BeerGuyJordan Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 My former father-in-law is a reservist JAG officer (we're on good terms). He's pretty well connected and I've already gotten some interesting color commentary, from him. Nothing I'd disclose here, and nothing "hush-hush." Just very interesting tidbits about how Foley & Co's approach has essentially begged for legal intervention, from day one. Thunder Bay Lynx - International Hockey Association (2 seasons, 2017-18, 2019-20, 2018 Xtreme Cup Champions) | Houston Armadillos - Major League Hockey (2 seasons, 2016-18) | Minnesota Muskies - North American Basketball Association (1 season, 2017-2018) | Louisville Thoroughbreds - United League of Baseball (1 season, 2017, 2017 United Cup Champions) | Las Vegas Thunderbirds - International Basketball League (1 season, 2016-17, 2017 Champions) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasBound Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 I also think they were put off when apparently Foley had his non profit folded flag foundation approach the Army Golden Knights to do a drop at T-Mobile and once they discovered it was for a for profit event (one which steals their likeness/name for profit) said no. That makes me think they already had a very strong hunch prior to the name reveal what was up so they have had time to "consider options"...time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2001mark Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Looks like Foley's gamble may not pay off? Should've double downed on both logo & wordmark? Where's Danny Ocean when you need him. @2001mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceCap Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 5 hours ago, BeerGuyJordan said: You would think that the NHL would have people in place dedicated to vetting this process and avoiding these types of headaches. Ahahahahahahahaha! aha! too funny PotD 26/2/12 1/7/15 2020 BASS Spin the Wheel, Make the Deal Regular Season Champion 2021 BASS NFL Pick'em Regular Season Champion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayMac Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 This franchise has yet to play a minute on ice and they don't even have an unveiled uniform, and they are already a joke. At least the 90s Senators played a few games before we knew they were a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M4One Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Well, at least Foley got permission from one group to use the Golden Knights name. He apparently asked Clarkson University if they were okay with Vegas using the name and they said yes. They also have a hockey team that goes back to at least 1962. I'm not sure how long they've used the Golden Knights name. Could that potentially change anything as far as Army's claim to the name? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRatPack Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 2 hours ago, M4One said: Well, at least Foley got permission from one group to use the Golden Knights name. He apparently asked Clarkson University if they were okay with Vegas using the name and they said yes. They also have a hockey team that goes back to at least 1962. I'm not sure how long they've used the Golden Knights name. Could that potentially change anything as far as Army's claim to the name? I would say no because there is a big difference between a school and an NHL team. One is a for profit only venture that will have world wide exposure. There are plenty of schools that use Golden Knights at a lower level. If Foley tried to use Clarkson as an excuse then he is being hypocritical. Why didn't he ask the other 20 schools who use Golden Knights...because they did not have the same stature as Clarkson same reason Army didn't care about Clarkson but cares about an NHL team. Furthermore Clarkson in no way implied or stole the Army teams likeness there is no confusion or potential dissolution there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeerGuyJordan Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 3 hours ago, M4One said: Well, at least Foley got permission from one group to use the Golden Knights name. He apparently asked Clarkson University if they were okay with Vegas using the name and they said yes. They also have a hockey team that goes back to at least 1962. I'm not sure how long they've used the Golden Knights name. Could that potentially change anything as far as Army's claim to the name? Not really, especially since Foley's approach was: Step 1: try to use nickname of USMA West Point, Black Knights Step 2: USMA denies use of nickname Step 3: try to drop Black from the name Step 4: blocked by the London Knights Step 5: decide to rip off the US Army parachute team's name and use a logo eerily reminiscent of West Point's. Step 6: have info that you wanted said parachute team involved in the unveil, bur couldn't work out the details, come to light. Foley's process has publicly been about "honoring" the Army, from day one. This is all public record from his camp, most of it directly from his mouth. There's no deniability, if the Army decides to press the issue. Based on common use laws, and the fact Foley has been open about the inspiration for his naming choices, the Army has the upper hand, if it wants to make a thing of it. I promise you, Foley will run out of money before they do. Thunder Bay Lynx - International Hockey Association (2 seasons, 2017-18, 2019-20, 2018 Xtreme Cup Champions) | Houston Armadillos - Major League Hockey (2 seasons, 2016-18) | Minnesota Muskies - North American Basketball Association (1 season, 2017-2018) | Louisville Thoroughbreds - United League of Baseball (1 season, 2017, 2017 United Cup Champions) | Las Vegas Thunderbirds - International Basketball League (1 season, 2016-17, 2017 Champions) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeerGuyJordan Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 11 hours ago, Ice_Cap said: Too funny Yeah, that wasn't an "I'm shocked they don't have this." More of a "With the league's history, regarding new ownership, you'd think they'd assign new owners a mandatory babysitter/handler, for the first three years." The NHL opted on Vegas, essentially shunning Quebec, in the process. Foley has taken a questionable business decision and turned it into an embarassment. I'll admit that I was wrong in saying, "Hey guys, lets give Vegas a chance." Not really for the reasons everyone was worried about, though. We haven't even gotten to the point where those concerns have even had a chance to play out. Foley has destroyed any faith I had in this team being run efficiently enough to survive. They've secured enough season ticket deposits to garuantee fiscal solvency for 5 years, minimum. Without an Army lawsuit, I give 'em 14 years. With it, likely much sooner. Hockey can't thrive with bad management, in a non-traditional market, just limp on, like Phoenix or Raleigh. Thunder Bay Lynx - International Hockey Association (2 seasons, 2017-18, 2019-20, 2018 Xtreme Cup Champions) | Houston Armadillos - Major League Hockey (2 seasons, 2016-18) | Minnesota Muskies - North American Basketball Association (1 season, 2017-2018) | Louisville Thoroughbreds - United League of Baseball (1 season, 2017, 2017 United Cup Champions) | Las Vegas Thunderbirds - International Basketball League (1 season, 2016-17, 2017 Champions) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 16 hours ago, TheRatPack said: No doubt by Foley's own words he damned himself by stating he named it after them, used their likeness, mantra, colors (some what) and name. They have all they need to stop it if they wanted, imo. it looks even worse for him that he is now stating otherwise. He is running scared imo and back tracking. HE EVEN SAID he wanted to have the Golden Knights parachute into the rally to celebrate naming the team the Golden Knights! In terms of arguing that he's trying to conflate the Army with his private enterprise, he gave away the game! ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRatPack Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 26 minutes ago, the admiral said: HE EVEN SAID he wanted to have the Golden Knights parachute into the rally to celebrate naming the team the Golden Knights! In terms of arguing that he's trying to conflate the Army with his private enterprise, he gave away the game! I recall like a decade ago Marquette before settling on Golden Eagles (disliked as well btw) considered Golden Knights for a moment BUT found it to closely linked to Warriors why ???? That brings me to Foley throwing around the term warrior attitude over and over again...it ties into the Army/Golden Knights even Marquette knew this 10-11 years ago! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockey week Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 It was posted somewhere that Vegas got permission from Clarkson for Golden Knights. Didn't Winnipeg get some sort of permission from the RCAF for their extremely simple name and generic-enough logo? If they did that with just basic connections, why wouldn't Vegas? After all of this time, money, and publicity, the name isn't going away. It just won't. It's like people complaining about the name Wild. Complain all you want, advocate all you want, speculate all you want, but it isn't going to change for real. There will be some deal between Army and the NHL and this will be some crazy footnote in those "How the Teams Got Their Names" articles, the problem will go away, and we'll have the Vegas Golden Knights until at least decade after the NHL finally gives up on the city and finally someone buys the team and moves it somewhere that makes sense. Until then, we're stuck. Thinking this large of a change can happen when this much money is at stake is fanciful in this day and age. I'll respect any opinion that you can defend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 TNSE needed no RCAF permission to be called the Winnipeg Jets; the NHL owned the intellectual property and handed it over to True North when it became clear there was no public desire for Manitoba Moose, Falcons, or Polar Bears. They requested and received permission from the RCAF to use the logo they designed, and requested and received permission from the Maple Leafs to, uh, put a maple leaf in it. As they always have, True North went about things in a measured and thoughtful manner, while Foley has been too busy waving his dick around to make sure anyone can run goddamn Windows Media Player. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Giant Pacific Octopus Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 7 minutes ago, the admiral said: As they always have, True North went about things in a measured and thoughtful manner, while Foley has been too busy waving his dick around to make sure anyone can run goddamn Windows Media Player. If True North was putting a team in the Southern U.S and Foley was putting a team in Canada and the same scenarios occurred you would bitching about True North. The Catch of the Day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkychewbarky Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 1 hour ago, hockey week said: Didn't Winnipeg get some sort of permission from the RCAF for their extremely simple name and generic-enough logo? If they did that with just basic connections, why wouldn't Vegas? They got permission, worked WITH the RCAF in developing logos, and pledged $1 million towards RCAF charities over the next 5 years. *The Battle of Seattle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 44 minutes ago, The Giant Pacific Octopus said: If True North was putting a team in the Southern U.S and Foley was putting a team in Canada and the same scenarios occurred you would bitching about True North. Got me with the classic Belgian's Windmill Fallacy! Both sides do it! BY MY OWN LOGIC I JUST PROVED YOUR POINT! ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 1 hour ago, The Giant Pacific Octopus said: If True North was putting a team in the Southern U.S and Foley was putting a team in Canada and the same scenarios occurred you would bitching about True North. No, not if True North still did what they did, and Foley still did what he did. It's not about location, it's about humility. And respect. And competency. And... the comfy chair! The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEANS Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 1 hour ago, sparky chewbarky said: worked WITH the RCAF in developing logos Got a source to back that up? https://www.andrewsterlachini.com/ or http://dribbble.com/MEANS1974 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 It's a stupid post because it supposes that I had some sort of prejudices about Mark Chipman and Bill Foley prior to their NHL ownership. I couldn't have told you a thing about either one before they hit the NHL and I still can't tell you much. I think Chipman owned car dealerships? I don't know. It's not germane. What I do know is that True North was very cautious in their pursuit of the Jets and very cautious in their management, sometimes to a fault when I've thought the roster should have been more improved or that they should have come forth with a purchase price on the Coyotes that would persuade the NHL to give up the ghost in Glendale. They were right and I was wrong, because they've drafted very well and we know now that no amount of money was going to move the Coyotes. So of course they would have been deferential and methodical about co-opting military imagery for their business because everything they've done has been deferential and methodical. If, for the sake of argument, Canadian-based interests were dead-set on a West Point-inspired nickname for their Las Vegas team and they went about securing it with West Point, I wouldn't be proud of them nor would I be angry with them. It wouldn't really matter. I'd just be relieved that an NHL owner didn't embarrass himself the way they usually do. As it happened, an NHL owner, such as he is at this point, has been making an ass of himself left and right, and I think I can make fun of it no matter where his team is. EDIT: not that I was the one who put it out there but I don't think TNSE and the RCAF sat down together and drew a logo, I think TNSE commissioned it, received it, asked "s'all right by you guys?", got a thumbs-up, and put it out there. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkychewbarky Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 38 minutes ago, MEANS said: Got a source to back that up? Right here MEANS...from NHL.com...https://www.nhl.com/news/winnipeg-jets-unveil-new-logo/c-569909 "True North Sports & Entertainment was also grateful to the Department of National Defense for their assistance in the process." You'd probably know better than me what that "assistance" was, but the point was that the RCAF was involved in the process in some way...Unlike, apparently, the development of the Vegas identity with the Golden Knights. *The Battle of Seattle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.