NHL’s New Seattle Kraken Announce Name & Logos

[Sebastianm]

 

1 minute ago, Gothamite said:

 

You're right - the NBA is home to some of the worst names ever.  I like "Pelicans", because it has local relevance as a symbol of Louisiana, but the other three are straight garbage.  "Kraken" is better than all of them.

Hey, Magic makes sense for the entertainment that makes Orlando iconic, they need to repurpose the Thunder name, Heat needs to go, I agree with you there.

[Gothamite]

1 minute ago, Cujo said:

Thunder wasn't/isn't a brutal name. It's the execution of the logo and uniforms that soured everyone on the identity.

 

Yeah, it really is.

[Beckhamcantbendmiami]

3 minutes ago, Shumway said:

Not crazy about the name (I don't think it's that bad, either), but goddamn, those jerseys are incredible. I haven't bought a new hockey jersey on years, but i might need that white one.

Funny enough I'm the opposite, I love the name but I think these jerseys are hideous in just about every aspect

[Cujo]

1 minute ago, Gothamite said:

Yeah, it really is.

 

Unlike Seattle Kraken, I can say Oklahoma City Thunder while keeping a straight face.

[-kj]

 

33 minutes ago, FiddySicks said:

God, ok I’m done. I won’t subject y’all to my rants any longer.

 

Riiiiiiiiiiight. 

  

24 minutes ago, Cujo said:

 

You speak for many of us on here. Nicknames like this is why the NHL will always be "the fourth major sport" in America, not to be taken seriously. Never would you see an NFL or NBA team stoop to such a ridiculous name. What a circus.

 

 

At least you didn't manage to put MLB in there, where teams are named for laundry, but some of the "traditional" team names in all sports are weird when taken on their own.  Packers? Browns? Pistons? Knickerbockers?  C'mon.

 

23 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

That is gorgeous.

 

Look, when Goth and I fully agree on something, it either has to be the worst thing ever or it's amazing.  In this case, it's 10s across the m-f-ing board.  

 

 

I've been hoping for Kraken the whole time; first because I liked the idea, then secondly because it would make so many of y'all mad.  Then to have that name accompanied by an amazing visual look?  The S logo nails it.  That's a beautiful hockey crest for what looks to be a terrific set of jerseys.  That anchor/Needle logo is terrific.  While the wordmark doesn't wow me as much as the rest, it's still really good.

 

I'm convinced that they've nailed it here.

[wildwing64]

I'll admit I cracked up at the name with it being the obvious predictable choice, but it's growing on me. They've absolutely nailed it with the visual identity, and I really like the uniforms even if they are very reminscent of their quackin' Pacific Division rivals.

[Guest darkpiranha]

3 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

I agree...to a degree.  When it comes to Star Wars and Pokemon, you go in expecting a wonky name.  If you're engrossed in Star Wars names like "Han Solo" and "Lando Calrisian" were in your lexicon.  Qui-Gon-Jin doesn't take a leap of faith.  Same for Pokemon.  You have something called a Jigglypuff.  Once you're willing to accept that, who cares about a Charmander?

 

But I think in sports, there are names that have a feel of "minor leagues" and "highest league".  Kraken sounds like something you'd name an ECHL team.  I could see the Kraken playing the Swamp Rabbits.  Those seem to be breeding grounds for "tough" or "weird" or "out of the box" names.  Perhaps Kraken will just be accepted down the road and we'll all shrug and say "Man we were weird to think that didn't fit", but I also don't think that'll happen anytime soon.  I think best case for Kraken is they win early, and we all go "Well that's...different" while subconsciously associating them with winners.  I think worst case is that in 10 years, they're bad, and the name comes back to really mock them.  Releasing the Kraken might become..well...a good thing for other teams.  Suddenly the team is a joke with its' name, and there's an issue with the branding that a team with a more...traditional name, might not have to face.

 

Perhaps.  I'll argue that Kraken, while wild and bold, isn't ECHL or minor league level.  If the logo had been a cartoon squid with its tentacles wrapped around the wordmark (and with a hockey stick being brandished in at least one of the tentacles), then yes, minor league.  But the branding is traditional.  If the team had been called the "Seattle Waves" or something generically nautical like that, this logo would be 100% appropriate.   Just like Golden Knights is a mess of a name, but the branding is traditional.  

 

Back to Star Wars for a minute, even with weird Star Wars names already a thing, "Qui-Gon Jinn" caused a bigger riot on Star Wars message boards in in that community than Kraken is here.  And then, and THEN.. "Jar Jar Binks" !  (Wait.  That may not be the best example to bring up in a thread about how dumb a name may or may not be...) 

 

I was more of a name die-hard until about seven years ago.  For my lifetime of being aware of sports names, the Golden State Warriors was always one of the dullest, least interesting teams and brands in all of sports.  I was especially bored when they reverted to more of their current retro look.  But generally, they were invisible to me as a team.  But I remember remaking to a sports logo friend I work with one day about how suddenly the name and colors and logo of the Golden State Warriors now inspired excitement in me, wonder, a feeling of "overwhelming skill".  All it takes is a little winning (or losing) and whatever pre-conceived notions one has of a team brand can be flipped, sometimes almost instantly.

 

The real test for me is if the Cleveland Browns can EVER do anything amazing enough to inspire any sort of excitement in me.  I'm looking forward to the day when I see a flash of that dull brown and orange color combo and think "Oh boy! Here we go!"

 

 

[PrimalCookie]

16 minutes ago, darkpiranha said:

 

I'd argue that the Miami Heat and Orlando Magic are two of the dumbest, most gimmicky names in sports.  Pelicans is boring.  Thunder is boring.   If generic and bland is what it takes to be considered a 'traditional' name, then I opt for something a notch more fun than traditional.   Kraken is perfectly fine. 

Magic is gimmicky, sure, but Orlando as a city still rallies around the brand 31 years later because it’s ours. If the people of Seattle love the name? It doesn’t matter what I think about it on the other side of the country, because if they can get behind it then it’s a good name.

 

With that said, I still think it’s awful. But hey, that doesn’t matter much.

[Gothamite]

4 minutes ago, Cujo said:

 

Unlike Seattle Kraken, I can say Oklahoma City Thunder while keeping a straight face.

So you’re the one!  

[CaliforniaGlowin]

I love it all.  So that's 3 NHL teams for me.

 

Finally ice blue in a pro sports team!!!  I want a hat and shirt in that color.  The multiple blues are great I think, goes well with hockey.

 

Let's get it Kraken!

[Guest darkpiranha]

10 minutes ago, henburg said:

You keep calling the NHL a “joke” and a “clown show” because...you’re not a fan of two expansion teams’ names? What am I missing here?
 

 

Man, this has me wishing a team would take on the name, "Clown Show".  Imagine the merch!   Cleveland seems like an appropriate city for this team.

[_RH_]

19 minutes ago, CreamSoda said:

Avalanche, Kraken, next on NBC....

That's not realistic.  NBC will instead be showing Chicago vs Pittsburgh.
 

Pretty cool!

 

1. The style guide shows 4 blues... am I crazy or are we only seeing 3?  Maybe equipment and breezers are the darkest color?

2. Really surprised there isn't a green color (IMO would've helped differentiate from '00 Canucks)

3. Wish the waist and sleeve stripes would match better

4. I wonder if a hint of white on the home jersey would've helped ... I bet on TV the contrast will be lost a little

[B-mer]

my immediate reaction: 

 

not my first choice, but they did make some cool design decisions and i'm sure it'll look great on the ice.

[henburg]

19 minutes ago, Maroon said:

 

Ya, gotta say I'd take the visual identity and team nickname of Seattle Kraken over the Pelicans and everything about them.

I feel like the Pelicans are a great parallel for Seattle if they had gone with Sockeyes or Evergreens. Pelicans is a name that is fine and good, but it was really chosen due to its connection with the area. That makes sense of course, but in a national context it was an underwhelming/awkward choice that has only lent itself to a dull identity. They had an opportunity to capitalize on the buzz and didn’t do much with it. In just the same way, Sockeyes would have worked fine and a number of Seattlites would have resonated with it, but I guarantee that identity wouldn’t have gotten nearly the amount of praise and general excitement that this one has received in forums outside of this one. Kraken is so much more expressive and the mysterious sea monster theme has already started showing how it can be really strong and unique within the sports world. 

 

That said, I get why many may not like it. I just feel excited that Seattle didn’t chicken out and play it too safe. 

[Digby]

18 minutes ago, darkpiranha said:

 

I'd argue that the Miami Heat and Orlando Magic are two of the dumbest, most gimmicky names in sports.  Pelicans is boring.  Thunder is boring.   If generic and bland is what it takes to be considered a 'traditional' name, then I opt for something a notch more fun than traditional.   Kraken is perfectly fine. 

 

How are Pelicans boring? Hawks is boring, Eagles is boring, Pelicans are extremely fun and weird creatures and make for an awesome distinctive local nickname for New Orleans, even if they've otherwise not done much with the branding. (Similarly but worse, Thunder has many directions in which it could go and be functional if the team didn't stubbornly stick to Generic Sports Knockoff 2003 look.)

[ScubaSteve]

25 minutes ago, Cujo said:

 

You speak for many of us on here. Nicknames like this is why the NHL will always be "the fourth major sport" in America, not to be taken seriously. Never would you see an NFL or NBA team stoop to such a ridiculous name. What a circus.

 

Yall must be fun at parties, yeesh. They're sports, they're supposed to be fun. Remember to smile occasionally 

[Chauncey917]

Kraken. LOL.

 

[Ridleylash]

1 minute ago, ScubaSteve said:

Yall must be fun at parties, yeesh. They're sports, they're supposed to be fun. Remember to smile occasionally 

There's "fun" and then there's "campy". "Kraken" falls into the "campy" side of the spectrum; it's trying so hard to be cool and badass that it loops into being silly.

[1908_Cubs]

1 minute ago, darkpiranha said:

 

Perhaps.  I'll argue that Kraken, while wild and bold, isn't ECHL or minor league level.  If the logo had been a cartoon squid with its tentacles wrapped around the wordmark (and with a hockey stick being brandished in at least one of the tentacles), then yes, minor league.  But the branding is traditional.  If the team had been called the "Seattle Waves" or something generically nautical like that, this logo would be 100% appropriate.   Just like Golden Knights is a mess of a name, but the branding is traditional.  

 

Back to Star Wars for a minute, even with weird Star Wars names already a thing, "Qui-Gon Jinn" caused a bigger riot on Star Wars message boards in in that community than Kraken is here.  And then, and THEN.. "Jar Jar Binks" !  (Wait.  That may not be the best example to bring up in a thread about how dumb a name may or may not be...) 

 

I was more of a name die-hard until about seven years ago.  For my lifetime of being aware of sports names, the Golden State Warriors was always one of the dullest, least interesting teams and brands in all of sports.  I was especially bored when they reverted to more of their current retro look.  But generally, they were invisible to me as a team.  But I remember remaking to a sports logo friend I work with one day about how suddenly the name and colors and logo of the Golden State Warriors now inspired excitement in me, wonder, a feeling of "overwhelming skill".  All it takes is a little winning (or losing) and whatever pre-conceived notions one has of a team brand can be flipped, sometimes almost instantly.

 

The real test for me is if the Cleveland Browns can EVER do anything amazing enough to inspire any sort of excitement in me.  I'm looking forward to the day when I see a flash of that dull brown and orange color combo and think "Oh boy! Here we go!"

 

 

Well, as I've said, the logo is NHL quality, when I was speaking of the name, it was simply the name, because it mostly is.  These types of names have been almost exclusively reserved for those levels.  There are examples where they haven't been, but generally speaking, it would fit far more in to those landscapes.  

 

I also don't deny that the Browns concept is a bit boring.  It is.  But it also looks good when done right.  And theres a ton of history with the Browns.  It's why they came back.  I don't particularly think a look must be "exciting" for it to be good.  The Cubs nor the Yankees have exciting visual identities.  The Yankees are navy and white with a flash of gray.  They have interlocking N and Y.  And stripes.  No one thinks "Oh boy here we go!" on that except for that it's the same basic identity they've had but done so as a winner.  I think the Kraken, however, are chasing that "exciting" look.  Like the Toronto Raptors were of the 90s.  "Look guys, it's a DINOSAUR!  Ooooooh!" as they chased a Jurassic Park vibe.  

 

The Browns can survive losing with a bland look (not that garbage they had been wearing), because it's traditional, easy on the eyes, and has some history.  There's no gimmick there.  The Browns are a "blue color team for a blue color town" or whatever.  However the Kraken are chasing a gimmick.  It only works if they are tough, mysterious and, well scary.  If they're terrible there's no gimmick there.  They'll look foolish.  So I don't disagree, a perception can change with winning, but I think it's more important when you come out, chasing a gimmick.  I do fear that with a decade of misery in Seattle to start, that the gimmick will wear off amazingly fast, and you'll be left with a kitschy name and a team no one in Seattle is jazzed about "releasing" (except, releasing players back to the FA market).  If that happens, I think this name completely backfires.  Which is why I'd have preferred them to go something more traditional.  Sockeyes doesn't have the same visual acuity, the same "initial" excitement or twitter-hashtag ability, but I also think a bad Sockeye team isn't chasing a gimmick (as long as they didn't steer into the Sock someone in the Eye, thing).  

[UnclearInitial]

The name is pretty dumb and I thought there were several better options available, but I’m not mad about it. I think Golden Knights was  worse TBH, and it doesn’t even come close to names like Wild.

 

The logos are really, really good. The uniforms are incredible. If anything, the thing I’m most disappointed about is the color scheme. While it’s good on its own merits, it looks more befitting of the Jets. I could even see it something like a mid-00’s alternate reality Nordiques look, with a darker blue and double blues everywhere. I really liked the black/salmon/seafoam look they had on the website and it could have easily been kept for Kraken. Or keeping with the Seattle theme of blue and green could have been done with dark enough colors.

 

Having said that, now that they got a team identity, it’s time to bring back the Sonics