NHL changes 2019-20

[Chromatic]

4 hours ago, 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?

Wow. So the team has had three/four different logos dividing the fanbase’s preference and your solution is to change the name? I understand you know absolutely nothing about the area you’re talking about given the rest of those comments but I can assure you, nobody wants the name changed.

[WSU151]

7 minutes ago, Chromatic said:

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.

 

There are far worse names (non Native related) than Canucks. 

 

And when the new team name doesn't win jack in the first few years, everyone will say "Let's just return to Canucks...it was better than what we have now".

[Chromatic]

Just now, WSU151 said:

 

There are far worse names (non Native related) than Canucks. 

 

And when the new team name doesn't win jack in the first few years, everyone will say "Let's just return to Canucks...it was better than what we have now".

I thought you were talking about the Wild. I am vehemently against changing the Canucks name.

[SFGiants58]

3 hours ago, WSU151 said:

The name is fine. 

 

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

 

There's no reason to think changing it to Seawolves will result in a bunch of championships. 

Well, Seawolves or my other mentioned names are hardly “bush league.” 
 

Besides, it’s not change for change’s sake. It’s establishing an identity with a clear-cut logo choice and one that isn’t as stained by failure as the Canucks sobriquet. Sometimes, it’s ok to throw away the name. Besides, any rebrand would maintain the colors. If it was “Seawolves” or “Orcas,” you wouldn’t even need a new logo! 
 

The legacy of the Canucks name is one of failure. Sure, a renaming won’t guarantee anything, but it’ll be a step in the right direction. 
 

I know it’s unpopular (especially among fans), and honestly I’m just saying it to stir the pot because I like seeing how pissy people get about the team, but Canucks is a bottom-ten team name for me. 

[WSU151]

14 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

Well, Seawolves or my other mentioned names are hardly “bush league.” 
 

Besides, it’s not change for change’s sake. It’s establishing an identity with a clear-cut logo choice and one that isn’t as stained by failure as the Canucks sobriquet. Sometimes, it’s ok to throw away the name. Besides, any rebrand would maintain the colors. If it was “Seawolves” or “Orcas,” you wouldn’t even need a new logo! 
 

The legacy of the Canucks name is one of failure. Sure, a renaming won’t guarantee anything, but it’ll be a step in the right direction. 
 

I know it’s unpopular (especially among fans), and honestly I’m just saying it to stir the pot because I like seeing how pissy people get about the team, but Canucks is a bottom-ten team name for me. 

 

New Coke was also seen as "a step in the right direction" before everyone hated it. 

 

The only time Seawolves would be good is if Seattle used it. 

 

The history of Johnny Canuck should be celebrated, not thrown away because a team won two Conference finals but couldn't win the Stanley Cup in Game 7. 

[Chromatic]

Seawolves is terrible. Canucks is a fine name. Just because the fan base have different preferences for the logo doesn’t mean anything is wrong with the name. I know it might not seem that way because you’re on a sports logo forum, but Canucks fans in real life simply have a preference of one logo or the other, it isn’t a heated thing, and most like the variety. I myself do not like the Orca yet I have a lot of merchandise with it on it. People aren’t out here strangling each other because one likes the stick-in-rink and the other likes the skate.

[SFGiants58]

Eh, agree to disagree. I genuinely dislike the name and find that "Seawolves" is a fantastic name (maybe for a Vancouver NBA team - you're not getting "Grizzlies" back from Memphis at this point). Still, I see that the name isn't the issue with you guys, and I'm cool with that. I just wanted to insert some new venom into The Great Canuck Crest War, since the circular arguments here got boring for me. Can't I have a little fun?  

[WSU151]

The Avs' navy pants don't match the navy in the alt jersey nor the socks...makes for somewhat of an odd look. It seemed to be a bigger disparity on TV. 

 

[IceCap]

3 minutes ago, WSU151 said:

The Avs' navy pants don't match the navy in the alt jersey nor the socks...makes for somewhat of an odd look. It seemed to be a bigger disparity on TV. 

 

Hockey pants are made out of a material that has a bit of a sheen to it. So it's hard to match that up with flat fabrics. 

[IceCap]

Anyway on the Canucks...

 

Had the Millionaires survived and made it into the NHL? They'd have an O6-tier identity no one would even consider changing. I kind of like that reality compared to the current one, where the Canucks owner merely suggesting a logo tweak sets everyone off on Internet Jihad. So I get where @SFGiants58 is coming from. 

 

That being said...I'm not sure that's possible. The New Orleans Hornets changing their name to the Pelicans would have been the last time a Big Four team changed their name while staying put, and NOLA had the Hornets for only a fraction of the time Vancouver has had the Canucks. The brand is too woven in. 

 

Anyway another point of diversion that could have saved us all a lot of trouble would have been for the team to adopt Johnny Canuck from its inception in 1970. Instead they went with the stick in rink, which came from the same "modern" school of logo design that gave us the Brewers' ball in glove. Only not as clever. Of course the stick in rink wasn't going to last, and it left the team's oldest mark lacking.

Had they gone with Johnny? Sure, the flying V/skate or even the double blue, maroon and silver orca looks may have happened, but Johnny would have given them a beloved mascot logo to fall back to once the urge to embrace the classic colours returned. 

Instead they paired those colours with the unpopular orca because they lacked a truly classic logo to go with it. The result is that no one is happy and we have to have this discussion over and over again. 

 

[IceCap]

6 hours ago, DastardlyRidleylash said:

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?

 

I mean if you want to get THAT literal about it? 

Vancouver is a city- an artificial construct that was made possible by lumberjacks- in more ways than one. I really think this line of thought is over-thinking things, but point is a lumberjack is not inappropriate considering the city's history and the nature of the Johnny Canuck character. 

 

6 hours ago, DastardlyRidleylash said:

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".

Ok. This kind of annoys me, but not the way you think it does. I'm not annoyed by you, or your preference for the Orca. I'm annoyed that this is more of the same bad romanticization of Canadian metropolitan areas. 

I saw the same thing with the Leafs when they unveiled their update of their classic logo. Some dude who is a professional designer but not from Toronto went off about how Toronto is a "multicultural world class melting pot" and how "having English text" was bad because Toronto's brand should be "international."

 

And...no. No. Sorry. The Maple Leafs were renamed as such to appeal to English Canadians. The team is a civic institution that pre-dates Toronto being the "multicultural city of the world" or whatever buzzwords are used to describe the city these days. The Leafs have their origins in a Toronto that came before all of that. The Raptors can be the trendy team that changes to reflect the modern mood of the city. The Leafs should be the Leafs- maple leaf crest, name on the leaf, traditional blue and white. That's all. 

That's not an attack on what Toronto has become mind you. Toronto is a great city in part because of its diversity. My point is that this isn't all Toronto is, but it sure seems to be all people from elsewhere think it is. 

 

So what does that have to do with Vancouver? Well you could swamp a few names around and I promise you that sentiment would apply to Vancouver. Like Toronto it's become a world class multicultural metropolis. And like Toronto it's so much more than that. It's got a history of its own- one in which forestry played a huge role. Is that what the city is today? Not really, but there's no shame in referencing that. The team doesn't have to be a billboard for whatever outsiders project onto it.

Yes, everything you mentioned about Vancouver is accurate and good, but that's hardly all the city is. And a team from the 70s, named after a pulp hero lumberjack, isn't wrong to use a lumberjack as a team logo. 

[SFGiants58]

Besides, we’re all fine with the Portland Timbers. Johnny Canuck is hardly different from the Timbers’ mascot. As long as the teams does some tree planting initiative that plants a large amount of trees (to reverse the damage caused by their namesake), you should be fine. 
 

I like the Orca and I like the idea of a Johnny Canuck crest. The current Johnny designs are both subpar (especially compared to the beloved Skating Penguin). Something akin to the 2D Senators logo (but smiling) would be good.

[IceCap]

2 hours ago, Chromatic said:

‘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.

I feel like they could rename to something bear-related and they'd barely (ha!) have to change their brand. The logo is already a bear. 

 

Sure, the Bruins exist but whatever. If we can have both the Blue Jackets and Blues? Two bear-themed names would be workable. 

[wildwing64]

Speaking of the Canucks; them VS the Throwback Flames has to be up there as one of the best uniform matchups.

 

[Morgan33]

12 hours ago, VancouverFan69 said:

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.

Why should they come first?  The original stick and rink was used as a primary for 8 seasons, the Orca's been around for 23.  The Orca's been around for periods of relevance including a cup finals appearance.  Why should the team throw that all out for a small but vocal minority?  It's not as if the older generation has nothing to identify with.  You have the original colour scheme, the second ever striping configuration and an updated take on the original logo as a shoulder patch.
 

Quote

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.

BS.  If the Canuck's chose agency solely to scale back uniform costs, why would they add the arched script over their logo?  Going with a bloc font and foregoing the arched script would use considerably less material.
 

Quote

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. 

 

The logo's not just an Orca whale though.  It's an Orca done in an art style that is evocative of the entire region.

[IceCap]

18 minutes ago, wildwing64 said:

Speaking of the Canucks; them VS the Throwback Flames has to be up there as one of the best uniform matchups.

 

Only brought down by two unfortunate anniversary logos.

[spartacat_12]

The orca was a decent logo when it was used on the West Coast Express era set, even if it didn't have much to do with the nickname. It perfectly matched the colour balance of those uniforms. The problem was that the fanbase clearly preferred the throwbacks, and the organization tried to have it's cake & eat it too by going to the traditional colours/template but keeping the orca. Recolouring logos usually doesn't work well, especially when you go from a 4 color scheme to a 2 colour scheme.

 

If ownership is insistent on keeping the orca around, I hope they at least find a way to add some green into it.

[IceCap]

I'd probably like the Orca more if if they managed to make it work with a V. From the Millionaires to the Canucks' first set with the V worked into the sleeve stripes to the flying V...I feel like Vancouver hockey should be represented by a V if it's going to be represented by any letter at all. Let the Flames and Canadiens use C-based logos.

[Morgan33]

23 minutes ago, wildwing64 said:

Speaking of the Canucks; them VS the Throwback Flames has to be up there as one of the best uniform matchups.

 

 

The Canucks new home and roads* look spectacular, I don't see what everyone's problem is.  They're the perfect compromise between old and new and are no longer being bogged down by the unnecessary script.

 

*The alternate is a very different story

[VancouverFan69]

7 hours ago, DastardlyRidleylash said:

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.

 

I have news for you my friend....

 

The City of Vancouver was built on the lumber industry as well as the fishing industry. If it weren't for those two things, Vancouver would cease it exist today as we know it. Meaning that all of today's industries that you've mentioned would exist somewhere else. 

 

And how do you know Johnny Canuck is Caucasian?? He could have been Native Canadian for all we know. 

 

The Canucks are a Canada's 3rd oldest NHL franchise with a pre-NHL history of 25 years, going back to 1945. They're not a Y2K franchise and Vancouver wasn't created in 1996. It was created in 1886, thanks to both the lumber and fishing industries.

 

Have a good day.