pluggerplugger1 74 Posted July 23 In a similar vein to my Minnesota Wild, it seems they've paired A+ logos and jerseys with a D+ name. Hopefully the name grows on me. I really dig that color scheme, but I'd like to see the teal and salmon red take more prominence and have navy as more of a trim color. 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Corvus 324 Posted July 23 1 minute ago, pluggerplugger1 said: In a similar vein to my Minnesota Wild, it seems they've paired A+ logos and jerseys with a D+ name. Hopefully the name grows on me. I really dig that color scheme, but I'd like to see the teal and salmon red take more prominence and have navy as more of a trim color. They can always have fun with that for 3rd jerseys. Especially if they do something Metropolitans inspired. 4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Magic Dynasty 2,124 Posted July 23 https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/29520108/how-seattle-nhl-team-became-kraken This is a good read on the process behind naming the team. One interesting tidbit is that they favored Metropolitans early on but the league said no, due to the Metropolitan Division’s existence. 5 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sportsfan7 305 Posted July 23 Just now, Magic Dynasty said: https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/29520108/how-seattle-nhl-team-became-kraken This is a good read on the process behind naming the team. One interesting tidbit is that they favored Metropolitans early on but the league said no, due to the Metropolitan Division’s existence. Yeah, that's one thing that's always bothered me about the Washington Nationals. 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyersfan 542 Posted July 23 Have we seen a full look of the jerseys? I expect them to go navy bottoms and reflect the sleeve stripe in the socks. However, if they go the old? bruins route (i know its not the same but it fits the example) and let the light teal color come up over the knee, it might feel less navy, columbus, and winnipeg-like. The stripes make it so they cant go full reverse color, but im just thinking out loud here. 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
-kj 2,222 Posted July 23 3 minutes ago, flyersfan said: Have we seen a full look of the jerseys? 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Corvus 324 Posted July 23 1 minute ago, Magic Dynasty said: https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/29520108/how-seattle-nhl-team-became-kraken This is a good read on the process behind naming the team. One interesting tidbit is that they favored Metropolitans early on but the league said no, due to the Metropolitan Division’s existence. Considering the transitory nature of division names, or hell, existence of particular divisions, this is exactly the kind of stubborn pettiness I'd expect from the league office. 9 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gothamite 22,740 Posted July 23 6 minutes ago, flyersfan said: Have we seen a full look of the jerseys? I expect them to go navy bottoms and reflect the sleeve stripe in the socks. @B-mer brought us this look from the unveiling: 3 hours ago, B-mer said: nabbed some screengrabs from the video.. So it appears that you would be correct. Navy breezers, and they do repeat the sleeve stripe on the socks. Which is an excellent look. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
M4One 1,178 Posted July 23 The jersey and the colours are nice. The logo is okay. The shape of the S is familiar, but I don't know where from. They could have gone crazy with the logo, so I'm glad they didn't go in that direction. The name. Yikes. Edit: Found it. 5 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyersfan 542 Posted July 23 thank you @Gothamite, missed that post in the chaos. I still think theres enough teal on it for it to not look like the other teams. For crying out loud the NHL allows tampa and toronto to look like they do... i doubt its a problem and @-kj 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrandMooreArt 3,760 Posted July 23 43 minutes ago, DG_ThenNowForever said: One other nice thing about the primary (and secondary logo, for that matter) is it fits something @Gothamite said once long ago that stuck with me: kids should be able to draw sports logos on their notebooks. This definitely passes that test. why is that important? 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gothamite 22,740 Posted July 23 Yeah, I don't think there'll be a huge problem with overlapping color schemes. The lack of white (vintage or otherwise) in the Kraken set is key. The other two have a lot of white in them, which really impacts the look. 6 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FiddySicks 10,736 Posted July 23 1 hour ago, henburg said: What’s the disease then? All of your rants against this name keep referring to this vague demise of the NHL and I’m just finding it hard to even understand what you’re even talking about. Is it expansion to American cities over more traditional markets? That’s the only slight connection that I can speculate you’re making here. The disease is the same now as it’s always been. A complete lack of any semblance of professionalism. Even MLS has been smart enough to realize goofy like naming your team Kraken was going to make it hard for anyone to take them seriously. And that’s why they’ll soon enough pass the NHL in terms of relevance. Look, sports are meant to be fun, and I don’t wanna be a complete and total killjoy, so I understand how people could object to how I feel about it. But the NHL has let this all get so far out of hand. I remember even as a kid and seeing the Thrashers, Wild, and Blue Jackets (especially wiith that dumb bug logo they had) and thinking to myself, “Wow, this sport is for children”. It’s been two decades since then and I feel even more so that way. If you’re willing to overlook that then that’s your right. I just find it REALLY hard to do that. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mingjai 953 Posted July 23 3 minutes ago, Corvus said: Considering the transitory nature of division names, or hell, existence of particular divisions, this is exactly the kind of stubborn pettiness I'd expect from the league office. As I suggested elsewhere, they should have then called themselves the Seattle Patricks and then reclaim the Metropolitans name when nostalgia inevitably demands that the NHL revert to the Patrick, Adams, Norris, Smythe division names. 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the admiral 26,427 Posted July 23 I've joked in the past about the board's sometimes disturbing tendency to will things into reality (search "arc of history"), but I think what actually happened here is far more harrowing, which is that the goobers at r/hockey glommed onto sparky chewbarky's Kraken concept and declared it to be Epic Bacon on the same level as all the other bad crap they like, like the Carolina Hurricanes doing dance recitals when they win, or the Dallas Stars being epic on Twitter, or Gritty. When they said they listened to the fans, I suspect they listened to those fans, and that's no good. There's a place for focus-grouping, but there's also a peril to it: imagining the Internet Wrestling Community getting to book WWE feels like it would be the Simpsons episode where the Mensa chapter tries to run Springfield. As for the actual work, most of it is objectively good, even if I think "maritime beveling" is a bit of a reach and that sort of heavy beveling looks very minor-league to me. The uniforms are very good if a little similar to their expansion mates. Feels like the blues should have leaned a little greener. It's solid craftsmanship dragged down by an absolutely terrible name fit for the ECHL, Junior A, or one of those baseball leagues that doesn't pay its players. Awful name, in no way timeless, too unserious for what I believe to be a serious market. It never should have even entered the public consciousness but for one obnoxious self-promoter getting dorks overexcited. 5 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the admiral 26,427 Posted July 23 8 minutes ago, M4One said: The shape of the S is familiar, but I don't know where from. Chicago White Sox 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WSU151 8,725 Posted July 23 9 minutes ago, M4One said: The jersey and the colours are nice. The logo is okay. The shape of the S is familiar, but I don't know where from. They could have gone crazy with the logo, so I'm glad they didn't go in that direction. The name. Yikes. As someone noted earlier the S is similar to the Seagram's S... But it reminds me of the font used on college diplomas...I think that's where the familiarity kicked in for me: 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gothamite 22,740 Posted July 23 It's a variation on a Blackletter S. Which, as you note, is common enough. The brilliance lies in what they've done with it. 6 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Around the Horn 1,277 Posted July 23 It's too bad hockey doesn't lend itself to introductions like this... All the brand speak about how their arena will be "feared" made me think of it. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SFGiants58 12,969 Posted July 23 (edited) 1 hour ago, the admiral said: GOD DAMN IT. MOD EDIT Edited July 23 by officeglenn 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
