been bandied about this board so much that it's played out before it's even begun. The name has no connection with the region whatsoever. It sounds like a shallow American style branding exercise.
The only thing the name has in common with Western Sydney is the letter W.
Wolves sounds crappy and cheap.
Again, the fact there are no wolves in W.Sydney is irrelevant, they don't symbolise a locality.
The are no Lions in England yet they use them as a symbol. Why? Because they symbolise concepts thata re not geographically relevant. Same as wolves.
Fair enough if you don't like wolves, everyone has their own opinion. But to dismiss it based on the fact that W.Sydney doesn't have wolves is weak. On that basis we can also cross off Stallions, Giants and Rangers.
chopperduck
23 Feb 2010, 09:01
Pretty sure there are no Tigers or Demons floating around Melb either. The team logo needs to be something marketable, especially for a new team entering a modern day national sport. I think Wolves does suit the criteria.
iGNITER
23 Feb 2010, 09:24
Western Sydney Warriors???
coasting
23 Feb 2010, 09:24
Pretty sure there are no Tigers or Demons floating around Melb either. The team logo needs to be something marketable, especially for a new team entering a modern day national sport. I think Wolves does suit the criteria.
There are plenty of demons floating around Melbourne.
ghostdog
23 Feb 2010, 15:55
Again, the fact there are no wolves in W.Sydney is irrelevant, they don't symbolise a locality.The fact they don't symbolise the locality is the reason why 'Wolves' is irrelevant. If you don't see the lack of connection, and therefore shallow justification for naming the team as such, then there is something seriously wrong with you.
The are no Lions in England yet they use them as a symbol. Why? Because they symbolise concepts thata re not geographically relevant. Same as wolves.The connection has a solid basis in English history though. The symbolism of the Lion to the English is based on the reverence with which Richard II was held - Richard The Lionheart. You are right about the Lion symbolising a concept, but the historical connection still gives their use as a mascot a hell of a lot more depth than the tacky 'wolves'.
Fair enough if you don't like wolves, everyone has their own opinion. But to dismiss it based on the fact that W.Sydney doesn't have wolves is weak. On that basis we can also cross off Stallions, Giants and Rangers.Yes, it is fair:thumbsu:
...and I agree, cross off Stallions and Giants. To dismiss "Wolves' on the basis that W Sydney has none is logical. To simply agree because it sounds cool or tough is totally piss weak and superficial. At least Rangers has some merit in its connection with the region and is therefore a much better choice than Wolves.
I maintain, Wolves is cheap, tacky and Americanised rubbish. It stinks of a cheap branding exercise rather than any attempt to build a real connection with the region.
Huntsmen, to return to the theme of the thread, is a much better choice.
BarneyBent
24 Feb 2010, 10:30
Yes, it is fair:thumbsu:
...and I agree, cross off Stallions and Giants. To dismiss "Wolves' on the basis that W Sydney has none is logical. To simply agree because it sounds cool or tough is totally piss weak and superficial. At least Rangers has some merit in its connection with the region and is therefore a much better choice than Wolves.
I maintain, Wolves is cheap, tacky and Americanised rubbish. It stinks of a cheap branding exercise rather than any attempt to build a real connection with the region.
Huntsmen, to return to the theme of the thread, is a much better choice.
But the mascot doesn't have to have a connection to the region. That's the entire point! Do you think Richmond have a high number of Tigers? Essendon a high number of bomber jets? Melbourne a high number of demons? The mascot doesn't have to be geographically linked, and it is incredibly limiting to make it so.
Why is "Wolves" tacky, cheap and American? Because wolves are found in America? If that's your reasoning, then that's just stupid. The wolf moniker and mascot is simple, hard, raw, but also able to be "cheesed up" for the kiddies if needed, incorporating family values. It's also NOT indigenous. Basically, West Sydney in a nutshell. It's also the polar opposite of a Swan, a (in this case) white, graceful, beautiful but perhaps flashy and a touch fragile bird.
Sorry to be picky but they are called HuntsmAn spiders. Not HuntsmEn.
I could live with it as a name, but if its spiders you like why not funnel-webs? much more aggressive and much more venomous. Also native to the area.
Sorry to be picky but they are called HuntsmAn spiders. Not HuntsmEn.
I could live with it as a name, but if its spiders you like why not funnel-webs? much more aggressive and much more venomous. Also native to the area.
Judging by the pictures he kept posting I think he meant it in terms of "hunters" rather than "spiders". It took me a while to figure that out too, which is as good a reason as any for the name to be thrown out... confusing names suck.
ghostdog
24 Feb 2010, 14:27
Judging by the pictures he kept posting I think he meant it in terms of "hunters" rather than "spiders". It took me a while to figure that out too, which is as good a reason as any for the name to be thrown out... confusing names suck.
It's a play on words.
ghostdog
24 Feb 2010, 14:43
But the mascot doesn't have to have a connection to the region.I'm suggesting that it should so that it has more depth than being simply a label. That's the entire point! Do you think Richmond have a high number of Tigers? Essendon a high number of bomber jets? Melbourne a high number of demons?I couldn't give a rat's arse about either Richmond or Melbourne. They both did it wrong IMO. Essendon are called the Bombers because of the proximity of the airport. What do you reckon they used to park there? The mascot doesn't have to be geographically linked, and it is incredibly limiting to make it so.Agreed. It could also be historically linked or culturally linked. Thus, it is not limited at all. Perhaps it is more accurate to suggest that finding more depth in the name is limiting to the less capable? :rolleyes: The name must have some substance other than the ease of marketing.
Why is "Wolves" tacky, cheap and American? Because wolves are found in America? If that's your reasoning, then that's just stupid.No. 'Wolves' is tacky and cheap because there is no depth of thought behind the name other than that it sounds cool or tough or hard or raw. Wtf does it mean? Where did it come from? In fairness to Americans (I've never met one I didn't like) they do have some names with some sceric of intelligence behind them, eg Detroit Pistons. Also, yes it's stupid because it's not an Australian creature. Isn't our game called Australian Rules? The wolf moniker and mascot is simpleCorrect. Next! able to be "cheesed up" for the kiddies...anything is. They're kiddies. It's also NOT indigenous.Wtf has that got to do with the price of eggs in China? It would be better if it was! Basically, West Sydney in a nutshell. It's also the polar opposite of a Swan, a (in this case) white, graceful, beautiful but perhaps flashy and a touch fragile bird.I also don't give a toss about the Swans.
So I remain. 'Wolves' sounds cheap and tacky. It's a crap name.
Outside funnel webs in every backyard and eels in the river, is there anything worthy of footy-moniker status in Greater Western Sydney...?
Spiders are no go when it comes to merchandising, because kids are easily freaked out by club mascots...would you buy your kids and your wife season tickets and scarves and footies with spiders scrawled all over them...? Would you allow a guy dressed as a 7-foot tall spider to shake your kids hand at a night match expecting that kid to sleep soundly when they get home? And Eels...you guys know better than I do, that Parramatta are cashing in on an in-joke by naming their team after that...couldn't possibly work for anyone else...
"Pride" makes me think Gay Mardi Gras, which may or may not be appropriate for Sydney, although locals would probably point out that the march happens in the middle of town, which is Swans territory...
Rangers is boring. Gladiators, Warriors, blah...done to death...the argument earlier against Wolves is Americanisation, which is interesting because the previous names can be found on many American teams to a much greater extent...the closest you'll get with Wolves is Timberwolves, and then there's Wolverhampton in England...
Greater Western Sydney is a massive place in a state that likes to arrogantly thump its chest and call itself the Premier State. It's also closer to Australia's most famous beach than any other team except for the Swans, who are ironically based upon an animal that prefers fresh water...
So call the team the Great(er) West Sharks - "great(er)" because it's NSW and they think they are, and it's got more grunt than "pride"...GWS shares the same initials, which should amuse the local demographic for years longer than it should (I kid cos I love), and because sharks are the top of the food chain...let's fact it, this team is up against it from the start, and needs every marketing ploy available to it to avoid Gayfl labels and to swing the minds of young boys who will ask the question at some stage "is this AFL team as tough as Parra/Canterbury/whoever"...
And a final test case? The Cronulla Sharks are derided from many quarters, for their lack of flag success, previous pretty boy image, supposed silver spoon heritage, and lately for bizarre sex acts...but even despite this, noone questions the image or the logo. It stand tall and always has no matter what crap gets flung at it...
Christ, you've got Kevin Sheedy! You might as well be loud and rude and passionate in all departments...
so after all that your suggestion is an already-used NRL name?
mate, you CANT use ANY NRL name, let alone one that is already in use in sydney.
you might be able to use a name from a different sport if its from a different city (redbacks) but even that is sketchy and not a great idea
I'm fine with the Wolves in fact i think its the best idea like most of you guys do too. If Western Sydney is looking on these forums they would see Wolves as the number 1 pick hopefully.
I just like some kind of brutal warrior wielding an axe. I think its cool. lol
so after all that your suggestion is an already-used NRL name?
mate, you CANT use ANY NRL name, let alone one that is already in use in sydney.
you might be able to use a name from a different sport if its from a different city (redbacks) but even that is sketchy and not a great idea
Of course you can use it. You just can't call the new AFL side the "Cronulla Sharks". The only precedent you'll find just about anywhere is when the Brisbane Lions forced the NSL Brisbane Lions to change to the Qld Roar - and the comparatively little soccer team lost that one...I'm not sure they were even compensated properly for it...
The way the Sharks are going, the name might be vacant shortly anyway...
But the crux point: From the point of view of what has WS got that's worthy of a decent club image, there's bugger all. It's bad enough the area has no Australian Rules credibility anyway and that the whole exercise is designed just to bump the tv rights up to a billion dollars and give Ten something to go up against Funniest Home Videos, but that's another argument. If we drop what is the premise of the thread (that it's got to be something related to the area) and just go for cool nicknames (which honestly is the best way to go anyway), then sure, eliminate the gay/wussy names and give them something with teeth that isn't already on the front page of NRL.com...
Black Falcon
28 Mar 2010, 17:07
Not the worst suggestion, but far from the best.
Nothing beats Wolves. Whoever came up with that hit the nail right on the head. I can't fault it, except for the fact that wolves don't tend to be found around WS, but then, when was the last time you saw a Lion in Brisbane?
Yeah but dingoes did, aren't they then the Ozzi wolf?
When a Sydney Swans supporter says "Nothing beats Wolves." I am sold on it. He can't fault it. Case closed. Lets move on to the WSW club song.
The Wolf and the Swannies with their Little Red Riding Hood colours - its a marketing bonanza. AFL can already hear the cash rolling in. :D
andrew81186
29 Mar 2010, 22:39
what about sydney daddy long legs?