2016-17 NHL Uniform and Logo Changes

[smzimbabwe]

Would there be a problem with the Mariners wearing Milwaukee Brewers throwbacks? The Brewers played in Seattle for one year...

 

As you can tell, I have a problem with the Mariners wearing Pilots throwbacks, and the Wild wearing North Stars...

[ColeJ]

Honest question... Have the Timberwolves ever worn Lakers throwbacks for any reason?

 

Or would that be weird?

[SFGiants58]

1 hour ago, Ice_Cap said:

That's easy. He's a Minnesota hockey fan. Doesn't matter that he's too young to even really remember the North Stars. The whole lot of them care more about the Stars now that they've left then they ever did when they played there.

So of course he's gonna flat out lie, or convince himself of a wrong assumption, to push the narrative that the Wild somehow get a "claim" on the Stars' heritage.

 

Harsh? Yes. Also very upfront. Like you I'm tired of saying the same thing over and over again. The fact that the Dallas Stars regularly embrace and celebrate their North Stars heritage is easily provable and easy to confirm.

And yet the more...militant?...Minnesota hockey fans just go "lalalala can't hear you!" any time those facts are laid out. At a certain point it stops being innocent ignorance. It's wilful ignorance at this point, and that's inexcusable.

 

Look Minnesota. I love you guys. You're the closest Americans get to being Canadian. I've been to your state a few times, and it's been a blast each time. The support you've shown to the Wild? An example for all post-80s expansion fanbases to follow. Fargo? Great show.

 

You guys gotta let the North Stars go though.

 

Here's the problem. The Wild don't have a proper "retro" identity for the "retro-chic" crowd (a generally younger audience) to buy. Their inaugural uniforms are not temporally far enough away for younger fans to feel nostalgia for them, and they also bear the same crest as the current uniforms (no pun intended). The Wild's marketing department needed a "retro" logo that was completely separate from the Wild's identity, and one that some people may feel attachment towards. This is why the Wild turned to the North Stars' identity to promote as a "retro" brand. The poor quality of the Wild's name (easily the worst name in sports, not counting certain Native American-themed names) has helped the "retro" brand gain traction in the market.

 

This is the same model we see in action with the Ducks/Mighty Ducks. Resurrecting a vintage brand (augmenting, but not replacing the current brand) to appeal to "retro chic" fans is a solid branding tactic. However, it gets messy when the team they're imitating still exists and has some visual continuity with their previous identity (the Dallas Stars). Stars fans have every right to be peeved at the practice and at all of the loopy dumbasses who want the Wild to change their name to "North Stars." The North Stars aren't coming back, the Stars should make their claims to the North Stars' mediocre history clear, and Wild fans should focus on trying to find a better name that fits with their excellent logo and color scheme.

 

You know, I doubt we'd be having this discussion if the Wild picked a better name for themselves at the start.

[ColeJ]

2 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

You know, I doubt we'd be having this discussion if the Wild picked a better name for themselves at the start.

 

You know, I originally backed the "Northern Lights" team name because of the nod to the North Stars heritage. I'd even have been okay with a logo similar to the N-Star, such as the Rockies/Avs/Devils cluster, as long as the teams were distinctly different.

 

It's this "North Stars are Wild throwbacks" revisionism that gets my goats.

[chcarlson23]

2 hours ago, ColeJ said:

"North Stars Minnesota are Wild Minnesota throwbacks"

I think you're missing the point... 

 

Now, whether or not fans are taking the approach you're talking about is up for debate. (They're probably is a large amount of Wild fans who think we do/should own the North Stars history.) The Wild are simply honoring the State's NHL history. They have lots of posters about Minnesota-born players who played for other NHL teams...  

 

No one owns history... It just happens. Yes the North Stars left. Ya it was a mixture of mediocre teams, management and fans... But the Wild revitalized everything, and there's a longing for nostalgic things now. The Wild have to pull off the North Stars-Minnesota History thing to get some of that nostalgia.  

 

3 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

That's easy. He's a Minnesota hockey fan. Doesn't matter that he's too young to even really remember the North Stars.

I was simply wondering if the Stars sell a lot of the N-star (Not only the stArs logo shared by both cities) logo merchandise. Like as much as the Wild.  I know that they've kept the all of the retired numbers with N-star banners, and they have honored a lot of the N-Stars players. I also figured that since they started selling the Dallas Texans stuff, they mixed in the N-Star stuff as throwback gear, and it's taken a backseat more or less... 

 

I hate the Stars by the way... I have always found the North Stars cool, and I do like players like Neal Broten, Bill Goldsworthy, and Lou Nanne, but I hate the Dallas Stars. 

[ColeJ]

as i've said many times, it's an ex-wife situation.

 

minnesota was married to the stars, but they got divorced and the stars moved in with dallas... dallas gets upset when minnesota longs for our girl, and minnesota clings to the memories of when they were still together.

 

some people don't think that's fair to the wild, who are minnesota's new wife. it's weird when some minnesota fans want the new wife to go by the old wife's name, and now we are debating if it's cool for minnesota to make their new wife wear their old wife's old tshirt because they thought it would look really good on her. lol.

 

the grumpy bastard in me says the wild shouldn't make too big a deal about the 50th anniversary of NHL hockey in Minnesota... firstly, because it's not like it's been a solid 50 year block of NHL hockey in Minnesota... and secondly, because the vast majority of the hockey fans in Minnesota only started caring that they had NHL hockey in 2000. Coming up quickly on 20 years of supporting NHL hockey.

 

but as i said, it's going to happen. i've made peace with it, and i have no problem with wild fans cherishing the years they had with the stars. i get it. the stars are/were awesome. i love them too. i don't blame ya'll.

 

if the tables were turned, however, i don't think i'd be able to wear north stars gear as a wild fan. as carlson just said he hates the dallas stars. i just see the stars as the stars. one entity.

 

if i saw someone in baltimore wearing a blue johnny unitas jersey to a game against Indy, i'd assume he was a colts fan... not a "baltimore football" fan. but maybe that's just me. am i alone?

[Gothamite]

I don't think you're alone, but I can't agree with you.  

 

I know that there are people who wear Warren Spahn or Hank Aaron 1957 Braves jerseys to Miller Park.  That doesn't mean they're Atlanta Braves fans.  And I've seen plenty of Jackie Robinson jerseys around Brooklyn, but I don't think the Los Angeles Dodgers are all that popular here. 

[Sport]

On 3/28/2017 at 11:24 PM, the admiral said:

The Oilers' lettering is painfully flawed, but CCSLCers (namely McCarthy and I) have eased the pain and corrected the lettering to follow the curve and not have those weird notches on the sides. I like your logo as something that could be a tertiary/quaternary design that the team uses but not on uniforms. While oil tends not to be copper or orange (well, motor oil can be), it isn't cobalt blue, either, and I'm not sure what the wavy body of water represents. It makes me think of the ocean. Oil shouldn't go in the ocean. That said, it's still better than the weirdly-holding-a-stick secondary or the MacFarlane metal droplet or other logos the Oilers have used.

 

posting again. This is all they need to do 

 

[Thaumatrope]

On 3/28/2017 at 11:24 PM, the admiral said:

The Oilers' lettering is painfully flawed, but CCSLCers (namely McCarthy and I) have eased the pain and corrected the lettering to follow the curve and not have those weird notches on the sides. I like your logo as something that could be a tertiary/quaternary design that the team uses but not on uniforms. While oil tends not to be copper or orange (well, motor oil can be), it isn't cobalt blue, either, and I'm not sure what the wavy body of water represents. It makes me think of the ocean. Oil shouldn't go in the ocean. That said, it's still better than the weirdly-holding-a-stick secondary or the MacFarlane metal droplet or other logos the Oilers have used.

 

Can't believe I missed your response. It took me seeing McCarthy's post to realize that you'd weighed in.

 

While I agree that the design is a bit too sparse to be a full time primary logo, I do want to set the record straight on a couple things.

 

Specifically, what you identify as water is intended to be oil...as in the logo is depicting a drop of oil falling into a larger volume of oil. If I were making the pitch to Katz and co. I'd say something to the effect of how "it symbolizes the power of team work; the blood, sweat, and tears of the individual being the fuel of collective victory."...or some such nonsense. 

 

As for oil not being cobalt blue...you may want to check your monitor's calibration. Obviously oil isn't navy blue either, but I feel like it does a much better job approximating oil than orange or bronze (or cobalt blue).

[Thaumatrope]

1 hour ago, McCarthy said:

 

posting again. This is all they need to do 

 

 

Thank you for posting that. I knew I'd seen it before but I wasn't sure who to attribute it to or how to go about tracking it down. 

 

I do find myself wondering though...why not just get rid of the thin white lines separating the letters? They are completely out of balance with the rest of the logo (weight wise) and I don't think they make the letters any more legible. 

[IceCap]

8 hours ago, chcarlson23 said:

No one owns history... It just happens.

It depends on how you quantify history. 

Record books and team lineages though? The league is very clear that teams own their lineages.

As an example. The Ottawa Senators have petitioned the NHL at least twice to be officially recognised as a continution of the originally Ottawa Senators team. The league has denied them those requests. The team still honours Ottawa's hockey history, but the league has determined that the history of the original Senators does not belong to the current Senators. 

 

Likewise, the league recognises that the North Stars' lineage and records are owned by the Dallas Stars. 

 

8 hours ago, chcarlson23 said:

I was simply wondering if the Stars sell a lot of the N-star...

Seems like something fairly easy to confirm rather than assuming the negative. 

 

8 hours ago, chcarlson23 said:

I know that they've kept the all of the retired numbers with N-star banners, and they have honored a lot of the N-Stars players.

Well there you go. The Stars have been honouring their history as the North Stars since they moved to Dallas. They've never pretended like they were a new team. 

And they've been in Dallas longer than you've been alive. We're getting to the point where Stars hockey in Dallas will eclipse Stars hockey in Minnesota in terms of longevity.

 

At what hat point do we all just accept that the North Stars/Stars franchise plays in Dallas? 

[chcarlson23]

13 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

It depends on how you quantify history. 

Record books and team lineages though? The league is very clear that teams own their lineages.

As an example. The Ottawa Senators have petitioned the NHL at least twice to be officially recognised as a continution of the originally Ottawa Senators team. The league has denied them those requests. The team still honours Ottawa's hockey history, but the league has determined that the history of the original Senators does not belong to the current Senators. 

 

Likewise, the league recognises that the North Stars' lineage and records are owned by the Dallas Stars. 

 

Seems like something fairly easy to confirm rather than assuming the negative. 

 

Well there you go. The Stars have been honouring their history as the North Stars since they moved to Dallas. They've never pretended like they were a new team. 

And they've been in Dallas longer than you've been alive. We're getting to the point where Stars hockey in Dallas will eclipse Stars hockey in Minnesota in terms of longevity.

 

At what hat point do we all just accept that the North Stars/Stars franchise plays in Dallas? 

You're assuming that I assumed the negative. I was simply stating my confusion on the selling of North Stars gear in Dallas. Online doesn't have much, and I have no clue about in Texas, because, well, I don't live in Texas. 

 

Also, the wife analogy is stupid... Lots of people love multiple teams, which in the same comparison is currently illegal in most countries. If you really want to make the wife analogy work, it would be more like a man's wife passed away, and he still enjoys the memories of his late wife, but also enjoys the memories with his current wife. The current wife then empathizes with him. 

 

Now you might think that the franchise isn't dead, that they're the Dallas Stars now, but the Stars franchise is dead to a lot of people in Minnesota. A lot of you on here should know what I'm talking about, because I've heard that a lot of people say that they'll refuse to follow the Raiders now, because they moved cities. The Raiders aren't dead, but...

[ColeJ]

lol. i like to pretend a couple of my exes are dead, too. turns out they're living rich and fulfilling lives post-cole.

[IceCap]

10 hours ago, chcarlson23 said:

Now you might think that the franchise isn't dead, that they're the Dallas Stars now, but the Stars franchise is dead to a lot of people in Minnesota. A lot of you on here should know what I'm talking about, because I've heard that a lot of people say that they'll refuse to follow the Raiders now, because they moved cities. The Raiders aren't dead, but...

Hey, guess what? The North Stars aren't dead. They're the Stars now. That's just how it is.

 

Now of course Minnesota fans are in no way obligated to continue to like them, and sure. They may be "dead" to you as far as teams go. That doesn't mean the franchise, its record books, and its legacy actually ceased to exist upon the move to Dallas though. 

 

And there's no logic in telling Dallas Stars fans that they can't celebrate the entirety of their team's history.

[Morgan33]

Minnesota North Stars last uniform set:


Dallas Stars first uniform set:


Any questions?

[chcarlson23]

3 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

Hey, guess what? The North Stars aren't dead. They're the Stars now. That's just how it is.

 

Now of course Minnesota fans are in no way obligated to continue to like them, and sure. They may be "dead" to you as far as teams go. That doesn't mean the franchise, its record books, and its legacy actually ceased to exist upon the move to Dallas though. 

 

And there's no logic in telling Dallas Stars fans that they can't celebrate the entirety of their team's history.

And there's no logic in saying the Wild can't honor Minnesota NHL history... 

(I also never said that the Dallas Stars can't... You're putting words in my mouth... well post )

[IceCap]

10 minutes ago, chcarlson23 said:

 And there's no logic in saying the Wild can't honor Minnesota NHL history... 

There's honouring Minnesota's NHL history and then there's claiming the Wild have some sort of ownership over the North Stars' history. The latter is undeniably false.

 

(I also never said that the Dallas Stars can't... You're putting words in my mouth... well post

 )

 

No, I'm not. I'm just getting tired of repeating the same argument in favour of actual history and actual facts. 

At a certain point I'm just ready to dispense with pretense. The Stars are the North Stars. That's who the record books and legacy belongs to.

Memories are certainly something different, but remembering something fondly doesn't mean you get to rewrite reality. 

[chcarlson23]

1 minute ago, Ice_Cap said:

There's honouring Minnesota's NHL history and then there's claiming the Wild have some sort of ownership over the North Stars' history. The latter is undeniably false.

 

 

 

No, I'm not. I'm just getting tired of repeating the same argument in favour of actual history and actual facts. 

At a certain point I'm just ready to dispense with pretense. The Stars are the North Stars. That's who the record books and legacy belongs to.

Memories are certainly something different, but remembering something fondly doesn't mean you get to rewrite reality. 

I PERSONALLY have never claimed that... 

Some fans though, definitely... But you made it seem like I was claiming that...

 

All I'm saying is that the Wild honoring the North Stars with WARMUP jerseys is pretty cool. I'm not saying that the Wild are the North Stars, and that Dallas is a separate franchise. They're not...

[IceCap]

Just now, chcarlson23 said:

I PERSONALLY have never claimed that... 

Some fans though, definitely... But you made it seem like I was claiming that...

I'm just tired of dealing with...overeager...Minnesota fans in general

If there was this much passion about the Stars when they played in Minny? They never would have had to move. 

 

4 minutes ago, chcarlson23 said:

All I'm saying is that the Wild honoring the North Stars with WARMUP jerseys is pretty cool. I'm not saying that the Wild are the North Stars, and that Dallas is a separate franchise. They're not...

Cool.

[The_Admiral]

If the North Stars had stuck around, as God intended, I think they would have wound up looking pretty similar to what the current NHL team is doing with the old-timey State of Hockey branding.