2015-16 NHL Uniform and Logo Changes

[Billy B]

That Sharks jersey is near perfect. Get it an updated crest and that's what they should be wearing every game.

[monkeypower]

The Ducks uniform can't become the primary fast enough. Blows the main set clear out of the water.

No way. The main jerseys are far superior because the "D" is a superior logo. The only cool thing about that jersey is that its orange and thats it.

That cartoon Mighty Ducks logo should have went out with the bath water along with the Mighty Ducks name.

I couldn't possible disagree more. The D is one of the most boring logos. It's easily among the very worst in the entire league. It's just a D shaped like a duck foot. What's so special about that? The Wild Wing logo on the other hand, is unique and easy recognizeable. Few teams sold as much merchandise as the ducks did, with that logo, back in the 90s. It was up there with the Jordan era Chicago Bulls. That logo made me a Ducks fan and a hockey fan. I'm thrilled that it's finally back on the front of a Ducks jersey. That logo is the star of the new third jersey. I'm not a fan of the orange, but i understand why they do it, being from orange country and all. But truth be told, i would have prefered something even more classic, something eggplant and teal. But in the end, i'm just glad that it's back.

The reason I think the "D" is the best logo the Ducks have ever had is because its a simple effective design that doesn't have to resort to cartoonish to represent a team called the Ducks. The simple stylized "D' that doubles as a webbed foot is both aesthetically pleasing and unique. It looks like a sports logo rather than a cartoon used to sell toys. It gives the team the classy and mature look of a sports franchise rather than some Disney product to appease children. Its sharp and bold and jumps off the jerseys at you. Its very reminiscent of the winged "P" of the Flyers or the stylized blue note of St.Louis. An effective simple and sharp design

The Mighty Ducks logo is a 1990's cartoon. A cartoon logo. For a team with a cartoon name. Designed by a company that specializes in producing cartoons. I'm surprised Tinkerbell and Goofy weren't in the logo.

Disney bought the franchise to sell merchandise and that's it. They didn't care about the sport. They wanted to build a brand around their movie which the team is named after. This is the reason the team was called the "Mighty Ducks of Anaheim" rather than the "Anaheim Mighty Ducks". They wanted to emphasize the nickname as a brand/franchise. To appeal to the non-sports fan. It was used to promote the film sequels (this is why the kids switch from their own design in the first film to the NHL uniforms in the sequels). It was also used to promote a cartoon and a toy line.

With the Disney ownership and silly "MIGHTY" nickname in the past (Thank God), its only fitting that Disney logo stays in the past as well. They did a great job building an identity with a real hockey logo. Why ruin it by going back to a dated Disney cartoon?

This is a hockey team. Not a Disney product.

Removed pictures to save space.

Yes because if Disney wanted to start a brand and sell more merchandise, the easiest way for them to do it was to buy and run a hockey team.

The hockey team wasn't used to promote the sequels, cartoons or toys. The sequels, cartoons and toys were a byproduct of the hockey team and how well the hockey teams merchandise was selling. I doubt Disney had a long term goal of buying a hockey team just for two movie sequels, a very short running cartoon and some toys from the cartoon.

[Sport]

I love the old logo. Not every thing needs to be stylistically perfect to work. I'd even say the updated logo is over-designed, if anything. Looks like an anime character.

Only change I'd make to the old logo is to fix the butt end on the stick.

[Sport]

BTW, when I was a kid I had this hot wheels car. I always thought the car influenced the Sharks' logo or vice versa

[sportstar1212]

I saw these logo mashups the other day. All of them were pretty lousy, except the one for the Sharks:

Personally, I could get on board with this. What do you guys think?

[CreamSoda]

I just looked at the old logo and the new shark logo side by side for awhile.

The old logo is a much better logo overall. Better designed and a stronger identity. The straight edged triangle looks nicer and the outlines help with the color balance. The angle of the top of the stick and the fins looks better as well on the old logo.

The new shark looks like a hybrid freak of a shark that is raging hard on 'roids and a frog.

[hockey week]

still way too many outlines, but it's a heckuva start.

[CreamSoda]

I saw these logo mashups the other day. All of them were pretty lousy, except the one for the Sharks:

Personally, I could get on board with this. What do you guys think?

Why make the eye the same color of the stick? Sharks eyes don't glow orange.

[hockey week]

I saw these logo mashups the other day. All of them were pretty lousy, except the one for the Sharks:

Personally, I could get on board with this. What do you guys think?

Why make the eye the same color of the stick? Sharks eyes don't glow orange.

Do Buffalo eyes glow red?

[CreamSoda]

I saw these logo mashups the other day. All of them were pretty lousy, except the one for the Sharks:

Personally, I could get on board with this. What do you guys think?

Why make the eye the same color of the stick? Sharks eyes don't glow orange.

Do Buffalo eyes glow red?

The original sharks logo doesn't have orange eyes.

I have stated I like that version better, and those eyes are a reason why. Did I say I like the Buffalo red eyes?

[hockey week]

I saw these logo mashups the other day. All of them were pretty lousy, except the one for the Sharks:

Personally, I could get on board with this. What do you guys think?

Why make the eye the same color of the stick? Sharks eyes don't glow orange.

Do Buffalo eyes glow red?

The original sharks logo doesn't have orange eyes.

I have stated I like that version better, and those eyes are a reason why. Did I say I like the Buffalo red eyes?

The idea has enormous precedent. Glowing eyes are a common way to make something more fierce, it's so common that it's a tvtrope http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GlowingEyesOfDoom

You asked why make the shark's eye glow...

[The Giant Pacific Octopus]

The Ducks uniform can't become the primary fast enough. Blows the main set clear out of the water.

No way. The main jerseys are far superior because the "D" is a superior logo. The only cool thing about that jersey is that its orange and thats it.

That cartoon Mighty Ducks logo should have went out with the bath water along with the Mighty Ducks name.

I couldn't possible disagree more. The D is one of the most boring logos. It's easily among the very worst in the entire league. It's just a D shaped like a duck foot. What's so special about that? The Wild Wing logo on the other hand, is unique and easy recognizeable. Few teams sold as much merchandise as the ducks did, with that logo, back in the 90s. It was up there with the Jordan era Chicago Bulls. That logo made me a Ducks fan and a hockey fan. I'm thrilled that it's finally back on the front of a Ducks jersey. That logo is the star of the new third jersey. I'm not a fan of the orange, but i understand why they do it, being from orange country and all. But truth be told, i would have prefered something even more classic, something eggplant and teal. But in the end, i'm just glad that it's back.

The reason I think the "D" is the best logo the Ducks have ever had is because its a simple effective design that doesn't have to resort to cartoonish to represent a team called the Ducks. The simple stylized "D' that doubles as a webbed foot is both aesthetically pleasing and unique. It looks like a sports logo rather than a cartoon used to sell toys. It gives the team the classy and mature look of a sports franchise rather than some Disney product to appease children. Its sharp and bold and jumps off the jerseys at you. Its very reminiscent of the winged "P" of the Flyers or the stylized blue note of St.Louis. An effective simple and sharp design

The Mighty Ducks logo is a 1990's cartoon. A cartoon logo. For a team with a cartoon name. Designed by a company that specializes in producing cartoons. I'm surprised Tinkerbell and Goofy weren't in the logo.

Disney bought the franchise to sell merchandise and that's it. They didn't care about the sport. They wanted to build a brand around their movie which the team is named after. This is the reason the team was called the "Mighty Ducks of Anaheim" rather than the "Anaheim Mighty Ducks". They wanted to emphasize the nickname as a brand/franchise. To appeal to the non-sports fan. It was used to promote the film sequels (this is why the kids switch from their own design in the first film to the NHL uniforms in the sequels). It was also used to promote a cartoon and a toy line.

With the Disney ownership and silly "MIGHTY" nickname in the past (Thank God), its only fitting that Disney logo stays in the past as well. They did a great job building an identity with a real hockey logo. Why ruin it by going back to a dated Disney cartoon?

This is a hockey team. Not a Disney product.

Removed pictures to save space.

Yes because if Disney wanted to start a brand and sell more merchandise, the easiest way for them to do it was to buy and run a hockey team.

The hockey team wasn't used to promote the sequels, cartoons or toys. The sequels, cartoons and toys were a byproduct of the hockey team and how well the hockey teams merchandise was selling. I doubt Disney had a long term goal of buying a hockey team just for two movie sequels, a very short running cartoon and some toys from the cartoon.

Sure the team was used to promote he movie. In the movie they wear the NHL jerseys! They used a variation of the logo for the cartoon and toys. That was the point of my post. The logo was to cross promote merchandise outside of the hockey team and build an identity around the brand outside of simply a sports team.

I think Disney's plan was to market the brand outside of just hockey. But with both sequels doing poorly at the box office and the cartoon flopping in the ratings they didn't get to build the franchises they wanted.

[Morgan33]

Hold on a minute, Morgo. Aren't you the guy who fights for the Canucks' orca logo?

Last I checked that logo is missing one of the team's colors entirely.

Yeah but not their main colour, like the 1991 sharks logo. Plus the orca has two versions, one where the ice is white and the other where the ice is blue, so the primary colour is always represented. When that old Sharks logo is on a white background, teal is barely represented at all. I particularly disliked how it looked on their white pre-edge. The Blackhawks can get away with it cause it's been like that forever but with the Sharks, theres no good excuse. Especially when they fixed the problem perfectly with their 2007 update.

[CreamSoda]

Would have preferred the Avs to actually have proper hemstripes but I am still ok with at least the white stripe at the bottom. It's better than any of their current sweaters.

This would look fantastic, to me at least:

[VikWings]

Regarding the Ducks:

Like someone else said, the logo/colors predate the 2nd movie and cartoon, not vice versa.

It's a goalie mask for a duck. It's clever for a hockey team. The color scheme wasn't cartoonish either it was just a form of Purple/Teal, which was popular at that time.

It it wasn't for the Disney ties and they were just owned by some random rich guy, no one would call those unis/logo cartoonish.

The "Mighty" prefix and the Wild Wing 3rd abomination are the only things that are remotely cartoonish/childish. Logo and colors are not.

[CreamSoda]

The idea has enormous precedent. Glowing eyes are a common way to make something more fierce, it's so common that it's a tvtrope http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GlowingEyesOfDoom

You asked why make the shark's eye glow...

I hate that the new Sharks logo is overly fierce. Hence why I like the black eyes over the glowing orange.

Regarding the Ducks:

Like someone else said, the logo/colors predate the 2nd movie and cartoon, not vice versa.

It's a goalie mask for a duck. It's clever for a hockey team. The color scheme wasn't cartoonish either it was just a form of Purple/Teal, which was popular at that time.

It it wasn't for the Disney ties and they were just owned by some random rich guy, no one would call those unis/logo cartoonish.

The "Mighty" prefix and the Wild Wing 3rd abomination are the only things that are remotely cartoonish/childish. Logo and colors are not.

The duck mask logo is cartoonish in design style, but that doesn't make it bad.

It looks great as a hockey logo and fits the team well. Nothing to do with Disney.

[VikWings]

Would have preferred the Avs to actually have proper hemstripes but I am still ok with at least the white stripe at the bottom. It's better than any of their current sweaters.

This would look fantastic, to me at least:

These look better than the icethetics renders did, but they're still just meh to me.

They're shoehorning Navy into their scheme for no reason. These should either be light blue instead of Navy or burgundy with light blue where the burgundy currently is.

I still think replacing the foot with the c is stupid and only made the worse jersey in the NHL worse.

But 'tis typical Avs.

[VikWings]

The duck mask logo is cartoonish in design style, but that doesn't make it bad.

It looks great as a hockey logo and fits the team well. Nothing to do with Disney.

I'll give you that it's cartoonish in style, but is it anymore cartoony than the Penguins logo? Not really.

My point was just towards the few people acting as if the logo was pulled right off a cartoon character or made solely to market a cartoon that didn't exist until a few years later.

[monkeypower]

The Ducks uniform can't become the primary fast enough. Blows the main set clear out of the water.

No way. The main jerseys are far superior because the "D" is a superior logo. The only cool thing about that jersey is that its orange and thats it.

That cartoon Mighty Ducks logo should have went out with the bath water along with the Mighty Ducks name.

I couldn't possible disagree more. The D is one of the most boring logos. It's easily among the very worst in the entire league. It's just a D shaped like a duck foot. What's so special about that? The Wild Wing logo on the other hand, is unique and easy recognizeable. Few teams sold as much merchandise as the ducks did, with that logo, back in the 90s. It was up there with the Jordan era Chicago Bulls. That logo made me a Ducks fan and a hockey fan. I'm thrilled that it's finally back on the front of a Ducks jersey. That logo is the star of the new third jersey. I'm not a fan of the orange, but i understand why they do it, being from orange country and all. But truth be told, i would have prefered something even more classic, something eggplant and teal. But in the end, i'm just glad that it's back.

The reason I think the "D" is the best logo the Ducks have ever had is because its a simple effective design that doesn't have to resort to cartoonish to represent a team called the Ducks. The simple stylized "D' that doubles as a webbed foot is both aesthetically pleasing and unique. It looks like a sports logo rather than a cartoon used to sell toys. It gives the team the classy and mature look of a sports franchise rather than some Disney product to appease children. Its sharp and bold and jumps off the jerseys at you. Its very reminiscent of the winged "P" of the Flyers or the stylized blue note of St.Louis. An effective simple and sharp design

The Mighty Ducks logo is a 1990's cartoon. A cartoon logo. For a team with a cartoon name. Designed by a company that specializes in producing cartoons. I'm surprised Tinkerbell and Goofy weren't in the logo.

Disney bought the franchise to sell merchandise and that's it. They didn't care about the sport. They wanted to build a brand around their movie which the team is named after. This is the reason the team was called the "Mighty Ducks of Anaheim" rather than the "Anaheim Mighty Ducks". They wanted to emphasize the nickname as a brand/franchise. To appeal to the non-sports fan. It was used to promote the film sequels (this is why the kids switch from their own design in the first film to the NHL uniforms in the sequels). It was also used to promote a cartoon and a toy line.

With the Disney ownership and silly "MIGHTY" nickname in the past (Thank God), its only fitting that Disney logo stays in the past as well. They did a great job building an identity with a real hockey logo. Why ruin it by going back to a dated Disney cartoon?

This is a hockey team. Not a Disney product.

Removed pictures to save space.

Yes because if Disney wanted to start a brand and sell more merchandise, the easiest way for them to do it was to buy and run a hockey team.

The hockey team wasn't used to promote the sequels, cartoons or toys. The sequels, cartoons and toys were a byproduct of the hockey team and how well the hockey teams merchandise was selling. I doubt Disney had a long term goal of buying a hockey team just for two movie sequels, a very short running cartoon and some toys from the cartoon.

Sure the team was used to promote he movie. In the movie they wear the NHL jerseys! They used a variation of the logo for the cartoon and toys. That was the point of my post. The logo was to cross promote merchandise outside of the hockey team and build an identity around the brand outside of simply a sports team.

I think Disney's plan was to market the brand outside of just hockey. But with both sequels doing poorly at the box office and the cartoon flopping in the ratings they didn't get to build the franchises they wanted.

EDIT: I found the article. This explains it pretty well.

So I will admit I misremembered with my earlier post quoted in this chain. But I don't see it being as much of a conspiracy or a problem or whatever you are making it out to be with the sequels (which did well at the box office) and the cartoon (which a single afternoon show is pretty expendable in Disney's eyes). It's just an owner trying to make money off of their team, nothing wrong with that. VikWing explains what I was trying to say earlier as it's not like this was the Anaheim NHL team's logo.

Also your example of promotion is probably the only thing that isn't promotion. It would be promotion if the NHL team wore the District 5 Ducks jerseys as part of the release of D2 or D3. It's not promotion for a movie to use the jerseys of a professional sports team.

[hockey week]

Would have preferred the Avs to actually have proper hemstripes but I am still ok with at least the white stripe at the bottom. It's better than any of their current sweaters.

This would look fantastic, to me at least:

These look better than the icethetics renders did, but they're still just meh to me.

They're shoehorning Navy into their scheme for no reason. These should either be light blue instead of Navy or burgundy with light blue where the burgundy currently is.

I still think replacing the foot with the c is stupid and only made the worse jersey in the NHL worse.

But 'tis typical Avs.

You know what it is? It looks fake. Like, placeholder fake. The jersey looks like it belongs on a bubble hockey player, or in a commercial for a sports bar, or a poster ad for mens bodywash. It's a bunch of very simple generic shapes in dark colors, so nothing really jumps out at you, nothing is very memorable, it looks somewhat generic, but not so much so that you notice how generic it is.

It's in the same category as these:

I think that's why it's so underwhelming for most of us. It doesn't offend, but it doesn't wow. We might have problems with an element of it (the color, the logo, the flag, etc), but nobody seems to outright reject it. It's just there...being disappointing.