The words "Blood" and "Wolf" mean absolutely jack shit in terms of naming conventions and supermoons are not as special as people think they are.
The "blood" part refers to the red hue the moon gets during an eclipse (a by-product of the earth's atmosphere filtering out the other colours, similar to how a sunset turns the sky orange), but it's just there because it sounds cooler than "total lunar eclipse." Total lunar eclipses produce these warm colours every time because that's how they work. There is no need to have the word "blood" in this word salad of a name.
The word "wolf" in this context refers to it being the first full moon on the year, but, in my opinion, it's just a way to make it seem more special than it actually is. There was a full moon last month, and the month before that, and the month before that. "Wolf" moons are not special.
Finally, a supermoon is when the moon is at it's closest approach to the earth. The difference in size (~7%) is indiscernible to the human eye when compared to the average moon. If someone didn't tell you, you would never know it was a supermoon. It simply doesn't matter.
I think the point of the name "Super Blood Wolf Moon Eclipse" is to generate as many clicks as possible on news articles and various other websites, similar to the word salad you see on Amazon listings (those posts which have as many words tacked onto them to catch any sort of filter). I have no idea why they can't be happy with just saying "Total Lunar Eclipse." It's an awesome event which does not need pseudo hype to make it more exciting.

Anyway, that''s just my opinion. Does anyone else feel the same way or is it just me getting annoyed for no reason?