jch Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 If the rumor is inded true, the two things that have been stated that seem to fit the stated criteria the best would be:1. The Dallas Stars and the Cowboys somehow collaborating. This would be a partnership agreement that would be a first in the NHL to the best of my knowledge. Perhaps this collaboration would involve cross-promotion, shared uniform/logo details, or perhaps even a game or two at Cowboys' Stadium.2. The Nashville Predators changing their identity to the Music City ________________. I think this would be the first time an NHL team adopted their city's nickname as the name of their team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac the Knife Posted June 9, 2011 Author Share Posted June 9, 2011 I don't know the the NHL allows corporate logos on jerseys (though it's only a matter of time), but I have always been surprised that none of the "big 4" teams have made an overt effort to try to incorporate a corporate logo into their logo. The closest I can think of is the Brewers kinda looking Miller-ish. Maybe we're looking at Florida's colors changing to that of their sponsor and their logo incorporating a silhouette of a soda can, car, or something. Man I hope not.To reiterate, corporate branding I've been told is not part of the equation in any way. No renaming the team to facilitate a sponsor, no sponsor brands on uniforms, etc., etc. When I read "something that's never been done before in the NHL," that was my first instict, as apparently it was for some of you as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 If it is the nickname, my vote would be Dallas. Lonestars anyone?How can "Lone Star" be pluralized? That would be akin to calling the team the "Lone Rangers".How can North Stars be pluralized? There is only one of those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSU151 Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 I think the alt logo looks better with only one flag, but overall I think the addition of light blue would def give them a unique color scheme and be cool.Two flags signifies a hurricane warning. One flag denotes only a storm warning.2. The Nashville Predators changing their identity to the Music City ________________. I think this would be the first time an NHL team adopted their city's nickname as the name of their team. I don't think the Predators get away from the Nashville name. Their marketing nickname of "Smashville" has been pretty popular. Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half. Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JQK Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 If it is the nickname, my vote would be Dallas. Lonestars anyone?How can "Lone Star" be pluralized? That would be akin to calling the team the "Lone Rangers".How can North Stars be pluralized? There is only one of those.There are many stars visable in the northern hemishphere... Stay Tuned Sports Podcast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac the Knife Posted June 9, 2011 Author Share Posted June 9, 2011 Two flags signifies a hurricane warning. One flag denotes only a storm warning.I always thought the Hurricanes were missing out by not playing "Storm Front" by Billy Joel prior to each period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puck Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 If it is the nickname, my vote would be Dallas. Lonestars anyone?How can "Lone Star" be pluralized? That would be akin to calling the team the "Lone Rangers".How can North Stars be pluralized? There is only one of those.The Lone Rangers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSU151 Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Two flags signifies a hurricane warning. One flag denotes only a storm warning.I always thought the Hurricanes were missing out by not playing "Storm Front" by Billy Joel prior to each period.You would be correct. What do they play instead, "Rock You Like a Hurricane" by Scorpions? Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half. Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knnhrvy16 Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 If it is the nickname, my vote would be Dallas. Lonestars anyone?How can "Lone Star" be pluralized? That would be akin to calling the team the "Lone Rangers".How can North Stars be pluralized? There is only one of those.There are many stars visable in the northern hemishphere...I can't tell if you're joking or not (sarcasm is hard to detect on the internet ), but the nickname is referring to THE North Star, not all of the stars in the sky. If the latter were the case, there'd be no reason to include "North" in the nickname. The opinions I express are mine, and mine only. If I am to express them, it is not to say you or anyone else is wrong, and certainly not to say that I am right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 If the rumor is inded true, the two things that have been stated that seem to fit the stated criteria the best would be:1. The Dallas Stars and the Cowboys somehow collaborating. This would be a partnership agreement that would be a first in the NHL to the best of my knowledge. Perhaps this collaboration would involve cross-promotion, shared uniform/logo details, or perhaps even a game or two at Cowboys' Stadium.2. The Nashville Predators changing their identity to the Music City ________________. I think this would be the first time an NHL team adopted their city's nickname as the name of their team.It certainly has to be one of those two things. With the information that we have, it can't be anything else.Seriously - what's the point of this? "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frylock Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 PuckDaddy introduced the idea when the Predators were slated to moved of having the Predators Hockey Club and letting them play their 40 home games at various locations on the continent. Could a regionalized version of that be ahead of us?After giving it some thought, I think this scenario is highly possible. But I disagree that it's Nashville. I fully expect it to be Phoenix. I think the 2011/12 season in Glendale is going to be a lame-duck season as the NHL gears up to run the Coyotes as a "floating" franchise playing out their season in several neutral sites. Call them the "NHL Voyagers" or "NHL HC" have them play 7-14 home dates in places such as Quebec City, Hartford, Hamilton, Kansas City, Portland, maybe even Atlanta.In my mind, it's not too dissimilar to when the Montreal Expos played "home" games in San Juan, or more acurately, when the Florida Bobcats of the Arena League played all of their games on the road back in 1997 or 1998. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jch Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 If the rumor is inded true, the two things that have been stated that seem to fit the stated criteria the best would be:1. The Dallas Stars and the Cowboys somehow collaborating. This would be a partnership agreement that would be a first in the NHL to the best of my knowledge. Perhaps this collaboration would involve cross-promotion, shared uniform/logo details, or perhaps even a game or two at Cowboys' Stadium.2. The Nashville Predators changing their identity to the Music City ________________. I think this would be the first time an NHL team adopted their city's nickname as the name of their team.It certainly has to be one of those two things. With the information that we have, it can't be anything else.Seriously - what's the point of this?The point? The point is I'm expressing an opinion in order to continue the discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knnhrvy16 Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 If the rumor is inded true, the two things that have been stated that seem to fit the stated criteria the best would be:1. The Dallas Stars and the Cowboys somehow collaborating. This would be a partnership agreement that would be a first in the NHL to the best of my knowledge. Perhaps this collaboration would involve cross-promotion, shared uniform/logo details, or perhaps even a game or two at Cowboys' Stadium.2. The Nashville Predators changing their identity to the Music City ________________. I think this would be the first time an NHL team adopted their city's nickname as the name of their team.It certainly has to be one of those two things. With the information that we have, it can't be anything else.Seriously - what's the point of this?The point? The point is I'm expressing an opinion in order to continue the discussion.I think he meant the point of the rebrand. I could be wrong, but that's what I thought. The opinions I express are mine, and mine only. If I am to express them, it is not to say you or anyone else is wrong, and certainly not to say that I am right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSU151 Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 If it is the nickname, my vote would be Dallas. Lonestars anyone?How can "Lone Star" be pluralized? That would be akin to calling the team the "Lone Rangers".How can North Stars be pluralized? There is only one of those.There are many stars visable in the northern hemishphere...I can't tell if you're joking or not (sarcasm is hard to detect on the internet ), but the nickname is referring to THE North Star, not all of the stars in the sky. If the latter were the case, there'd be no reason to include "North" in the nickname.JQK isn't talking about all of the stars in the sky...just the northern hemisphere stars. There is a difference between northern stars and southern stars. Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half. Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jch Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 If the rumor is inded true, the two things that have been stated that seem to fit the stated criteria the best would be:1. The Dallas Stars and the Cowboys somehow collaborating. This would be a partnership agreement that would be a first in the NHL to the best of my knowledge. Perhaps this collaboration would involve cross-promotion, shared uniform/logo details, or perhaps even a game or two at Cowboys' Stadium.2. The Nashville Predators changing their identity to the Music City ________________. I think this would be the first time an NHL team adopted their city's nickname as the name of their team.It certainly has to be one of those two things. With the information that we have, it can't be anything else.Seriously - what's the point of this?The point? The point is I'm expressing an opinion in order to continue the discussion.I think he meant the point of the rebrand. I could be wrong, but that's what I thought.If so, then I apologize for misreading it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 PuckDaddy introduced the idea when the Predators were slated to moved of having the Predators Hockey Club and letting them play their 40 home games at various locations on the continent. Could a regionalized version of that be ahead of us?After giving it some thought, I think this scenario is highly possible. But I disagree that it's Nashville. I fully expect it to be Phoenix. I think the 2011/12 season in Glendale is going to be a lame-duck season as the NHL gears up to run the Coyotes as a "floating" franchise playing out their season in several neutral sites. Call them the "NHL Voyagers" or "NHL HC" have them play 7-14 home dates in places such as Quebec City, Hartford, Hamilton, Kansas City, Portland, maybe even Atlanta.No way.A travelling team is a logistical nightmare. The amount of organization is immense, and you won't get the advertising revenues that come from playing in your own building. This wouldn't be like the Montreal Expos playing a couple games in San Juan or the 1968/69 White Sox playing games in Milwaukee, both of which were test runs for relocation. This would be on a massive scale, without the possibility of great returns.And even if the NHL was inclined to do that, it wouldn't be with the Coyotes. Glendale is subsidizing the league's losses on that team to the tune of $25M a year, which is the only way Bettman can justify keeping them in Arizona. Once the Coyotes start playing home games in another arena, that money goes away, lawsuits commence, and a situation you thought couldn't get any worse does. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeBalloonCoast Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Just a thought, if Dallas changed their name to something like The Lone Star Hockey Club of Dallas, would people still refer to them as the Stars? Or would they call them the Lone Stars? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColeJ Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 i'd still call them the stars... as would everyone else...and if it has anything to do with dallas, and anything to do with the cowboys, my loyalty will be tested. i can't stand the cowboys, and most of my stars-fan-friends are in agreement on that issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceCap Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 I wonder if anyone who's in the "team X failed because the stadium was too hard to get to" has ever been to a major east coast city.It's Cleveland Vet. It's different. You just don't understand. PotD 26/2/12 1/7/15 2020 BASS Spin the Wheel, Make the Deal Regular Season Champion 2021 BASS NFL Pick'em Regular Season Champion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sport Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Everyone is overlooking Columbus, I could totally see them renaming them self's the "Ohio _____" and playing games in Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati. All three have arena's with 14,000+, and all have had some sort of pro hockey teams play in there. Pending these rumors are true of course.I could see Cincinnati getting up for an NHL game, but Cleveland is completely unimpressed with anything from Ohio that isn't Cleveland and they're all weirdly opposed to the sport of hockey. When they got an NBA team in 2003 it really messed that city up because back in the day, Cleveland was a darn good AHL town. Anyways, regional teams have never really worked and no free agent would want to endure that travel schedule.Oh, now that's not true. There are no CBJ fans up here because they don't win and TV is monopolized by the Cavaliers. (I'll also let you know the Monsters averaged the best attendance this Calder Cup playoffs...with only 4 games played at home but drew over 8,100 each game.)People here root for Ohio State and the Crew if they like soccer, but the team has got to win first. Otherwise they're Wongs or Pens fans.I've never met anyone from Cleveland (under 30) who claims to be a die-hard hockey fan. Moreover they seem to have a bizarre anti-hockey stance, and Cleveland gets awful ratings for nationally televised NHL games. Now the Monsters' attendance surprises me because televised regular season games always look like there's more players than fans. Anyways, I'm saying a team in Cleveland would not be the success that everyone thinks it would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.