BeerGuyJordan

Memphis looks out- ing-standing. SS just killed everything Brandiose did, this off-season.

I hope they don't ditch the name. Memphis has one of my favorite identities in all Minor League sports, the name is an honage to the parent club, while still leaving some room for an independent identity.

I just spoke with a friend who lives about an hour from NOLA. He and his wife liked to catch the occasional Zephyrs game. He swears that they will continue to cheer "Let's go Zephyrs," come hell or high water.

I get where you're coming from, but essentially requiring a team to abandon their look every time their affiliation changes is bad doctrine for two reasons. 1: Fanbase continuity. For those teams that are geographically near the parent organization, owned by them and have a local fanbase that generally also supports the parent organization, go for it. Memphis, Gwinnett, Pawtucket, even Louisville, go for it. For Nashville, Charlotte, Buffalo and other teams that have changed hands more than three times, you sacrifice creating a local identity and history for those fanbases to be proud of. All for an aesthetic tie-in that the majority of your fanbase couldn't care less about. Fans in Nashville don't care about looking like the A's, Brewers, or Pirates. 2: Taking a step backward. Say you have a team with beautiful uniforms based on team A. Their affiliation changes to a team that has a horrendous uniform set. Your doctrine leaves no room for them to keep their set, especially since it now looks like a different farm system. Overall, I'm more open to the idea if it is just uniform style and text, but parent clubs often force horrible color schemes for the identity, as part of the deal. Leaving room for it, where it works, but not applying it, as a hard doctrine, is best. Since this is a baseball thread, I'll leave it at that, and not go off into a tirade about how this irks me even more in minor league hockey.

@Ferdinand Cesarano Looking like your parent affiliate can be a great move, but stripping a team of their identity to do it is a horrible move. If you think that a team like the Mud Hens, Indy Indians or Bison needs to change colors any time they change affiliations, you're dead wrong, especially since the identities are older than many MLB teams. That's just in Triple-A. You try to work over the Crawdads or Mudcats, and those fanbases would have a fit. Since hockey is my main sport, lets look at that, sure, teams like the Wolf Pack and Griffins can look like their affiliate and have it work for them. If you are honestly suggesting that the Hershey Bears (Capitals) or Rochester Americans (Sabres) change to their parent organization's color and look, you can't see the forest for the trees. The IceCaps, Moose and Condors looked better before the new colors were forced on them. Suggesting that affiliates look great when copying their major league team is fine. Suggesting that every team should be doing it is an affront to some of the greatest identities in sports and is just questionable aesthetics.

Wow, way better than the Tucson Saguaros, at least.

So try the discussion in 2020, when it's relevant?

As someone who actually fits all the criteria Canada is looking for, to immigrate there, I do find myself occasionally tempted.

WTF is happening to my country?

Tucson seems to be benefitting from the proximity, but the Coyotes don't have the following the Kings or Ducks do, in their territory. The attendance is actually picking up steam, as time progresses. It's horrible, but Cunningham's medical emergency, and the news story it became, may be the most crucial piece of PR the team has had, all season. I'm a season ticket holder, and doing everything I can to create more fans, but hockey in the desert is, truly, an uphill battle. There are a few stark differences between SJ and Winnipeg. The Sharks are averaging 17,486. In a stadium with a max capacity of 17,562, that's a good figure, especially in a non-traditional market. But every game isn't a sell-out, most of the people who want to go to a Sharks game can, assuming they have the time and money. Nearly all of those regularly attending Barracuda games are doing so for the price tag, not because they love hockey, or are fans of the team. Putting your farm team in the same arena, under those circumstances, is basically setting it up to be a cashflow sinkhole. Winnipeg, on the other hand has a sold out game. Every. Single. Game. They have a waiting list for season tickets. On top of driving up ticket costs, that means there are a lot of people out there who aren't able to go. The Moose benefit from being a local feeder team, overflow from the wait list, and the cost. That is a formula to make money. If, in 5-10 years, the Moose numbers start dwindling, they can always pack up the team and move them to Fargo, Duluth or Thunder Bay. All near enough for easy call ups. Grabbing Stockton seems like it would be a better call, for San Jose, but I think Calgary would need a tempting alternative.

I think it looks more like it has two noses, but still an upgrade.

Bakersfield and Stockton are doing well enough, as I understand it. I've talked to a few people who've been, as traveling away fans, and they generally described attendance as follows: San Jose: Sad Stockton and Bakersfield: Decent Ontario: Good San Diego: Nuts, one guy said it's on par with Hershey. It's still early, though. The Reign and Gulls have the advantage of being a pipeline to a "local" team. The novelty of hockey may wear off, in a few seasons, for the Condors and Heat. San Jose really is just for convenience sake. In such a large MSA, I think it'd be crazy for the Sharks to not move their team somewhere else, in the Golden Gate area, eventually. That way, you keep the convenience, but can still sell some tickets. The Moose are actually an instance of the "in house feeder team" being a good call. With only 15,000 able to go to Jets games, there's still a big demand for Moose tix. As far as Worcester goes, it's the ECHL's gain.

With Portland and Seattle, I get the impression that they support WHL because it's there, and that's all they have, from those I've talked to. It sounds like it might be a better chance of breaking in. Seattle is right in the Canucks' backyard, so I say the chance is worth it, for the ease of call-ups. An NHL team happening still gives you a minimum of 2 years, in the area, and it isn't like the odds are an empty net. Just go with brandingnthat can move, if you have to. If they don't do Abbotsford or Seattle, I say join the California fray. At least that way you are spending less on the team's travel. Portland gives you neither benefit, so I don't think it's a good call. Fresno isn't ice capable, anymore. The city has also stated they're content to not get back into the minor league hockey merry-go-round.

I would think they'd hit up Abbotsford, before doubling down in Vancouver proper. A Canucks farm team would probably be a bigger draw than the Heat were. Victoria is, easily, the more attractive option, but history has shown us that Canadian markets tend to follow their Junior teams, over the AHL. I doubt the AHL could compete with the Royals. They might have a better shot at Seattle, if they can find a suitible home, or just joining the California fray.

Seriously, when an independent team (essentially three tiers down) is rolling out a superior identity than Trip-A...the MiLB needs to get their act together.

The league would love to get into Houston, but with only one viable arena that has an NBA owner guard dog, it's incredibly unlikely. I, personally, would rather see 32 be a "stability market," to temper the risk of Vegas. Seattle, Portland or Milwaukee would fit the bill (all three have their own roadblocks, though). It sounds more and more like Quebec may swoop in and grab up the Hurricanes.

It's still not downtown PHX, but it's much more central than before. Plus, as you mentioned, it's closer to the money side of town. This should make a big difference in attendance, especially on weeknights. I'm moving to northern Tucson, so I'm a lot more likely to make the trip up. Now, if they could just do better than dead last.

I'd call that more of an accent color.

Or just go to the last page. With the majors, sure, every season makes sense. With MiLB, a single thread works.

I like Barn Owls, hate Pipsqueaks.

I think that was a very underrated logo.

As someone who has been bitten by a rattlesnake, it looks pretty close to the real thing, to me.

Polish a turd...

If a local team were the affiliate, that'd be different. I just don't see any incentive for Utica to stay. The Devils moving from Albany might make the most sense. Not likely, this article indicate that, as of now, Fresno, Reno and Sacramento aren't happening. It sounds likenthey'll work out a short-term partnership and look at their options. http://m.reviewjournal.com/sports/nhl-vegas/bill-foley-seeks-minor-league-affiliate-las-vegas-nhl-team

Got it, another byproduct of the League's hard-on for the Seattle market.