Texans or Oilers?

by Patrick L. Kennedy on Feb 4, 2007 12:05 AM CST Comment 4 comments

Hey all, being a Tampa Bay Bucs fan, I am absolutely 100% indifferent to the Houston Texans. I think that the Bucs have played the Texans maybe twice in regular season play since their inception, and at least three or four times in the preseason, but nonetheless, there isn't really much of a connection.

However I am a fan of pro football history, and the Houston Oilers were undoubtedly a big part of that, being one of the founding franchises of the AFC. I realize that the Oilers name has been "retired" by the NFL, but considering that the Cleveland Browns retained their name after they moved to Baltimore, how do Houston fans feel about this? Do you really like the name "Houston Texans", or would you want the old Oiler tag back?

Further, I have some informational questions about the switch. Does Bud Adams and the Titans franchise now own the rights to the Houston Oilers name and logo? Was there ever a movement to get it back. And lastly, why is the old Houston franchise's history with the Nashville reincarnation?

Thanks for any responses that you can provide me in advance on this subject. I wasn't even really a football fan when the Oilers left Houston, being as I was just five years old, however I was just curious as to these matters. So thanks for the input, and good luck this offseason!

0 recs | Comment 4 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Oilers

The Oilers name and logo is owned and being held hostage by the Budster. He collects royalties on merchandise sales and would not part with it. The people here in Houston would have been happy about getting the name, but we also did not want to deal with Bud in any negotiations for it either. In the long run, we would call them The Unicorns if they would just win ten games.

I think people should have to earn a Superman tattoo, by getting shot in the chest first. You know, just to make sure.

by txnpwrlifter on Feb 5, 2007 12:14 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Spot On

The comment above is dead on. Houstonians would have loved to bring the Oilers name and logo back when we got the expansion franchise, but Bud Adams wasn't giving it up and we weren't going to pay a king's ransom to get it. Despite the Oilers having left ten years ago, there's still A LOT of bad blood over their departure.

I know that the Texans name and logo has certainly grown on me. I can't imagine having anything else on 92% of my wardrobe.

Looking forward to a day when being a Texans fan doesn't mean that April is the highlight of my season...

by Tim on Feb 7, 2007 11:21 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

OK...

I signed up specifically for this question.

I spent last night watching old Oilers clips. In fact, I still call them the Oilers and steadfastly refuse to use either "T" word. As far as I am concerned, the Oilers vanished for a couple of years and resurrected as a D-III college team. I hope that'll change.

Fact is, Adams is one of the biggest POSes in the history of pro sports. Nobody liked him in the 70s, and it never changed. When he fired Bum, the entire city quit on his stupid @ss. That he did what he did was inevitable: he doesn't care about anything other than money, and he's willing to sacrifice literally anything to make a buck.

To make one last tired point, there is no logical reason why the team in TN should inherit the history of the Oilers. Bud purposely broke the team down to make it suck before he left. He insulted every Oiler to ever wear the uniform and every fan who cheered for the team with his selfish actions. The Oilers still live, and they ain't in TN.

Five, eh? Jeebus, I have underwear older than you...which means nothing complimentary to me.

To editors: it'd be nice if the SB Nation logins carried over from site to site.

by bigfatdrunk on Feb 7, 2007 10:13 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

We're not big on Bud, either.

He's only done 2 good things for Nashville:

Bring us an NFL franchise.
Revive our Arena Football League franchise.

Other than that, he's pretty much a dickhead. And we're glad he still lives in Texas.

As for the whole "franchise history" thing: the Titans have the Oilers history, because it's the same franchise in a new city. Cleveland keeping the name and history was an abberation that should never have been done.

The Cardinals have been in 3 cities; neither Chicago nor St. Louis has any rights.
Baltimore didn't get to keep the Colts, although they do still have their Super Bowl V trophy.
Decatur, IL, doesn't have the rights to the Staleys (now the Chicago Bears).
Los Angeles has had how many teams, lost them all, and has none of their history or names, and can't get the NFL to even contemplate giving them another one.

Teams move, they change names, their history goes with them, it's a fact of professional sports. Not just the NFL, either; ask how New Orleans feels about the (NBA) Utah Jazz.

Likewise, Houston didn't have to ask anybody permission to use the name "Texans," even though they're the second NFL franchise to use the name (the original Dallas Texans are now the Kansas City Chiefs, I believe), nor did Bud have to get permission for the New York Jets, who were once also named the Titans.

by hartley on Mar 1, 2007 2:39 AM CST reply actions 0 recs