<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Houstonist: Different takes on 1836</title>
<link>http://houstonist.com/2006/02/20/different_takes.php</link>
<description>All comments for Different takes on 1836</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>2009 Brittanie Shey</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2009 15:00:00 -0600</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<managingEditor>brittanie@houstonist.com</managingEditor>
<webMaster>brittanie@houstonist.com</webMaster>
<ttl>60</ttl>
<item>
<title>Todd M.</title>
<link>http://houstonist.com/2006/02/20/different_takes.php#comment-148929</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://houstonist.com/2006/02/20/different_takes.php#comment-148929</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Sat, 25 Feb 2006 09:21:37 -0600</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Nice post Jim.  I have to admit to liking 1836 but had not thought about how others might view the name.  It does put MLS in a tough position as they cannot afford to alienate any potential fans.  

I worry though about what they might change the name to.  Do you think they will reverse course and select on of the original options that aimed toward the hispanic fan like Houston Gatos or Houston Toros or take a safe alternative like the Houston Mustanges.

I believe this was the original list of names that is not very impressive:  Apollos, Americans, Bulls, Buffalos, Eagles, Generals, Gatos, Lonestars, Mustangs, Stallions, Stars, Toros&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>