Breaking News: Anaheim vs Angels

**Bluesteve32** · 02-09-2006, 04:47 PM

This just in the local news. The jury reached a verdict in the trial and found for the defense, the Angels 9-3. The jury was in deliberation for a bit onger than the Simpson jury.

**UnderPressure** · 02-09-2006, 04:55 PM

Oh well, I knew the city had no chance of winning.

**Bluesteve32** · 02-09-2006, 05:02 PM

Many "Anahomers" thought that the city would win.

Go Los Angeles Angels!

**Elvis** · 02-09-2006, 08:58 PM

Cool! Now everyone gets to make fun of that goofy name for many years to come!

**hiddengem** · 02-09-2006, 11:53 PM

Originally Posted by Elvis9045

Cool! Now everyone gets to make fun of that goofy name for many years to come!

That goofy name made them millions.

**runningshoes** · 02-10-2006, 03:33 AM

Has a nice ring to it, and lets not forget that the Angels are an original LA team with an original LA name; not taken from somewhere else.

**KCGHOST** · 02-10-2006, 06:02 AM

I guess I really don't care one way or the other, but this is a case where the law outweighed what is fair.

**trosmok** · 02-10-2006, 06:44 AM

The city officials in Anaheim are "disappointed", Angels owner Moreno is "satisfied", and the pettifoggers on both sides are laughing all the way to the bank. Guess it just gripes me that a cool $2,000,000.00 in legal fees could have been better spent by donating to the RBI (Reviving Baseball in Inner cities) programs, founded by John Young in Compton, CA. Even Tony LaRussa's ARF (Animal Rescue Foundation) would have been a more worthy cause than giving all that dough to some altready wealthy shysters.

**Bluesteve32** · 02-10-2006, 07:15 AM

Blame the city for sueing the Angels. If they had just let Arte change the name outright, and not be saddled with the "of Anaheim" part of the name.

**mojorisin71** · 02-10-2006, 10:03 AM

Originally Posted by runningshoes53

Has a nice ring to it, and lets not forget that the Angels are an original LA team with an original LA name; not taken from somewhere else.

Rumor has it that some Angelenos hate Gene Autry for moving the Angels out of LA 40 years ago.

**Elvis** · 02-10-2006, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by runningshoes53

Has a nice ring to it, and lets not forget that the Angels are an original LA team with an original LA name; not taken from somewhere else.

"Los Angeles Angels" has a nice ring to it.

"Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim" is completely idiotic. Just ask anyone in Anaheim. Orange County is not a suburb of L.A. even though it borders it. It's a separate metro area with a completely separate culture and vibe. And they HATE being associated with L.A.

I still say it's as nutty as saying the Washington DC Orioles of Baltimore... Or the Vancouver Mariners of Seattle.

**Mattingly** · 02-10-2006, 11:17 AM

I see that the LA Times has "Angels" amongst their home teams. Interesting. Here's an article on this:

Anaheim Strikes Out Against Angels
Jurors reject the city's contention that `Los Angeles' shouldn't be part of the team name. Claim of potential lost revenue is also denied.

Ending a yearlong dispute that sparked regional one-upmanship and talk-show ridicule, an Orange County jury Thursday decided that the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim could keep their geographically awkward name.

After deliberating just over four hours in a trial that pitted the city of Anaheim against its hometown team, jurors voted 9 to 3 that the Angels did not violate five words in the stadium lease that required that the team "include the name Anaheim therein."

Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle, who led the city's multimillion-dollar fight to restore the name, said: "There was a really a broader issue, and that was to make sure our identity of Orange County and Anaheim be preserved. We're very disappointed."

**AnaheimAngelsFan** · 02-10-2006, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by Bluesteve32

This just in the local news. The jury reached a verdict in the trial and found for the defense, the Angels 9-3. The jury was in deliberation for a bit onger than the Simpson jury.

Rumor has it that nine of them WERE on the OJ jury!

**Mattingly** · 02-10-2006, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by AnaheimAngelsFan

Rumor has it that nine of them WERE on the OJ jury!

So by this, I suppose you'd have preferred that the name would change back to "Los Angeles Angels"?

BTW, who here closely followed the trial? Was it on CourtTV or any other program?

**bluezebra** · 02-10-2006, 03:10 PM

Originally Posted by runningshoes53

Has a nice ring to it, and lets not forget that the Angels are an original LA team with an original LA name; not taken from somewhere else.

The ORIGINAL Los Angeles Angels were the Pacific Coast League (AAA) property of the Chicago Cubs. Just as the San Diego Padres were also A team in the PCL. And the Milwaukee Brewers were a AAA team of the Cubs.

Bob

**mojorisin71** · 02-10-2006, 03:11 PM

Originally Posted by Mattingly

So by this, I suppose you'd have preferred that the name would change back to "Los Angeles Angels"?

BTW, who here closely followed the trial? Was it on CourtTV or any other program?

I don't think anyone outside of sports talk radio cared too much about the trial here in SoCal.

**AnaheimAngelsFan** · 02-10-2006, 03:54 PM

Originally Posted by Mattingly

So by this, I suppose you'd have preferred that the name would change back to "Los Angeles Angels"?

BTW, who here closely followed the trial? Was it on CourtTV or any other program?

No. I would have preferred they would go back to "Anaheim Angels." But my second choice would have been "Los Angeles Angels." But since both parties (Anaheim and the Angels) signed a contract that said "Anaheim" had to be in the team's official name, we now will have that ridiculously sounding "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim." An embarrassment.

I guess we've learned that in contracts, the actual words in the document are more important than the intent of the signers of the document.

Any contract lawyers here, who can shed light on this?

Bob

PS None of it was televised.

**AnaheimAngelsFan** · 02-10-2006, 03:56 PM

Call them: "Los Angeles de Anaheim." (Spanish for "The Angels of Anaheim.")

I could live with that.

**Mattingly** · 02-10-2006, 05:24 PM

Originally Posted by mojorisin71

I don't think anyone outside of sports talk radio cared too much about the trial here in SoCal.

Just one of those times for you folks to change channels or switch the radio dial, I figure?

Originally Posted by AnaheimAngelsFan

No. I would have preferred they would go back to "Anaheim Angels." But my second choice would have been "Los Angeles Angels." But since both parties (Anaheim and the Angels) signed a contract that said "Anaheim" had to be in the team's official name, we now will have that ridiculously sounding "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim." An embarrassment.

I guess we've learned that in contracts, the actual words in the document are more important than the intent of the signers of the document.

Any contract lawyers here, who can shed light on this?

Bob

PS None of it was televised.

Silly me. I'd meant *ANAHEIM* Angels as what you'd likely have meant. Happens when you're trying to cook some food and post daily.

In contracts, there are always these "vague language" things which allows for what's commonly known as "loopholes", which is what others refer to as "creative thinking".

Just to use another geographic reference, say for instance that I mean that "someone must be from the USA" in order to do this thing or the next. If I instead write "American", then that's vague, since a Canadian is North American and can then qualify for this. So can a Mexican, who's also North American, as could a Central or South American. By this, the "spirit" of the law states I'm looking for someone "born in the USA". However, the letter of the law states "American", which in this case is highly debatable as to what it means. Just done for argument's sake.

When you put into writing "born in the USA" or something, then that's much more specific. I didn't read the writing of the contract, but have worked with lawyers, including those who've worked on sports contracts (players' associations for the major sports). Everything has to be hammered out and there should be no room for creativity. Everything is to be spelled out so that it can only mean one thing, or it can easily be challenged.

If you mean that "the City of Anaheim, which is located in the State of California, County of Orange" should be the *ONLY* city name used, then say just this. I'd go even further and say that "Ananheim" should be the only geographic location to be used in the team's name, since if I wrote down "city", then some bozo could could along and write that "Los Angeles" could also be considered a "county", not just a "city", and by "Los Angeles", they were referring to the "County of Los Angeles", not the "City of Los Angeles". Do you see where the creativity begins now?

These laywers are very creative types when it comes to undoing what less skillful practitioners of their trade, have done. The spirit of the law may be debatable, depending upon who's looking at it. However, the letter of the law should never be debatable, given that it's wording is very definite and extremely specific in what it states.

**Mattingly** · 02-10-2006, 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by AnaheimAngelsFan

Call them: "Los Angeles de Anaheim." (Spanish for "The Angels of Anaheim.")

I could live with that.

Then we'd have no "Angels" in the team name.

How about "Los Angels de Anaheim"?

Or dare I say ...

"Los Angels de Los Angeles y Anaheim"?

**Elvis** · 02-10-2006, 09:29 PM

Originally Posted by Mattingly

Then we'd have no "Angels" in the team name.

How about "Los Angels de Anaheim"?

Or dare I say ...

"Los Angels de Los Angeles y Anaheim"?

That means "The Angels of the Angels and Anaheim"!

**Bluesteve32** · 02-10-2006, 10:09 PM

Originally Posted by Elvis9045

"Los Angeles Angels" has a nice ring to it.

"Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim" is completely idiotic. Just ask anyone in Anaheim. Orange County is not a suburb of L.A. even though it borders it. It's a separate metro area with a completely separate culture and vibe. And they HATE being associated with L.A.

I still say it's as nutty as saying the Washington DC Orioles of Baltimore... Or the Vancouver Mariners of Seattle.

There is a discernable difference between Washington and Baltimore. Where is the discernable difference between LA and Orange Counties?

**Bluesteve32** · 02-10-2006, 10:14 PM

Here is a pic someone made about Anaheim mayor, Curt Pringle, who is no relationship to the potato chip. Some have refered to him as Mayor "Potato Chip."

**Bob Hannah** · 02-10-2006, 10:14 PM

Originally Posted by Bluesteve32

There is a discernable difference between Washington and Baltimore...

Not if you're Peter Angelos.

Call them the Los Angeles Angels and be done with it. You guys have had more name changes in the past 45 years than D.C. has had franchises. You have a good team, a REAL owner willing to compete, no stadium hassles, and great weather.
Be happy for what you do have.

**Bluesteve32** · 02-10-2006, 10:24 PM

Originally Posted by Bob Hannah

Not if you're Peter Angelos.

Call them the Los Angeles Angels and be done with it. You guys have had more name changes in the past 45 years than D.C. has had franchises. You have a good team, a REAL owner willing to compete, no stadium hassles, and great weather.
Be happy for what you do have.

I'd love to just be simply the Los Angeles Angels, but the city won't budge on the lease issue so we are stuck with the akward name.

Bob, by looking at the photo, can you see any discernable seperation between LA and OC?