re: Hornets247 Rebrands to Bourbon Street Shots

There are a number of things about the name that make it less than the best. However, not many of those things have been recounted here.

quote:

---

I think it is very politically incorrect. Some people would say it represents violence in the city. Bourbon Street "Shots" are shots of gunfire.

---

That's not even in the conversation of political correctness. Learn what big words mean before you try to use them.

`You' also aren't thinking. Like many, `you' are just complaining to complain. There is no satisfying some. Since they can not be swayed, they do not enter into the calculus. Same goes for those who would just read regardless. Basic economics.

Well, if the world was one where you had to name things based on their function, you'd have a point.

Also, if it was one where you were not told to avoid using the team's branding, you'd have a point.

As it stands, the `good' examples you have given have failed to meet some basic criteria.

Some of this is known to those who read the article instead of just reacting.

And if one wanted to pick on details:

Droppings can be offensive, 24/7 is inaccurate, Whatever report didn't report anything, and there's more typing going on than talking. If that's too literal, then fighting would be more accurate.

Is pass interference accurate? Must all signifiers be meticulous descriptions of the signified? No on both counts.

I have zero expectation that most people here would like the site's name, and it really doesn't matter because those people weren't going to read regularly anyway. Good work will be discussed regardless of the name, and that is just the truth.

So just dislike it. That's perfectly fine. Trying to reason out why someone else is stupid or whatever is just a waste of time, especially when you aren't even considering the constraints.

Again, I'd just like to see some names get suggested that aren't ripped apart or dismissed very quickly by the writers here. Still, the outspoken few who didn't like the site before complaining now is in line with expectations.

I expect few to none to put forth the effort.

Don't get defensive 42. The name is horrible.

Sometimes we make mistakes and need to swallow our pride and admit when we are wrong.

Scrap the shite name. Start over.

quote:

---

well why do you like it?

---

Fair question.

It's fun. It's tied to the city more than the team. It's got some flexibility and some easy branding one can do since it can be used to blend a few good things in the city: images, sounds, sports, partying.

There is a laundry list of negatives.

It met our criteria, which included:

No Pelicans or team trademarked property, so crescent city basketball was out, for instance

It had to be available as a URL, twitter, etc. without `funny business' like _'s or NOLA or NBA or such clumsy things

It had to point unambiguously to either New Orleans or the Pelicans, so "Bird Writes" was out

There were more, but this really choked things down.

For what it's worth, polls had it testing neutral to good in nearly all cases, with a fair overall response. Not great. Not bad.

quote:

---

I know what you are saying, but you know what I'm saying too.

If you have a list of, say, 10 names, the consensus of the group may not be the top choice of anyone. It's perfectly reasonable for a group of people's favorite restaurants all to differ but for them all to really like some other place without it being the favorite of anyone.

---

at what point do you just brainstorm more?

quote:

---

the name doesn't matter.

---

it definitely matters when trying to draw new readers


say someone retweets a tweet from BourbonStShots on twitter...ok, maybe the tweet is about the Pelicans, but you see the name and just figure its not. Am i going to click the account and see what if its about?


Well, if im interested in basketball, probably not. Because i figure it has nothing to do with the pelicans. With the new team name and logo going into next year, a solid name would be the 1st thing on my list in order to draw new readers. You know people's interest will be high. A name like BourbonStShots is not going to hook them to the new rebranding of the Pelicans

shite, the avatar isnt even basketball related. Its a Bourbon St sign.

quote:

---

it definitely matters when trying to draw new readers


say someone retweets a tweet from BourbonStShots on twitter...ok, maybe the tweet is about the Pelicans, but you see the name and just figure its not. Am i going to click the account and see what if its about?


Well, if im interested in basketball, probably not. Because i figure it has nothing to do with the pelicans

shite, the avatar isnt even basketball related. Its a Bourbon St sign.

---

Fair.

But, the logo is coming. That's just a placeholder. The banner art was considered enough to make the move.

The twitter point is also fair. The content of the tweet should speak more than the name. If someone sees a Pelican. A Pelican-name (which was not an option) may not speak to the NBA without basketball content . . . so why is the content not enough.

I'm not saying you aren't raising good points. You are. We went though this, and this is part of how the name came out. Just explaining.

As far as brainstorming goes, I can say that it was a fairly uneven process, with progress being made in fits and starts, but you stop when you get tired, and this was worked on for a while.

I can only remind people of the constraints if they care to understand the process. None of it is intended to make anyone like the name.

ATL's point about the branding is a good one.

quote:

---

did y'all ever put it to vote with the readers? or get their ideas?

---

No, not formally. It was considered, but rejected for a few reasons.

I bumped into readers here and there, wrote out a list of known non-starter good names, known non-starter bad names, and names in play. I asked them to just say what they wanted to say.

The best name, in my opinion, got a large number of high markets and a few really low marks. So that was nixed despite being better `on average'.

I asked writers, people with no real stake.

The reception has actually been very good among those that matter most: The readers. Surprisingly good, really. I trusted our process, but it's really working out well so far. I'm always skeptical with such a small sample size. We'll see if it keeps up into next week, into the season, and beyond.