NHL’s New Seattle Kraken Announce Name & Logos

[Guest darkpiranha]

1 minute ago, Digby said:

 

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.)

 

I live in Louisiana.  Even here, Pelicans are boring.  Sure it's on the state flag, but there's nothing remotely inspiring or interesting or intimidating about pelicans.  "You guys are going DOWN!  Get in my giant beak and I'll swallow you!"  There's really no good pelican-related chants or insults available.  It's just.. a locally-appropriate, generic, boring logo.  I NEVER see any Pelican hats or t-shirts out in the open.  It's 100% Saints or LSU.  When I see a Pelican's image that doesn't have the wordmark with it, it always takes me a minute to remember what team it's supposed to be, because I NEVER see it.  And that's here in Louisiana.  In the rest of the country, Pelicans have to be buried under five layers of afterthought.  Maybe Zion can lead them to relevance.  More likely he does well and then moves on to a big boy team.  

 

But Kraken (ha! butt-crack!)  is a name that breaks through the generic name noise and will resonate with the country.  Just watch.

 

 

[Cujo]

"Gosh darn it, I wish ESPN and mainstream sports media would take NHL hockey more seriously and show highlights from tonight's Kraken vs Wild game"

[1908_Cubs]

12 minutes ago, henburg said:

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. 

I also think what hurt the Pelicans, however, is a lack of interesting uniforms and logos.  They came out, bland as hell after the New Orleans Hornets had all of those crazy mardi gras colors, and what not.  Navy and red (even with the gold) felt like a downgrade visually.  The uniforms themselves weren't special, or great.  They were...there.

 

A sockeye team in Salmon-Red and Seafoam primaries?  I think it creates that unique visual identity that the Pelicans lacked. And would have solved some of those issues.

 

I actually feel like they did play it safe here, speaking.  I think they could have come out with almost any logo/color that didn't look like a 4 year old drew it and you'd have sold merch upfront with Release the Kraken trending on twitter and people excited to yell that nationally.  "Fire!" or whatever.  If you want immediate attention, Kraken kind of is the safe route.  It garners immediate eyes on product.  I think from a merch standpoint and a press standpoint, Kraken definitely has some ground and a strong identity to it.  I think Sockeye is a much harder national sell, making it, honestly, the less safe option.  At least from a "today" stand point.

[Digby]

I mean I don't know that Pelicans are lame and Saints...aren't? There are deeper issues happening there than the logo packages. NHL is such a regional sport that I don't know if it matters that Kraken is silly and weird enough to own the Twitter joke cycle today. The important thing is that it seems competently executed enough to suggest a stable team is coming to Seattle. 

 

What was the last team rebrand that resonated with the entire country, recent Washington NFL news notwithstanding? I'm thinking the Brooklyn Nets. As generic as can be, but had the right cosigners. Sold a lot of hats in the mid-10s.

[Corvus]

Man, sometimes sports fans take things way too seriously. 

 

I don't know, I'm not from Seattle, but I am from the PNW, if we include Vancouver in that. The name is fun, has a maritime connection which is fitting for a coastal city, the logo is dope and a call back to Metropolitan's log. Uniforms look great. 

 

We are going to get years of great maritime memes involving Kraken, Sharks, and the Canuck's whale. 

[Guest darkpiranha]

2 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

I also think what hurt the Pelicans, however, is a lack of interesting uniforms and logos.  They came out, bland as hell after the New Orleans Hornets had all of those crazy mardi gras colors, and what not.  Navy and red (even with the gold) felt like a downgrade visually.  The uniforms themselves weren't special, or great.  They were...there.

 

A sockeye team in Salmon-Red and Seafoam primaries?  I think it creates that unique visual identity that the Pelicans lacked. And would have solved some of those issues.

 

I actually feel like they did play it safe here, speaking.  I think they could have come out with almost any logo/color that didn't look like a 4 year old drew it and you'd have sold merch upfront with Release the Kraken trending on twitter and people excited to yell that nationally.  "Fire!" or whatever.  If you want immediate attention, Kraken kind of is the safe route.  It garners immediate eyes on product.  I think from a merch standpoint and a press standpoint, Kraken definitely has some ground and a strong identity to it.  I think Sockeye is a much harder national sell, making it, honestly, the less safe option.  At least from a "today" stand point.

 

Agreed.  While Sockeye would have been the more unique option, and give off an Original Six feel as someone suggested, this would have been 100 times more gimmicky to the general public than Kraken.  

[_DietDrPepper_]

Minnesota North Stars vs Seattle Sockeyes > Minnesota Wild vs Seattle Kraken

[SCL]

1 minute ago, _DietDrPepper_ said:

Minnesota North Stars vs Seattle Sockeyes > Minnesota Wild vs Seattle Kraken

Atrocious names but great branding. This branding with Sockeyes would've been nearly perfect.

[SFGiants58]

You know, I think I’m coming around on the name a little. It’s at least at less-abstract concept than Wild.

[1908_Cubs]

5 minutes ago, darkpiranha said:

 

Agreed.  While Sockeye would have been the more unique option, and give off an Original Six feel as someone suggested, this would have been 100 times more gimmicky to the general public than Kraken.  

I don't think Sockeye would have been felt as more "gimmicky" than the Kraken nationally, I think everyone gets the Kraken gimmick here.  If they didn't #ReleaseTheKraken wouldn't be trending.  I think many people outside of Seattle would be have thought it was more boring (which I think a unique color scheme could have aided greatly with)  

 

That said, Seattle shouldn't be chasing the guy in Pittsburgh who's going to buy a Kraken hat today and then never care about the Seattle NHL franchise ever again.  That's a one time purchase.  I think Seattle should be trying to capture the Seattle market long term.  Which is why I fear the gimmick of Kraken will wear off with a loser.  There's no PNW connection, and once the "Aw :censored:, Release the Kraken!" crew have their one shirt or hat they barely wear, you have to wonder how much it'll resonate with the city.  Or how much it'll backfire on the national stage when they're not good and they have that gimmick.  

 

Again, if they're a winner for a while, they can likely build a kitchsy "winner" vibe.  But that seems like a pretty big gamble on a gimmick.  

[LMU]

Perspective:

 

Heat - verb or a condition

Magic - concept

Avalanche - singular phenomenon

Thunder - verb or singular phenomenon

Wild - obscure adjective

Jazz - singular noun

Lightning - singular phenomenon

 

---

 

Kraken - proper plural noun

[Digby]

I'm sitting with this and I think the reason I don't like the name, beyond "Sockeyes" being goofy and idiosyncratic in a way that works for me, is that I can't figure out the "Kraken" collective noun situation. Is the plural of kraken also kraken? Or does the collective of the guys on the ice collectively form a kraken versus a half-dozen penguins or sharks? This is like the "duck-sized horse" question.

[Guest darkpiranha]

1 minute ago, Digby said:

I mean I don't know that Pelicans are lame and Saints...aren't? There are deeper issues happening there than the logo packages. NHL is such a regional sport that I don't know if it matters that Kraken is silly and weird enough to own the Twitter joke cycle today. The important thing is that it seems competently executed enough to suggest a stable team is coming to Seattle. 

 

What was the last team rebrand that resonated with the entire country, recent Washington NFL news notwithstanding? I'm thinking the Brooklyn Nets. As generic as can be, but had the right cosigners. Sold a lot of hats in the mid-10s.

 

The reality is, that about 75% of team names if they were introduced today would be mocked endlessly.  "LIONS???"  There aren't any Lions associated with Detroit!!  It has to be automotive or Motown-related!!     "Browns???  You're naming the team after the owner??? NO WAY!"    Almost all team names have been grandfathered in because for the past 80 years, the names have just settled into our subconscious as BEING the thing.  Imagine trying to introduce "Celtics" today and insisting it be pronounced with the "S" sound instead of the "K" sound like it's supposed to be.  But "Seltics" IS just what it is, period.   These things all just fade into the background and are one part of the entire gestalt of the team/organization/legacy.

[Guest darkpiranha]

1 minute ago, Digby said:

I'm sitting with this and I think the reason I don't like the name, beyond "Sockeyes" being goofy and idiosyncratic in a way that works for me, is that I can't figure out the "Kraken" collective noun situation. Is the plural of kraken also kraken? Or does the collective of the guys on the ice collectively form a kraken versus a half-dozen penguins or sharks? This is like the "duck-sized horse" question.

 

I remember when the Miami Heat was first announced SI's Rick Reilly had a funny article about how weird it was that the name was non-plural.  He said something like, "What do you call one member of the team?  A Hot?"  

 

 

[LMU]

3 minutes ago, Digby said:

I'm sitting with this and I think the reason I don't like the name, beyond "Sockeyes" being goofy and idiosyncratic in a way that works for me, is that I can't figure out the "Kraken" collective noun situation. Is the plural of kraken also kraken? Or does the collective of the guys on the ice collectively form a kraken versus a half-dozen penguins or sharks? This is like the "duck-sized horse" question.

Kraken is acceptable pluralization.

[Ridleylash]

If they don't pull a Vegas and end up getting knocked out early or completely miss the playoffs with an under .500 record in their first year, I'm wondering how much the name will be considered "cool" then. It's a name that effectively requires a team be hot out of the gate to not get turned into a complete joke.

 

If the team flounders or is outright bad, the name is going to become associated with that floundering, miserable team and become reviled.

[Cujo]

1 hour ago, RichardWitham said:

what's Kraken, yall?

 

Disruptive... Tyrant... The nautical version of a Karen

[-Akronite-]

Kraken is a perfectly fine name for an expansion franchise, especially when the brand design is this strong. It doesn't explicitly tie in with Seattle but nautical :censored: tracks, so they probably won't need to change even when the novelty wears off.

 

The primary is great, the secondary is great, the colors and fonts work, they nailed the uniforms... Don't see any downside unless you really hate the name Kraken, and I don't.

 

I'm surprised and maybe a little disappointed at the color scheme, if anything. It looks good and it's well used, but another multi-blue team with a red accent feels kinda cookie-cutter.

[andrewharrington]

For all yous who were so mad they kept delaying the name announcement, this is exactly why. There would have been four months with nothing but garbage and vitriol being posted before the rest of identity came out and people eventually realized, “Oh, well, not that bad. It’s growing on me now that I’ve seen the full context.”

[andrewharrington]

2 minutes ago, Ridleylash said:

If they don't pull a Vegas and end up getting knocked out early or completely miss the playoffs with an under .500 record in their first year, I'm wondering how much the name will be considered "cool" then. It's a name that effectively requires a team be hot out of the gate to not get turned into a complete joke.

 

If the team flounders, the name is going to become associated with that floundering. That's just the way sports brands work.

You two just want this to fail sooo bad.