[Archived] Rebranding Ewood

[BlueMonday]

Ewood Pataks.

Stays true to the brand, but incorporates our new Eastern synergies, blue skies thinking, evolution

not revolution blah, blah, blah

EWOOD PARK. HANDS OFF!

[champions1995]

There should be a poll. 'For rebranding' and 'against rebranding'. I personally am against.

[Mc Love]

Most people will be against because we have an attachment to rovers and where and what the ground name is

[Mattyblue]

Get with the times people

Emirates, Ricoh, DW, Reebok, Walkers...............

Also as said previously if they called the ground the Venky Dome what would you call it? I know I'd still say I'm going down Ewood.

All said grounds are new builds. Doesn't matter if that is the case- there is no historical or emotional attachment to the ground so you can call it what you want.

If it is your existing home, it is diffrent- Anfield, Old Trafford, Highbury, Villa park, Stamford Bridge- never changed.

[JAL]

IF, the rebranding of Ewood Park is linked with many millions being spent on improving the stadium, then yes, why not, we fans will always think of it as Ewood Park whatever new corporate name it takes onboard.

Failing to put money into the club without improving the ground should be met with disapproval from Rovers fans allover. The issue of making improvements to Ewood Park stadium should not be overlooked or side stepped by the new owners.

[thenonda]

The branding of Ewood would not make any difference to us the fans anyway, we would all call it Ewood Park or as I say I'm off to the Rovers. Something that can bring in a substantial amount money to help the club progress has to be a good thing.

[Roverbiff]

KFCwood

[Tim Southampton Rover]

I'm all for it if it brings in huge amounts of money which will benefit the club.

It will always be known as Ewood Park by Rovers fans and football fans in general anyway.

When Southampton's ground was called 'The Friends Providence St Mary's Stadium' it was always called St Mary's Stadium in the national and local papers and especially by all football fans. I bet the majority of you knew it as St Marys rather than the full title. Which goes to show that fans outside of the town/city will pretty much refer to it by it's original name anyway.

Considering Ewood Park has been there for over 100 years, I don't think many people will suddenly call it something else.

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

They can try and re-name our heritage all they want,to ALL rovers fans it will always be our proud home.......

EWOOD PARK

[PAFELL]

All said grounds are new builds. Doesn't matter if that is the case- there is no historical or emotional attachment to the ground so you can call it what you want.

If it is your existing home, it is diffrent- Anfield, Old Trafford, Highbury, Villa park, Stamford Bridge- never changed.

Jack Walker had the new ewood ground built. what is it now 20 years old. The ground would always be called or known as ewood park. But if somebody says they will pay this or that to rebrand the name, so bit it. to the die hard, it would still be ewood park. After all they will never change the name of the area that the ground is built upon. The ground is built in ewood along the bolton road

[Sparky Marky]

Pafell, you seem to have a unparalleled knowledge of the club....

[m1st]

Not sure that's quite the same. Anyway, there are two St. James' Parks that I know of.

It'll always be t'Ewood for the fans. Just hope it's not given some dumb sponsor name like Clare's example.

You make the case for it staying as Ewood, Jisty.

To much amusement, the one in Newcastle was renamed the "sportsdirect.com@St. James' Park" by the owner of that club last season and, afaik, that's still its official name. And NOBODY uses it; everybody still refers to "St James' Park".

Surely the only way our ground should no longer be called Ewood Park is if our new owners sold it and built us a new ground somewhere else in town.

[Billy Castell]

They can call it the 'Look at which member of JLS has his face on the extra safe condoms Arena ' in a lucrative deal for all I care, as long as we, the fans, the soul of the club keep calling it Ewood Park.

Put it this way, how many people still call it Sportsdirect@St. James' Park?

[Hughesy]

Most people will be against because we have an attachment to rovers and where and what the ground name is

Exactly....

If they actually plan to do it - then they need to provide us with the reasons why.

Im sure a vote would soon be swayed if they said - it means an extra £4m a season to spend on players + the stadium getting modernised etc.

Like people say - to the fans the name will always be Ewood, what does it matter if the media name is something else?! People around here will still call it Ewood.

[Zulu]

After all they will never change the name of the area that the ground is built upon. The ground is built in ewood along the bolton road

So you could call it Bolton Park! (I'm not helping, am I?)

On a serious note, I agree with those who say let them call it what they like. It will still be Ewood Park to all the Rovers supporters and most outsiders too. It's very difficult to change the name of a long-standing stadium in the public's perception.

It's different if you build a new stadium. There were Bolton fans who wanted to call the new ground New Burnden, or similar. That was never going to fly. You can't replace your old stadium in the fans' eyes. Reebok pitching up with wedges of cash also helped oil the wheels, of course.

It all depends who the sponsor is, obviously, in terms of ridicule from others. The Reebok, The Emirates etc are bearable. The Webuyanycar.com Bowl or The Chicken is the Future Dome may be harder to live with.

[ABBEY]

I'm all for it if it brings in huge amounts of money which will benefit the club.

It will always be known as Ewood Park by Rovers fans and football fans in general anyway.

When Southampton's ground was called 'The Friends Providence St Mary's Stadium' it was always called St Mary's Stadium in the national and local papers and especially by all football fans. I bet the majority of you knew it as St Marys rather than the full title. Which goes to show that fans outside of the town/city will pretty much refer to it by it's original name anyway.

Considering Ewood Park has been there for over 100 years, I don't think many people will suddenly call it something else.

new ground different circs...we are blackburn rovers founder member of the football league and our ground will always be ewood park..unless we moved.

uncle jack will be spinning at the thought of chunky chicken bowl.

[GiddyGoat]

If naming rights come up for sale it would be a nice touch if the Walker Trust (having just trousered £40m+) bought in as a high profile memorial to the source of their wealth.

[ABBEY]

So you could call it Bolton Park! (I'm not helping, am I?)

On a serious note, I agree with those who say let them call it what they like. It will still be Ewood Park to all the Rovers supporters and most outsiders too. It's very difficult to change the name of a long-standing stadium in the public's perception.

It's different if you build a new stadium. There were Bolton fans who wanted to call the new ground New Burnden, or similar. That was never going to fly. You can't replace your old stadium in the fans' eyes. Reebok pitching up with wedges of cash also helped oil the wheels, of course.

It all depends who the sponsor is, obviously, in terms of ridicule from others. The Reebok, The Emirates etc are bearable. The Webuyanycar.com Bowl or The Chicken is the Future Dome may be harder to live with.

the breezeblock though is souless and completly unfinished inside,bare wires,pipes and bare breeze blocks eveywhere.

[BuckyRover]

I refute the idea that Jack would be horrified at the idea, he always did everything possible so that we could compete, that was his aim. If selling the name helped with this, I believe he would have done the same.

[Hughesy]

I refute the idea that Jack would be horrified at the idea, he always did everything possible so that we could compete, that was his aim. If selling the name helped with this, I believe he would have done the same.

Agreed - it was all about making the club self sufficient for him...If the naming rights help to that then he too would have done it.

[unluckymorton]

So you could call it Bolton Park! (I'm not helping, am I?)

On a serious note, I agree with those who say let them call it what they like. It will still be Ewood Park to all the Rovers supporters and most outsiders too. It's very difficult to change the name of a long-standing stadium in the public's perception.

It's different if you build a new stadium. There were Bolton fans who wanted to call the new ground New Burnden, or similar. That was never going to fly. You can't replace your old stadium in the fans' eyes. Reebok pitching up with wedges of cash also helped oil the wheels, of course.

It all depends who the sponsor is, obviously, in terms of ridicule from others. The Reebok, The Emirates etc are bearable. The Webuyanycar.com Bowl or The Chicken is the Future Dome may be harder to live with.

I agree Zulu. If your new stadium was built on the site of Burnden Park we would all still call it Burnden, I think the general public only really take notice of the stadium name change is when a club re-locate. I and many others will always call it Ewood Park.

I think we need to realise that the club have got to do all they can to ensure sustainability and last another 10 consecutive seasons in the top flight. If renaming the stadium helps the cause then so be it.

Too many people want a take over to go through on their terms and not in the best interests of the future of the club. Changes will happen and must happen to take the club further, we will not receive any 'free' money and a few noses will be put out of joint on the way but if we want to improve we must go with and support whoever holds the purse strings because they hold the key to our future competing in the top flight.

[ABBEY]

Agreed - it was all about making the club self sufficient for him...If the naming rights help to that then he too would have done it.

then WHY didnt he do it?

[unluckymorton]

then WHY didnt he do it?

Maybe he didn't feel the need to Abbey. We were extremely well off in those days, since then the Abramovich's of this world have got involved and taken the Premier League to all new highs as far as finances go.

[Mattyblue]

All this about Jack wanting us to be self sufficent needs to be squared with the football environment of the time.

in the 90s with our gate recipts, tv money, sponsorship incomes all growing and wages not at today's utter obscene levels, Jack would have been justified in thinking we could compete and be self sufficent.

Jack could never have forseen the game in 2010, can we be self sufficent in today's football? I doubt it.

[ABBEY]

Maybe he didn't feel the need to Abbey. We were extremely well off in those days, since then the Abramovich's of this world have got involved and taken the Premier League to all new highs as far as finances go.

what about when we went down?