squamfan

2020-2021 NHL Changes

Recommended Posts

Re: Uniform Ads. My stance is the same as it's always been - Uniform ads are both bad and inevitable. I've understood they were going to come for a long time and I understand why (I MAKE MY LIVING IN ADVERTISING, GOONS), but that doesn't mean I have to like it. I understand people who don't care at all because there's lots of things I'm not the least bit passionate about that many others are (video games and pro wrestling are two examples). What I don't understand and will never understand are the people with no financial interest on either the team's side or the advertisers' side, people who found their way to a message board about sports uniforms, who take and defend the position that uniforms ads look good. WHAT THE HELL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not just make the manufacturer logo more prominent? I'll take that every day over having an ad for some random company like in the NBA.

 

I do not mind the jersey manufacturer logos at all in the NCAA. I also really like the symmetry in the NCAA with the conference logo on the other side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Ark said:

Why not just make the manufacturer logo more prominent? I'll take that every day over having an ad for some random company like in the NBA.

 

I do not mind the jersey manufacturer logos at all in the NCAA. I also really like the symmetry in the NCAA with the conference logo on the other side.


yup.  For me I don’t care about the size and placement as much as the company itself.  
 

Why does Ford have a logo on a Florida Panther helmet?  Ford isn’t a hockey company or team... It makes no sense and looks out of place and cheap.  
 

Having a larger CCM logo on the side makes sense and blends in.  CCM makes hockey equipment so it fits the overall aesthetic.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, CreamSoda said:

Why does Ford have a logo on a Florida Panther helmet?  Ford isn’t a hockey company or team... It makes no sense and looks out of place and cheap.  

Ford is a long-time sponsor of the Panthers, though; they've been partnered for a decade now. The entire gist of this isn't "slap random ads on", it's "give existing sponsors a means of recouping some value from sponsorship deals". That's why all the ads we've seen have been companies that already sponsor the team; CapitalOne, Prudential, Ford, etc.

 

This isn't about being related to hockey, it's about finding a way to give sponsors a means to recoup something from their deals with the whole conundrum of fans likely not being allowed into all of the arenas until at least midway through the season. In a pandemic-less year, they likely never happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Ridleylash said:

Ford is a long-time sponsor of the Panthers, though; they've been partnered for a decade now. The entire gist of this isn't "slap random ads on", it's "give existing sponsors a means of recouping some value from sponsorship deals". That's why all the ads we've seen have been companies that already sponsor the team; CapitalOne, Prudential, Ford, etc.

 

This isn't about being related to hockey, it's about finding a way to give sponsors a means to recoup something from their deals with the whole conundrum of fans likely not being allowed into all of the arenas until at least midway through the season. In a pandemic-less year, they likely never happen.


I don’t care if Ford is a Florida Panthers sponsor.  They aren’t a hockey company and their logo has no business on an NHL team uniform.  
 

Give Ford a giant tarp over a section of seats, give them a logo on their app, but leave the uniforms alone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ridleylash said:

Team values have all declined for the first time since 2001, league revenue was 14% less then 2019-20, and operating income is down 68% from previous years (all Forbes estimates, but it gives a general idea of how the league's finances are).

 

The only teams out of the 31 in the league at a 0% loss according to those estimates are the Rangers, Leafs, Habs, Hawks and Bruins; notably, all of them are teams with very lucrative local TV deals. Every other team's values dropped, from Original 6 powerhouse Detroit to relocation magnet Florida. That kinda thing is going to be concerning to the board, and they'll want to have means of cushioning the impact for everybody.

 

Those expansion fees can only help so much when the league's continually being hit from all angles. It's why you saw Dallas holding limited-attendance watch parties for the Finals, and why you'll see some teams have limited attendance to games this season. Gate is a huge deal for the NHL in comparison to other leagues, so losing it affects the league's financials more.

 

If you and most of the other owners are spending that money on trying to keep your heads above water, it's not like those will be magical safety nets that solve the problem. Most teams aren't making money right now; the Isles, for example, are listed by Forbes as having an operating income of -$37.9 million. The Panthers are listed with an operating income of –$28.9 million

 

Now either way you slice it, not many people would be happy about losing anywhere close to that much money. These people didn't get their wealth by being frivolous spenders who don't care about losing money; if they can find ways to recoup the costs, they'll do it for the health of the collective league.

 

Economically, helmet ads benefit the whole league from top to bottom. In a time where the economy as a whole is wrecked and fan attendance is limited to hell if even allowed, taking a nuclear option is kinda what they have to do as a collective group to make money. Sure it looks kinda ugly, but at the end of the day none of them care about a helmet ad ruining "the aesthetic" if it keeps everybody afloat for as long as possible.

 

Just because we're a sports logo discussion board does not mean we should discount the business and economic sides of things when they don't suit our desires and just chalk it up to "greedy owners ruining everything".

Nice numbers, but you're cherry picking. Yeah they went down a bit after growing exponentially for the last 15-20 years. The Panthers and other teams in non traditional markets have never made any money. This is nothing new. The owners still make money with the rink itself https://nhl.nbcsports.com/2012/11/26/how-the-panthers-make-money-despite-er-losing-money/

Not this year, of course, since there are no concerts. Again, $15M in helmets ads is chump change in the grand scheme of things. It's just unnecessary, there were enough ads already. To keep this uniform related, I'd be curious to know how much money the league has made with the Reverse Retro jersey sales

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 hours ago, AFirestormToPurify said:

Again, $15M in helmets ads is chump change in the grand scheme of things. It's just unnecessary, there were enough ads already. To keep this uniform related, I'd be curious to know how much money the league has made with the Reverse Retro jersey sales


So would I, but the league will never tell us.  It would go against their “pandemic poverty” narrative. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, B-mer said:

EA spilling the beans?

spacer.png

 

from this video:

 

 

Of what, it’s already known they are going with blue equipment for awhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So unnecessary.  There was nothing wrong with the black equipment...  Or the original uniforms from 1996 for that matter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real ones apparently have adjusted color shades.

 

I'm assuming slightly darker blue, maybe slightly lighter burgundy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Morgan33 said:

There was nothing wrong with the black equipment...

I mean, considering the amount of de-emphasis they've been doing with regards to that color, it's not exactly shocking. The black equipment stood out like a sore thumb in a kit that has no other black in it besides a tiny bit on the logos; the blue is more cohesive with the rest of the jersey design since the Adidas transition.

 

And really, the all-black equipment made the Avs look too much like a beer-league team that just uses whatever equipment they had because they can't afford to color-coordinate. Plus, they never really even used black as anything but a minor stripe color outside of the equipment.

It was an entirely unnecessary addition to the palette; the maroon serves just fine as a dark contrast color to the slate blue and white, so black comes off as both entirely needless and so underutilized it's not even really worth having. If your only application of a color on your entire identity is a tiny piece of the logo set, maybe it's not what you want your equipment colored like.

 

Better to trim the fat then to just have a color that's completely useless in terms of the overall color scheme and only really serves to make the uniform incohesive at this point. It's a maroon jersey and socks with a slate blue stripe design and a touch of silver...and then just randomly a black helmet, gloves and pants. Making those all slate at least unifies the entire uniform's color scheme.

 

And I'll be honest...I don't mind it on the roads, either;

spacer.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That change is such a massive upgrade that I can't believe it's even up for debate. Black barely appears on the jerseys at all (and honestly shouldn't, maroon and blue contrast just fine) and that blue is a gorgeous color.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the question we all need to ask is, if the CCSLC existed in 1995, and this was the look the Nord-Avs unveiled, would we be happy? If they unveiled the look they did, would we call it BFBS?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'll take some time to adjust to it, and I loved the originals, but these look good.

 

What isn't good is how it makes the already weak C/puck/flag shoulder logo stand out even more and look worse with that big black dot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, nash61 said:

If they unveiled the look they did, would we call it BFBS?

 

It wouldn't be BFBS. They didn't add black in after the initial unveiling, nor did they create a black jersey just to have a black jersey.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, QCS said:

That change is such a massive upgrade that I can't believe it's even up for debate. Black barely appears on the jerseys at all (and honestly shouldn't, maroon and blue contrast just fine) and that blue is a gorgeous color.

 

I agree in the fact that it is a massive upgrade for the home. For the road, it looks strange. I would almost rather have them go with maroon equipment on the road and blue at home... Would love to see a mock up of the road unis with maroon equipment 

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.