Canucks Bringing Back the Flying Skate Uniforms in 2020

[M4One]

And this will be their new uniforms for that season with Johnny Canuck on the front.  Okay, maybe not, but this fan concept for the Canucks owned National Lacross League team has given me reason to finally believe that Johnny will work on the front.  I have always thought it wouldn't work, at least not without having some sort of backdrop, whether it be a triangle or roundel.  But, I guess it can work standalone.

 

If the Canucks were to ever update their current jersey, which they don't really need to, this would work. 

 

[Morgan33]

7 hours ago, Prince Harry said:

No other team in the NHL has changed it up so much and I think Canucks should own that.

 

You hear that a lot but when you look at things objectively, the Canucks have really only used 3 colour schemes (I don't count darkening the orange to red as a separate one).  I think the reason the Canucks have the reputation for never settling is because the yellow, black and orange was so radically different from what they entered the league in.  In 2007 they finally fixed their mistake and should leave it at that.

[Placebo]

I'd like the Canucks current uniforms with black, yellow, red color scheme better, I think.

[Cosmic]

On 8/14/2018 at 5:13 PM, Danny said:

20th anniversary: 1989-90

30th anniversary: 1999-00

40th anniversary: 2010-11

50th anniversary: 2019-20

 

What was the reason for the 40th anniversary being delayed a year? The lockout? Buffalo did the same thing.

Maybe they had someone smart working in promotions in 2009/10. The Sabres and Canucks started playing in the fall of 1970; their 50th anniversaries should be in the 2020-21 season. It always seems desperate to me when teams jump the gun on anniversary celebrations.

[VancouverFan69]

21 hours ago, Prince Harry said:

The Flying skate logo is one of the best examples of a logo that looks cool from a distance but once you look at it up close it’s quite bad. 

 

When i I was younger, I always thought it was really neat because it looked like some sort of abstract sunset and it carried a real presence on the jersey. Then i found out it’s actually just a skate rendered in goofy late 70s graphic design. 

 

I don't get all the criticism of the Skate logo. I know it's busy but if you look at it and compare it to the likes of Oilers and original Jets(team name workmark) and the Flyers and Blues(streaking lines), there are similarities. The colours are bold and blend very nicely together and it represents the speed of hockey.

 

The problem with the Skate is that it's not the original Canucks crest and it was inspired by lame sports psychology.

[IceCap]

4 hours ago, VancouverFan69 said:

I don't get all the criticism of the Skate logo. I know it's busy but if you look at it and compare it to the likes of Oilers and original Jets(team name workmark) and the Flyers and Blues(streaking lines), there are similarities. The colours are bold and blend very nicely together and it represents the speed of hockey.

All of those logos reference team nicknames.

The Canucks’ skate does not. 

[andrewharrington]

2 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

All of those logos reference team nicknames.

The Canucks’ skate does not. 

 

Canadian citizens are renowned for their skating prowess, are they not? Hell, Minnesotans are renowned for their skating prowess here in the States.

[SFGiants58]

7 hours ago, VancouverFan69 said:

 

I don't get all the criticism of the Skate logo. I know it's busy but if you look at it and compare it to the likes of Oilers and original Jets(team name workmark) and the Flyers and Blues(streaking lines), there are similarities. The colours are bold and blend very nicely together and it represents the speed of hockey.

 

The problem with the Skate is that it's not the original Canucks crest and it was inspired by lame sports psychology.

 

I've got a soft spot for it because it looks like the cover of one of my favorite Judas Priest albums (right behind Killing Machine/Hell Bent for Leather) : 

 

 

 

If the Canucks somehow inspired Doug Johnson's amazing design, then they get a mild thumbs up in my book. I do wonder what a 1970s minimalist Johnny Canuck would look like in those colors. 

[IceCap]

1 hour ago, andrewharrington said:

 

Canadian citizens are renowned for their skating prowess, are they not? Hell, Minnesotans are renowned for their skating prowess here in the States.

You feeling alright? You may have pulled something stretching as you did  

 

21 hours ago, Morgo said:

 

You hear that a lot but when you look at things objectively, the Canucks have really only used 3 colour schemes (I don't count darkening the orange to red as a separate one).  I think the reason the Canucks have the reputation for never settling is because the yellow, black and orange was so radically different from what they entered the league in.  In 2007 they finally fixed their mistake and should leave it at that.

The problem is that even three is more than optimal for establishing a brand. 

 

On top of that? It hasn’t even been three solid brands. The Messier orca look was pretty consistent, but the other two? Eh...

 

The blue and green can’t seem to decide if it’s embracing the stick in rink, the orca, or some form of Johnny. 

The “Team Germany” look went through two major revisions. First the Flying V, then the gold at home skate, and finally the more traditional look that closed the identity out. 

 

So while it’s only been three overall identities? They’ve still been rocked by inconsistency.  

[The_Admiral]

1 hour ago, SFGiants58 said:

I do wonder what a 1970s minimalist Johnny Canuck would look like in those colors. 

 

[The_Admiral]

The six red triangles represent the six players on the ice, and the sides of each triangle represent offense, defense, and passion. The seventh, black triangle represents the Canucks' seventh man, the fans. The eighth triangle represents that I forgot to count. The black stick and square are an oblique minimalist nod to the stick-in-rink, as they represent the stick and the rink, the rink being the body of the sport of ice hockey. The red circle represents having a good head for the game of hockey and the pom-pom on top of the toque represents having puck on the brain. The colors are designed to make you angry because red is the color of aggression and yellow is the color of bad '70s design.

[SFGiants58]

10 minutes ago, the admiral said:

 

 

It’s a beautiful piece of 1970s traah. I love it and the write-up!

[andrewharrington]

5 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

You feeling alright? You may have pulled something stretching as you did  

 

The problem is that even three is more than optimal for establishing a brand. 

 

On top of that? It hasn’t even been three solid brands. The Messier orca look was pretty consistent, but the other two? Eh...

 

The blue and green can’t seem to decide if it’s embracing the stick in rink, the orca, or some form of Johnny. 

The “Team Germany” look went through two major revisions. First the Flying V, then the gold at home skate, and finally the more traditional look that closed the identity out. 

 

So while it’s only been three overall identities? They’ve still been rocked by inconsistency.  

 

Lemme put it a different way: if a skate doesn’t represent the name “Canucks,” then what does? I’m not locking myself into saying a skate is the best piece of imagery for the job, but I’ve yet to see/hear one that does better without bowing to the same or lower level of stereotype (generic bearded white man wearing plaid and a toque whilst skating with a hockey stick, or a hockey rink and stick making a questionable C, or an orca).

 

Side note, I like the orca as the star of the identity better than the other choices (in a vacuum), but its corporate roots rub me the wrong way and I’d challenge anyone to come up with something better given the name and locale of the team.

[IceCap]

28 minutes ago, andrewharrington said:

Lemme put it a different way: if a skate doesn’t represent the name “Canucks,” then what does? I’m not locking myself into saying a skate is the best piece of imagery for the job, but I’ve yet to see/hear one that does better without bowing to the same or lower level of stereotype (generic bearded white man wearing plaid and a toque whilst skating with a hockey stick, or a hockey rink and stick making a questionable C, or an orca).

Johnny Canuck. You can call him generic and stereotypical, but he's something of a notable piece of Canadiana. And unlike any other logo the Canucks have in their arsenal? He references the team nickname. He's probably the best option available that isn't an intentionally ugly gag as far as the Canucks go.

 

28 minutes ago, andrewharrington said:

Side note, I like the orca as the star of the identity better than the other choices (in a vacuum), but its corporate roots rub me the wrong way and I’d challenge anyone to come up with something better given the name and locale of the team.

The orca is pretty bad. The corporate nature doesn't help, but I'm not sure I like it on its own.

First off, it didn't work with the colour switch from navy, royal, maroon, and silver to royal and green. The recoloured orca that's currently being used really doesn't fit in with the rest of the identity.

 

Secondly, I'm not a fan of how it passes Native art styles through a late 90s/early 2000s filter. Pacific Northwest Native art is rarely snarling. It's the same problem I have with the Seahawks' logo. It's too aggressive, and the Native influence is lessened as a result.

 

The fact that it's a C. Maybe it's just personal preference, but I prefer monogram logos to reference the team's locale and not nickname (here's your regular reminder that the Montreal Canadiens are, officially, simply "le Club de hockey Canadien").

The C just irks me because of that. It's made worse when you compare it to Vancouver hockey history though. The Millionaires, both the V sleeve stripes and Flying V of the Canucks, hell even the VooDoo of Roller Hockey International- they all make use of the letter V. And why wouldn't they? It's a great shape for a logo. If you're a Vancouver-based team and you want a monogram? The V is perfect.

The C, preferences for locale monograms aside, just looks out of place in the tradition of Vancouver hockey logos. That and it's awkward. The way the "water" portion bends to form the bottom of the C really doesn't work with the orca portion of the logo. Looks too forced.

 

So yeah. The orca's corporate and it sucks anyway. Go with Johnny Canuck. He's got a bit of history to him that transcends the team and he ties in with the name. Sure, he's kitsch, but it's sports. We need more kitsch and less snarling animals anyway.

[andrewharrington]

11 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

All of those logos reference team nicknames.

The Canucks’ skate does not. 

 

I dont disagree with any of that, but it’s beside the statement above.

 

The skate is stereotypical, generic, of its era, all of the above, (and equally so are the stick-in-rink and Johnny Canuck), but it’s not any less indicative of the team nickname than the Oilers, Jets, Flyers, or Blues’ logos. “Canucks” happens to be a more ambiguous term, but I think a skate is just as good as a hockey-playing lumberjack, a Mountie, a guy drinking beer at the curling club,  etc. when it comes to defining the image that fits the name “Canucks.” History really has little to do with the statement at hand.

[Chromatic]

1 hour ago, andrewharrington said:

 

Lemme put it a different way: if a skate doesn’t represent the name “Canucks,” then what does? I’m not locking myself into saying a skate is the best piece of imagery for the job, but I’ve yet to see/hear one that does better without bowing to the same or lower level of stereotype (generic bearded white man wearing plaid and a toque whilst skating with a hockey stick).

I don't think the skate represents it particularly well, nor do I think a literal depiction of the team name is required. That said, I think if this is what you're concerned with, Johnny Canuck does a good job. He's the reason for the team's namesake, and there's evidence the etymology of the term 'Canuck' originally referred to woodsmen. Forestry is huge in BC, and I think a lumberjack is appropriate to the name "Canucks" much like a minuteman is appropriate to the "Patriots" or a leprechaun is to "Celtics".

[andrewharrington]

8 hours ago, Chromatic said:

I don't think the skate represents it particularly well, nor do I think a literal depiction of the team name is required. That said, I think if this is what you're concerned with, Johnny Canuck does a good job. He's the reason for the team's namesake, and there's evidence the etymology of the term 'Canuck' originally referred to woodsmen. Forestry is huge in BC, and I think a lumberjack is appropriate to the name "Canucks" much like a minuteman is appropriate to the "Patriots" or a leprechaun is to "Celtics".

 

I’m definitely not concerned with it the mark being a literal representation of the team name. In fact, on some level, I think I prefer it not be literal. I think the result can be much more clever, smart, and sophisticated if it’s not what you expect.

 

My only point is that for a vague term like “Canucks,” anything with Canadian cachet (or Pacific Northwest cachet in this case), is just as fitting as any other, and they all have strengths and weaknesses. The rink is simple and quite iconic, but it’s pretty dull. The skate is recreationally pertinent and unique, but it’s visually dated and ultra-complex. Johnny is the true origin of the term, but he’s also a human version of the Penguins’ logo. The orca is artistically and geographically relevant, but it’s corporate roots rub some people the wrong way.

[SFGiants58]

9 minutes ago, andrewharrington said:

Johnny is the true origin of the term, but he’s also a human version of the Penguins’ logo. 

 

You say that like it’s a bad thing. It is, in fact, a fantastic approach. Not a lot of people have a problem with multiple “cartoony” logos in baseball, so why should hockey be any different?

 

Johnny could also work as a Senators or Robo-Pen style portrait of a burly lumberjack.

[andrewharrington]

1 minute ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

You say that like it’s a bad thing. It is, in fact, a fantastic approach. Not a lot of people have a problem with multiple “cartoony” logos in baseball, so why should hockey be any different?

 

Johnny could also work as a Senators or Robo-Pen style portrait of a burly lumberjack.

 

I like Johnny as a cartoon, and he could be a great logo with a little care, but yes, being too similar to your business competitors is typically a bad thing when it comes to branding. Especially when the competitor they would be emulating has five of those coveted silver bowls.

 

It would be a different story had they stuck with Johnny, but they left the door open and it’s pretty safe to say that Pittsburgh owns the campy, skating mascot going forward. Johnny would make Vancouver look like a follower and reinforce the “little brother” attitude. They need a confident, unique identity and they need to stick with it.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

Several years ago I visited Vancouver and bought a Johnny Canuck hat. I wear it to this day and I get a lot of questions about what it is exactly, but also a lot of compliments.

 

Johnny Canuck across the front of a hockey jersey would be big business. And fun too -- hockey's supposed to be fun.