NHL 2017-18

[CreamSoda]

5 minutes ago, BeerGuyJordan said:

Overall, fans prefer dark at home, and the league has had vastly more seasons with teams wearing their dark jerseys at home. Only a few teams have a road jersey that is better looking than their home ones, anyway.

 

 

Ha, where are you getting that blanket generalization?  I know I prefer white at home, and know many people who feel the same way.

[B-mer]

39 minutes ago, Point1 said:

Be careful with the concept posting, they deleted a whole whack of them just a while ago. I only posted Avi's prediction because it's an accurate mockup of what they'll do, not as what I think would look good.

 

Fair enough.  Sorry about that. 

 

As to the white vs dark at home, i've gotten so used to dark at home it'd be a weird transition back. 

[BeerGuyJordan]

3 minutes ago, CreamSoda said:

 

 

Ha, where are you getting that blanket generalization?  I know I prefer white at home, and know many people who feel the same way.

Yes, there are those that prefer white.

I will acknowledge that hockey aestietics buffs tend to have more "white at home" leanings, but you can't judge general fans, based on the boards.

Although, these boards are even split, i can think of a dozen members who have stated a preference for dark, at home, myself included.

 

I know people who prefer white at home, but ask casual fans how they would feel about switching back to white, at the next game you go to. Most have said "dark at home" this has been at Preds, Sharks, Ducks, Habs, Coyotes, Jackets and Wild games. I realize that this sampling group is almost all teams with more history wearing dark, in front of the home crowd, but those are the games I've been to. The AHL swapped, mid-season, and fans have been more receptive to dark at home.

 

Even in the "white at home" era, darker jerseys outsold the light. They are easier to care for, for the casual fan. Colors create a stronger visual home fan identity, something most teams encourage/embrace.

[B-mer]

I believe Justin's original concept removed black entirely and had blue pants. I edited it to keep the original color scheme. I honestly have never minded the black/silver/gray as part of it. 

[BrianLion]

2 hours ago, BeerGuyJordan said:

 

 

Define "bulk."

 

For teams in their current location, 19 of 30 have spent more seasons wearing dark at home.

 

Sure, you can try and add franchise history for the Stars, Avs, Coyotes and 'Canes, but how many of those fans actually care about the previous "version" of the team? Very few, in general.

 

Even if I give you those four, that is literally a 50/50 split for franchises having spent more seasons wearing dark/light at home. I say light because several teams used to still wear colors, at home, mainly yellow, during 1970-2003.

 

Overall, fans prefer dark at home, and the league has had vastly more seasons with teams wearing their dark jerseys at home. Only a few teams have a road jersey that is better looking than their home ones, anyway.

 

Look at the Habs, their design is relatively the same as what they wore for the 1917-1918 season. They've worn that beautiful bastard at home for 64 seasons. White at home isn't honoring anything, for them.

 

Is there a case to be made for white at home, for a single season? Sure, but it's a relatively weak one, if you want to base it on numbers. Better to stick to a nostalgia argument.

 

I meant "bulk" not in the number of teams (I did say "a lot") but in the context of teams have worn white at home for most of their history. And yes you need to look at in the context of the franchise, not just the current city they may be in since we're looking at their overall existence in the last 100 years. 

 

Obviously for the O6 this isnt the case, but if you take the '67 expansion teams like PHI, STL, PIT, MIN/DAL, LAK (lets count yellow as white for argument's sake as it was their lighter colored sweater), even they've had 32 ('70/71-''02/03) of "white" at home, and about 18 in dark at home ('67/'68-'70/'71, '03/'04-''16/17), that's nearly 2/3 of their history. 

 

Then you have the next wave of expansion/absorption of the WHA. 

 

Buffalo and Vancouver:  '70-'03 in white at home (32), '04-'17 in dark. (14)

NYI and Atl/Calgary: '72-'03 in white at home (30),  '04-'17 in dark. (14)

Washington and KC/Col/NJ:  '74 in white at home (28),  '04-'17 in dark. (14)

 

EDM and WPG/PHX and QUE/COL and HAR/CAR: '79-'03 in white at home (23), '04-'17 in dark. (14)

 

That's half the NHL still having spent the large majority of their time wearing white at home.  

 

Technically you could probably make a case for the Sharks as well. 

 

San Jose: '91-'03 in white at home (11), '04-'17 in dark. (14) (If you want to count the Seals years (similar market), they skew even further white at home) 

 

Then you have basically every other team that came into the league from 1992-2000 in the various expansions that were basically born into the "white at home" world and have some history/nostalgia with it. It wouldn't exactly be a foreign concept, and would only last just for one season when the alleged reason for the switch back in 2003 (third jerseys) isn't in play for one year. . 

 

[BeerGuyJordan]

@BrianLion I ran the numbers, before I made my case. I just don't think the average fan prefers white, and I will be shocked if the league does a change for a year. I don't think they should, either. We'll see, though.

[TBGKon]

4 hours ago, tigerslionspistonshabs said:

Sorry to divert a bit, but on the topic of the Wild, why did they build a new arena when the Target Center was less than 10 years old? Too basketball specific?

Sort of....below is a chart for Target Center hockey.  It's a little boxy, but better than Barclays or AmericaWest in Phoenix.

 

[OnWis97]

I've been to hockey at the Target Center.  It's serviceable but not nearly as nice as the Xcel Center...perhaps because of when each was built or perhaps because the Target Center was built for the Timberwolves.  If the North Stars had been able to work out a Target Center deal I suspect they'd still be gone. While we did not support the team, some of the other reasons (Norm Green's sexual harassment rumor, etc.) were true.

 

The Met Center, while less modern, was probably a better hockey venue, but the Target Center had luxury boxes and the downtown location.  I think they could have survived there, but I am not sure they would have.

[IceCap]

I moved all of the Avalanche concepts here...

 

...please don't clog threads in Sports in General with concepts.

[Steve-O]

White should not be the default for home games. I get that people like to see other team's colored jerseys but what is the point in having a team color if the opposing crowd is the only one that gets to see it?

 

Wearing colors at home is like bringing someone into your house, surrounded by 20,000 people wearing Maple Leaf blue or Red Wings red. It adds to the atmosphere of home games in a big way. Same goes for when you broadcast. Imagine every game with the stands predominantly white jerseys adjacent to the white ice and the only team in color is the visiting team? Not great for TV if you ask me.

 

100% against whites at home. I'd love to see more color vs. color games though...

[IceCap]

The "white at home means you can see more colours!" argument makes no sense. Not in an era where you can watch any game in the league on any given night on your phone.

[daniel75]

I actually prefer white jerseys, but at home it just makes sense to wear your colors.

[njdevs7]

31 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

The "white at home means you can see more colours!" argument makes no sense. Not in an era where you can watch any game in the league on any given night on your phone.

Its about seeing the jerseys in person though. Every single Devils game I go to is Red v White, its gets boring.

[IceCap]

43 minutes ago, njdevs7 said:

Its about seeing the jerseys in person though. Every single Devils game I go to is Red v White, its gets boring.

Again, that makes no sense. It's never been easier to see your team play on the road, in any arena in the league.

[njdevs7]

14 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

Again, that makes no sense. It's never been easier to see your team play on the road, in any arena in the league.

No, you aren't making sense. I just said its different seeing the jerseys in person. And you keep telling me I can just watch any game in TV....

 

It adds a uniqueness to each game. I liked it when Philly came to town in orange. Toronto came to town in blue. Each game I went to had a little different look to it. Now its just red v white every game.

[IceCap]

Just now, njdevs7 said:

No, you aren't making sense. I just said its different seeing the jerseys in person. And you keep telling me I can just watch any game in TV....

Because that's the world we live in! Back when the NHL switched to white at home? Going to the game or watching home games on tv was often the only way to see the local team. So white at home allowed fans to see every other team's coloured sweaters.

 

What you don't get is that going to see a game live isn't that "different" or unique. Every team has a local affiliate or their own network that covers all of their games, home or road. We have all-inclusive cable packages that allow you to watch games from any NHL arena on any device that has a screen.

 

True, you only see one colour vs white if you go to a game, but guess what? That's only one of the many, many ways that you can see your team play. And often the most expensive option. 

You're hung up on the "going to the games in person" aspect when it's no longer the primary way most fans even watch their team anymore.

[ColeJ]

8 hours ago, tigerslionspistonshabs said:

Sorry to divert a bit, but on the topic of the Wild, why did they build a new arena when the Target Center was less than 10 years old? Too basketball specific?

Lots of reasons posted, but one of the main reasons had to do with advertisements. Target Center would be in no way owned by the Stars. They'd be a tenant only. As part of the landlord agreement the Target Center was offering, the Stars wouldn't have any control over their advertising in the arena.

 

For example, say the Target Center or Timberwolves have a partnership with Pepsi. If Coca-Cola sponsored the Stars, it doesn't matter. Pepsi would be on the ice and on the boards... That would severely damage the bottom line of a team that was struggling to make ends meet even when they had full control of ad revenue.

 

Similar to the Oilers in Houston before the move to Tennessee, no one would build a new facility FOR the team, and they ended up calling the bluff and daring them to either deal with financial losses, a loss of ad revenue, or find a city willing to bend over backwards for them.

 

Dallas bent over backwards for the Stars. Nashville bent over backwards for the Oilers. The Twin Cities wouldn't. Houston wouldn't. Then both the Twin Cities and Houston realized what they'd lost and understood the new sports business landscape and what is (for better or worse) expected of major league cities... So they both bent over backwards for new expansion teams, giving them free passes they'd never have dreamed of giving to their original franchises, that would have kept their original teams in place if only they'd had the change of heart sooner.

 

That's just how the cookie crumbles. I've been on both sides of it. I got my favorite hockey team in my state because Minnesota wouldn't make the right concessions. I also lost my favorite football team from my state because Houston was too stubborn to give the Oilers what they were more than happy to give the Texans only a few years later.

[Sport]

3 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

The "white at home means you can see more colours!" argument makes no sense. Not in an era where you can watch any game in the league on any given night on your phone.

 

Also it's not like every team's road uniform is plain white. There's more than enough color on the white jerseys to differentiate one from the other. 

 

If hockey did the clash kit system most teams would choose their dark color as their primary jersey. That's the sweater you should wear in front of your home fans. 

[coltravesty]

dark jerseys became popular over time and it doesnt make sense to have fans wear navy and you are wearing white. People don't go to games in suits or casual wear anymore.

[Kevin W.]

4 hours ago, njdevs7 said:

Its about seeing the jerseys in person though. Every single Devils game I go to is Red v White, its gets boring.

Do you go to every single home game, though?