Las Vegas NHL Expansion

[CreamSoda]

Las Vegas Voyageurs

 

Too soon?

[BeerGuyJordan]

It is worth noting that the Vegas Review Journal's poll is down to its final four names in the series of unofficial polls (which sees well over a thousand votes daily). Aces, Scorpions, Outlaws and Bighorns. 

 

Completely aside from the Knights debate, I hope Foley and the league are paying attention. These voters are likely going to make up a good chuck of the Vegas faithful come October of next year. Some of the best branding in the league has been built on fan selections.

[charger77]

Outlaws could work... We don't have a Cowboy / Wild West / Renegade themed team in the league.

[BrianLion]

15 minutes ago, BeerGuyJordan said:

It is worth noting that the Vegas Review Journal's poll is down to its final four names in the series of unofficial polls (which sees well over a thousand votes daily). Aces, Scorpions, Outlaws and Bighorns. 

 

Completely aside from the Knights debate, I hope Foley and the league are paying attention. These voters are likely going to make up a good chuck of the Vegas faithful come October of next year. Some of the best branding in the league has been built on fan selections.

I'd go for any of those except Bighorns at this point. 

[twi]

I personally like the name Scorpions, but for some reason can't separate the name from a red and black color scheme. I don't think another red and black team would be a good idea. 

[SJAnfield]

If the NHL or Army's copyright do indeed halt the Knights branding, it'll be the first good thing to come out of this whole mess of a franchise. 

[IceCap]

2 hours ago, BeerGuyJordan said:

It is worth noting that the Vegas Review Journal's poll is down to its final four names in the series of unofficial polls (which sees well over a thousand votes daily). Aces, Scorpions, Outlaws and Bighorns. 

 

Completely aside from the Knights debate, I hope Foley and the league are paying attention. These voters are likely going to make up a good chuck of the Vegas faithful come October of next year. Some of the best branding in the league has been built on fan selections.

Have they?

Take the Sharks' original branding, which we can all agree was pretty on-target. 

The fans chose "Blades." The decision to go with "Sharks" came from the top, and the team created a great and enduring brand around that executive decision.

 

[MEANS]

It's going pretty good. How's everyone else doing?

[IceCap]

13 minutes ago, MEANS said:

It's going pretty good. How's everyone else doing?

[rams80]

On 7/19/2016 at 9:19 AM, Ice_Cap said:

The lack of a single red, white, and blue Philadelphia Eagles uniform has me thinking the name "Eagles" was chosen because the owners at the time thought it was a good name. Any connection to Philadelphia as "the birthplace of American freedom" seems like a stretch considering the team never once tried to play up the "eagle as a symbol for America" angle in their branding. 

 

And? What does the name Tigers have to do with Detroit? Both big cat names were chosen because ownership thought they sounded good. There's no "local" reason for either team to be named what they're named. And that's ok.

 

Again, I find myself asking "and?" I'm not talking about how the name was chosen. Merely the fact that the name has no inherent tie to Philadelphia. FFS, the Royal Canadian Air Force's hockey team used the name. 

 

Don't try to claim the Atlanta Hawks' name has local significance. The team used the name "Hawks" in Milwaukee and St. Louis before they ended up in Atlanta. It's use by the team has nothing to do with any sort of local tie-in. If there is one? It's a happy accident. 

Bears? Sharks? These names are generic because they can apply to any number of places. You could use them for teams where there isn't a local connection and no one would bat an eye. The Memphis Grizzlies do just that!

 

"Sounding good" should be the primary concern when it comes to naming a team. You shouldn't marry yourself to a local connection if no suitable option is available. 

 

I keep bringing up the Cleveland Cavaliers because thematically a Cavalier and a Knight are similar. They're both nobles who raise arms in the name of their monarch. A Cavalier is a Knight adapted to the age of gunpowder.

There is no local reason for a team in Cleveland to be named the Cavaliers. They went with it for one reason. It sounded good. And it worked out for them in the long run. 

 

"Knights" has a wealth of imagery to build an identity around. It sounds good. It has no ties to gambling. 

Passing on that to go with a sub-par name with a pained local connection? That's bad business in the long run.

If Vegas is going to succeede as a market? The long run has to be the focus. A name that can build a solid, enduring identity for potentially decades to come is key. "Knights" provides that. 

 

 

 

Just to play with your Cleveland tangent, I think there was at least an unofficial attempt to do some "medieval/royal" theme naming-the expansion Cavaliers were owned by Nick Mileti, who at the time owned the AHL Cleveland Barons, and he later named his WHA team the Cleveland Crusaders.

[BeerGuyJordan]

57 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

Have they?

Take the Sharks' original branding, which we can all agree was pretty on-target. 

The fans chose "Blades." The decision to go with "Sharks" came from the top, and the team created a great and enduring brand around that executive decision.

 

They have. The specific teams I had in mind were Pittsburgh and Philadelphia.

 

10 minutes ago, rams80 said:

 

Just to play with your Cleveland tangent, I think there was at least an unofficial attempt to do some "medieval/royal" theme naming-the expansion Cavaliers were owned by Nick Mileti, who at the time owned the AHL Cleveland Barons, and he later named his WHA team the Cleveland Crusaders.

This just echoes my point: completely generic names are out there. Many of the seemingly generic ones have underlying reasons. 

 

Truly generic team names assigned by management, that don't have a tie in to the location, or a running city naming theme, are actually a rarity.

[IceCap]

4 hours ago, BeerGuyJordan said:

They have. The specific teams I had in mind were Pittsburgh and Philadelphia.

Neither team name has anything to do with the city, by the way.

"Sharks" works for the location, but was imposed on the team by management that had completely rejected the fan choice.

 

4 hours ago, BeerGuyJordan said:

Truly generic team names assigned by management, that don't have a tie in to the location

Ah, now you're moving the goalposts. You used to argue in favour of names with a local connection. Now you're claiming that the only good options are names with a local connection or generic names chosen by the fans.

Look, if you don't like "Knights"? That's fine. Don't try to play it up as anything more than your personal opinion though, because right now? You're on track to change your argument yet again to "the only names that work are ones with local connections, were chosen by the fans, or ones I personally like."

 

4 hours ago, BeerGuyJordan said:

This just echoes my point

No, it doesn't. 

You keep dodging the point, so I'm going to keep bringing it up. "Cavaliers" in Cleveland, like "Knights" in Las Vegas, has no local connection. Yet in the former case? It worked because it sounded good. There's absolutely no reason, outside of your own personal preference, to believe that "Knights" in Las Vegas can't build just as enduring a brand for the city's NHL team as the Cavs' name has for Cleveland's NBA team.

 

Which is ultimately where I stand. No viable name (ie one with no gambling connections) so far seems as solid a choice as "Knights." No other name seems like it has enough to it to last for decades without seeming stale.

 

EDIT- Outlaws could work, and would be pretty unique in the NHL. The problem is the XFL history. That may not want to be something the NHL wants to reference.

[wildwing64]

Must admit that I'm coming around on the Knights name. Yeah, it's a bit generic, but it's not exactly bad. I'd rather they did that than be stuck with something like the Wild forever.

 

Up 'til now I was pretty much sold on the Aces moniker thanks in part to Sparky's concept. But it was pointed out in the NHL megathread that Las Vegas Aces sounds very clunky, and I hate to say it but it kind of is. One too many S sounds in there.

[generalshepherd141]

7 hours ago, twi said:

I personally like the name Scorpions, but for some reason can't separate the name from a red and black color scheme. I don't think another red and black team would be a good idea. 

I feel like a Las Vegas Scorpions team would have to choose orange as their primary color, but maybe that's just how I view scorpions.

[IceCap]

13 minutes ago, wildwing64 said:

Must admit that I'm coming around on the Knights name. Yeah, it's a bit generic, but it's not exactly bad. I'd rather they did that than be stuck with something like the Wild forever.

 

Up 'til now I was pretty much sold on the Aces moniker thanks in part to Sparky's concept. But it was pointed out in the NHL megathread that Las Vegas Aces sounds very clunky, and I hate to say it but it kind of is. One too many S sounds in there.

Too many "s" sounds, too many "ah" and "a" sounds.

 

My preference for Knights comes down to three factors. The first is that it has no ties to gambling. Some people don't like that, and I'm not saying they're wrong necessarily. It's just that the NHL has made it abundantly clear that a gambling-related name is a no-go.

Secondly? I think it sounds good. "Las Vegas Aces," even if divorced from its gambling connections, is too awkward. Too many peaks and valleys in the pronunciation. "Las Vegas Knights" just flows better.

Finally? Knights, of all the choices presented, has the best imagery to draw from for a strong brand. In my opinion. Shields, swords, lances, chargers, helms...there's no shortage of solid imagery to choose from when constructing an identity. It just seems to me that the name Knights, and the imagery associated with it, could be used to construct a brand that could endure. It's not trendy or gimmicky. It's just a solid name that would have worked fifty years ago, twenty years ago, or would work ten years from now.

 

The biggest problem with "Knights" is that it does infringe on the Los Angeles Kings' identity a bit. Which is where I feel Outlaws has an advantage, if not for the XFL connection. I don't see the similarities as that big a deal though. The Carolina Panthers and Jacksonville Jaguars entered the NFL at the same time with big cat names, and things worked out.

Besides. People are pushing for "Aces" and playing up Nevada's USAF history. When the team will play in the same conference as the Winnipeg Jets. A team from a city with strong RCAF history. To the point that they use the roundel as the logo. "Knights" no more infringes on the medieval theme of the Kings than "Aces" infringes on the military aviation theme of the Jets.

[Cosmic]

On July 19, 2016 at 11:41 AM, CreamSoda said:

Las Vegas Voyageurs

 

Too soon?

Yeah, but only by about 10 years.

 

7 hours ago, SJAnfield said:

If the NHL or Army's copyright do indeed halt the Knights branding, it'll be the first good thing to come out of this whole mess of a franchise. 

The only way the Army thing blocks the name is if Foley insists on "Black Knights". There's already the UCF Knights, and they even use similar colors to Army's college teams.

[Dynasty]

8 hours ago, charger77 said:

Outlaws could work... We don't have a Cowboy / Wild West / Renegade themed team in the league.

 

That's the route I would personally like to see them go (Outlaws, Bandits, Desperadoes, etc.).

[4_tattoos]

Well if we're going to consider adopting an old XFL name in Las Vegas Outlaws, why not do the same for the more recent short lived UFL. Let the Las Vegas Locomotives be reborn as a hockey team!!!

1. the UFL lasted longer than the XFL
2. the Las Vegas Locomotives (Locos for short) won the UFL Championship twice in it's 3 years of existence

Okay I'm done now

[rams80]

IP issues aside-here is the other problem with "Black Knights"

 

 

Do you really want to run with something associated with that as your name?

 

[reffan]

14 hours ago, charger77 said:

Outlaws could work... We don't have a Cowboy / Wild West / Renegade themed team in the league.

Gunslingers maybe?