Seattle NHL Brand Discussion

[Ridleylash]

A brand name shouldn't be rejected because of another team's brand, that's pretty reactionary branding. Lions kill and eat horses all the time in Africa, but that didn't stop the Broncos and Colts from tying their identity and mascot to a horse in the same league as the Detroit Lions.

If you try to make as unmockable a brand as possible, you also end up making a exceptionally sterile brand, as well. No matter what you do, if you make an evocative brand, people will make mocking versions of it. That's part of the trade of sports fandom.

 

The Ducks become the Sucks, the Red Sox/White Sox can become the Sux, the Sharks become the Shorks, the Leafs become the Laffs, the Red Wings become the Dead Wings, the Oilers become the Coilers, the Flames become the Lames, the Jets become the Jerts, the Capitals become the Crapitals, the Wild become the Mild, the Predators become the Perds, etc. etc.

 

Yes, people from other fandoms would inevitably call them the "Seattle Suckeyes", but at least it's an evocative name. It draws reaction. Imagine if the team was named some by-committee crap like the "Seattle Serpents" or something that tries so hard to be unmockable that it comes off as exceptionally generic. 

[FiddySicks]

14 hours ago, Chromatic said:

This is some pretty loopy reasoning 

 

Yes, exactly. The very basis of the original argument is "loopy" in of itself. But we're already down that rabbit hole discussion wise, so...

[B-Rich]

On 10/25/2019 at 5:50 PM, benpc21 said:

The two Cardinals in the same city, blows my mind. Did people buy tickets for the football team thinking they were getting baseball tickets? It had to happen, but I'm sure it was few and far between. 

Adding to the possible confusion was the fact that they played at the same venue (Busch Stadium).

Let's not forget that even earlier, for thirty years  (1925-55) the New York Giants played in football AND baseball in New York, at the same venue (Polo Grounds).

 

 

 

On 10/26/2019 at 9:49 AM, gosioux76 said:

Having just moved to St. Louis recently, I was surprised to come across old newspaper clips where the NFL team was referred commonly as "Big Red." Seems like that was a local differentiator. 

 

On 10/26/2019 at 7:43 PM, the admiral said:

The football Cardinals mostly seemed to go by the Big Red.

 

Correct, and gosioux76 nailed it with the term "local differentiator". Most notably used by their local sportscasters and broadcasters, and picked up and used by local fans. The still common "Redbirds" were used for the baseball team.

 

 

 

On 10/27/2019 at 6:30 PM, benpc21 said:

As someone who worked in ticketing, you'd be amazed at how often, especially with the implementation of the internet and secondary markets, people think they are getting one thing but it's really the other.

Embarrassed to say that just a couple of years ago, when I was buying tickets to a Stars-Blues game on December 27 in Dallas via Vivid Seats or Seatgeek (don't remember which one), I somehow wound up buying tickets to the Stars-Blues game on December 21 in St. Louis.   I realized my error as soon as the confirmation was sent, but was never able to re-sell the tickets. 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, DastardlyRidleylash said:

The Ducks become the Sucks, the Red Sox/White Sox can become the Sux, the Sharks become the Shorks, the Leafs become the Laffs, the Red Wings become the Dead Wings, the Oilers become the Coilers, the Flames become the Lames, the Jets become the Jerts, the Capitals become the Crapitals, the Wild become the Mild, the Predators become the Perds, etc. etc.

 

 This was self-originating (not from other teams' fans), but still...

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

14 minutes ago, B-Rich said:

On 10/25/2019 at 6:50 PM, benpc21 said:

The two Cardinals in the same city, blows my mind. Did people buy tickets for the football team thinking they were getting baseball tickets? It had to happen, but I'm sure it was few and far between. 

Adding to the possible confusion was the fact that they played at the same venue (Busch Stadium).

Let's not forget that even earlier, for thirty years  (1925-55) the New York Giants played in football AND baseball in New York, at the same venue (Polo Grounds).

 

The New York Yankees of the AAFC played at Yankee Stadium from 1946 to 1949.  And the NFL's Brooklyn Dodgers played at Ebbets Field in the 1930s and early 1940s, before an AAFC Brooklyn Dodgers team played in that park in the late 1940s.

[FiddySicks]

1 hour ago, DastardlyRidleylash said:

Sharks become the Shorks

 

 

 

For the love of God, it's the Sharts. 

[SFGiants58]

17 minutes ago, Bucfan56 said:

 

 

For the love of God, it's the Sharts. 

That’s insulting to the excretory system. 

[M4One]

I don't remember who here suggested that the name would be revealed by the all-star game, but Chris Johnson of Sportsnet, confirmed that the name would indeed be revealed before the all-star break.

[poser]

On 10/30/2019 at 8:55 AM, Bucfan56 said:

 

 

 

For the love of God, it's the Sharts. 

 

 

[Survival79]

How Seattle Is Taking a Data-Driven Approach to Building Its New NHL Team

 

[Reyes47]

On 4/13/2017 at 6:57 PM, hockey week said:

I don't think Metropolitans will happen for many reasons:

It hasn't been used in nearly a century (Ottawa always had minor league teams named the Senators wearing barberpoles, or at least red/white/black)

The original team is a trivia question (not the mythic history of the four? Cups Ottawa won in the NHL)

Senators is more specific than Metropolitans (Senators in the Capital, Ottawa. Every city is a Metropolitan area)

I can't imagine the New York Mets not wanting a say in this (even if Mets is no longer short for Metropolitans, it's close enough)

the NHL has a Metropolitan Division, and wouldn't that be confusing?

Metros has new meanings now, and I can't imagine the NHL wants to risk offending people, even if it's innocent

It's not a catchy sports name. That stuff worked a century ago and is charming now, you can't just create that now.

 

And I think Totems has the same potential to offend. In the same era as the Redskins and Chief Wahoo cling on for dear life, why would anyone risk testing those waters now?

I don’t mind the name metros. I do think the Thunderbirds could be cool and incorporate the northwestern native art into their brand like the seahawks

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

They wont be the Thunderbirds. The Thunderbirds will still be around. Even though they're a minor league team in a big league city, there's too much of a fan base and a following. 

 

 

[dont care]

Since when is Mets no longer short for metropolitans?

[hawk36]

4 hours ago, tigerslionspistonshabs said:

They wont be the Thunderbirds. The Thunderbirds will still be around. Even though they're a minor league team in a big league city, there's too much of a fan base and a following. 

 

 

Money talks if the owners really want it...

[M4One]

Even if the Thunderbirds were to move, Seattle should not take the name.  Yes, it's a decent name, certainly better than other suggested recycled names like Metros and Totems.  But, I don't think that means Seattle should just take it.  It's not as if the junior team had cease to exist for 10-20+ years. If that were the case, then it would be okay.

 

 

[AstroCree]

5 hours ago, dont care said:

Since when is Mets no longer short for metropolitans?

Bruh, everyone calls them the Metropolitans. It never left.

 

Also I don’t think that’s something that would be a problem. There’s a million teams named Rangers. I doubt a 2nd Mets will cause an uproar, especially if the hockey team will use the full name. 

[FiddySicks]

15 hours ago, insert name said:

Bruh, everyone calls them the Metropolitans. It never left.

 

Also I don’t think that’s something that would be a problem. There’s a million teams named Rangers. I doubt a 2nd Mets will cause an uproar, especially if the hockey team will use the full name. 

 

Sidebar somewhat unrelated to this thread (And then I'll leave again, as to not bog this all down):

 

I REALLY wish the Mets would play up the whole 'New York Metropolitan Baseball Club' moniker more. That's actually a really cool name, and at the very least, that should be featured on a logo they wear as a sleeve patch. 

[TenaciousG]

21 hours ago, tigerslionspistonshabs said:

They wont be the Thunderbirds. The Thunderbirds will still be around. Even though they're a minor league team in a big league city, there's too much of a fan base and a following. 

 

 

I don’t see why they can’t just become the Kent Thunderbirds (or even Tacoma T-Birds, since the Stars play in the same building).
 

Still, I think the ownership group has shown little interest in graduating the T-Birds name, and the media too. It’s a shame because I still think it’s the best option.

[TaylorMade]

21 hours ago, tigerslionspistonshabs said:

They wont be the Thunderbirds. The Thunderbirds will still be around. Even though they're a minor league team in a big league city, there's too much of a fan base and a following. 

 

That's exactly why they would do it. It's the same reason the MLS team is called the Seattle Sounders, which wasn't even an option until fans wrote it in.

 

If they were to go that route, you can bet the WHL team would get a big fat check for a rebrand. (Kent Kraken, anyone?)

[The_Admiral]

22 hours ago, Survival79 said:

How Seattle Is Taking a Data-Driven Approach to Building Its New NHL Team

 

::dismissive wanking motion::

[Ridleylash]

15 minutes ago, TenaciousG said:

It’s a shame because I still think it’s the best option.

I don't. It's really generic, almost like if they decided to name their affiliate the Firebirds. I doubt they go for a team name that could be pulled straight from an EASHL club.