Minnesota North Stars Rebrand Petition

[rams80]

Just now, hawk36 said:

Just showing how ridiculous it is to try and say some parts can have history but others can't. Owners, front office, coaches, players, all change.

 

The organizations have history, but the people change from time to time (but never all at once).  That's not ridiculous at all.  That's how corporate bodies work.

[CarpentJ]

On April 23, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Ice_Cap said:

And yet the petition you linked only had a goal of 100 people. A goal it hasn't even reached yet. So...

 

hockey week is right. Some people just need to let it go. It's not happening, nor should it.

When the Texans moved to Kansas City they became the Chiefs. Houston got the Texans name back in Texas when the Chiefs held the rights and branding of the name. The Chiefs use to wear the old Texans  logo on their helmets. Kc should have never been able to wear those helmets because the Texans history ended in Texas when they moved to kc. The north stars history ended in Minnesota. Dallas has its own history as the stars and that began in 1993. There is no reason why Minnesota can't get their name back. The Dallas Stars is branded off of the Texas star. The North Star logo is branded off of Minnesota's state name which is the North Star state. Saying that it's too late is not true. The Texans Name stop existing in 40 years until the nfl and the Chiefs allowed Houston to claim the brand of the Texans name. 

[hawk36]

Just now, rams80 said:

 

The organizations have history, but the people change from time to time (but never all at once).  That's not ridiculous at all.  That's how corporate bodies work.

Right but when a franchise moves, and especially when they change their name/mascot, I think they lose their exclusive right to history. For instance in my mind:

- North Stars are more Minnesota than Dallas Stars

- Oilers are more Houston than Tennessee Titans

- Browns are more Cleveland than Baltimore Ravens

- Sonics are more Seattle than Oklahoma Thunder

[CarpentJ]

8 minutes ago, rams80 said:

 

The organizations have history, but the people change from time to time (but never all at once).  That's not ridiculous at all.  That's how corporate bodies work.

 

[CarpentJ]

2 minutes ago, CarpentJ said:

When the Texans moved to Kansas City they became the Chiefs. Houston got the Texans name back in Texas when the Chiefs held the rights and branding of the name. The Chiefs use to wear the old Texans  logo on their helmets. Kc should have never been able to wear those helmets because the Texans history ended in Texas when they moved to kc. The north stars history ended in Minnesota. Dallas has its own history as the stars and that began in 1993. There is no reason why Minnesota can't get their name back. The Dallas Stars is branded off of the Texas star. The North Star logo is branded off of Minnesota's state name which is the North Star state. Saying that it's too late is not true. The Texans Name stop existing in 40 years until the nfl and the Chiefs allowed Houston to claim the brand of the Texans name. 

 

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

24 minutes ago, hawk36 said:

Revisionist History...

So since the Rams and Colts traded franchises in 1972, then I guess the Colts history is actually the Rams and vice versa? Now I'm really confused.

 

18 minutes ago, rams80 said:

The only thing that changed for both organizations was the owners.  Not the same thing.  But thanks for trying to muddy the waters.

 

12 minutes ago, hawk36 said:

Just showing how ridiculous it is to try and say some parts can have history but others can't. Owners, front office, coaches, players, all change.

 

10 minutes ago, rams80 said:

The organizations have history, but the people change from time to time (but never all at once).  That's not ridiculous at all.  That's how corporate bodies work.

 

Right. The fact that the Rams' and the Colts' new owners had previously owned other NFL teams is immaterial.  This is no different than if each team had been sold to any other new owners.  

The same thing happened in the NBA when the Boston Celtics and the Buffalo Braves each got new owners in 1978, and each team's new owner was the former owner of the other team.

A weird twist on this happened in 1984 in the USFL, when the owners of the Arizona Wranglers and the Chicago Blitz each bought the other's team.  In this case, they also swapped most of the players, such that most players followed the owner to the new team.  But still, all this means is that the all-time rosters of those two teams have lots of players in common.

[hockey week]

You guys realize that there are no real rules to any of this, all of the trademarks and histories are freely shared around the leagues, the identities are not the sacred owned things that everyone is treating them like, and the permissions to use anything are minor, at best. Anything about "allowed" or "able" is superfluous at best.

[rams80]

4 hours ago, CarpentJ said:

 

 

I'm not quite sure I follow your point.  And unfortunately babelfish lacks a "Texas-English" translation tool.

[The Giant Pacific Octopus]

21 hours ago, VancouverFan69 said:

 

Norm Green changing the North Stars green uniforms to black was just another short-term cash grab in the 90's BFB$ movement. The idea of the overall change in both the logo and colours was to eventually move the team to Anaheim and have the team be known as the "Los Angeles ST^RS". However, with the NHL's eyes on Disney expansion money, the league allowed Green to move to Dallas instead.

 

 

 

 

The change was done because of lousy merchandise sales  In fact Howard Baldwin, who bought the team from the Gunds and then sold them to Green a few months later, wanted to change the logo too. Green never intended to move the team until 1992. At that point he already had owned the team for two years. When he bought the club in 1990 he actually bought property including a cottage in Minnesota because he wanted to stay there. Green was a Northern guy who was from Calgary. He also put $2 million dollars of his own money into renovations at the Met Center in 1990, and at the same time took huge loses by coming up with promotions to give away free tickets in order to entice fans*. So yeah, I'm not buying that this guy wanted to move the team from day one when he bought property and sunk a huge sum of his own money into the club. Around 1992, he started looking to get out, and Phoenix was his first choice not Anaheim. After realizing it wouldn't work in a basketball only facility he looked at Anaheim as a second option before settling on Dallas when the NHL put an expansion team there.

 

 

Quote

He bought a team that, eventually, came within two wins of winning its first Stanley Cup and then does whatever he could to alienate the North Stars fan base, such as ditching the iconic N* and primary green colour. The NBA Timberwolves offered him a sweetheart deal at the new Target Center but Green insisted to stay at the aging Met Center so he can prove that he's losing money, just so he can punch his ticket to move the team and not face sexual harassment charges.

 

 

Whoa whoa. You have to stop making up bull to try to get across a inaccurate point. Green didn't alienate fans by changing the N logo. The N logo wasn't selling. The NorthStars were the worst team in the NHL in terms of merchandise sales. The "Stars" jersey was actually pretty popular when it came out and put Minnesota into the top ten in teams merchandise sales. Also while the team came within 2 wins of a Stanley Cup they still averaged 2,000 empty seats the following season and only drew 5,000 for their home opener in October 1992. That wasn't on Green. Also the Timberwolves didn't offer him a sweetheart deal. The Timberwolves wanted to cut into revenue streams by refusing to advertise North Star sponsors and wanted a huge cut of concession sales and parking. He would have went bankrupt if he took that deal. Its the same reason the Gunds didn't move into the Target Center before they sold the team. Its also the same reason Steven Gluckstern and Richard Burke moved the Jets to Phoenix. Their original plan was to move the team to Minnesota but couldn't get a decent deal at the Target Center.  Then the Suns owner offered them  a sweetheart deal to bring the team to Phoenix. The same thing applied to the Minnesota Moose of the IHL who ended up playing most of their games at the St.Paul Civic Center due to the fact that the Timberwolves were going to control everything. The Timberwolves had so much power in that building even though it was funded by public money.

 

 

*

 

[rams80]

It's also not like the North Stars were this long beloved team that had recently fallen on hard times.  There's a damn good reason that the North Stars were the team that the Cleveland Barons merged with, and that reason was the North Stars weren't much better off than the Barons at the time.

[mafiaman]

On 4/23/2016 at 3:55 PM, Ice_Cap said:

That's demonstratedly false. The team has always recognized that it was a continuation of the North Stars franchise. They've never denied it. No team, aside from the Flames, has been as open about recognizing their pre-relocation history. 

Masterton, Goldsworthy, and Broten - tucked onto a banner that was half-blank for 20+ years in Dallas...until it was replaced with individual banners two years ago when Modano's number was raised to the rafters.

Much better.  

 

[IceCap]

And? They still hung the banner. Which is more than most relocated teams do. 

I'm not sure what you're arguing. You claimed the Stars acted like an expansion team, disavowing their Minnesota roots for most of their time in Dallas.

 

They hung a banner honouring the North Stars' retired numbers. They kept the last North Stars logo as their team logo for decades. They actively acknowledged they were the North Stars as far as team history went. 

This isn't an "agree to disagree" situation. Your claim just isn't correct. 

[ColeJ]

I guess the Celtics don't acknowledge their retired numbers appropriately either...

[mafiaman]

1 minute ago, ColeJ said:

I guess the Celtics don't acknowledge their retired numbers appropriately either...

Well, there's a few more than 3 (now 4), so there's that...

[ColeJ]

Sorta feels like the goal posts keep moving.

[hockey week]

2 hours ago, mafiaman said:

Well, there's a few more than 3 (now 4), so there's that...

 

Hasn't stopped Montreal...or any other team...

 

Does it look like a bingo card? Yeah. It does. But that doesn't mean it's not ok

[BBTV]

Montreal isn't sharing rafter-space with another major-league team that has its own banners, like the Celtics do with the Bruins.

[mafiaman]

You are making my point for me.  21 years of a single banner with 3 empty spaces out of 6 total.  If the Celtics banners were half-occupied, we'd be comparing apples to apples.  

[hockey week]

But it was still there. 

 

Do the Avs have a Nordiques retired numbers banner? Does Carolina have one for the Whalers? Do we dispute their history? At least it's there.

[SCL]

20 hours ago, The Giant Pacific Octopus said:

 

 

The change was done because of lousy merchandise sales  In fact Howard Baldwin, who bought the team from the Gunds and then sold them to Green a few months later, wanted to change the logo too. Green never intended to move the team until 1992. At that point he already had owned the team for two years. When he bought the club in 1990 he actually bought property including a cottage in Minnesota because he wanted to stay there. Green was a Northern guy who was from Calgary. He also put $2 million dollars of his own money into renovations at the Met Center in 1990, and at the same time took huge loses by coming up with promotions to give away free tickets in order to entice fans*. So yeah, I'm not buying that this guy wanted to move the team from day one when he bought property and sunk a huge sum of his own money into the club. Around 1992, he started looking to get out, and Phoenix was his first choice not Anaheim. After realizing it wouldn't work in a basketball only facility he looked at Anaheim as a second option before settling on Dallas when the NHL put an expansion team there.

 

 

 

 

Whoa whoa. You have to stop making up bull to try to get across a inaccurate point. Green didn't alienate fans by changing the N logo. The N logo wasn't selling. The NorthStars were the worst team in the NHL in terms of merchandise sales. The "Stars" jersey was actually pretty popular when it came out and put Minnesota into the top ten in teams merchandise sales. Also while the team came within 2 wins of a Stanley Cup they still averaged 2,000 empty seats the following season and only drew 5,000 for their home opener in October 1992. That wasn't on Green. Also the Timberwolves didn't offer him a sweetheart deal. The Timberwolves wanted to cut into revenue streams by refusing to advertise North Star sponsors and wanted a huge cut of concession sales and parking. He would have went bankrupt if he took that deal. Its the same reason the Gunds didn't move into the Target Center before they sold the team. Its also the same reason Steven Gluckstern and Richard Burke moved the Jets to Phoenix. Their original plan was to move the team to Minnesota but couldn't get a decent deal at the Target Center.  Then the Suns owner offered them  a sweetheart deal to bring the team to Phoenix. The same thing applied to the Minnesota Moose of the IHL who ended up playing most of their games at the St.Paul Civic Center due to the fact that the Timberwolves were going to control everything. The Timberwolves had so much power in that building even though it was funded by public money.

 

 

*

 

Beware of this several paragraph slanted and factually inaccurate post. The last line is completely false, the Timberwolves built and owned the Target Center.