Toronto206

Seattle NHL Brand Discussion

210 posts in this topic

IMG_2183.thumb.JPG.5240a1e3386a3be61763eae9a56eca91.JPGIMG_2187.JPG.9c91d4e0e9f68880c6aabc9f9670f2f2.JPG

This isn't necessarily for next season, but here are renderings for a renovated Key Arena, one from each group vying to be the ones to make the changes. This would most likely give Seattle (according to their estimates) a team by 2020.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Toronto206 said:

IMG_2183.thumb.JPG.5240a1e3386a3be61763eae9a56eca91.JPGIMG_2187.JPG.9c91d4e0e9f68880c6aabc9f9670f2f2.JPG

This isn't necessarily for next season, but here are renderings for a renovated Key Arena, one from each group vying to be the ones to make the changes. This would most likely give Seattle (according to their estimates) a team by 2020.

.

 

That looks AWFULLY small.  Would be nice to see it happen but I think a new arena is the better way to go.  Have the hedge guy shell out the money for it since he has been pushing hard on this for the last 5 years.  Make it viable for an expansion NBA franchise while we're at it too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, tohasbo said:

That looks AWFULLY small.  Would be nice to see it happen but I think a new arena is the better way to go.  Have the hedge guy shell out the money for it since he has been pushing hard on this for the last 5 years.  Make it viable for an expansion NBA franchise while we're at it too.

It would be expanded and add around 5,000 total seats. Around 17k for hockey and 18k for basketball. Honestly this looks better than the tires Hansen has been kicking. After the street vacation got nixed, it seems dead. Yes he is buying up land, but that won't help and the MOU still needs to be modified for NHL-first. At this point, Key will be the way to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Toronto206 said:

IMG_2187.JPG.9c91d4e0e9f68880c6aabc9f9670f2f2.JPG

This isn't necessarily for next season, but here are renderings for a renovated Key Arena, one from each group vying to be the ones to make the changes. This would most likely give Seattle (according to their estimates) a team by 2020.

 

2 scoreboards?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want Seattle to have a hockey team based around a Submarine/Navy theme, with the Seahawks colors, logo of a sub breaking through the ice

 

And call them...

 

The Seattle Submariners

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, hockey week said:

I want Seattle to have a hockey team based around a Submarine/Navy theme, with the Seahawks colors, logo of a sub breaking through the ice

 

And call them...

 

The Seattle Submariners

 

Any Seattle team would be almost certainly called the Metropolitans/Metros, with only Totems having even an outside shot at being the name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rams80 said:

 

Any Seattle team would be almost certainly called the Metropolitans/Metros, with only Totems having even an outside shot at being the name.

 

I've never liked either name for Seattle. I like HW's idea, but not the name. They better come up with something new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rams80 said:

 

Any Seattle team would be almost certainly called the Metropolitans/Metros, with only Totems having even an outside shot at being the name.

 

Clearly the joke went over your head (or perhaps, below the waves), considering that Seattle already has this team:

Image result for seattle mariners

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nautical =/= Navy

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hockey week said:

 

Clearly the joke went over your head (or perhaps, below the waves), considering that Seattle already has this team:

Image result for seattle mariners

 

Sub breaking through the ice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*facepalm*

 

Because Seattle would have both the Mariners and Sub-Mariners

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hockey week said:

*facepalm*

 

Because Seattle would have both the Mariners and Sub-Mariners

 

ah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, hockey week said:

The Seattle Submariners

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Metropolitans will happen for many reasons:

It hasn't been used in nearly a century (Ottawa always had minor league teams named the Senators wearing barberpoles, or at least red/white/black)

The original team is a trivia question (not the mythic history of the four? Cups Ottawa won in the NHL)

Senators is more specific than Metropolitans (Senators in the Capital, Ottawa. Every city is a Metropolitan area)

I can't imagine the New York Mets not wanting a say in this (even if Mets is no longer short for Metropolitans, it's close enough)

the NHL has a Metropolitan Division, and wouldn't that be confusing?

Metros has new meanings now, and I can't imagine the NHL wants to risk offending people, even if it's innocent

It's not a catchy sports name. That stuff worked a century ago and is charming now, you can't just create that now.

 

And I think Totems has the same potential to offend. In the same era as the Redskins and Chief Wahoo cling on for dear life, why would anyone risk testing those waters now?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And their logo can be a direct ripoff of the Rimouski Oceanic logo! we are really building a great identity for Seattle here on the boards!

7478_rimouski_oceanic-primary-2014.thumb.png.40cb95fe157f980b733ae3c2ac49a842.png

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hockey week said:

I don't think Metropolitans will happen for many reasons:

It hasn't been used in nearly a century (Ottawa always had minor league teams named the Senators wearing barberpoles, or at least red/white/black)

The original team is a trivia question (not the mythic history of the four? Cups Ottawa won in the NHL)

Senators is more specific than Metropolitans (Senators in the Capital, Ottawa. Every city is a Metropolitan area)

I can't imagine the New York Mets not wanting a say in this (even if Mets is no longer short for Metropolitans, it's close enough)

the NHL has a Metropolitan Division, and wouldn't that be confusing?

Metros has new meanings now, and I can't imagine the NHL wants to risk offending people, even if it's innocent

It's not a catchy sports name. That stuff worked a century ago and is charming now, you can't just create that now.

 

And I think Totems has the same potential to offend. In the same era as the Redskins and Chief Wahoo cling on for dear life, why would anyone risk testing those waters now?

 

I think it's stupid to name your team after a previous local team. It only happened with the Jets because SOOOOOOOOOO many people wanted it. The Metros played over a century ago, where the name should stay. And yea the NY Mets and Metropolitan Division connection doesn't really give it much help. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hockey week said:

I don't think Metropolitans will happen for many reasons:

It hasn't been used in nearly a century (Ottawa always had minor league teams named the Senators wearing barberpoles, or at least red/white/black)

 

Not really.  WHA incarnations were named the Nationals and Civics, the OHL team was named the '67s, and we've got a couple of other names too.  There was nearly a 3 decade interregnum at some point.

 

3 minutes ago, hockey week said:

The original team is a trivia question (not the mythic history of the four? Cups Ottawa won in the NHL)

 

One person's trivia is another's mythic history and vice versa.  And besides, something to being the first American team to win the Cup.

 

3 minutes ago, hockey week said:

Senators is more specific than Metropolitans (Senators in the Capital, Ottawa. Every city is a Metropolitan area)

 

/Glances at teams with "generic" animal names.

 

Your point? 

 

3 minutes ago, hockey week said:

I can't imagine the New York Mets not wanting a say in this (even if Mets is no longer short for Metropolitans, it's close enough)

 

Look, the Jets were cool with the Winnipeg Jets both times, so I'm not sure where the concern here is coming from.

 

3 minutes ago, hockey week said:

the NHL has a Metropolitan Division, and wouldn't that be confusing?

 

Not really, but rename it the East Division if you must.

 

3 minutes ago, hockey week said:

Metros has new meanings now, and I can't imagine the NHL wants to risk offending people, even if it's innocent

 

.....

 

...........

 

IT'S :censored: ING SEATTLE!  I MEAN, ITS NOT SAN FRANCISCO BUT STILL SOMEHOW I DON'T THINK YOU ARE GOING TO TURN OFF POTENTIAL FANS WITH THAT SHORTENED MONIKER!

 

3 minutes ago, hockey week said:

It's not a catchy sports name. That stuff worked a century ago and is charming now, you can't just create that now.

 

It's no Aqua Knightz, I'll tell you that.

 

3 minutes ago, hockey week said:

 

And I think Totems has the same potential to offend. In the same era as the Redskins and Chief Wahoo cling on for dear life, why would anyone risk testing those waters now?

 

Because the NHL is stupid.  Granted I think that potential to offend might be a deciding factor, although on the flip side hello local junior hockey team that is named after a Native American cryptid!

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not really sure how you split up my quote so well, so I'm foregoing that.

 

-A 3 decade interregnum is not the century we're talking about in Seattle. There's nobody around to remember it. There's no nostalgia. Nostalgia is such a huge sell right now, and they might try to play on that, but nobody remembers this team to have warm memories. The NHL is better off crafting a new brand, and I think they know that.

 

-But it wasn't NHL history, either. And it was before the NHL really started. I think between the two, it was left out of most hockey history books whereas the Senators were a tremendous chapter in early hockey history (built on the talent of the Silver Seven, but I digress). Ottawa was kept in the memories of the league all this time, the fact that they ever folded was considered a shame. I don't think the Seattle Metropolitans have any of that working for them, first Cup or not. Have an S logo, put a banner in the rafters, and call it a day.

 

-My point with the genericness is not that generic names don't happen, of course they do, but does the nostalgia exist to bring such generic names BACK? I think Ottawa had a civic pride thing with the Senators, and though the Jets aren't all that unique, they were so recent that nostalgia overruled other options - it was Jets or else.

 

-Look, with Metros, all I'm saying is that it's 2017, and it wasn't that long ago that a high school decided against the name Cougars because of the name's association with older women preying on young men. I wish I made that up. Seriously. One person in a focus group gets it thrown out early, or petitions spring up when it's announced...look at all the BS around Golden Knights, there will be some kind of bad press no matter what. I think the NHL would want to avoid anything bad.

 

-You've taken the opposite end of the spectrum with the modern name, and I grant you, that's far worse. But think of something like Maple Leafs. Could that EVER happen today if the Toronto team never used it? If there wasn't an acceptability to it through age, would people be excited about Leafs? And that whole plural issue, Leafs vs Leaves. I just don't think it would be acceptable in our world with excessive sports branding and identity narratives and merchandising. It's a long, unwieldy name that needs to be abbreviated right out of the gate - and I don't think that works well today.

 

-Local junior teams, at least the ones I've worked with, don't know crap about branding. If things like this are still happening, then I wouldn't trust them as a barometer for anything http://www.goerie.com/news/20160729/new-erie-hockey-team-changes-name-after-logo-backlash

 

Sorry to write a book. Really, it's just a series of opinions, and it's not like the decision is made over whose side has better reasoning. 

 

I just don't think the name is a lock like you do.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the Whalers won't be returning anytime soon, I'd like to see a Seattle team adopt their original scheme.  They could be to the Canucks as the Canadiens are to the Rangers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now