Chicago Blackhawks Logo has to go?

[charger77]

I don't want to take sides in this debate, but knowing that it comes up here from time to time, I took this shot (with this board in mind) of an interesting T-shirt I saw outside of Wrigley Field starting last year:

I doubt it would satisfy the PC crowd or the traditionalists -- and it may have already been discussed here -- but I thought it was an interesting concept (and much better than the distinctly non-PC stuff that is normally sold on a bootleg shirt outside Wrigley). It wasn't worth starting a thread over, but now that it's here...

(P.S. I wonder who owns the trademark to this.)

I saw a t-shirt with that logo at a Blackhawks/Blue Jackets game in Columbus this season.

[CubsFanBudMan]

I think that's from our Concepts board. I maintain that it should replace the IceHogs.

I like that idea. And if it's really from the concepts board -- wow, small world. (And sorry, unless you are also the person selling it outside Wrigley.)

[Morgan33]

well I look at it from a different angle

you can argue that it's not racist or assume it's not offensive to anybody but to me but that's not the point - it's just not a good image to reflect current society

case in point...there would NEVER ever ever ever ever be a NEW logo made by a professional sports team that would be the image of a native american man's face/likeness or that of any other minority group

the fact that it would never be created or accepted (if it was new) today speaks volumes as to just how outdated it is

with all the creativity and resources available today I'm sure someone could come up with a logo that is more reflective of current society and also is versatile, impactful and representative of the team

I always wish they would modernize the secondary logo (shoulder patch "C" w crossed tomahawk) and use that as the main logo, or simply design something based off the blackhawk name like an actual BLACK HAWK...someone could make a fierce looking black colored hawk that would probably look pretty awesome w the red & black color scheme

I don't think changing a logo means you're throwing everything about your team away...the blackhawks have a new fan base, a rejuvinated franchise and a young team and I really think all the people who would rather see the sun fall out of the sky than change the logo from the head of a native american are in the minority

No offense but those are both terrible ideas. Your talking about replacing a logo thats been around for 50+ years and is a prominent part of one the most iconic looks in all of hockey. The Blackhawks Jerseys are of those looks that should NEVER be touched. You remove the Native American Head and its not a Blackhawks Jersey, Period. The only thing offensive in the entire discussion is the article itself which is why I brought it to everyones attention. Im sick of this puritan, PC attitude prevalent in society. When you try to please everyone all at once you usually end up pleasing no one. Its time people stood up for tradition. The charge that this logo is racist is absolutely ridiculous. The Native American Warrior being depicted is done is a classy tasteful manner. As an earlier poster said, you want to talk about racist logos, look at Cheif Wahoo.

Rant over

[The_Admiral]

I will say that just to be on the safe side when it comes to this sort of thing, Hawks fans shouldn't take the Indian imagery any further than the Indian Head itself: don't paint your face or wear a silly headdress and buckskin or make stupid gestures. At that point, you're getting into the murky waters of Illini fandom, and that's really not good for anybody. There are ways to express yourself without townie gimmickry.

[Lee.]

Damien Cox is barely a journalist, his only job is to fellate the Leafs and get other teams' fans riled up.

[Billy B]

I don't want to take sides in this debate, but knowing that it comes up here from time to time, I took this shot (with this board in mind) of an interesting T-shirt I saw outside of Wrigley Field starting last year:

I doubt it would satisfy the PC crowd or the traditionalists -- and it may have already been discussed here -- but I thought it was an interesting concept (and much better than the distinctly non-PC stuff that is normally sold on a bootleg shirt outside Wrigley). It wasn't worth starting a thread over, but now that it's here...

(P.S. I wonder who owns the trademark to this.)

My friend has one of hese shirts and I thought it originated from the concepts board here, I can't remember who designed it though.

[Sodboy13]

I, too, saw that "Black Hawk" design at quite a few stands and shops while I was walking around Wrigleyville last Saturday morning. While I understand what they're going for, the whole thing seems a bit overdone, and definitely has a late-'90s/early-'00s minor-league vibe to me. And it did look vaguely familiar when I saw it.

[The_Admiral]

See, that's why it's perfect for what is now the IceHogs. It's a minor league team, and Rockford is a good 8 to 12 years behind most of the country, so it'd fit right in.

[_RH_]

As with all things "PC" related, this is rediculous. If you don't like something, don't support it. No one should have to apologize for offending someone.

P.S. I think that logo is by the fashion-hat-people, if I remember right.

[scarsofthumper]

I think I just hate the IceHogs logo because it's basically the same as the Midland Rockhounds

[SilverNRed]

well I look at it from a different angle

you can argue that it's not racist or assume it's not offensive to anybody but to me but that's not the point - it's just not a good image to reflect current society

case in point...there would NEVER ever ever ever ever be a NEW logo made by a professional sports team that would be the image of a native american man's face/likeness or that of any other minority group

the fact that it would never be created or accepted (if it was new) today speaks volumes as to just how outdated it is

with all the creativity and resources available today I'm sure someone could come up with a logo that is more reflective of current society and also is versatile, impactful and representative of the team

Current society SUCKS. Current society is how we ended up with the BuffaSlug in Buffalo. Or the friggin' Goathead before that. Every time some marketing guru wants to come up with something "impactful", "modern", "versatile", etc. just ends up coming up with something aimed at teenagers that ends up looking dated itself a few years later.

The logo isn't "outdated." It's a classic. And it's a good thing that the 2010 Blackhawks are wearing the same logo that Chicago hockey players have worn for decades. That is cool. How much better is it when an 18 year old gets drafted and the sweater he pulls over his head is Original Six? That's different than a guy getting drafted and putting a Nashville Predators jersey on. Tradition matters.

The teams that are constantly changing their uniforms and logo always look worse than the teams that don't. Is there any debate about this?

[uniformity]

Damien cox is a media troll. He does controversy thing all the time with various fan bases.

[Sodboy13]

See, that's why it's perfect for what is now the IceHogs. It's a minor league team, and Rockford is a good 8 to 12 years behind most of the country, so it'd fit right in.

I've been to Rockford, I've been to Beloit, I've been to Janesville. You're being generous.

I'm all for the idea of the "Rockford Black Hawks", though, because the IceHogs' name and logo are just vile.

[BBTV]

As with all things "PC" related, this is rediculous. If you don't like something, don't support it. No one should have to apologize for offending someone.

P.S. I think that logo is by the fashion-hat-people, if I remember right.

Yes, building divisions between people is great. Marketing something offensive (not that this Hawks jersey is, I'm not going to judge it) so that people can buy, wear, and perpetuate the offense is a great way to build a peaceful and productive society.

BTW - there's no "e" in ridiculous. As an intelligent and educated person, your entire post has offended me. I'll be disappointed if you apologize though.

[andrewharrington]

Dear Mr. Cox:

At the risk of sounding insensitive, if you don't like team names or team logos that involve Native American imagery, don't buy Indians or Blackhawks or Redskins merchandise. If it offends you, don't watch or attend their games. Just don't ruin it for the people who like the tradition housed in this imagery and interpret its meaning differently than you do. Just as anyone has a right to be offended by Native American imagery, the owner of the team has a right to outfit the team however he sees fit, and the fans have a right to support it, even if it contains Native American imagery. If he's losing money because of boycotts, maybe the fanbase has spoken and it's time to change. Likewise, if he values the tradition in the name and image and he doesn't see it as a detriment to his business, he also has a right to display that tradition without interference from the law. Simple as that. Political correctness is slowly erasing our first amendment rights.

I don't support or oppose the presence of minority imagery in sports, but the issue absolutely can not be decided in a courtroom. It is covered by the first amendment. If you paid your way into an art museum and were offended by a piece you saw in the gallery, can you file suit and have a courtroom force the museum to remove the piece? No, or at least I would hope not. A more common and appropriate reaction would be to voice your displeasure to someone in charge and move on to the the next gallery. Or don't go to the museum anymore. Don't see why sports is subject to differnt rules than other media.

[rams80]

Damien Cox is barely a journalist, his only job is to fellate the Leafs and get other teams' fans riled up.

So wait...it's ok for the Leafs to keep their (allegedly) Great War-derived moniker, but not the Blackhawks?

[Viper]

you can argue that it's not racist or assume it's not offensive to anybody but to me but that's not the point - it's just not a good image to reflect current society

case in point...there would NEVER ever ever ever ever be a NEW logo made by a professional sports team that would be the image of a native american man's face/likeness or that of any other minority group

the fact that it would never be created or accepted (if it was new) today speaks volumes as to just how outdated it is

Then again are a few other current and former non-Native American team names that would also raise controversy if they were newly coined today. The Hartford Whalers are at the top of that list - there'd be no end to the protests from Greenpeace and other like-minded groups if someone came up with that nickname today. Then there are lots of high school and college teams named "Warriors" and "Crusaders", both nicknames that catch flak from pacifist types for being militaristic; the latter is also allegedly offensive to Muslims. I could probably go on and on but you get the idea. If we did away with all team identities that wouldn't fly if they were new today, a lot of teams would be changing at all levels of sport.

I myself am of native canadian descent and i bought a Johnathan Toews jersey because of the Blackhawk. Im a Leafs fan but am also a proud Native too and this logo doesnt really bother me. Either does the Braves or the Indians logos. The Washington Redskins though i do have a problem with. I doubt theyre named after the tribe and am sure theyre named after the derogatory term for natives. But only religious people with nothing to do who have problems with Devil in the name Devil Rays get their say and get results. Either way, as long as these teams including the 'Skins dont degrate the native people then i say run with it. The Hawks, Indians, Skins and Braves have been around for years so its too late to change now. Play nice everyone!

Remember a Blackhawks player back in the 1980s named Everett Sanipass? He was (IIRC) the first full-blooded Native (North) American to play in the NHL and he once said he had hoped it would be for the Blackhawks, precisely because of their identity.

As for the Redskins, the short version of how they got their name was that they were originally named the Boston Braves, after the baseball team, which was originally under the same ownership. The football team was sold and the new owners changed its name to the Boston Redskins to differentiate it from the Braves without having to replace all their equipment, etc. that was stamped with the old Braves logo. This was all before the move to DC.

As for the Devil Rays, I always found it a bit odd that the religious right was able to get them to change their name but not the New Jersey Devils. It certainly wasn't for lack of trying.

[Lee.]

Damien Cox is barely a journalist, his only job is to fellate the Leafs and get other teams' fans riled up.

So wait...it's ok for the Leafs to keep their (allegedly) Great War-derived moniker, but not the Blackhawks?

No. In fact, I want the Leaves to change their name to "Blue Storm" immediately.

[rockngoalie1]

I don't want to take sides in this debate, but knowing that it comes up here from time to time, I took this shot (with this board in mind) of an interesting T-shirt I saw outside of Wrigley Field starting last year:

I doubt it would satisfy the PC crowd or the traditionalists -- and it may have already been discussed here -- but I thought it was an interesting concept (and much better than the distinctly non-PC stuff that is normally sold on a bootleg shirt outside Wrigley). It wasn't worth starting a thread over, but now that it's here...

(P.S. I wonder who owns the trademark to this.)

My friend has one of hese shirts and I thought it originated from the concepts board here, I can't remember who designed it though.

Designed by Mike Ivall (MikePho3niX,) in case anyone was losing any sleep over it.

[ltjets21]

One day, I don't know when, all person based mascots will be gone.

that will be a sad day

Never will happen because, Notre Dame will always be the fighting Irish. I see the Indians retiring chief wahoo soon.