Besides Portlanders have something that borders on obsession with their team, it's the only major sports team in the city. It's something unifies a very individualistic, and somewhat yuppie tinged city across it's diverse ethnic and economic lines. This team belongs to Portland and no other fan base embraces a team like we do. During the game, the trivia question what did March 21st mean to the Blazers, and the answer was the 800th straight sellout. Mike Rice mentioned that across the league they have never heard of anything that comes close. To muddle it's association with the city (and that's what regionalizing the name would do), would be to me and I'm sure many others a breach of loyalty, showing no respect to fans after so many years of steadfast support.

I mean if the first thing people thought when they heard the Pacific Trailblazers was Seattle wouldn't you be offended?

Maybe in time, Portland will become more of a world city like San Francisco, LA, Chicago, and NYC. But right now, it's still Seattle's sleepy eco-friendly liberal little brother. One of the things that distinguishes us from them, is this team, taking that away is taking away part of Portland's identity.

Otherwise, it's a slap in the face to the entire city of Portland, that has supported this Blazer team through thick and thin (and it got very, VERY thin there, for a while).

Let an entire city (that doesn't care enough about basketball to even try to keep the team they have) hop on the bandwagon right before we're primed to run up a bunch of championship banners? Even claim that they were part of the climate change that caused the Blazers current success?

How could a true Blazers fan NOT be insulted at the very idea?

But I've never seen anyone suggest that the Seattle Seahawks that played in the Superbowl a few years back ought to be shared with Portland market. So why give Seattle any of the Blazers?

But more importantly, we're still the only game in town. Seattle still has Seahawks and Mariners. If the Blazers lose the "Portland", the name "Portland" won't ever come up in sports.

On the other hand, that would help give us a very large fanbase and increase merchandise sales and sellouts at the Rose Garden.

However, I've been to the Supersonicsoul and Sonicscentral when they've discussed it and the vast majority are apathetic to the suggestion, and would boycott the NBA altogether.

The Golden State Warriors are probably a pretty good parallel.  They play in Oakland, which is usually second fiddle to San Fransisco, but the team is still usually recognized as Oakland's team by fans that actually know where the heck they play.  If it ended up like that, I'd probably be a bit upset at first, but I'd get over it.

Of course it could also end up like the Tampa Bay Devil Rays.  For those that don't know, "Tampa Bay" is not a city, but a region.  The three main cities in the area are Tampa, St Petersburg, and Sarasota.  Of the three, Tampa is easily the biggest and most prominent.  The Devil Rays actually play in St Petersburg, but even most MLB fans probably think of that the same way NFL fans think of the Patriots playing in Foxborough (or the way NBA fans would think of it if the Blazers played in Gresham).  If it ended up like that, I'd be pissed and probably wouldn't get over it.

There are factors pushing in both directions.  Oakland may be play second fiddle to San Fran, but it has a good bit more national identity than Portland... and significantly more national identity without the GSW than Portland without the PTB.  On the other hand, the whole Tampa/Tampa Bay thing can be confusing and St Petersburg is right  next to Tampa instead of a couple hundred miles up the interstate.

Overall though, I'm mostly thinking like Dheepan.

But no, forget about forming ties to our hated Starbucker's to the north.

Also, I'd nominate "The Oregon Territory Trail Blazers".
Bring it back to when the states of the region had a singular identity,
a time invoked by the very name "Trail Blazers", clearly referring to the Oregon Trail.

  But as a Portlander, my fear of homogenizing The Blazer name to represent a region comes from the unpredictability of the future.

  A decade ago who would of thought The Sonics were vulnerable and would someday leave Seattle? Paul Allen has bought The Rose Garden, The Portland Trail Blazers are on the rise, things are good in Portland.

  But 10 years from now? Who knows what future might develop. I just think it's a potentially a slippery slope.

  Part of it is purely selfish, I do want The Blazers to remain Portland and Oregons team. I'm afraid if you start by widening the identity to represent a region or multiple states then it could become the first step in instability.

  Someday, what if Paul Allen does decide to sell? Someday what if new owners are looking at a smaller market Portland with an aging Rose Garden and an open market in Seattle that maybe at that time has built a new stadium or agree's to do so?

  If we are simply "The Trail Blazers" and not The Portland Trail Blazers, haven't we greased the skids of potential movement?

  I'm sorry for Seattle Sonics fans, it's a raw deal for them. I'm willing to share The Blazers if they want to be fans. But I'm afraid my generosity ends with tweaking the name to make them feel better. IMO if you want to be a fan of The Trail Blazers you just are going to have to accept that they are The Portland Trail Blazers.

   It's a paranoid look at the future, and I'm not saying any of that negativity would happen, just saying it could. I'm just going to feel better if we keep the name stable.  

Let's list out the reasons, many of which are already covered:

1. This is unfair to the people in the city of Portland, who has supported the team through thick and thin. Sure attendance was down during the bad years, but the city still supported them and didn't want them to move.

You could easily replace the word "Portland" with "Seattle" in the above statement and it would be the same. But that's a reason not to move the Sonics, not a reason to change the Blazers' town name.

2. As noted, it won't take long until this turns into "Well, since they're named for the region, we should play [x] games in Seattle each year". It can go downhill quickly from there. That's disconcerting. And it takes games away from the city that supported them and is selling out weekday (!) games for a team not making the playoffs.

This isn't an issue in NE because they play 8 games at home all season (sans playoffs). It's a lot easier to start phasing another city in when there are 41.

3. Again, it's not like the Seahawks and Mariners are considering a similar measure, which might make me consider a softening of my stance.

4. Do we just rename back if Seattle gets Memphis' or New Orleans' team? That seems dumb.

5. This is likely moot because it would be a little... obnoxious for the Blazers to change their town name so quickly after the Sonics leave, as if to say "see, come pay us money!"

If the Blazers were leaving for Ok City would I become a Sonic fan?  I think more than likely I would lose interest in the NBA and do something else with my time and money.  If I was from Seattle, that something else would be the Seahawks and Mariners.

I don't like the idea of a regional name change but I am from Portland so...

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sonics/2003982305_blazers30.html

I'm sorry, i have no sympathy for Seattle losing their team after the Seattle Times had the audacity to publish such a slap in the face article.