N Y C F C New Hashtag #weareone
- Thread starter franchise646
- Start date
You would think they would even wear the black uni's too Saturday but that would make too much sense
Stephanie P
Registered
I have been scratching my head at PR and Marketing all season. The introduction of this slogan at this point of the season and on a Wednesday night has me scratching with both hands now. It has the feeling of a turnover in the marketing staff and an attempt by someone new to do "something". Painfully unoriginal and, as mentioned before, close enough to 9/11 to cause confusion in its intended meaning. I gather it is a rallying cry for a poor performing team with a plea towards unity as we enter the season tickets selling drive. For next season's sake I hope we not only buy a better team but a better marketing department.
They actually are wearing the black aways. Same web page as the shirt announcement.
sorry, that's a helluva stretch.
I was confused by this but only because of when it was introduced. When I saw the hashtag I clicked on it and there were more results for 9/11 than for The Pigeons.
ah, interesting. Never saw that phrase associated with 9/11 before but I also never click hashtags, so fair point then
I'm not sure it's a big 9/11 thing either, at least not in an organized way. I think it's just the kind of open-ended feel-good short phrase that people will spontaneously use on Twitter for multiple causes. FC can make it its own, but it will always be a somewhat cluttered field.
After reading roxfontaine's admonishment to me and the rationale when they announced it, I felt NYCFC could have improved upon it by adding one word... CITY. As in, #WeAreOneCity.
I dunno. I kinda feel like the team and the fans, many of them on this forum, often want to avoid any association with Manchester City. And I totally get there are NYCFC fans that are fans of Chelsea, Liverpool and the Blackburn Rovers, just to name a few, but the fact is that NYCFC is the baby brother to MCFC and distant brothers in Melbourne and Yokohama. It's an association that's not going to go away anytime soon either.
It's why I refer to NYCFC as City despite the reluctance around the league to do the same although I have heard Joe, Ian, Adrian and Taylor occasionally slip it into their presentations.
#WeAreOneCity
It's what the club was marketed on, apparently successfully.
I dunno. I kinda feel like the team and the fans, many of them on this forum, often want to avoid any association with Manchester City. And I totally get there are NYCFC fans that are fans of Chelsea, Liverpool and the Blackburn Rovers, just to name a few, but the fact is that NYCFC is the baby brother to MCFC and distant brothers in Melbourne and Yokohama. It's an association that's not going to go away anytime soon either.
It's why I refer to NYCFC as City despite the reluctance around the league to do the same although I have heard Joe, Ian, Adrian and Taylor occasionally slip it into their presentations.
#WeAreOneCity
It's what the club was marketed on, apparently successfully.
franchise646
Registered
We have 3 teams named City, and 5 FCs, just in MLS. Dozens of both in the UK. To end up with "City" being the primary designation of this team is a failure of both judgment and imagination. Also, for all the UK teams with "City" in the name, the "City" element is used to distinguish the club from the actual city, because none of those towns or cities are actually called "______ City." Nobody would ever hear you say Manchester City and think you meant the city of Manchester. Same for Swansea, Birmingham, Coventry, etc. Manchester is the city, but Manchester City is the team. It's a British thing. But "New York City" will always mean the city and moreso than the team, no matter how successful this club ever becomes.
Which, by the way, also argues against Sporting Kansas City being called "City." OTOH, Orlando City SC can have it if it wants.
franchise646
Registered
Which was the point I was hinting at but no harm, no foul.
I like to expound. Subtlety is too damn subtle.
Oooh, a heated argument. Bring it on!
Both sides have earned points here but the difference is that our name is New York City Football Club. So in a sense we don't have a normal team name, something like New York Cougars, say. My second item is that the league insists on calling that other team by the New York name, designating us as New York City. I think these two things together make City seem like a "natural" name for the team. And I have a suspicion the league is hoping for the team to get the City name without officially calling it that. On the other hand I don't think they anticipated the Lampardgate/Man City backlash so that may have affected those plans (if they even truly existed).
I'm a Man City fan and somewhat of a Lampard fan so take all that as you may. And also I do acknowledge that a United fan or a Chelsea fan may find the City name simply unimaginable and I can understand that perspective.
So my vote is for the City name, but I'd also feel better about it if that's what we all end up calling the team in a few years just by natural growth of usage.
Both sides have earned points here but the difference is that our name is New York City Football Club. So in a sense we don't have a normal team name, something like New York Cougars, say. My second item is that the league insists on calling that other team by the New York name, designating us as New York City. I think these two things together make City seem like a "natural" name for the team. And I have a suspicion the league is hoping for the team to get the City name without officially calling it that. On the other hand I don't think they anticipated the Lampardgate/Man City backlash so that may have affected those plans (if they even truly existed).
I'm a Man City fan and somewhat of a Lampard fan so take all that as you may. And also I do acknowledge that a United fan or a Chelsea fan may find the City name simply unimaginable and I can understand that perspective.
So my vote is for the City name, but I'd also feel better about it if that's what we all end up calling the team in a few years just by natural growth of usage.
Loyalty to those who betrayed you is unhealthy.
Well, neither one's betrayed me, actually.
I was a casual fan of Lampard from his Chelsea years, even though I'm not at all a Chelsea fan. And if you watched the first half of the last game there were a good number of just superior quality passes back and forth between Lampard and Pirlo that are really good signs for next season. That's why they're here.
To me, my being a fan seems fine. This continued unending vitriol and hatred that I see so much of here is what seems unhealthy. Not saying you ought to feel one way or the other as that's totally up to you though.
Not bad in my book. Also applies to the umbrella company which, for better or worse, is our reality. We are 5 boroughs; one city. 3.2 clubs; one city.
