"No one today would dream of calling their club Hotspur"

[guiltyparty]

Yes, but it is very much a Shakespearean reference too, which would have been much better and more widely understood in 1882 than it is now.

By the way, when the club was formed there was already a London Hotspur already in existence, which also demonstrates the romantic power of the "Hotspur" reference.

Yes we were founded as Hotspur FC, I believe. The Hotspur came before the Tottenham

 

[Dundalk_Spur]

don't like their quality of journalism?

Quality, heh, good one. In fact journalism is a stretch.

 

[HotspurFC1950]

Yes we were founded as Hotspur FC, I believe. The Hotspur came before the Tottenham

Yes and Hotspur FC is what it should be. Tottenham Hotspur is limiting. It was only because there was another Hotspur outfit at the time that we added " Tottenham " .

 

[HotspurFC1950]

As someone else has said on another thread the name Tottenham limits the Club's potential new stadium prospects to a few square miles unlike clubs with names which do not reflect the area they play in (Arse, Everton etc.) or in the case of the likes of Liverpool, Newcastle, Birmingham, Manchester etc the names relate to far bigger areas for potential stadium sites within the boundaries of the cities they are named after.

 

[LSUY]

As someone else has said on another thread the name Tottenham limits the Club's potential new stadium prospects to a few square miles unlike clubs with names which do not reflect the area they play in (Arse, Everton etc.) or in the case of the likes of Liverpool, Newcastle, Birmingham, Manchester etc the names relate to far bigger areas for potential stadium sites within the boundaries of the cities they are named after.

Isn't Everton a district in Liverpool?

I wouldn't mind the club being Hotspur FC but if they put London in there like QPR did with their new badge it's going to be tacky, lame and so blatantly obvious that we're targeting the overseas markets. The only reason I would happily accept the dropping of Tottenham is if we are forced to leave the area to build the new stadium (though I would hope we would remain in North London).

I'm glad the FA stopped the Hull name change because it would have been another step closer to the franchise system. Hull Tigers would be up there with Real Salt Lake & Sporting Kansas City for worst football team names. Adding Tigers to Hull's name isn't going to help them flog a few more shirts in the Far East, the only reason Man Utd make so much money over there is because they've been England's best team for over a decade. One of the great things about football (and cricket) is the traditions. If a team wants to change its name then it should be with the consent of the fans as owners, managers and players come and go while the fans remain.

 

[Ironskullll]

Why can't you post links to the mail articles?


What's the connection?

In the capital city it makes me wonder how no recognisable team ever ended up with the city in their name. Not even any amalgamations took place to form a big city team. I'm just thinking the likes of Manchester (x2), Newcastle and Liverpool. Would seem a very marketable team. It's interesting.

There is quote, "In a world full of United's, City's and Rovers, there is only One Hotspur." Who said that? And before you say it, NO, it was not you.

In a world full of United's, City's and Rovers, there is only One Hotspur.

As much as I like our unique title suffix, I don't so much like the over-use of the nickname which derives from it, especially in formal environments. I do like the formality of our title in its entirety, 'Tottenham Hotspur.' Even the PremierLeague.com homepage league table lists us as "Spurs" and we're the only team who's
nickname is used. I don't see "Red Devils" or "Saints" or "Reds" (That's Liverpool right?)

That's one of the things I've always liked since I was a kid. That only Spurs were so well known they could be known by their nickname. Only Wolves come close in that respect. And then we have the utter naffness of the others' nicknames such as Gunners, Reds, Ree Devils and Pensioners

 

[Ironskullll]

By the way, only five clubs in English history have ever managed an average throught the season of over 50,000. Liverpool, Manchester City and Chelsea are not among them. The five are Man Utd, Everton, Spurs, Arsenal and Newcastle United, and it's worth noting that for four years out of ten in the leadup to the double season, Spurs had topped the league average, one of which had been in division two. I'd like us to aspire to those days again, and even better.

 

[Shea]

To me we are and always have been simply Spurs

The name Spurs means so much more to me than Tottenham or Tottenham Hotspur

If someone asks me who I support my answer without thinking is Spurs

Come on you SPURS

 

[Gassin's finest]

The club has always been far more of a community club than all these other ones. They do so much in the area, to the point where we actually incorporate benefits to Tottenham into any plans we have for the stadium (colleges, housing, transport etc).

That's why the Hotspur part is just the jaunty suffix to give the team a bit of zest. The club is Tottenham.

 

[riggi]

Lets do an arsenal but move to South London. Hotspur fc. Then millwall fans can sing "fuck off back to tottenham, South London is ours". Irony would be delicious...

 

[Lufti]

Think the problem is that nothing, or at least very little is sacred in football anymore. Managers, chairmen, owners, players, coaches, even some fans move on so regularly that there's little continuity and identity at clubs these days. The only things that really stay the same now are the fans (to an extent), and the club name. Everything else seems to be changeable, even things like stadium names (see Newcastle) and logos (see Everton), and in some cases even cities (MK Dons). If the actual club names are now open to change and are simply at the will of the clubs owners, then there's very little to hold onto in football to be honest

 

[CosmicHotspur]

Lets do an arsenal but move to South London. Hotspur fc. Then millwall fans can sing "fuck off back to tottenham, South London is ours". Irony would be delicious...

Woolwich Hotspur would never be right!

Also...

We must never play in a red strip.

It must always be White Hart Lane no matter who our owners or sponsors may be in the future.

 

[Shea]

Woolwich Hotspur would never be right!

Also...

We must never play in a red strip.

It must always be White Hart Lane no matter who our owners or sponsors may be in the future.

If it's a new stadium it won't be called White Hart Lane I doubt

Especially not once the sponsors are arranged - The Emirates was going to be Ashburton Grove but now everyone knows it by its sponsorship name

The same would undoubtedly happen with us

 

[Dinghy]

Woolwich Hotspur would never be right!

Also...

We must never play in a red strip.

It must always be White Hart Lane no matter who our owners or sponsors may be in the future.

Too late...

1890-Sept 1895

From http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Tottenham_Hotspur/Tottenham_Hotspur.htm

and various incarnations over the years as a second strip...

 

[CosmicHotspur]

If the stadium is renamed it will be time for IT WILL ALWAYS BE WHITE HART LANE t-shirts to be worn!

Yes, there's a little bit of red on the strip, but it's not the whole shirt.

 

[jimbo]

If the stadium is renamed it will be time for IT WILL ALWAYS BE WHITE HART LANE t-shirts to be worn!

Yes, there's a little bit of red on the strip, but it's not the whole shirt.

Weren't we called the 'Tottenham Reds' for a while and played in an all red strip?

 

[Shea]

If the stadium is renamed it will be time for IT WILL ALWAYS BE WHITE HART LANE t-shirts to be worn!

Yes, there's a little bit of red on the strip, but it's not the whole shirt.

White Hart Lane will be a stadium that's torn down and replaced by the NDP anyway, would it even be named White Hart Lane before sponsorship anyway?

White Hart Lane would be to the new stadium what Highbury is to the Emirates (the clubs previous stadium)

As for the red kit - what the other poster is saying to you is that we once wore an all red shirt, before indeed we ever wore an all white shirt. The pure red shirt was worn from 1890 til 1895 and we did not introduce our now famous all white shirt until 1898 (so I guess he was making a flippant remark about your "we must never wear red" comment)

Although of course we all know that in spite of our orgins and ancient history the all white shirt is now synonymous with our club and part of our identity so of course it is what we associate with Tottenham Hotspur and we'd never want to return to any form of our historically original shirts be it Red, White and Light blue or Yellow and Brown....we're the lillywhites

 

[Shea]

That's one of the things I've always liked since I was a kid. That only Spurs were so well known they could be known by their nickname. Only Wolves come close in that respect. And then we have the utter naffness of the others' nicknames such as Gunners, Reds, Ree Devils and Pensioners

Is it because the club is so well known? or just because of the fact they're referred to by their nickname more than their actual name while other clubs are not

Less syllables in Spurs and Wolves than the actual names - Man U are certainly a lot more well known world wide than Spurs are and even more so than Wolves so its not a matter of fame which means they're not known by the Red Devils its just because unlike that nickname ours is more user friendly than our actual name

 

[SpursManChris]

That's one of the things I've always liked since I was a kid. That only Spurs were so well known they could be known by their nickname. Only Wolves come close in that respect. And then we have the utter naffness of the others' nicknames such as Gunners, Reds, Ree Devils and Pensioners

LOL, any reason why you compiled every single one of my posts into one single reply quote?

 

[CosmicHotspur]

White Hart Lane will be a stadium that's torn down and replaced by the NDP anyway, would it even be named White Hart Lane before sponsorship anyway?

White Hart Lane would be to the new stadium what Highbury is to the Emirates (the clubs previous stadium)

As for the red kit - what the other poster is saying to you is that we once wore an all red shirt, before indeed we ever wore an all white shirt. The pure red shirt was worn from 1890 til 1895 and we did not introduce our now famous all white shirt until 1898 (so I guess SHE * was making a flippant remark about your "we must never wear red" comment)

Although of course we all know that in spite of our orgins and ancient history the all white shirt is now synonymous with our club and part of our identity so of course it is what we associate with Tottenham Hotspur and we'd never want to return to any form of our historically original shirts be it Red, White and Light blue or Yellow and Brown....we're the lillywhites

I * wasn't being flippant, yes i do know that we played in a red strip a very long time ago but we have been known as the Lilywhites and played in navy and white for a much longer time and that's long been part of the identity of the club.