BJ Sands

NHL changes 2019-20

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

I just want to see it in kelly/yellow/black for some controversy. 

 

Also, if we're talking an alternate logo for the Leafs, I have a fantastic idea!

 

27879426614_290d9933fc_z.jpg 

 

Take the '67 leaf and combine it with the Toronto Arena's "T" insignia.


From what I understand, anything involving a stand-alone T and leaf is legally dead on arrival because of the University of Toronto’s deep association with it.

Share this post


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

No, not what I said. Its fine to criticise a logo and have opinions, thats obvious. What Im referring to is the comments that lack any consideration of what the real life context is. Its just so easy for people to continuously state how they would want to see this instead of this without evaluating what the reasons are for why things are the way they are. I guess I'm just a bit tired of reading opinions that are based on nothing else other than "I wish they'd use my favourite logo instead of the logo they're using now" and repeating the same opinions ad nauseam.

Sounds to me like you're fine with opinions so long as they're opinions you agree with. 

Share this post


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

Sounds to me like you're fine with opinions so long as they're opinions you agree with

 

So you're pretty much ignoring what Im trying to say entirely. Got it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way the Flames are marketing their third jersey retro look, I think the eventual adoption of that look full time is a fait acompli. Unless I missed such an announcement...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Bayne said:

 

So you're pretty much ignoring what Im trying to say entirely. Got it.

No, I'm unsure what your point is. You say you're fine with people expressing their opinions but you don't like it when people say they want to see older identities brought back "without context." Like it or not, this is a place where people are free to express their opinions on stuff like that. And if they do so respectfully? I guess you can just learn to deal with it.

 

Maybe try to understand the preferences of people you disagree with rather than just dismissing it as "nostalgia" lacking "context."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

No, I'm unsure what your point is. You say you're fine with people expressing their opinions but you don't like it when people say they want to see older identities brought back "without context." Like it or not, this is a place where people are free to express their opinions on stuff like that. And if they do so respectfully? I guess you can just learn to deal with it.

 

Maybe try to understand the preferences of people you disagree with rather than just dismissing it as "nostalgia" lacking "context."

 

I love how the second I make a post that is slightly provocative someone uses it as leverage to attack and assert their moral superiority. You do realise Ive been on these message boards for well over a decade..

 

Believe it or not I do understand the opinions of other people when they say " I wish they'd stop using the orca". I understand that that means... they dont like the orca? I'm just asking for a bit more than that sometimes. Yes, consider the "context" and the real world and the realities of why certain logos are in place and others are not. Otherwise we just go in circles saying "I like this logo" "no, I like this logo". I mean, that will keep happening (and yes I actually do know how to deal with it thanks) but its not achieving a whole lot IMO.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bayne said:

I love how the second I make a post that is slightly provocative someone uses it as leverage to attack and assert their moral superiority. You do realise Ive been on these message boards for well over a decade..

"It's everyone else who's wrong!"
 

Quote

Believe it or not I do understand the opinions of other people when they say " I wish they'd stop using the orca". I understand that that means... they dont like the orca? I'm just asking for a bit more than that sometimes. Yes, consider the "context" and the real world and the realities of why certain logos are in place and others are not. Otherwise we just go in circles saying "I like this logo" "no, I like this logo". I mean, that will keep happening (and yes I actually do know how to deal with it thanks) but its not achieving a whole lot IMO.

It's a message board about logo and uniform design. People share their opinions. Sometimes it's pretty straightforward, sometimes it's an opinion you (a general "you") don't like.

Try not responding to people you disagree with if you don't like "go(ing) in circles."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Chewbacca said:

I wish they would finally just get rid of the Orca. 

 

20 hours ago, Chewbacca said:

I do not want to accept it though. I do not like the Orca on the Canucks jerseys and as a lifelong Canucks fan - who grew up with the Orca uniforms and the West Coast Express with Markus Naslund, Todd Bertuzzi and Brenden Morrison, I honestly never have. It just does not look like it belongs on their jerseys at all and I do not like the look of it. I know what the Canucks do is out of my/our control, however, I thought the point of these threads was to discuss our opinions on logos and uniforms with other people, whether it is out of our control or not. I respect your opinion about the Canucks uniforms and the Orca, however, I respectfully disagree with you.

 

Chewbacca, I echo your exact sentiments 110%.

 

Unfortunately, as long as this crooked ownership group owns the Canucks, the Orca isn't going anywhere. I've always hated the Orca because of the corporate connection to Orca Bay and the way OBSE pushed their Orca agenda in the Canucks organization.

 

Now, I have a second reason for hating the Orca...the Aquilinis. When Francesco Aquilini boldly states that "we have a new generation of fans" and the Orca "is indigenous to the area", he is clearly dividing the fan base of Canada's 3rd oldest NHL franchise by telling longtime and knowledgeable fans who go back to the Pacific Coliseum days, the long losing years, from the WHL and early days of the franchise that they and their views as Canucks fans no longer count. He is also continuing the club's identity crisis when it really is an easy fix - 1970 Stick in Rink and Johnny Canuck. I personally think that what Francesco said was absolute malarkey. The real reason for keeping the Orca is that costs an awful lot of money to change a primary logo altogether. It's a lot cheaper to tweak and go cut-and-paste. Even the weak Agency font with no green is a lot cheaper than traditional Athletic block font with bordering. Unlike  owners like Buffalo's Tom Pegula, Vegas's Bill Foley and Dallas's Tom Gaglardi(wish he had gotten the Canucks *sigh*), the Aquilinis don't have a true feel for hockey and sports in general. It's only about the mighty $$$$$$. I have friends whose families know the Aquilinis and they have clearly stated that the Canucks owners are BAD news. They just don't care.

 

21 hours ago, Bayne said:

 

Make your life a bit more pleasant and just learn to accept it. Its not bad. I like it and Im interested to see what a tweaked version of it may be. Trust me its a lot more fun to see the positives of what is than to constantly bemoan things that are out of your control.

 

Why should someone have to accept a logo that one doesn't like? I love the Skate but I'm not offended if someone doesn't like it. Why should people have to settle for anything that they feel is inappropriate or wrong?? 

 

There are reasons why the Orca is so controversial. For starters, it doesn't fit the Canucks name. Any team on the west coast can call themselves the "Orcas" or "Whales"(on NHL Seattle's team name list), but is there another major pro sports team in Canada called "Canucks"?? No. "Canucks" is a great Canadian hockey team name and it needs to be branded properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

"It's everyone else who's wrong!"
 

It's a message board about logo and uniform design. People share their opinions. Sometimes it's pretty straightforward, sometimes it's an opinion you (a general "you") don't like.

Try not responding to people you disagree with if you don't like "go(ing) in circles."

 

Its not simply about me not agreeing with someone else's opinion. I really dont mind. The original article that started all of this was in relation to the canucks management tweaking the orca at some point in the future. I expressed that I thought this could be interesting and someone else resorted to the standard response of "Yeah i dont like the orca" aaaaand here we go again.

 

Instead of discussing the article and possible senarios that could result (reality), people are more interested in using it as another excuse to express their opinion anout why this logo is better than that one (fantasy - nothing wrong with fantasy, I get it. Before anyone jumps on that one). It would make no difference if I didn't like the orca logo either - its more interesting to discuss what the reality is (because thats literally what I was doing) than to play another game of "in my perfect world this is what I'd do..."

 

VF69, sorry man I've heard you say the exact same thing so many times it just comes across as a personal agenda inside an echo camber.

Share this post


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

 When Francesco Aquilini boldly states that "we have a new generation of fans" and the Orca "is indigenous to the area", he is clearly dividing the fan base of Canada's 3rd oldest NHL franchise by telling longtime and knowledgeable fans who go back to the Pacific Coliseum days, the long losing years, from the WHL and early days of the franchise that they and their views as Canucks fans no longer count.


And you're stating that fans who appreciate and identify with the Orca don't count.
 

Quote

He is also continuing the club's identity crisis when it really is an easy fix - 1970 Stick in Rink and Johnny Canuck.


In your opinion this is the easy fix.  The Canucks have overlapped 3 logos with three different colour schemes.  If they went with your preference, people could still say they have a identity crisis and not be wrong.  Making a lumberjack the primary as you've often advocated would add a fourth logo and divide the fan-base even more.
 

Quote

Even the weak Agency font with no green is a lot cheaper than traditional Athletic block font with bordering. Unlike  owners like Buffalo's Tom Pegula, Vegas's Bill Foley and Dallas's Tom Gaglardi(wish he had gotten the Canucks *sigh*), the Aquilinis don't have a true feel for hockey and sports in general. It's only about the mighty $$$$$$. I have friends whose families know the Aquilinis and they have clearly stated that the Canucks owners are BAD news. They just don't care.


The Canucks used one-coloured numbers the entire time they wore green and blue from 1970 to 1978.  They don't have them now because they cheaped out.  And it seems to me that using a bloc font would be the cheaper option since so many teams use it already.
 

Quote

There are reasons why the Orca is so controversial. For starters, it doesn't fit the Canucks name. Any team on the west coast can call themselves the "Orcas" or "Whales"(on NHL Seattle's team name list), but is there another major pro sports team in Canada called "Canucks"?? No. "Canucks" is a great Canadian hockey team name and it needs to be branded properly.

 

This is like saying the Bruins have to get rid of their logo because they're not called the Boston Hubs.  Teams are allowed to incorporate symbols from their region into their logos.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Morgo said:


And you're stating that fans who appreciate and identify with the Orca don't count.
 


In your opinion this is the easy fix.  The Canucks have overlapped 3 logos with three different colour schemes.  If they went with your preference, people could still say they have a identity crisis and not be wrong.  Making a lumberjack the primary as you've often advocated would add a fourth logo and divide the fan-base even more.
 


The Canucks used one-coloured numbers the entire time they wore green and blue from 1970 to 1978.  They don't have them now because they cheaped out.  And it seems to me that using a bloc font would be the cheaper option since so many teams use it already.
 

 

This is like saying the Bruins have to get rid of their logo because they're not called the Boston Hubs.  Teams are allowed to incorporate symbols from their region into their logos.
 

 

Fans who don't identify with the Orca have been around a lot longer than those that do identify with it, so the older generations of fans should come first and foremost. Even for someone like myself who proudly grew up with the Flying V and Skate, I have a strong appreciation for the Canucks' heritage and history. If it weren't for Orca Bay, there never would have been an orca logo to begin with.

 

Actually, going full-circle back to the classic Stick in Rink with Johnny Canuck as a secondary is something the majority of Canucks fans would favour, including Skate supporters. Long-time hockey experts have said that going back to the classic 1970 uniforms would make the most sense. If Johnny Canuck were the fourth primary logo, whether it's the Skating version or even the 3D Johnny Canuck C concept, most fans would breath a big sigh of relief and say "We finally have a Canuck for a primary. Good riddance corporate Orca".

 

Agency font is very cheap. Less material. No bordering - also cheap. Even the Golden Knights proudly show their steel grey and gold in the classic block font.

 

Boston is a long-time famous hub city. Vancouver is not an orca city. It's a city known for its natural surroundings, like the mountains and water which is why the Canucks went with blue, green and white in the first place. 

Share this post


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

You dont want to accept it? Sorry, that to me is a bit of an entitled way of saying "its not the logo I'd like to see them use". Its the logo they've been using for 23 years. Do you not accept reality?

Geez, sorry for having a different opinion than you. I accept reality, it is the way it is but I disagree with it. I totally respect those of you who like the Orca. People have different opinions about this and that's totally okay. For me, I have never liked the Orca and I would love to see the Canucks finally move in a different direction. I certainly did not intend to cause any arguments just by having a different opinion on what the Canucks logo and uniforms should be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:

Geez, sorry for having a different opinion than you. I accept reality, it is the way it is but I disagree with it. I totally respect those of you who like the Orca. People have different opinions about this and that's totally okay. For me, I have never liked the Orca and I would love to see the Canucks finally move in a different direction. I certainly did not intend to cause any arguments just by having a different opinion on what the Canucks logo and uniforms should be.

 

Again...... if I didn't like the orca that much either, I'd still be able to make the same argument. Everyone seems to want to simplify this down to me being annoyed that people dont like the same logo I do. Not the point. 

 

 

Share this post


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

Vancouver is not an orca city. It's a city known for its natural surroundings, like the mountains and water which is why the Canucks went with blue, green and white in the first place. 

But Vancouver IS a seaport city that prides itself on that natural beauty. Does a lumberjack, who's job it is to cut down the very same beautiful natural surroundings the city is known for, make for a better representation of the city and what it prides itself on in 2019?

 

Besides, when I think of what makes Vancouver "Vancouver", I don't immediately jump to "tree cutters". I think of all the other major industries settling there; animation studios, film studios, game development, aerospace work, biotechnological work; all that is what I would describe as being the essence of modern Vancouver, not lumberjacks. Forestry is still a big part of Vancouver's economy, yes, but there's a lot more to the city of Vancouver then just dudes with beards and plaid in overalls cutting down trees. I think of Vancouver and I think "cultural hub of Western Canada", not "lumberjacks".

 

Maybe it would be a lot better-fitting in 1945 when the PCHL Canucks were founded, but there's way more to 2019 Vancouver then forestry. Hell, 30% of all people in Vancouver have Chinese heritage; so by the logic of "representing the city", the Canucks should have a logo like an Asian dragon that panders to that large Chinese demographic, not a white lumberjack, right?

 

And just because the team is named after a cartoon character does not mean they need that cartoon character as their primary brand. A name is just that; a name. It should not pigeonhole someone into only being able to do one specific look because a small contingent of disgruntled fans dislike a primary logo that is equally representative of what Vancouverites pride themselves on (the natural beauty and seaport nature of the city) as Johnny Canuck.

 

And FYI? All sports logos are corporate. Saying the Orca is "corporate" is literally just saying it's made by a corporation. Which, well, it was. Because it was made by the Vancouver Canucks. The Johnny logo is just as corporate as the Orca, which is just as corporate as the Flying Skate, which is just as corporate as the Stick-in-Rink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, just change the name. It’s not like the team has ever won anything of value as the Canucks. Unlike the Angels, Padres, Brewers, Marlins, and Orioles, this wasn’t a “traditional name” worthy of promoting to the majors. 
 

Besides, why use “Canucks” in Canada’s least “Canadian” major city? It’s the city that has doubled for nearly every other major city in the world.
 

Orcas would be better, Millionaires would be better, Ospreys would be better, something referencing the film industry in the city would be better, and even Grizzlies would be better.

 

Say what you want about Minnesota’s name, but they nailed that logo. The Vancouver NHL club hasn’t nailed a logo for the team. Maybe a better name would help them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SFGiants58 said:

Honestly, just change the name. It’s not like the team has ever won anything of value as the Canucks. Unlike the Angels, Padres, Brewers, Marlins, and Orioles, this wasn’t a “traditional name” worthy of promoting to the majors. 
 

Besides, why use “Canucks” in Canada’s least “Canadian” major city? It’s the city that has doubled for nearly every other major city in the world.
 

Orcas would be better, Millionaires would be better, Ospreys would be better, something referencing the film industry in the city would be better, and even Grizzlies would be better.

 

Say what you want about Minnesota’s name, but they nailed that logo. The Vancouver NHL club hasn’t nailed a logo for the team. Maybe a better name would help them?

It'll probably never change just due to how long this team has been the "Canucks"; you don't exactly change a name from 1945 lightly. "Vancouver Seawolves" feels like it'd be a pretty good name for them if they felt bold enough to go in such a direction, though; keeps the orca connection with a slightly more imaginative name then "Orcas".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DastardlyRidleylash said:

It'll probably never change just due to how long this team has been the "Canucks"; you don't exactly change a name from 1945 lightly. "Vancouver Seawolves" feels like it'd be a pretty good name for them if they felt bold enough to go in such a direction, though; keeps the orca connection with a slightly more imaginative name then "Orcas".


I like Seawolves! That’s probably one of the better Northwest names not in use by a major franchise.

 

Just because a team name is ancient doesn’t mean it’s invulnerable to being thrown away.  For most fans, the name is synonymous with frustration and playoff agony/rioting. This isn’t a Chicago Cubs “lovable losers” situation when you make it marketable, but rather is a Cleveland Indians “this team just consistently underperforms for generations and we’re sick of it” scenario. The cache in the name has long-faded, destroyed by an identity crisis and terrible play.

 

All the logo debate has done is made me hate the name almost as much as I dislike “Wild.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The name is fine. 

 

Changing it to some collegiate/minor league sounding name would be a mistake. Change for the sake of change is not always a good thing.

 

The Denver Nuggets have had a lot of looks, a lot of colors, and a lot of playoff failures...yet no one would ever be like "We need to change the team name because...well...just because....there's a minuscule chance that a new team name will mean more wins, yeah that's it". There's no reason to think changing it to Seawolves will result in a bunch of championships.

 

And the NHL doesn't need a Washington Wizards scenario where fans just think the new name is weak, the new name doesn't result in better play, and fans just clamor for throwback stuff anyway. 

 

 

Edited by WSU151
Seattle Seawolves would be a pretty sweet NHL team name. Similar enough to Seahawks, and tangential to Mariners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, WSU151 said:

The name is fine. 

 

Changing it to some collegiate/minor league sounding name would be a mistake. Change for the sake of change is not always a good thing.

 

The Denver Nuggets have had a lot of looks, a lot of colors, and a lot of playoff failures...yet no one would ever be like "We need to change the team name because...well...just because....there's a minuscule chance that a new team name will mean more wins, yeah that's it". There's no reason to think changing it to Seawolves will result in a bunch of championships.

 

And the NHL doesn't need a Washington Wizards scenario where fans just think the new name is weak, the new name doesn't result in better play, and fans just clamor for throwback stuff anyway. 

 

 

It’s not really change for the sake of change. It’s change for the sake of getting rid of the worst nickname in pro sports (Don’t @ me about Native American names, that’s a different discussion).

 

‘Nuggets’ is campy and silly and kind of dumb but fun. ‘Wild’ is forced and cringe inducing. If Minnesota fans like the name don’t change it, but if they did want something different they would have my complete sympathy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.