Seattle NHL Brand Discussion

[Gothamite]

4 hours ago, DastardlyRidleylash said:

And even then, I'd argue "Totems" is just not a great NHL name. Not only is it not really at all culturally relevant to the area's Native population (the Native tribes of Washington never had totem poles, those that were brought in were poached from up north by settlers), it's just really bland as a name in general; what makes "Seattle Totems" a really good professional team name? It's kinda just bland. A totem is a giant wooden pillar with carvings on it, that kinda doesn't feel like the best idea to use as an NHL name. If we wanna argue history, "Metropolitans" is at least historically extremely significant due to being the first American team to ever win the Stanley Cup, but even that won't fly because of the Metropolitan Division.

 

Pretty sure that if the Seattle owners wanted the name, the NHL would rename the division.  It’s not like anyone would be asking them to strip those teams of some great historical moniker; the division name is arbitrary, relatively new and utterly nonsensical. 

[McCall]

14 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

Pretty sure that if the Seattle owners wanted the name, the NHL would rename the division.  It’s not like anyone would be asking them to strip those teams of some great historical moniker; the division name is arbitrary, relatively new and utterly nonsensical. 

Washington NATIONALS - NATIONAL League.

[uniformity]

12 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

Again, the team should ask for tribal permission before even thinking about the Totems.

 

 

I don't think that this is particularly gaudy:

 

...but your are right about the Metropolitans. This would be a PITA for any color-blind fan.

 

 

Ottawa has made simplified barberpole designs look decent, so I assume Seattle can do the same.

 

 

Also, your point about the Canadiens' barberpole is inaccurate. The Millionaires/Metropolitans never wore something that repugnant.

 

 

 

The Totems' jersey is OK (but once again, needs tribal permission), but that Canucks jersey is exceptionally bland. If the Canucks want an appropriate third for the rivalry, why not this?

 

 

They're decent enough, but I wouldn't put them "leagues above" the Millionaires/Mets. 

The Mets and Millionaires sweaters have history but they are not classics. Most barberpole jerseys are not really even hockey sweaters. They came from the early infancy of the sport and were utilitarian. These are rugby jerseys. There was no design involved and there is nothing particularly attractive about them other than their history. The only two hockey teams that can pull off a barber pole jersey are the Blackhawks and Senators. All others are meh.

 

Whatever your opinion though I strongly object to the Canucks and Seattle playing Millionaires dress up for several reasons. 1st is the fact that they are not the Millionaires, 2nd the Canucks uniform history is complicated enough. 3rd the Canucks and Totems had a very strong history in the WHL and I'd like to see that continue. The Totems were once granted an NHL franchise in the mid 70s. If they choose any historical name for a Seattle that should be the one.

[SFGiants58]

1 minute ago, uniformity said:

The Mets and Millionaires sweaters have history but they are not classics. Most barberpole jerseys are not really even hockey sweaters. They came from the early infancy of the sport and were utilitarian. These are rugby jerseys. There was no design involved and there is nothing particularly attractive about them other than their history. The only two hockey teams that can pull off a barber pole jersey are the Blackhawks and Senators. All others are men.

 

Really? There's plenty of "design" to them and they can look fantastic (as the Sens have shown). 

 

1 minute ago, uniformity said:

 

Whatever your opinion though I strongly object to the Canucks and Seattle playing Millionaires dress up for several reasons. 1st is the fact that they are not the Millionaires,

 

That didn't stop them before:

 

 

1 minute ago, uniformity said:

2nd the Canucks uniform history is complicated enough.

 

Not really. The Millionaires' look has precedence and they can "Canuck" it up. Per @hockey week:

 

 

1 minute ago, uniformity said:

3rd the Canucks and Totems had a very strong history in the WHL and I'd like to see that continue. The Totems were once granted an NHL franchise in the mid 70s. If they choose any historical name for a Seattle that should be the one.

 

Neither the WHL Canucks nor the Totems have that special "Stanley Cup" touch that the Millionaires and Metropolitans have. Besides, failed expansion rarely merits honoring, especially if said name is a Native American-based one. See @DastardlyRidleylash's post for more information. Totems and Kraken are the two worst options.

[Ridleylash]

It's simply much easier and far more culturally-relevant to the Washington region to call the NHL team Sockeyes over Totems; because one has extensive history in the region, the other has very little to do with the Native American tribes of the region the team is playing in. And considering how touchy Native imagery in sport is these days, I think all parties involved will definitely scratch Totems as a team name to avoid any sort of explosive backfire. And marketing wise, Sockeyes just makes more sense then Totems; you can play off it easier as a brand identity and mascot, which makes merchandising a hell of a lot easier while completely evading the issue of totem poles and their highly questionable history in the Washington region.

 

I mean, plus it's much easier to make puns with; "Let's give 'em a sockeye!" is far catchier then trying to make a catchphrase out of "Totems", let's be honest. Calling the Seattle team the Seattle Totems is just asking for a minefield of trouble, and I can't see the ownership group being blind to that sort of brand damaging being really a quite bad idea. Yeah, sure, someone'll crack jokes about "lol orcas and sharks eat salmon lol what dummies", but I'm pretty sure that's small potatoes to the owners, in comparison to the far more heated waters they'd be in by using the name Totems.

[hawk36]

As I've said before, the win/win is to be the Totems with the blessing of local tribes. Rather than adversarial, it would be an embracing of the Native culture and giving them a voice. If the tribes balk, fine, move on to the Sockeye, but working with tribes would be a huge benefit to both entities. 

[Ridleylash]

18 minutes ago, hawk36 said:

As I've said before, the win/win is to be the Totems with the blessing of local tribes. Rather than adversarial, it would be an embracing of the Native culture and giving them a voice. If the tribes balk, fine, move on to the Sockeye, but working with tribes would be a huge benefit to both entities. 

The issue is totem poles are a huge sore point for Natives of the area because they aren't endemic to Washington. People poached the poles from up north and brought them down into Washington, which is why Sockeyes (a huge part of Native culture in the region) is a much better idea for a name then Totems for an NHL franchise. There's no win/win with Totems, it's just a landmine waiting to blow off a leg. Sockeyes is respectful, a huge part of the Native culture of Washington and, more importantly, not a hugely controversial subject.

 

Just because a minor league team has that name does not mean an NHL franchise would benefit from it. If we go that logic, then I say Seattle Silvertips or Seattle Rockets would be far better names then Totems.

[IceCap]

1 hour ago, hawk36 said:

As I've said before, the win/win is to be the Totems with the blessing of local tribes.

You're assuming you'll get it. I'm not saying they won't...I don't know the tribal situation in Washington state. I just don't think you can assume that they'll agree.

[hawk36]

4 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

You're assuming you'll get it. I'm not saying they won't...I don't know the tribal situation in Washington state. I just don't think you can assume that they'll agree.

Right, not assuming anything. Just saying I'd prefer a name that pays homage to the Native culture in the region and is blessed by the tribes. One that honors them. If the tribes have no interest in it, then fine, chose a non-Native themed name.

 

I'm just so tired of the fighting over this issue, I'd like a feel good story that all agree is a good solution and further paves the way toward how the issue should be dealt with.

[HecEdHooligan]

On 5/27/2019 at 10:07 PM, Ark said:

 

I love the 90s Sonics uniforms.

 

 

So did I, and the NHL Seattle group could certainly avail themselves of this palette and come out with a very sharp set.

[Chromatic]

7 hours ago, hawk36 said:

Right, not assuming anything. Just saying I'd prefer a name that pays homage to the Native culture in the region and is blessed by the tribes. One that honors them. If the tribes have no interest in it, then fine, chose a non-Native themed name.

 

I'm just so tired of the fighting over this issue, I'd like a feel good story that all agree is a good solution and further paves the way toward how the issue should be dealt with.

The tribes aren't a monolith though. Granted I'm not as familiar with the political systems of native tribes in the US but at least up here each tribe has a different power structure and can take different positions on various issues. Even the question of which tribes you consult is an issue. So its not as simple as just "getting their blessing".

 

Honestly I don't want them to go with a native themed name at all. No matter what happens, someone, somewhere down the line will find a reason to complain, especially in a city like Seattle. Its better to just avoid that can of worms entirely.

[IceCap]

5 minutes ago, Chromatic said:

The tribes aren't a monolith though. Granted I'm not as familiar with the political systems of native tribes in the US but at least up here each tribe has a different power structure and can take different positions on various issues. Even the question of which tribes you consult is an issue. So its not as simple as just "getting their blessing".

Yeah, the University of North Dakota learned that out when the NCAA mandated they needed the permission of all local Sioux tribes to continue using the "Fighting Sioux" name. One of the tribes didn't give consent even though the other one did.

 

The "get tribal consent" thing is tricky because of that. It can work if there's only one local tribe or if the thing you're using is super specific to one tribe. Then you can likely work out a partnership. If you're using broader imagery like an entire ethnic group's name or something that spans tribal divisions? You're going to have a harder time just because you're going to have to get multiple political structures to agree on something. Which is ALWAYS a challenge

 

[Chromatic]

7 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

Yeah, the University of North Dakota learned that out when the NCAA mandated they needed the permission of all local Sioux tribes to continue using the "Fighting Sioux" name. One of the tribes didn't give consent even though the other one did.

 

The "get tribal consent" thing is tricky because of that. It can work if there's only one local tribe or if the thing you're using is super specific to one tribe. Then you can likely work out a partnership. If you're using broader imagery like an entire ethnic group's name or something that spans tribal divisions? You're going to have a harder time just because you're going to have to get multiple political structures to agree on something. Which is ALWAYS a challenge

 

Yeah there are bands in Canada that have claims to land in/near Seattle. Do you consult them? What if you pick the name totems but take into account the tribes around there didn't really have them. Do you talk to the tribes that do? Is that stepping on the toes of the ones living near Seattle? Plus assuming all goes well and the tribes give their consent and everything, there is nothing stopping someone completely unrelated 10 years down the line finding something newly "problematic" about it and complaining. And then it starts all over. There are simply too many potential hurdles when all of this headache could be avoided by picking one of the countless names that have nothing to do with Native American imagery. 

[Ben in LA]

HAT CLUB will be dropping this cap soon: Seattle Pilots. Not a bad look actually.

 

 

@seanmccarthycreative "Pilots" 59FIFTY

"The backstory for the inspiration behind this logo was to create a concept identity for a future Seattle hockey team, which started way back in 2012; long before Seattle was awarded a team.

Every Seattle NHL concept on the web seems to go with Metropolitans, Totems, Sockeyes, Evergreens, or Kraken so I wanted to try something that a lot of people hadn't done to that point before and I wanted to tie the new team into the city's sports history.

So I used the Seattle Pilots name to give it a second chance after their one failed season in Major League Baseball. The final result was this pilot stylized to match the era when Seattle took off as the capitol for aviation manufacturing."

[ZombieSonic]

I’m still Partial to Sasquatch. All of the people crying for Kraken and mythical creatures seem to be overlooking the mythical creature that is ACTUALLY relevant to us. And the color scheme could easily be Brown, light blue and/or yellow. Completely unique. 

[Gothamite]

4 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

Yeah, the University of North Dakota learned that out when the NCAA mandated they needed the permission of all local Sioux tribes to continue using the "Fighting Sioux" name. One of the tribes didn't give consent even though the other one did.

 

And I still don’t see the problem with that. 

 

Oregon wants to use Donald Duck?  Work out a deal with Disney. You want to use the name or iconography of a First Nation?  Then strike a deal to license their intellectual property. Or don’t, and then don’t. 

[hawk36]

Well the city of Seattle is named after Chief Seattle, Chief of the Suquamish and Duwamish tribes. Get their blessing on using something related to those tribes (or the Chief himself). City of Seattle has a great iconic logo of the Chief already. And again, if the tribes aren't in favor of it, just leave it alone. 

 

[Ridleylash]

I'd rather them evade the idea of depicting Native Americans altogether or using totem poles and simply use Sockeyes, because it can easily be the best of both worlds of a Native identity that isn't horribly controversial. The sockeye is a fish with heavy significance to the Native culture of the region, and you can get Native artists of the region to help design a logo that's authentic and visually distinct; and by going that way, you can pay respect to Natives without continuing the problematic appropriation of Native people as imagery for sports franchises. We don't need ANOTHER Indians-esque debacle.

 

That's a true win/win; a thematic identity designed by a Native that is highly important to Natives of the Pacific Northwest that also does a nice job tying into Seattle since sockeye are found in Puget Sound, which Seattle is located on. I'd MUCH rather that over Totems because of one failed attempt at expansion that happened in the 1970's.

[Krz]

^^Winning comment^^

[The_Admiral]

Mint green, medium green, forest green, arranged in kind of a plaid pattern as a nod to lumberjacks and grunge-era flannel.

 

 

Use that as an insert in a striping pattern, like where the green on a Canucks sweater is.