![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think it would be a good project for someone who is familiar with the Zephyrs to reorganize the first paragraph dealing with the current situation of the Zephyrs' affiliations. "most recently affiliated with the Nationals" but now affiliated with the Mets. A little confusing and poor choice of wording. Mikelj 22:45, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
In the 4th paragraph, it states "To date, the Zephyrs are the only professional sports franchise in Louisiana to win a championship" -- this is UNTRUE. Shreveport won seven Texas League championships; Alexandria won two Texas-Louisiana League championships & the 2006 United League championship; Baton Rouge won the 2001 All-American Association championship...
Tyler wildcatters
03:04, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm putting the citation request back on the statement "The team was well-known in part for being the only baseball team with a "Z" on their caps"
"unneccessary request. It's easy to research that the NO Zephyrs are the only the team with a "Z" on their caps." is not a valid reason to remove the tag, in my opinion. First of all, that isn't the question - the question is how do we know that they were well-known in part for the Z on their caps. Second of all, the statement seems to require original research. Rather than require a search to acculutlate date to substantiate a fact, that fact must already have been published. -- Chancemichaels 20:02, 3 April 2007 (UTC)Chancemichaels
The article states, "To date, the Zephyrs are the only professional sports franchise in Louisiana to win a championship." However, the Shreveport Mudbugs, a professional hockey team, won three championships between 1999-2001.
He is no longer part of the Zephyrs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.2.124 ( talk) 18:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
The Infobox had three problem areas which I have attempted to clear up.
B00P ( talk) 23:15, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Under Kansas City, article states: The most notable player for the franchise was future Baseball Hall of Fame member Phil Rizzuto, the League MVP and Sporting News Minor League Player of the Year in 1940.
I personally was under the impression that Mickey Mantle was a more notable player than Phil Rizzuto. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.136.146.25 ( talk) 06:37, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on New Orleans Zephyrs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 05:51, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
This section of this entry:
A large portion of the fanbase is apparently disgusted with the new name, as evidenced by the almost universal rejection of it on social media. Fans seem to be disappointed ...
This section seems to be a personal and biased opinion rather than information regarding the team. I think it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.2.246.33 ( talk) 16:55, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
"The city of New Orleans hopes to bring in a Double-A Southern League team to carry on the Baby Cakes identity."
This passage doesn't make any sense and is not supported by the footnoted reference. I'm not even sure what is meant by "carry on the Baby Cakes identity." Any Southern League team would be a different franchise with new owners and playing in a different league with a new major league affiliation. The team's records and statistics would not transfer to a new double-A team. There is nothing about the Baby Cakes' "identity" that would attach to the new team aside from just being a professional team of a different league in the same city. Certainly, there's no indication that they would assume the Baby Cakes name (or it is to be hoped not...). Presumably the legal rights to the name would follow the PCL team to Wichita (even if the name isn't used). They could sell the rights to the name, but there is no reference indicating that would happen, or why a Southern League franchise would even want to buy the name or logo or anything else about the current team's identity. Unless someone can justify this, or reword it appropriately, I plan to delete the reference to the team's "identity." LeftField ( talk) 04:36, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
The Ballpark Digest article doesn't say that the potential Southern League team would assume the current PCL team's history and records. If Schwechheimer is going to own both the Wichita team and the potential SL New Orleans team as the article suggests, then the rights to the hideous name could well go to the Southern League team. But it still is a different franchise with its separate records. There's more to "identity" than just the name. The two Mudcats franchises are clearly considered to be distinct franchises in different leagues and different classifications, and with separate records. Lots of names are repeated in unrelated franchises. There's the 19th century Baltimore Orioles of the National League, the 1901-1902 Baltimore Orioles of the American League (now the yankee franchise), the International League Baltimore Orioles prior to 1954, and the current AL team. All maintain different records, played in different leagues, and despite sharing a name, they do certainly not have the same identity. I don't see how you could even transfer team records from one classification to another. Would all the AAA records of the New Orleans team now be wiped from the AAA and PCL record books, and become AA and Southern League records? If the records were made against AAA competition, they should remain AAA records. The AAA records of the PCL Padres didn't become major league records just because the team was replaced with a different franchise in the major league classification, even though the replacement NL team shared the same name.
I guess my objection is mainly to the term "identity." If Schwechheimer buys a SL team and moves it to New Orleans, he has the legal right to transfer the Baby Cakes name and branding as the Ballpark Digest suggests. But I don't see any indication that it would be considered a continuation of the same franchise with the same records. The Cleveland Browns worked out a deal to retain their original identity and records, and a similar thing happened with the NBA Hornets. But they both stayed in the same league and the same level of play. It's not like the Browns moved into the Big Ten and took all their NFL records with them.
Can't we just cite the Ballpark Digest and say the new team is expected to assume the Baby Cakes name and branding? That's what the article says. LeftField ( talk) 04:32, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think it would be a good project for someone who is familiar with the Zephyrs to reorganize the first paragraph dealing with the current situation of the Zephyrs' affiliations. "most recently affiliated with the Nationals" but now affiliated with the Mets. A little confusing and poor choice of wording. Mikelj 22:45, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
In the 4th paragraph, it states "To date, the Zephyrs are the only professional sports franchise in Louisiana to win a championship" -- this is UNTRUE. Shreveport won seven Texas League championships; Alexandria won two Texas-Louisiana League championships & the 2006 United League championship; Baton Rouge won the 2001 All-American Association championship...
Tyler wildcatters
03:04, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm putting the citation request back on the statement "The team was well-known in part for being the only baseball team with a "Z" on their caps"
"unneccessary request. It's easy to research that the NO Zephyrs are the only the team with a "Z" on their caps." is not a valid reason to remove the tag, in my opinion. First of all, that isn't the question - the question is how do we know that they were well-known in part for the Z on their caps. Second of all, the statement seems to require original research. Rather than require a search to acculutlate date to substantiate a fact, that fact must already have been published. -- Chancemichaels 20:02, 3 April 2007 (UTC)Chancemichaels
The article states, "To date, the Zephyrs are the only professional sports franchise in Louisiana to win a championship." However, the Shreveport Mudbugs, a professional hockey team, won three championships between 1999-2001.
He is no longer part of the Zephyrs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.2.124 ( talk) 18:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
The Infobox had three problem areas which I have attempted to clear up.
B00P ( talk) 23:15, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Under Kansas City, article states: The most notable player for the franchise was future Baseball Hall of Fame member Phil Rizzuto, the League MVP and Sporting News Minor League Player of the Year in 1940.
I personally was under the impression that Mickey Mantle was a more notable player than Phil Rizzuto. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.136.146.25 ( talk) 06:37, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on New Orleans Zephyrs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 05:51, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
This section of this entry:
A large portion of the fanbase is apparently disgusted with the new name, as evidenced by the almost universal rejection of it on social media. Fans seem to be disappointed ...
This section seems to be a personal and biased opinion rather than information regarding the team. I think it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.2.246.33 ( talk) 16:55, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
"The city of New Orleans hopes to bring in a Double-A Southern League team to carry on the Baby Cakes identity."
This passage doesn't make any sense and is not supported by the footnoted reference. I'm not even sure what is meant by "carry on the Baby Cakes identity." Any Southern League team would be a different franchise with new owners and playing in a different league with a new major league affiliation. The team's records and statistics would not transfer to a new double-A team. There is nothing about the Baby Cakes' "identity" that would attach to the new team aside from just being a professional team of a different league in the same city. Certainly, there's no indication that they would assume the Baby Cakes name (or it is to be hoped not...). Presumably the legal rights to the name would follow the PCL team to Wichita (even if the name isn't used). They could sell the rights to the name, but there is no reference indicating that would happen, or why a Southern League franchise would even want to buy the name or logo or anything else about the current team's identity. Unless someone can justify this, or reword it appropriately, I plan to delete the reference to the team's "identity." LeftField ( talk) 04:36, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
The Ballpark Digest article doesn't say that the potential Southern League team would assume the current PCL team's history and records. If Schwechheimer is going to own both the Wichita team and the potential SL New Orleans team as the article suggests, then the rights to the hideous name could well go to the Southern League team. But it still is a different franchise with its separate records. There's more to "identity" than just the name. The two Mudcats franchises are clearly considered to be distinct franchises in different leagues and different classifications, and with separate records. Lots of names are repeated in unrelated franchises. There's the 19th century Baltimore Orioles of the National League, the 1901-1902 Baltimore Orioles of the American League (now the yankee franchise), the International League Baltimore Orioles prior to 1954, and the current AL team. All maintain different records, played in different leagues, and despite sharing a name, they do certainly not have the same identity. I don't see how you could even transfer team records from one classification to another. Would all the AAA records of the New Orleans team now be wiped from the AAA and PCL record books, and become AA and Southern League records? If the records were made against AAA competition, they should remain AAA records. The AAA records of the PCL Padres didn't become major league records just because the team was replaced with a different franchise in the major league classification, even though the replacement NL team shared the same name.
I guess my objection is mainly to the term "identity." If Schwechheimer buys a SL team and moves it to New Orleans, he has the legal right to transfer the Baby Cakes name and branding as the Ballpark Digest suggests. But I don't see any indication that it would be considered a continuation of the same franchise with the same records. The Cleveland Browns worked out a deal to retain their original identity and records, and a similar thing happened with the NBA Hornets. But they both stayed in the same league and the same level of play. It's not like the Browns moved into the Big Ten and took all their NFL records with them.
Can't we just cite the Ballpark Digest and say the new team is expected to assume the Baby Cakes name and branding? That's what the article says. LeftField ( talk) 04:32, 5 September 2019 (UTC)