NHL 2011-2012: Possible Uniform Changes

[Morgan33]

Hm, I suppose in that context it doesn't look as bad after all, but I still can't get past the minor-league whimsy of "Manitoba Moose." Getting the Thrashers and their sparrow tornado out of the picture is some good addition by subtraction, too.

Exponentially

[hockey week]

When it's put among the other NHL logos, my eye goes directly to it. It looks out of place. I think it might have to do with being too textured, too...for lack of a better word, cartoony. I don't know, it's something with minor league logos that they all have a cartoon-like quality to them, and no matter how good this logo is, it still has that. I actually think it's worse when it's just the head. As the head-only logo, it looks less like a powerful thrashing motion, and more like a cross between the severed horse-head of The Godfather and an awkward taper of some kind of moose-ghost. I just don't like it.

I think the best possible outcome would be a redesign of the same logo, like a cross between the Sharks' redesign (of taking an existing logo and fixing its flaws and streamlining it more) and the Coyotes' redesign (take a basic premise and really class it up). I think a more stoic-looking moose with more of the body (maybe even full body? charging? I don't know) could be the perfect answer to everybody's issues.

With a name like Moose, and we all agree it's stereotypical, you have to have a logo that commands respect to back it up.

[Lee.]

Which means that, as an NHL franchise, it'll be a big M with antlers.

[Jhero34]

I think the current Moose jersey and logo is better suited for the AHL. The name and colors can work but with a new logo and jersey.

Are you saying you don't like this logo?

Now I've read everything on this board.

I like it, for the AHL. "Manitoba Moose" sounds like some joker's idea of what a Canadian hockey team would be called. Look, there's even a maple leaf in the M! Because Canada!

funny but the moose actually started in minnesota and moved to winnipeg

[nash61]

When it's put among the other NHL logos, my eye goes directly to it. It looks out of place. I think it might have to do with being too textured, too...for lack of a better word, cartoony. I don't know, it's something with minor league logos that they all have a cartoon-like quality to them, and no matter how good this logo is, it still has that. I actually think it's worse when it's just the head. As the head-only logo, it looks less like a powerful thrashing motion, and more like a cross between the severed horse-head of The Godfather and an awkward taper of some kind of moose-ghost. I just don't like it.

I think the best possible outcome would be a redesign of the same logo, like a cross between the Sharks' redesign (of taking an existing logo and fixing its flaws and streamlining it more) and the Coyotes' redesign (take a basic premise and really class it up). I think a more stoic-looking moose with more of the body (maybe even full body? charging? I don't know) could be the perfect answer to everybody's issues.

With a name like Moose, and we all agree it's stereotypical, you have to have a logo that commands respect to back it up.

Would you prefer...

[Lee.]

He and the Blackhawks logo can smile at each other!

[tvko]

The only logo that stands out as "amateur" or "minor league" is the new Lightning logo.

Nashville, Ottawa, Pittsburgh.

[Lee.]

Is it me, or does the "Islanders" part of their logo rise higher on the left than on the right? That is, is the I really that much higher than the S?

[IceCap]

It is, so the I can point out the location of the team's arena on Long Island, if I remember correctly.

[vmd9]

Winnepeg didn't support the Jets and they left. Why would they deserve another team?

[Lee.]

This has been covered time and time again.

[The_Admiral]

Hm, get to do this again.

Winnipeg supported the Jets, but the Jets played in a jury-rigged 1950s arena where most of the sweet concession/parking revenue went to some public/private authority like the Northlands club in Edmonton. Also, in contrast to the NHL's herculean efforts to keep the Coyotes in Glendale, Bettman scuttled community efforts to buy the team. Also, the Canadian dollar was 65 cents American, with most expenses (player salaries) being paid in American funds with revenues being earned in weaker Canadian funds.

Nobody "deserves" or doesn't deserve a team, but the conditions of the market are such that a Winnipeg team could be expected to do well.

[ElwoodCuse]

Nobody "deserves" or doesn't deserve a team, but the conditions of the market are such that a Winnipeg team could be expected to do well.

for a couple years, until the novelty wears off and the team still hasn't won a playoff series and guys would rather play in Edmonton than Winnipeg

[hockey week]

When it's put among the other NHL logos, my eye goes directly to it. It looks out of place. I think it might have to do with being too textured, too...for lack of a better word, cartoony. I don't know, it's something with minor league logos that they all have a cartoon-like quality to them, and no matter how good this logo is, it still has that. I actually think it's worse when it's just the head. As the head-only logo, it looks less like a powerful thrashing motion, and more like a cross between the severed horse-head of The Godfather and an awkward taper of some kind of moose-ghost. I just don't like it.

I think the best possible outcome would be a redesign of the same logo, like a cross between the Sharks' redesign (of taking an existing logo and fixing its flaws and streamlining it more) and the Coyotes' redesign (take a basic premise and really class it up). I think a more stoic-looking moose with more of the body (maybe even full body? charging? I don't know) could be the perfect answer to everybody's issues.

With a name like Moose, and we all agree it's stereotypical, you have to have a logo that commands respect to back it up.

Would you prefer...

lol There's always a worse option. Throw antlers on a Greenville Grrrowl logo and you have what's worse than the above haha.

I'm just saying that it can become classier. I think removing some of the texture in the logo would probably be a big step in the right direction, but I'm just tossing ideas out there.

Again, imagine a moose in a style similar to the Coyotes, with the body in shadow like the full-body Sharks logo, that's my thoughts.

So what about the rumors of the Winnipeg Falcons? Heritage (1920 Olympics) pick older than the Jets. I once read that the Jets had to get permission from the New York Jets before unveiling their name, would the Falcons have to (oddly enough) get approval from Atlanta?

[kw11333]

Winnepeg didn't support the Jets and they left. Why would they deserve another team?

Good lord, it had nothing to do with Support. Don't just make up facts.

[Sport]

Vmd9's signature reads, "If Canada were so great it'd be a state". I wouldn't worry about what he thinks.

[IceCap]

Nobody "deserves" or doesn't deserve a team, but the conditions of the market are such that a Winnipeg team could be expected to do well.

for a couple years, until the novelty wears off and the team still hasn't won a playoff series and guys would rather play in Edmonton than Winnipeg

You know what? That's still a better situation then either Phoenix or Atlanta.

Vmd9's signature reads, "If Canada were so great it'd be a state". I wouldn't worry about what he thinks.

He's the epitome of a troll.

[BLUELANDbeliever]

Nobody "deserves" or doesn't deserve a team, but the conditions of the market are such that a Winnipeg team could be expected to do well.

for a couple years, until the novelty wears off and the team still hasn't won a playoff series and guys would rather play in Edmonton than Winnipeg

You know what? That's still a better situation then either Phoenix or Atlanta.

whoa whoa whoa. Atl is better of than Phoenix... the owners are the problem here...

[IceCap]

Nobody "deserves" or doesn't deserve a team, but the conditions of the market are such that a Winnipeg team could be expected to do well.

for a couple years, until the novelty wears off and the team still hasn't won a playoff series and guys would rather play in Edmonton than Winnipeg

You know what? That's still a better situation then either Phoenix or Atlanta.

whoa whoa whoa. Atl is better of than Phoenix... the owners are the problem here...

I never said Atlanta was a worse situation then Phoenix. Only that Winnipeg is a better option then both of them.

For the record I agree with you. It's a dang shame that Bettman's ego the NHL is sacrificing the Thrashers to save the worse off Coyotes.

[BLUELANDbeliever]

Nobody "deserves" or doesn't deserve a team, but the conditions of the market are such that a Winnipeg team could be expected to do well.

for a couple years, until the novelty wears off and the team still hasn't won a playoff series and guys would rather play in Edmonton than Winnipeg

You know what? That's still a better situation then either Phoenix or Atlanta.

whoa whoa whoa. Atl is better of than Phoenix... the owners are the problem here...

I never said Atlanta was a worse situation then Phoenix. Only that Winnipeg is a better option then both of them.

For the record I agree with you. It's a dang shame that Bettman's ego the NHL is sacrificing the Thrashers to save the worse off Coyotes.

You dont know how much hearing this means to me. Especialy coming from a canadian. Like i have said before, i actally want Winnipeg (and maybe QC) to have a team..just not mine or at the expense of another franchise. If ur on twitter, i started the hashtag #wheresBETTMAN 3 weeks ago... sent him an email and guess what the reply was?