TheGrimReaper

2016-17 NHL Uniform and Logo Changes

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, VancouverFan69 said:

 

Something like this? 

 

66011376_2ba815c457.jpg.cf.jpg

 it looks like something stuck in the 90s bulging biceps angry face and wielding a object in a menacing manner this looks like one of rob liefelds creations I think the orca is not that bad of a logo or heck I liked the flying skates maybe they could bring it back in their current colors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Rj0498 said:

 it looks like something stuck in the 90s bulging biceps angry face and wielding a object in a menacing manner this looks like one of rob liefelds creations I think the orca is not that bad of a logo or heck I liked the flying skates maybe they could bring it back in their current colors

 

 

Yeah, that logo makes the Fisherman look tasteful, and the amputated Orca logo doesn't fit that aesthetic in the slightest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, VancouverFan69 said:

66011376_2ba815c457.jpg.cf.jpg

 

It's a little ironic given the other debate happening, but this is what a 90's version of Johnny Canuck would look like.

Share this post


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


- Both logos have nothing to do with the history of their respective franchises.  The Canucks never used 'Johnny' and the Islanders should have never used 'Gorton' after their early, historic success.

Actually yes, before the Canucks joined the NHL they were in the WHL and that was their logo. So Johnny Canuck is historic to the Canucks. 

Share this post


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


The Red and Blue 'Johnny' is an old-timey mascot logo.  The blue and green one is a 90's extreme remake, just like the Fisherman.  The only difference being that latter was made in the late 2000's.
 

 

We're not talking about the WHL Canucks.  We are talking about the NHL team established in 1970 that has never used the logo.

They are the same team, granted as an expansion team to the NHL in 1970 yes but it's just like the WHA team that came in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the Fishsticks jerseys, the only mistake they made was using the fisherman for the front. The lighthouse logo is far superior...

mjfh90bxecszrp1vt74hjs3jc.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CreamSoda said:

 

You must struggle with these too then:

 

venf9fmhgnsawnxxvehf.gif jhepegs329pc7ugyypebl28wg.gif124.gifllrs2zxi127vkqgcsvfb.gif

 

- What is this?  Canadiens have more definition than a smile face.

Actually, that Canadiens logo kinda looks like a sideways toilet seat to me. ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CreamSoda said:

 llrs2zxi127vkqgcsvfb.gif

 

- I do not see one building in those letters...

 

...Or capital letters.

 

Spoiler

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't the Vancouver Giants logo initially designed for the Canucks and they passed on it?

vancouver.png

 

Because I've always been a fan of that logo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, this conversation has completely hit the fan. People complaining about the Johnny Canuck logo being too cartoonish yet the Ducks use a literal cartoon goalie mask in the shape of a ducks face. While I love the Mighty Ducks logo, skating Penguin etc, the Johnny Canuck logo would be just fine. If a depiction of a male lumberjack offends you, I'd hate to ask you how you feel about the Washington Redskins.

 

It's a sports team/logo. Just stop already

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, worcat said:

Eh, this conversation has completely hit the fan. People complaining about the Johnny Canuck logo being too cartoonish yet the Ducks use a literal cartoon goalie mask in the shape of a ducks face. While I love the Mighty Ducks logo, skating Penguin etc, the Johnny Canuck logo would be just fine. If a depiction of a male lumberjack offends you, I'd hate to ask you how you feel about the Washington Redskins.

 

It's a sports team/logo. Just stop already

I wouldn't say anyone was offended, but yes, the conversation has become tiresome. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Redskins? Mighty Ducks? We're a grey facemask reference away from making this the most obnoxious CCSLC discussion ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

are the Oilers 3rds and Florida Panthers new jerseys with the numbers on the shoulders and patches above the arm stripe, the future of NHL sweaters? Does anyone else like them? I love the look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, coltravesty said:

are the Oilers 3rds and Florida Panthers new jerseys with the numbers on the shoulders and patches above the arm stripe, the future of NHL sweaters? Does anyone else like them? I love the look.

The Oilers 3rds are a straight throwback to these, so it's not really a modernity thing with those.

IMG_3582.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It still looks awesome also every time I see the avs alts the more I want them to be the primary because right now they have one of the uglier looks in the league imo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on how arenas are going with press-box height. 

 

Remember, those sleeve numbers serve a purpose: they're typically the first and most-often used identifier of the players for the broadcast team. Players don't have their backs to the broadcast booth often enough to be the standard. Therefore, those sleeve numbers are absolutely vital. I've announced games with teams that don't have them, and it's hell. Absolutely awful games to call. 

 

The shoulders work if you're up high enough. Otherwise, they're a lot less helpful than sleeve numbers. I know that I've never been placed up high enough for that to work for me, but I couldn't tell you at NHL rinks.

Share this post


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

Depends on how arenas are going with press-box height. 

 

Remember, those sleeve numbers serve a purpose: they're typically the first and most-often used identifier of the players for the broadcast team. Players don't have their backs to the broadcast booth often enough to be the standard. Therefore, those sleeve numbers are absolutely vital. I've announced games with teams that don't have them, and it's hell. Absolutely awful games to call. 

 

The shoulders work if you're up high enough. Otherwise, they're a lot less helpful than sleeve numbers. I know that I've never been placed up high enough for that to work for me, but I couldn't tell you at NHL rinks.

Would you imagine this is the reason that shoulder numbers are a lot more popular in the NFL, because of how high up press/announcers are?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

Redskins? Mighty Ducks? We're a grey facemask reference away from making this the most obnoxious CCSLC discussion ever.

No the grey facemask wouldn't do it, because we have no references yet to the Cleveland Browns or the San Diego Padres brown and gold debate.... oh wait, I think I just made it the most obnoxious discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.