TrevorBotting

I definitely understand the “why” behind name changes. Money, branding, etc. but the nostalgic part of my brain thinks that keeping the name just adds so much history to the entire franchise. I am also well aware of being on the losing end of the discussion. And I gave Dallas a pass because they kept Stars but dropped the North. But c’mon, the Dallas North Stars? That’s gold. It makes zero sense and is an automatic conversation starter/trivia answer. I say lean into it. Same with Colorado Nordiques. It just gives the whole franchise a layer of something completely different to that area. Suddenly, the fleur-de-lis is a symbol for hockey in Colorado! Maybe I flip this over to the concepts boards. A current league where all teams kept original names when they moved.

Los Angeles Lakers makes no sense. Utah Jazz makes no sense. LA Dodgers makes no sense. But those teams had a chance to build decades of history after the move with the name. I think it would keep the legacy of the franchise alive and give it a starting point to build on top of.

Did a quick search and didn't see any results, but whats the general consensus on teams keeping names as they move cities? I feel this fits as an Unpopular Opinion but I am 100% for it. Give me the Colorado Nordiques, the Minnesota Senators and the Oklahoma City SuperSonics. And I realize its gets muddled with some instances, or how far to go back (do you want the New Jersey Rockies or the New Jersey Scouts in the NHL?), but I do like the premise. (if this is the wrong section for this, please let me know).

Love the initial concepts. Look great. I was pondering a Wild throwback to the North Star years awhile back and came up with this. Thought it would be a fun tribute.

Looks like the lighthouse is a very subtle greyscale in the "N"? Maybe try just a hair darker or even knocking the shapes out fully?