BJBlue Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 I voted no, purely because of the wording really. I don't know how far a one off investment like that would take us. If it was a take over with ongoing investment and development of the club, well then come on you Roosters! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deyres42 Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 If you haven't got a long term plan these days you are nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 Owl Power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlossopLatic Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 What would calling oursleves Oldham Roosters achieve that that Oldham Athletic wouldn't? Lets assume it is this Martin Lee guy and his aspirations are to own a global sporting empire if we are his european football team. People would know its part of his sporting francise without the name change When John Henry bought Liverpool he didn't need to change it to the Liverpool Red Sox to show that he owns both them and the Boston red sox. I can't imagine the name change alone isn't going to get more fans into the stadium. The investment will do that. From the poll it appears we have a split and it would appear to alienate a good proportion of our fan base. We'd lose more than we would gain by doing something like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Latics and England Posted January 26, 2017 Author Share Posted January 26, 2017 The specific name change is purely an example, it is probably more apt to look at a sponsorship deal whereby the club would be come Oldham Red Bull or similar. The same principal stands. At the moment this must be one of the closest polls we have had in a while which is interesting in itself. As Glossop points out, however, there is a bigger picture with some fans being alienated and walking away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcprozac Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 We were known as Pine Villa once.... The Oldham part is the most important for me, that's why Failsworth Athletic (and I know it was considered, despite the denials) was never a starter for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcprozac Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 Trip to Nando's now makes sense... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 100% no from me. What a joke we would be and known as a selling our soul across the country! Surprised so many would be ok with it...desperate times influencing decisions maybe? Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nonaenever Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 A very good topic/thread - and things like this clearly matter to supporters. It should, in theory, be relatively easy to protect our heritage in any sale i.e. insert a contract clause along the lines of, "this sale is strictly conditional upon the football club being called Oldham Athletic throughout the new owner/s' tenure". If that were to stop any potential sale - you could argue that the new buyers did not have the club itself at heart - and therefore wouldn't make suitable new owners anyway? (i.e. the Chairman has always said he wants the right type of buyer). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosa Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 Wasn't there or still is an Oldham Owls basketball team? Became Oldham and Tameside Owls, now simply The Owls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyPimp Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 So long as 'Athletic' doesn't translate to ass-nugget in Chinese, why on earth would they want to change it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusoe Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 In light of tonight's statement, how about the Oldham Gun-jumpers? Oldham Premature Athletic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeP Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 (edited) Absolutely not. We're Oldham Athletic. Really not arsed about the £100 million. More bothered about the improvement of attention to detail which costs very little and would make fans proud of the club again. Edited January 27, 2017 by JoeP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yarddog73 Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 To be fair attention to detail probably comes at a price, last night's statement looks like it might have been thrashed out by whoever stepped in on the Junior Takeover Day, then again I am probably doing that 11 year old a disservice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewBlue Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 Genuinely can't believe so many have voted in favour of the example Staggering - I'd no longer be able to support the club never mind embrace it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yarddog73 Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 Staggering that so many are unable to support the club and embrace it in its current guise is more of a worry to me, it's an hypothetical question but it has produced a reasonable debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorvik_latic Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 Genuinely can't believe so many have voted in favour of the example Staggering - I'd no longer be able to support the club never mind embrace it They'd just buy new fans with the money to replace you like City have done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forte_Baby Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 Fair few Hull fans see what is happening now by there owners as pay back for not letting them change there name Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Burns Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 I didn't really get the hull thing. I would be fine being called the Oldham Athletic Owls. I never say Athletic, so one extra word not to say doesn't make any difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 I didn't really get the hull thing. I would be fine being called the Oldham Athletic Owls. I never say Athletic, so one extra word not to say doesn't make any difference. True, seems to be have been accepted in Rugby without too much fuss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scapegoat Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 I know a few fans of 'ull and most are vehemently against the name change. When was the last time a club changed its name? I recall the classic Soccer Saturday "they'll be dancing in the street of Total Network Solutions tonight", but in terms of a league team I cannot think of any. Football fans like tradition, and generally are against most change. Maybe there is a hierarchy of acceptable changes? Changing the name of the Stadium is an example - and for us it is not too much of an issue, as we have an old name we will use. But when you get a new stadium and it's sponsored, and then the name changes e.g. The Reebok - well it is more of an impact. Changing kit colour - blue to red. A bigger issue? Colours are what many fans identify themselves with - would we like red? Team name? I recall the outrage of Manchester North End. Too far? Changing the last part of a name - is that OK? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Latics and England Posted January 27, 2017 Author Share Posted January 27, 2017 I know a few fans of 'ull and most are vehemently against the name change. When was the last time a club changed its name? I recall the classic Soccer Saturday "they'll be dancing in the street of Total Network Solutions tonight", but in terms of a league team I cannot think of any. Football fans like tradition, and generally are against most change. Maybe there is a hierarchy of acceptable changes? Changing the name of the Stadium is an example - and for us it is not too much of an issue, as we have an old name we will use. But when you get a new stadium and it's sponsored, and then the name changes e.g. The Reebok - well it is more of an impact. Changing kit colour - blue to red. A bigger issue? Colours are what many fans identify themselves with - would we like red? Team name? I recall the outrage of Manchester North End. Too far? Changing the last part of a name - is that OK? I would guess that it is Leyton Orient as they have had "Leyton" in and out. I think "Greenock" has been in and out of Morton's name too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewBlue Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 True, seems to be have been accepted in Rugby without too much fuss. Rugby also franchise teams and is full of toffs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 Rugby also franchise teams and is full of toffs Rugby teams like Bradford Bull's and Leeds Rhino's are full of toffs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewBlue Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 Athleticos apparently changed their name to Gate 16 Not sure if it sounds more like a 90s boyband or a hooligan firm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.