Toronto206

Seattle NHL Brand Discussion

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, the admiral said:

The Canucks were red-orange, yellow, and black because it was the '70s and that was the kind of thing you did back then, but then a new uniform manufacturer didn't make that same reddish-orange dye, so they had to switch to regular red. Maybe there's something Canadian about that.

 

Apparently, the gold was also changed for yellow. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, VancouverFan69 said:

 

I totally agree with the Canucks sticking with blue, green and white. Not only because they are PNW colours but they're the Canucks' original colours. However, red and yellow do have a Vancouver/Western Canadian look to them. The red is Canadian🍁, the yellow represents BC's sunsets☀️ while the black, as a dark base, complements both the red and yellow. 

 

As for Seattle, they could still have their own version of blue and green. The Canucks are royal blue with kelly green but Seattle could be forest green with sky blue/teal/seafoam.

 

I agree. But the whole 'yellow represents the sunsets we have' thing to give meaning to colours is so deluded. Like, really? Any colour can be given justification like that, especially when you're talking about something as generic and ubiquitos as sunsets lol. Blue and green should stay as Vancouvers colours. I don't like the skate logo, but part of my lack of support for it is simply trying to avoid another departure from a solid colour scheme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/30/2020 at 6:17 AM, FiddySicks said:

Give it five years. They’ll warm up.

Technically 2020 was year three, so I’ll be sure to come back to this post in 2022.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/18/2020 at 12:41 AM, throwmesomepics said:

Kraken has grown on me since the rumor first emerged. It’s much better than sockeyes or some of the other names floating around, like emeralds or Sasquatch.


I want something over the top like Sasquatch or Kraken. 

My wants mean nothing. But it would be unique and welcoming to the sport. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Kraken"'s grown on me the same way a tumor would; it's growth, but that doesn't make it good.

Share this post


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


I want something over the top like Sasquatch or Kraken. 

My wants mean nothing. But it would be unique and welcoming to the sport. 


For as goofy as it is, Seattle Sasquatch is a straight up bad ass name. 

 

Seattle Kraken is the kind of name that prevents me from ever taking the NHL seriously as a league. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not just the Seattle Yetis?? lol

And Slim Jim can be one their main sponsors!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, imagining radio hosts saying something like "and tonight it's the Red Wings versus the Kraken" makes me shudder. It just doesn't sound right. It's like a serious hockey team and a wacky sports team with a weird nickname. I feel like it cheapens the NHL's image. There's a few teams who do this already...Wild, Golden Knights (seriously drop the Golden), Ducks (was worse when it was the Mighty Ducks, but still)... but why add another? 

Share this post


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

Honestly, imagining radio hosts saying something like "and tonight it's the Red Wings versus the Kraken" makes me shudder. It just doesn't sound right. It's like a serious hockey team and a wacky sports team with a weird nickname. I feel like it cheapens the NHL's image. There's a few teams who do this already...Wild, Golden Knights (seriously drop the Golden), Ducks (was worse when it was the Mighty Ducks, but still)... but why add another? 

Playing Devil's Advocate -- unless you are on a board like this, does anyone think this way?

Share this post


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

Honestly, imagining radio hosts saying something like "and tonight it's the Red Wings versus the Kraken" makes me shudder. It just doesn't sound right. It's like a serious hockey team and a wacky sports team with a weird nickname. I feel like it cheapens the NHL's image. There's a few teams who do this already...Wild, Golden Knights (seriously drop the Golden), Ducks (was worse when it was the Mighty Ducks, but still)... but why add another? 

 

110% agree with you on all counts except I don't have a problem with Golden Knights. Knights by itself sounds better but of course, due to the London Knights trademark.... California Golden Seals, Vegas Golden Knights, it works for me.

Share this post


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

 

110% agree with you on all counts except I don't have a problem with Golden Knights. Knights by itself sounds better but of course, due to the London Knights trademark.... California Golden Seals, Vegas Golden Knights, it works for me.

Again with the Devil's Advocate - outside of a certain level of hockey fan, does anyone think this way?

Share this post


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

 

110% agree with you on all counts except I don't have a problem with Golden Knights. Knights by itself sounds better but of course, due to the London Knights trademark.... California Golden Seals, Vegas Golden Knights, it works for me.


Golden Knights is a terrible name, but the absolute WORST part of their identity is that they decided to ditch the Las portion of their name and just call themselves the Vegas Golden Knights. That’s the lamest, hokiest, most tacky on the nose Las Vegas bull :censored: I’ve ever seen a sports team do. There is absolutely nothing redeeming about that dumb hockey team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seattle HC. That way no name is technically chosen and all the hipsters will love it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, FiddySicks said:


Golden Knights is a terrible name, but the absolute WORST part of their identity is that they decided to ditch the Las portion of their name and just call themselves the Vegas Golden Knights. That’s the lamest, hokiest, most tacky on the nose Las Vegas bull :censored: I’ve ever seen a sports team do. There is absolutely nothing redeeming about that dumb hockey team. 

 

Originally, I had issues with ditching the "Las". Ideally, I would have loved Las Vegas Knights. However, Las Vegas is commonly referred to as "Vegas". The NBA Warriors aren't Oakland, California or even San Francisco Bay. They are "Golden State", the nickname of California but it also rhymes with "Golden Gate" as in the Golden Gate Bridge. There's Tampa, Fla. However, all Tampa teams are called "Tampa Bay" and not just Tampa.

 

29 minutes ago, Chromatic said:

Seattle HC. That way no name is technically chosen and all the hipsters will love it.

 

Seattle HC...this isn't Europe. Sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, FiddySicks said:


Golden Knights is a terrible name, but the absolute WORST part of their identity is that they decided to ditch the Las portion of their name and just call themselves the Vegas Golden Knights. That’s the lamest, hokiest, most tacky on the nose Las Vegas bull :censored: I’ve ever seen a sports team do. There is absolutely nothing redeeming about that dumb hockey team. 

 

I would say that the Angels calling themselves the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim is worse.

 

6 hours ago, Chromatic said:

Seattle HC. That way no name is technically chosen and all the hipsters will love it.

 

It's America.  It should actually be Seattle Ice Hockey Club.

Share this post


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

Seattle HC. That way no name is technically chosen and all the hipsters will love it.


Hard pass... I love my Sounders and don’t even really understand why it has to be Seattle Sounders FC. The FC isn’t all that necessary to the brand.

Share this post


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

Seattle HC. That way no name is technically chosen and all the hipsters will love it.

FC makes sense in soccer, because most teams are "city name FC" or "city and team name FC". It makes very little sense in hockey, considering no North American team uses the HC label. It's not the "Boston Bruins HC", it's just the "Boston Bruins".

 

Seattle just being "Seattle HC" would be the second-dumbest name they could possibly go with. Only "Kraken" would be worse, in my opinion. I'm hoping to God they don't go with either of those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, M4One said:

 

I would say that the Angels calling themselves the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim is worse.


Yeah the Angels have the foundations for a beautiful identity, but it’s basically completely ruined by their city naming issue. They basically decided not to even address their city name and now have half of the resources to work with in terms of building a branding package. In response, they panicked and overused the primary logo to compensate. The whole thing is such a mess. 

 

 

They should’ve just stuck with the California Angels name. The AITO set is such a strong foundation to work with. 

Share this post


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