Not the Minnesota Wild?

[The Giant Pacific Octopus]

"Minnesota North Stars Memories with Lou Nanne"

I've been a Stars fan since 1979, and let me tell you that book is fantastic. If anyone is remotely interested in the North Stars that book is a must read. Unfortunatly its a bit pricey.

As for the uniform change, I think it had to do with lousy merchandise sales. I recall reading in The Hockey News back around 1990, that the North Stars were ranked 21st (of the 21 teams) in terms of merchandise and apparel sales.

[illwauk]

The re-brand from the North Stars final two seasons in Minnesota was created specifically to disassociate themselves with anything "northern." The Dallas Stars have never worn anything similar to the classic North Stars identity that stayed more/less the same for 23 the years prior. Even the shades of green and gold they've been wearing in Dallas are distinctively different from what they used in Minnesota.

I love it when people make up facts to support some idealistic agenda.

I am quite the logo-stalinist, aren't I?

Unfortunatly you are wrong about all the above statements. First of all the Logo was NOT created specifically to eliminate anything "North" because they planned to move. Nothing could be further from the truth. The logo was in fact designed by Bill Mack who was a resident of Minnesota as well as a friend of Lou Nanne. The only payment he recieved for designing it was a pair of Minnesota North Stars season tickets. The idea that it was designed for Dallas before the move holds no water.

Oh, well that proves everything since no artist would ever design something for a team that didn't play in their hometown.

Also If you put your bias aside and actually looked at the logo you would notice that Star does contain a reference to "North." The italicization of the Star makes it point a specific direction, guess what direction that is? North! Its actually alot more clever than people give credit, though it was ruined when the word "Dallas" was added to the top.

HOLY S**T YOU'RE RIGHT!!! I just noticed that the point at the top of the Texans eye-star star ALSO points north (better hope the Vikings lawyers don't catch on to that one) and all the north-pointing stars on the Dr.J-era Nets jerseys... what a clever way to call attention to the fact that they played in North Jersey!

You are also wrong about the colours. During the initial redesign in Minnesota the only colour that changed was the yellow becoming metallic gold. The shade of Kelly Green remained the same and did so for the first year in Dallas as well. It was darkened to forest green in 1994 which has stayed the same since.

How does this trivial bit of information change the fact that the Minnesota and Dallas versions of the team had/have for the overwhelming majority of their existences used distinctively different logos and color palettes?

[IceCap]

Kelly green, athletic gold, and black are not distinctly different from forest green, Vegas gold, and black. To us, sure they are. To most non-logo/uniform geeks (ie most fans) they aren't.

Really, it's the same basic scheme, just darkened (as colour schemes generally were in the 90s). Regardless of the intent behind the logo change, the fact remains that the current Stars logo has its roots in Minnesota.

Look, I love the name "Minnesota North Stars" too, who doesn't? I just don't think it would be right to bring it back into the league. The Wild have had their own thing going on for ten seasons now, which include their own distinct colour scheme and logos. Why make them pretend to be the North Stars when the real North Stars are currently in Dallas with similar colours and logos?

I actually applaud the Dallas Stars for maintaining the connection between their current incarnation and their past as the North Stars. I really dislike the Cleveland Deal, so it's nice to see a team actually be allowed to take its own history and legacy with them. I mean they own it right? Seems rather wrong to take it away from them.

[Morgan33]

Oh, well that proves everything since no artist would ever design something for a team that didn't play in their hometown.

It proves the rebrand was not some diabolical plan by the evil Norm Green to remove all references of "North" from the identity because he planned on moving the team, the logo would show up as early as 1990. As Giant Pacific Optopus said, the North Stars had slumping merchandise sales along with attendance woes so what better way to attract new fans than with a fresh identity package? The North Stars 1991-1993 jerseys were really trendy and revolutionary for their time. They were the first team use a metallic shade on their logo and the first team outside the Penguins and Bruins to dive into the 90's trend of Primarily Black Uniforms. Also I think its telling that Bill Mack only recieved season tickets as payment instead of money. Obviously he was a fan of the team.

HOLY S**T YOU'RE RIGHT!!! I just noticed that the point at the top of the Texans eye-star star ALSO points north (better hope the Vikings lawyers don't catch on to that one) and all the north-pointing stars on the Dr.J-era Nets jerseys... what a clever way to call attention to the fact that they played in North Jersey!

Such wit. Subtle as it may be, the logo still represents "North Stars."

How does this trivial bit of information change the fact that the Minnesota and Dallas versions of the team had/have for the overwhelming majority of their existences used distinctively different logos and color palettes?

As Ice Cap said they are not that different. Most casual fans don't notice subtle differences in shades we do.

[illwauk]

Kelly green, athletic gold, and black are not distinctly different from forest green, Vegas gold, and black. To us, sure they are. To most non-logo/uniform geeks (ie most fans) they aren't.

Really, it's the same basic scheme, just darkened (as colour schemes generally were in the 90s).

I'd say that switching from athletic gold to vegas gold is a more dramatic shift to people outside the design world who tend to see them as completely different colors (and usually can't understand why we call the latter "gold" in the first place). Since Dallas has minimized their green while making black their default primary color and featuring it more prominently than the "classic" North Stars ever did, I'd say they'd be more than distinguishable from any hypothetical North Stars revival, especially if they limited themselves to kelly, athletic gold and white.

[IceCap]

Well from all accounts the new Dallas third will be very North Stars-inspired.

The Wild have been around for ten seasons. I don't think it's a stretch to say that soon the North Stars will be a distant memory with Twin City hockey fans. I would rather the wild stick around with their unique colour scheme and logos then ape a colour scheme and logos that belong to a team that's still active.

It's like when the Lightning went to just blue and white uniforms, and someone brought up the fact that OF COURSE teams will overlap in a 30 team circuit. Well the thing is the Lightning and the Leafs avoided overlapping for close to twenty seasons. Kind of the same thing thing here. The Wild and Stars have two unique, separate identities. If the Wild became the North Stars they would not only be stealing an identity from a still-active organization but they would create another case of unnecessary overlap in terms of similar colour schemes, names, and logos.

Plus, having the North Stars and Stars in the same league is only one step above having the Roughriders and Rough Riders.

[SCL]

I actually applaud the Dallas Stars for maintaining the connection between their current incarnation and their past as the North Stars. I really dislike the Cleveland Deal, so it's nice to see a team actually be allowed to take its own history and legacy with them. I mean they own it right? Seems rather wrong to take it away from them.

Sorry but what a shill for ownership you are, you are the only person I have ever heard upset behind the Browns name remaining in Cleveland which officially confirms how delusional you are. The names Brown and Northstars were identities to the people of Cleveland and Minnesota not Modell and Green, they were simply owners of the teams at one point in their history (because of petty reasons not having a stadium built right when he wanted it and a sexual assault case moved their teams) doesn't mean they should automatically be sided with.

[SCL]

Well from all accounts the new Dallas third will be very North Stars-inspired.

The Wild have been around for ten seasons. I don't think it's a stretch to say that soon the North Stars will be a distant memory with Twin City hockey fans. I would rather the wild stick around with their unique colour scheme and logos then ape a colour scheme and logos that belong to a team that's still active.

It's like when the Lightning went to just blue and white uniforms, and someone brought up the fact that OF COURSE teams will overlap in a 30 team circuit. Well the thing is the Lightning and the Leafs avoided overlapping for close to twenty seasons. Kind of the same thing thing here. The Wild and Stars have two unique, separate identities. If the Wild became the North Stars they would not only be stealing an identity from a still-active organization but they would create another case of unnecessary overlap in terms of similar colour schemes, names, and logos.

Plus, having the North Stars and Stars in the same league is only one step above having the Roughriders and Rough Riders.

League owns the Northstars identity and it has all but been confirmed that the WIld will wear the Northstar jersey as a throwback at some pt. in the near future. Also, Northstars gear is the #1 heritage brand in the NHL because of Minnesota.

[IceCap]

I actually applaud the Dallas Stars for maintaining the connection between their current incarnation and their past as the North Stars. I really dislike the Cleveland Deal, so it's nice to see a team actually be allowed to take its own history and legacy with them. I mean they own it right? Seems rather wrong to take it away from them.

Sorry but what a shill for ownership you are, you are the only person I have ever heard upset behind the Browns name remaining in Cleveland which officially confirms how delusional you are. The names Brown and Northstars were identities to the people of Cleveland and Minnesota not Modell and Green, they were simply owners of the teams at one point and because of petty reasons (not having a stadium built right when he wanted it and a sexual assault case) doesn't mean they should automatically be sided with.

You're a joke. Really.

The name Browns and North Stars BELONG TO THE TEAM AND THUS THE PEOPLE WHO OWN THE TEAM. How hard is that to comprehend? Personal failings of the owners aside, if they move the team they should have every right to take the team's history, legacy, and intellectual property (ie team names, colours, uniforms, logos) with them.

I feel sorry for illwauk here, having someone like you on his side of this discussion. I may disagree with him but at least he knows what the hell he's talking about and presents well reasoned arguments to support his point of view. Then you come in angry that someone dared to side with people who actually own the teams you love so much.

You know those fans you claim are oh so right and oh so virtuous? "True fan" at work.

[SCL]

I actually applaud the Dallas Stars for maintaining the connection between their current incarnation and their past as the North Stars. I really dislike the Cleveland Deal, so it's nice to see a team actually be allowed to take its own history and legacy with them. I mean they own it right? Seems rather wrong to take it away from them.

Sorry but what a shill for ownership you are, you are the only person I have ever heard upset behind the Browns name remaining in Cleveland which officially confirms how delusional you are. The names Brown and Northstars were identities to the people of Cleveland and Minnesota not Modell and Green, they were simply owners of the teams at one point and because of petty reasons (not having a stadium built right when he wanted it and a sexual assault case) doesn't mean they should automatically be sided with.

You're a joke. Really.

The name Browns and North Stars BELONG TO THE TEAM AND THUS THE PEOPLE WHO OWN THE TEAM. How hard is that to comprehend? Personal failings of the owners aside, if they move the team they should have every right to take the team's history, legacy, and intellectual property (ie team names, colours, uniforms, logos) with them.

I feel sorry for illwauk here, having someone like you on his side of this discussion. I may disagree with him but at least he knows what the hell he's talking about and presents well reasoned arguments to support his point of view. Then you come in angry that someone dared to side with people who actually own the teams you love so much.

You know those fans you claim are oh so right and oh so virtuous? "True fan" at work.

Haha I got compared with tree hick, that's good stuff...Just as you think my argument is ridiculous, I think yours are just as preposterous on the other side. I'm not going to get into an abortion debate about it or try to convince you....I'll just disagree.

[The_Admiral]

Yes, the team owner should be able to keep the team's intellectual property, but it's not always as cut and dried. In the case of the North Stars, I would understand completely if a court ruled that Norm Green was a monumental fvckup and the intellectual property of the team was to be seized.