| View previous topic :: View next topic |
waveraven
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 3:46 pm Post subject: Sask. not expected to allow Ottawa to use Rough Riders |
 |
|
Seems the Western Riders want to keep the Roughriders only to themsleves even though the Ottawa named the team that in 1876 and were the Rough Riders first.
It would be nice to tie the teams history to today's team. I know if an NHL team came here I'd be disappointed if it wasn't the Jets. I'm sure the fans would love to have that name again and by looking at the comments looks like people would like it. They have reaquired the rights.
This does happen in other leagues, I know college football has same named teams in same conferences even.
Shame on you SSK for letting greed be the driving factor for this. By the way how many SSK fans won't buy SSK gear because Ottawa has the RR's back ? None.
New CFL team likely won't be the Rough Riders
_________________
Stay thirsty for Blue my friends ! |
|
iso_55
Location: Calgary
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Migs is so proud of his team for doing this. He'll see this message I put up & come on here talking about copyright infringement, the fact the Rough Riders folded, that the name Roughriders only refer to his team & all that crap. Doesn't matter that the team in Ottawa were the Rough Riders first. He doesn't care about the history of the team in Ottawa or their legacy. The bottom line his team even though they are money makers now & almost went bankrupt 10 years ago are still morally bankrupt... in the head.
Stay classy, Roughriders. |
|
TrueBlue4U
Location: Sunny St.James
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Not sure they could name them the Rough Riders anyways...
The reason Ottawa chose the Renegades as a name last time around was because Horn Chen retained the name when the league suspended the Rough Riders (once upon a time ago )
iirc he still owns the name and wanted a small fortune to sell it back to the last ownership group or the league (Glieberguys wasn't it???) |
|
bobbyboucher
Location: Winnipeg
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thank god. Having 2 teams in a 9 team league with the same name is ridiculous.
_________________
Glenn still sucks |
|
grumpy old man
Location: winnipegsandbox.com
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It might be ridiculous if the two teams were named so in modern CFL history. But these teams have history going back 100 years, from different leagues, in different parts of the country.
Now is the time though to break with their traditions and name Ottawa something else.
_________________
You can agree with me or you can be wrong... |
|
Migs
Location: Regina Sk
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:28 pm Post subject: Re: Sask. not expected to allow Ottawa to use Rough Riders |
|
|
| waveraven wrote: |
Seems the Western Riders want to keep the Roughriders only to themsleves even though the Ottawa named the team that in 1876 and were the Rough Riders first.
It would be nice to tie the teams history to today's team. I know if an NHL team came here I'd be disappointed if it wasn't the Jets. I'm sure the fans would love to have that name again and by looking at the comments looks like people would like it. They have reaquired the rights.
This does happen in other leagues, I know college football has same named teams in same conferences even.
Shame on you SSK for letting greed be the driving factor for this. By the way how many SSK fans won't buy SSK gear because Ottawa has the RR's back ? None.
New CFL team likely won't be the Rough Riders
|
The Ottawa Rough Riders ceased to exist 15 years ago so the argument that they had the name first is irrelevent. Since that time the current Roughriders have grown that name into a multi-million dollar money tree. Most money making companies do whatever they can to protect their brand, good on the Riders for doing the same.
_________________
http://reginainpictures.blogspot.com |
|
Migs
Location: Regina Sk
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| iso_55 wrote: |
| Migs is so proud of his team for doing this. He'll see this message I put up & come on here talking about copyright infringement, the fact the Rough Riders folded, that the name Roughriders only refer to his team & all that crap. Doesn't matter that the team in Ottawa were the Rough Riders first. He doesn't care about the history of the team in Ottawa or their legacy. |
You know things are normal when iso makes a goofy post. Would you be all for calling the new Ottawa franchise the Ottawa Stamp Eders? Do you think Jerry Jones would have a problem if an NFL expansion franchise in LA wanted to call themeselves the Cow Boys?
| Quote: |
The bottom line his team even though they are money makers now & almost went bankrupt 10 years ago are still morally bankrupt... in the head.
Stay classy, Roughriders. |
Irony at its finest. lol
_________________
http://reginainpictures.blogspot.com |
|
grumpy old man
Location: winnipegsandbox.com
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Migs wrote: |
| You know things are normal when iso makes a goofy post. Would you be all for calling the new Ottawa franchise the Ottawa Stamp Eders? Do you think Jerry Jones would have a problem if an NFL expansion franchise in LA wanted to call themeselves the Cow Boys? |
Apples to pomegranate comparison. Hardly worth the effort. Fact is the Rough Rider name existed unlike the Cow Boys and Stamp Eders. Why bother?
_________________
You can agree with me or you can be wrong... |
|
Migs
Location: Regina Sk
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| grumpy old man wrote: |
| Migs wrote: |
| You know things are normal when iso makes a goofy post. Would you be all for calling the new Ottawa franchise the Ottawa Stamp Eders? Do you think Jerry Jones would have a problem if an NFL expansion franchise in LA wanted to call themeselves the Cow Boys? |
Apples to pomegranate comparison. Hardly worth the effort. Fact is the Rough Rider name existed unlike the Cow Boys and Stamp Eders. Why bother? |
Actually it is a valid comparison because legally speaking a team that ceased to exist well over a decade ago is no different than a franchise that never existed. So whatta ya say, lets call them the Ottawa Bluebombers, do you support that idea?
_________________
http://reginainpictures.blogspot.com |
|
iso_55
Location: Calgary
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 2:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Migs wrote: |
| grumpy old man wrote: |
| Migs wrote: |
| You know things are normal when iso makes a goofy post. Would you be all for calling the new Ottawa franchise the Ottawa Stamp Eders? Do you think Jerry Jones would have a problem if an NFL expansion franchise in LA wanted to call themeselves the Cow Boys? |
Apples to pomegranate comparison. Hardly worth the effort. Fact is the Rough Rider name existed unlike the Cow Boys and Stamp Eders. Why bother? |
Actually it is a valid comparison because legally speaking a team that ceased to exist well over a decade ago is no different than a franchise that never existed. So whatta ya say, lets call them the Ottawa Bluebombers, do you support that idea? |
Migs got his legal degree off the box top of a cereal box a few years ago. And his analogies prove it. |
|
grumpy old man
Location: winnipegsandbox.com
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 6:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Migs wrote: |
| grumpy old man wrote: |
| Migs wrote: |
| You know things are normal when iso makes a goofy post. Would you be all for calling the new Ottawa franchise the Ottawa Stamp Eders? Do you think Jerry Jones would have a problem if an NFL expansion franchise in LA wanted to call themeselves the Cow Boys? |
Apples to pomegranate comparison. Hardly worth the effort. Fact is the Rough Rider name existed unlike the Cow Boys and Stamp Eders. Why bother? |
Actually it is a valid comparison because legally speaking a team that ceased to exist well over a decade ago is no different than a franchise that never existed. So whatta ya say, lets call them the Ottawa Bluebombers, do you support that idea? |
Perhaps some considered thinking would have prevented this rebuttal. But it seems that thinking may not be your strong suit.
In its absence, the result is another true troll-like post. Good work! Consistency is a sure sign of excellence. And there can be no doubt you sir are an excellent troll...
_________________
You can agree with me or you can be wrong... |
|
Migs
Location: Regina Sk
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 6:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| iso_55 wrote: |
Migs got his legal degree off the box top of a cereal box a few years ago. And his analogies prove it. |
Once again you make zero sense. Debate the facts. Do you think the Riders would threaten a multimillion dollar lawsuit on a case they wouldn't win? Since the Rough Riders ceased to exist over 15 years ago, legally speaking the Ottawa group would be faced with the same challenge using that name in the CFL as it would any other name ie Argo Nauts, Stamp Eders, Esk Imos, Al Ouettes, Bluebombers, etc. That is a fact, feel free to rebut with a legal argument, even though you can't. Would you support calling the Ottawa team the Stamp Eders? If you don't then you are no different than me.
_________________
http://reginainpictures.blogspot.com
Last edited by Migs on Tue Jul 27, 2010 6:47 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Migs
Location: Regina Sk
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 6:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| grumpy old man wrote: |
Perhaps some considered thinking would have prevented this rebuttal. But it seems that thinking may not be your strong suit.
In its absence, the result is another true troll-like post. Good work! Consistency is a sure sign of excellence. And there can be no doubt you sir are an excellent troll... |
Typical. When you can't debate the facts or answer a simple question, you bring out the troll card. Says more about you than anything. Legally speaking my comparison is valid no matter how much you wanna avoid it.
_________________
http://reginainpictures.blogspot.com |
|
grumpy old man
Location: winnipegsandbox.com
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
In your world migs, was there another team in either league with names like Cow Boys, Stamp Eders, Bluebombers?
So why then does your argument include them as though relevant and meaningful?
There was significant history of two teams with similar names in the CFL right? It matters not that the name has been in limbo for a few years. If the rights are available I can't see the green riders winning a suit. But I'm not a lawyer like you so I'll defer to you for legal advise.
BTW for my official thoughts on the notion read this thread.
_________________
You can agree with me or you can be wrong... |
|
grumpy old man
Location: winnipegsandbox.com
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 6:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Migs wrote: |
| grumpy old man wrote: |
Perhaps some considered thinking would have prevented this rebuttal. But it seems that thinking may not be your strong suit.
In its absence, the result is another true troll-like post. Good work! Consistency is a sure sign of excellence. And there can be no doubt you sir are an excellent troll... |
Typical. When you can't debate the facts or answer a simple question, you bring out the troll card. Says more about you than anything. Legally speaking my comparison is valid no matter how much you wanna avoid it. |
Huh? You had a real question directed to moi? I missed it miggsie. Sorry... Care to point it out?
_________________
You can agree with me or you can be wrong... |
|
|
|
|
