Was the official name Nationals or Senators?

[Brownieand45sfan]

Baseball-Reference.com has the A.L. franchise as "Senators" throughout its existence. But there is authority that they were not officially named Senators until the mid-50s. According to Wikipedia:"Officially the "Nationals" but widely known as the "Senators" for much of their history, they officially changed their name to the Washington Senators after 1956, although headline writers continued to use "Nats" as an alternate nickname. "

Can anyone shed light on this?

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Nationals_%28disambiguation%29

[Aa3rt]

Brownieand45sfan-this question has been discussed here before (I'd have to review some of the older threads to find the links.) but, you can find the short answer in my post in the thread titled "Does this make sense?":

Does this make sense? (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=43551)

Edit: A more definitive explanation here from Sports eCyclopedia:

Senators or Nationals? (http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com/al/wasdc/nats.html)

[Brownieand45sfan]

... is in Wikipedia (amazing thing, isn't it?):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Twins (see the start of the listing)

[bryanac625]

Baseball-Reference.com has the A.L. franchise as "Senators" throughout its existence. But there is authority that they were not officially named Senators until the mid-50s. According to Wikipedia:"Officially the "Nationals" but widely known as the "Senators" for much of their history, they officially changed their name to the Washington Senators after 1956, although headline writers continued to use "Nats" as an alternate nickname. "

Can anyone shed light on this?


My understanding is Nationals was the official name from 1901-1958. But it's hard to think of either name as being "official" in the days before registered trademarks, licensing agreements and mass marketing of sports merchandise. If the popularity for sports merchandise had existed 100 years ago as it does now, the team could have made a lot of money marketing both names.

During the 1924 World Series, one of the Washington Post front-page stories read "Nationals Pound Three Giant Pitchers for 7-4 Victory and Again Even Series."

And here is a pic of the team's 1953 yearbook, six years before they wore the name Senators on their jerseys (which was 53 years after last having a name on the uniform).

23289

In the early 1900s, teams could also be referred to by the name of the owner or for a very popular player. In this case, the Nats were also known as the Griffmen, the Griffs or the Griffiths (for manager/then owner Clark Griffith).

Certainly, the name issue was never helped by the team spending the majority of its years wearing bland uniforms with only a W on the sleeves or one on the chest.

[welch]

My shabby memory is that the AL team was named Washington Senators for a few years. Around 1915, when Clark Griffith took control, he re-named them "Nationals", which had been used by the National League team before it folded about 1899.

People continued to call the team either Senators or Nationals, but I know that my early-50's baseball cards called them Washington Nationals.

Around 1956, Calvin Griffith officially re-named them Senators. People didn't care...I had called them the Senators because my Dad called them that, and called them "The Nats" for short.

The newspapers always put "Nats" in the headlines, because it is shorter than "Senators"

The expansion Washington Senators, the team we called "the new Senators" were always officially the Senators, but "the Nats" for short. When Frank Howard was hitting, we always chanted "lets go, Nats!"

Is that clear (????).

Simplest answer is that people called our team both full names, called them "the Nats" for short...no matter what the official name was.

Why? Well, why is DC Stadium (now RFK) on a river pronounced "Anacos-cha", when outsiders call it "Anacos-tee-ya". Why was a Little Tavern hamburger better than those new MacDonalds burgers? That's just the nature of things.

[mathews41]

My shabby memory is that the AL team was named Washington Senators for a few years. Around 1915, when Clark Griffith took control, he re-named them "Nationals", which had been used by the National League team before it folded about 1899.

People continued to call the team either Senators or Nationals, but I know that my early-50's baseball cards called them Washington Nationals.

Around 1956, Calvin Griffith officially re-named them Senators. People didn't care...I had called them the Senators because my Dad called them that, and called them "The Nats" for short.

The newspapers always put "Nats" in the headlines, because it is shorter than "Senators"

The expansion Washington Senators, the team we called "the new Senators" were always officially the Senators, but "the Nats" for short. When Frank Howard was hitting, we always chanted "lets go, Nats!"

Is that clear (????).

Simplest answer is that people called our team both full names, called them "the Nats" for short...no matter what the official name was.

Why? Well, why is DC Stadium (now RFK) on a river pronounced "Anacos-cha", when outsiders call it "Anacos-tee-ya". Why was a Little Tavern hamburger better than those new MacDonalds burgers? That's just the nature of things.

I am not trying to reach out toooo far, but having grown up in the metro D.C.
area as a kid. They were indeed referred to as both Nats/Senators, but I always knew them as Senators. The reach I am referring to is the fact that their primary sponsor on TV and radio was National Bohemian Beer, and as a kid I always thought that the announcers were always giving an additional plug to the beer company, which by the way was the best selling beer in the metro area.
A reach? I don't know, but certainly plausible.

[Brownieand45sfan]

Forget what happened to the Senators ... what the heck happened to that "best selling" beer? Never heard of it....
I am not trying to reach out toooo far, but having grown up in the metro D.C.
area as a kid. They were indeed referred to as both Nats/Senators, but I always knew them as Senators. The reach I am referring to is the fact that their primary sponsor on TV and radio was National Bohemian Beer, and as a kid I always thought that the announcers were always giving an additional plug to the beer company, which by the way was the best selling beer in the metro area.
A reach? I don't know, but certainly plausible.

[Brian McKenna]

Forget what happened to the Senators ... what the heck happened to that "best selling" beer? Never heard of it....

National Bohemiam was I assume a Baltimore company. Owner Jerrold Hofberger bought the Browns and brought them to Baltimore.

You can still get Natty Boh around Baltimore.

[Brian McKenna]

Club is being called Senators even before Opening Day 1901.

In February 1905 The Senators ask fans to write in potential new nicknames for the club. On March 26, 1905 team president Noyes officially renames the club "Nationals." Fan Frank L. McKenna (no relation), described as an old-time fan, was the first to send in the suggestion and thus won a season pass.

On October 30, 1956 Calvin Griffith announces that the clubs official name is now Senators. The move is made to symbolically show the team's committment to DC after talk of it moving. At the same meeting the Washington club voted against an invitations from LA and "several other cities" to move the club.

[Aa3rt]

You can still get Natty Boh around Baltimore.

You can still find it here in southern Maryland as well. National Bohemian used to be a decent regional brew. They closed down in 1978 due to competition from midwestern breweries. A beer with the National Bohemian label is now brewed in Wilkes-Barre, PA under license by Pabst. The beer changed-not nearly as good as it once was.

Did Jerry Hoffberger have any input in the Browns move to Baltimore? I do know that then Mayor of Baltimore Tom D'Alesandro (SP?) headed the group that purchased the team. Mayor D'Alesandro is the father of Nancy Pelosi.

[Brian McKenna]

[QUOTE=Aa3rt;965933]
Did Jerry Hoffberger have any input in the Browns move to Baltimore?[QUOTE]

I misspoke - Hoffberger was involved though being a primary sponsor of the Senators and the Orioles. In fact, he renegotiated with Griffith to help see the transition went smooth.

[PlayJay]

Saw a copy of the 1955 yearbook on a shelf in a memorabilia shop at one of the local flea markets. All it read on the cover (which featured a handsketch common with the 'Big League' books of the day) was 'Washington 1955'. So, apparently, even THEY were confused.

'55 was an utterly forgettable season for the Griffs, anyway :o

[Brian McKenna]

Nicknames are just that - one way to refer to an entity.

I was reading about Ray Chapman's death recently - 1920 - and the papers were calling the Yankees the "New York Americans" - and this was the New York Times.

[PlayJay]

In the years pre-Ruth, that was more common than not. Nicknames were not as prominent in the press as it became in time. Teams were called, for instance, the Boston Nationals, the St. Louis Americans. The Newark Federals.

T-206 tobacco baseball cards of the pre-WW1 era showed this.

Corporate names reflected this as well. Philadelphia National League Club, etc.

[taylorwalsh]

My grandfather was one of the three original owners of the AL franchise, created by Ban Johnson in 1901. He was Edward J. Walsh; his partners were Ben Minor and Harry Rapley. They were all local DC businessmen. Other investors like the Noyes's and Kaufmanns came in in later years.

At its formation the organization was formally known as the Washington American League Base Ball Club, according to documents we have. They were called the Nationals from the beginning, until as others have noted the 1950's. We called them "Nats" either way...and alot of time, just the "Rats" for obvious reasons!

It is pretty cool to imagine the someday the new Nats will beat the Yankees in the World Series, eh?

[Brownieand45sfan]

According to David Pietrusza Major Leagues: The Formation, Sometimes Absorption and Mostly Inevitable Demise of 18 Professional Baseball Organizations, 1871 to Present, the original 1901 owner was Fred Postal, a Detroiter who was hand-picked by Ban Johnson to own the franchise. The Kansas City owner, Jimmy Manning, was "encouraged" to sell the club to Postal. Manning was allowed some stock and to continue as manager as he had been for the previous 7 years. Manning and the team then moved East. By the end of the '01 season, Manning was out as manager and sold his stock to Postal for $15,000. Perhaps your grandfather and his friends bought the team from Postal later?

My grandfather was one of the three original owners of the AL franchise, created by Ban Johnson in 1901. He was Edward J. Walsh; his partners were Ben Minor and Harry Rapley. They were all local DC businessmen. Other investors like the Noyes's and Kaufmanns came in in later years.

At its formation the organization was formally known as the Washington American League Base Ball Club, according to documents we have. They were called the Nationals from the beginning, until as others have noted the 1950's. We called them "Nats" either way...and alot of time, just the "Rats" for obvious reasons!

It is pretty cool to imagine the someday the new Nats will beat the Yankees in the World Series, eh?

[Brian McKenna]

My grandfather was one of the three original owners of the AL franchise, created by Ban Johnson in 1901. He was Edward J. Walsh; his partners were Ben Minor and Harry Rapley. They were all local DC businessmen. Other investors like the Noyes's and Kaufmanns came in in later years.


Postal was the first president of the Senators; he shared ownership with Manning. Then, Thomas Loftus and Postal purchased Manning's shares in October/November 1901.

In August 1903 Postal sold out of the club to join Detroit. The club was basically run by Ban Johnson and Loftus.

Thomas C. Noyes and William Dwyer bought 75% of the club out of receivership in March 1904. Attorney William Lambert was made president. There was a Walsh - John J. - elected secretary.

In February 1905 - new officers elected - Noyes is president, Ben Minor is secretary and general manager, Rapley is treasurer and Edward J. Walsh is now on the board.

-------------------

Mr. Taylor Walsh - do you have any documents from 1911 or later? Would love to get some background about your family and others for a project I'm working on. Brian McKenna.

[Chicken Hawks]

It's all political and based on the DC government's agenda to change the Constitution. Let me paraphrase Mayor Williams who was mayor of D.C. at the time: there are no Senators representing the District of Columbia,therefore we will not name the team the "Senators". The name Nationals won the poll over Grays which came in second. IIRC Senators was not even a choice. So in fact someday the DC team could be named the Senators. There just has to be enough popular sentiment to accomplish this feat.

At least the Senators can claim 3 pennants, one WS and HOFers like Rice, Johnson, Goslin, Harris, Cronin and have a decent "ring of honor". The way it is now any claim to those icons are questionable. Just $.02 from a dissappointed former SENATORS fan.

[bryanac625]

It's all political and based on the DC government's agenda to change the Constitution. Let me paraphrase Mayor Williams who was mayor of D.C. at the time: there are no Senators representing the District of Columbia, therefore we will not name the team the "Senators". The name Nationals won the poll over Grays which came in second. IIRC Senators was not even a choice. So in fact someday the DC team could be named the Senators. There just has to be enough popular sentiment to accomplish this feat.

I recall hearing several years ago that former Mayor Anthony Williams declared "a kids' contest" would be held in order to select a name for the team. Obviously that never happened (so much for government by the people), but I also remember his statement that "DC has no Senators." I understand he wanted to re-name the Expos the Grays for the Negro League team.

I love the history of the game and I would have truly preferred the team to have been re-named the Washington Senators, as if picking up right where they left off in 1971. At the same time, as a native DC resident, I understand the mayor's feelings. DC is not a state and has no vote in the Congress that is located right in its own borders. After the Revolutionary War, veterans who lived in the city who had fought for democracy and against "taxation without representation" were aware they were being taxed without Congressional representation because they resided in DC. For many years until the 23rd Amendment, Washingtonians couldn't even vote in presidential elections. I would prefer to maintain 50 states while increasing the city's Congressional power for its residents. Saying DC has an "agenda to change the Constitution" makes it sound like some kind of liberal, elitist plot where the citizens of the city not only want Congressional voting rights but actually want to control the entire country.

Both baseball and Washington, DC have changed a lot since the early 1970s. Again, I would prefer "Senators," but at least "Nationals" is not a stupid name like "Wizards" or "Mighty Ducks." Besides, it was the official name of the teams of Walter Johnson, Sam Rice and Mickey Vernon. All things considered, I think this one was handled very well.

[PlayJay]

It's all political and based on the DC government's agenda to change the Constitution. Let me paraphrase Mayor Williams who was mayor of D.C. at the time: there are no Senators representing the District of Columbia,therefore we will not name the team the "Senators". The name Nationals won the poll over Grays which came in second. IIRC Senators was not even a choice. So in fact someday the DC team could be named the Senators. There just has to be enough popular sentiment to accomplish this feat.


I didn't know this. Thank you for the info!

Naming them the Homestead Grays would not have been a bad idea. It might have gone a long way towards MLB and American society embracing, rather than just acknowledging, a bygone legend that no one wants to face up to.

I also know for a fact that no one's gonna lock me up for calling this present club the 'Senators'... :shhh:

[Tim Brent]

The official nickname thru the Clark Griffith era was Nationals, with Senators or Nats being used by the media.

[Steven Tyler]

They became the Senators in 1956 until their move to the Twin Cities.

I'm sure they're referred to this by historians as this was their last name.

Heck, even the Phillies went by the Blue Jays for a couple of years during WWII.

[Brian McKenna]

In case it was missed:

Club is being called Senators even before Opening Day 1901.

In February 1905 The Senators ask fans to write in potential new nicknames for the club. On March 26, 1905 team president Noyes officially renames the club "Nationals." Fan Frank L. McKenna (no relation), described as an old-time fan, was the first to send in the suggestion and thus won a season pass.

On October 30, 1956 Calvin Griffith announces that the clubs official name is now Senators. The move is made to symbolically show the team's committment to DC after talk of it moving.

[six4three]

Heck, even the Phillies went by the Blue Jays for a couple of years during WWII.
Well, kinda. They added Blue Jays as a secondary nickname, but never dropped "Phillies." It even stayed on the front of the uniform both seasons.