Mac the Knife

Latest Rumor: NHL Team Expected to Announce Rebranding in 2012

Recommended Posts

Everyone is overlooking Columbus, I could totally see them renaming them self's the "Ohio _____" and playing games in Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati. All three have arena's with 14,000+, and all have had some sort of pro hockey teams play in there. Pending these rumors are true of course.

I could see Cincinnati getting up for an NHL game, but Cleveland is completely unimpressed with anything from Ohio that isn't Cleveland and they're all weirdly opposed to the sport of hockey. When they got an NBA team in 2003 it really messed that city up because back in the day, Cleveland was a darn good AHL town.

Anyways, regional teams have never really worked and no free agent would want to endure that travel schedule.

Oh, now that's not true. There are no CBJ fans up here because they don't win and TV is monopolized by the Cavaliers.

(I'll also let you know the Monsters averaged the best attendance this Calder Cup playoffs...with only 4 games played at home but drew over 8,100 each game.)

People here root for Ohio State and the Crew if they like soccer, but the team has got to win first. Otherwise they're Wongs or Pens fans.

I've never met anyone from Cleveland (under 30) who claims to be a die-hard hockey fan. Moreover they seem to have a bizarre anti-hockey stance, and Cleveland gets awful ratings for nationally televised NHL games. Now the Monsters' attendance surprises me because televised regular season games always look like there's more players than fans.

Anyways, I'm saying a team in Cleveland would not be the success that everyone thinks it would.

Well you're talking to a die-hard hockey fan that's 20. Also, isn't it normal that a city loves its own teams? Cleveland isn't anti-hockey, but it's spoiled on major league teams. If there was an NHL team here and it was advertised, people would come. Once the Monsters made the playoffs and started advertising, I saw a jump of around 1,250 or so average more attendance each game in the reg season. Also, Lake Erie had top 10 attendance in AHL. People will like hockey here but they want a winner.

Which we both know the CBJ are not. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone is overlooking Columbus, I could totally see them renaming them self's the "Ohio _____" and playing games in Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati. All three have arena's with 14,000+, and all have had some sort of pro hockey teams play in there. Pending these rumors are true of course.

I could see Cincinnati getting up for an NHL game, but Cleveland is completely unimpressed with anything from Ohio that isn't Cleveland and they're all weirdly opposed to the sport of hockey. When they got an NBA team in 2003 it really messed that city up because back in the day, Cleveland was a darn good AHL town.

Anyways, regional teams have never really worked and no free agent would want to endure that travel schedule.

Oh, now that's not true. There are no CBJ fans up here because they don't win and TV is monopolized by the Cavaliers.

(I'll also let you know the Monsters averaged the best attendance this Calder Cup playoffs...with only 4 games played at home but drew over 8,100 each game.)

People here root for Ohio State and the Crew if they like soccer, but the team has got to win first. Otherwise they're Wongs or Pens fans.

I've never met anyone from Cleveland (under 30) who claims to be a die-hard hockey fan. Moreover they seem to have a bizarre anti-hockey stance, and Cleveland gets awful ratings for nationally televised NHL games. Now the Monsters' attendance surprises me because televised regular season games always look like there's more players than fans.

Anyways, I'm saying a team in Cleveland would not be the success that everyone thinks it would.

Well you're talking to a die-hard hockey fan that's 20. Also, isn't it normal that a city loves its own teams? Cleveland isn't anti-hockey, but it's spoiled on major league teams. If there was an NHL team here and it was advertised, people would come. Once the Monsters made the playoffs and started advertising, I saw a jump of around 1,250 or so average more attendance each game in the reg season. Also, Lake Erie had top 10 attendance in AHL. People will like hockey here but they want a winner.

Which we both know the CBJ are not. :(

Which is the same everywhere. You put the CBJ and their 10 year track record in Cleveland and the attendance wouldn't be any better than it is in Columbus. Actually based on the Cavs' 11,000 the year before Lebron, it would probably be worse. Cleveland is not a better hockey market than Columbus, as Vmd9 surmised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My gut tells me the team making the change is Carolina. Florida would be next in line, but not with all of these changes we're hearing for 2011-12.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple thoughts/questions about the crazy speculation going on here:

If a team was truly planning on going regional, I think it would almost certainly leak from somewhere other than a sports logos message board. That would be huge news in the hockey world and someone high up in the media would probably know before a guy working on a name/uniform rebrand would know (and tell his friend). No offense to Mac or his friend, I just doubt we'd all first be hearing about a story like that in this context.

Did Mac confirm that the "something that's never been done in the NHL before" will not include a possible corporate tie-in (either in the name of the team or in ads on the sweater)? I thought I read someone say that earlier in the thread, but then people kept talking about it. That seems like the most obvious possibility to me.

Also, do we know if the "something that's never been done in the NHL before" is related to just the uniforms or something bigger (like the team name or city it plays in)? For all we know, it could be something relatively insignificant like nameplates on the front of the sweater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Mac confirm that the "something that's never been done in the NHL before" will not include a possible corporate tie-in (either in the name of the team or in ads on the sweater)? I thought I read someone say that earlier in the thread, but then people kept talking about it. That seems like the most obvious possibility to me.

Mac said there would be no corporate tie-in. See Page 6 of this thread for more info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple thoughts/questions about the crazy speculation going on here:

If a team was truly planning on going regional, I think it would almost certainly leak from somewhere other than a sports logos message board. That would be huge news in the hockey world and someone high up in the media would probably know before a guy working on a name/uniform rebrand would know (and tell his friend). No offense to Mac or his friend, I just doubt we'd all first be hearing about a story like that in this context.

Did Mac confirm that the "something that's never been done in the NHL before" will not include a possible corporate tie-in (either in the name of the team or in ads on the sweater)? I thought I read someone say that earlier in the thread, but then people kept talking about it. That seems like the most obvious possibility to me.

Also, do we know if the "something that's never been done in the NHL before" is related to just the uniforms or something bigger (like the team name or city it plays in)? For all we know, it could be something relatively insignificant like nameplates on the front of the sweater.

The "something that's never been done before" might seem like a huge thing to some people and turn out to be nothing special to those of us around here. I mean c'mon. We're the frickin Star Wars nerds of sports logos. Our expectations may be quite a bit higher than normal people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple thoughts/questions about the crazy speculation going on here:

The "something that's never been done before" might seem like a huge thing to some people and turn out to be nothing special to those of us around here. I mean c'mon. We're the frickin Star Wars nerds of sports logos. Our expectations may be quite a bit higher than normal people.

^^^ Post of the day^^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My first thought was Tampa, then I quickly remembered the rebrand. Then I thought of Dallas, as the name is fairly generic. But the 99 cup makes me think otherwise. So the question is how important is a new alt or primary?

I'd say one of the following:

  • Florida: The most irrelevant team in sports. I could see them going with "Miami" since there is another team in FLA (though there was when they started). The Marlins are doing it. I always thought it was weird for a team in a state with more than one team to name after the state.
  • Carolina:Though they won a cup too. But their uniform is so boring. Plus some people don't like natural disaster names.
  • Nashville: (How key are the new uniforms?)
  • Phoenix: May be a stretch to connect to the Winnipeg move...I hope not. As long as they are in PHO, it's a great name.
  • Anaheim: Maybe a SoCal resident has a sense of whether the old identity is preferred. I hope they don't go back to the Disney name. I could deal with the logo/colors, but no "Mighty"

If I had to make one guess, I'd say Florida becomes Miami and changes their name.

One scenario I thought of is the Kings. They are by far the most established of the "southern based" teams and my gut was "no way." But consider this: the Sacramento Kings are probably coming to Anaheim. Would the LA Kings change to separate themselves (and take advantage of an opportunity to get new merchandise out)? I hope not...that would send the message that the NHL is rolling over for the NBA.

I am also intrigued by "something that's never been done in the NHL before". Then again, word on the expansion bobcats uniform was that it was going to be revolutionary (leading to rumors of clear side panels) and...meh.

If it were the Panthers, I would know because I still have a lot of friends in the organization. They're switching to red, that's about it. On top of it, the Panthers play in Sunrise, not Miami. Sunrise is in Broward County, and the county owns the arena. Therefore, I don't see the Panthers as the choice in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the rumor is inded true, the two things that have been stated that seem to fit the stated criteria the best would be:

1. The Dallas Stars and the Cowboys somehow collaborating. This would be a partnership agreement that would be a first in the NHL to the best of my knowledge. Perhaps this collaboration would involve cross-promotion, shared uniform/logo details, or perhaps even a game or two at Cowboys' Stadium.

2. The Nashville Predators changing their identity to the Music City ________________. I think this would be the first time an NHL team adopted their city's nickname as the name of their team.

An NHL team yes, but not the first team to do it. Golden State Warriors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a team was truly planning on going regional, I think it would almost certainly leak from somewhere other than a sports logos message board. That would be huge news in the hockey world and someone high up in the media would probably know before a guy working on a name/uniform rebrand would know (and tell his friend). No offense to Mac or his friend, I just doubt we'd all first be hearing about a story like that in this context.

Did Mac confirm that the "something that's never been done in the NHL before" will not include a possible corporate tie-in (either in the name of the team or in ads on the sweater)? I thought I read someone say that earlier in the thread, but then people kept talking about it. That seems like the most obvious possibility to me.

Again I have to question the source of this "information." If an NHL team were to rebrand themselves with a corporate emphasis (a la "New York Red Bulls"), I think it would have become bigger news from a larger, more certifiable source.

I simply cannot imagine the Stanley-Cup-winning Stars, Lightning, or Hurricanes (or the Ducks, less emphatically because of their previous nickname and corporate connection as the Mighty Ducks) doing a complete overhaul of their brand. As a local Hurricane fan for their entire existence, the logistical nightmare involved with rebranding the franchise as a local/multiple-city team or corporate-sponsored team boggles my mind. The Hurricanes have spent the last 10+ years establishing their brand, logos, colors, etc. with fans, media, corporate sponsors, local radio and TV, etc. From a purely business standpoint (not to mention the design/branding issues), why throw that all away?

How do you handle season ticket holders logistically when you're playing "home games" in multiple cities? How do you handle the local corporate sponsorship? What is the nature of the agreement with multiple arenas and their holding companies? What is the business sense in dividing the brand loyalty among local markets, when each market's local sponsors don't get full exposure and each market's local ticket holders can only purchase so many tickets? It just doesn't make sense, and I cannot fathom how it could fit the NHL's business model.

Maybe I could see the "Florida" Panthers attempting to rebrand as the "Miami" Panthers. Maybe. Not likely. But I reiterate that until we have more to go on than hearsay and anecdotal evidence, no credence should be lended to this claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I think I figured it out. I did a 30 second "Worst Jersey Mockup Ever," but I think Carolina will be adopting Atlanta's old template. Then they'll change their names to a regional Deep South General Lees. It would attract a lot more of the general population out there.

GeneralLeeJersey.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think this is complete bull :censored:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I ask a question here? Why is it that so many people seem to have it stuck in their craniums that just because a team happens to win a championship, their logos/uniforms/identity suddenly becomes "untouchable"? Let's face reality here--this ain't the '50s, '60s, or '70s here--hell even the '80s and shieet, even the early '90s. Social/media/brand awareness is higher than its ever been, and if a franchise's front office/ownership feels like an identity overhaul, to whatever extent, will drive up merchandising revenue and/or fan interest, that's just what they gon' do, championship or not. (Case in point: the aforementioned Tampa Bay Lightning just won a Cup several seasons ago, and they're rebranding their identity. Hell the daggone Stars won Lord Stanley, then proceeded to virtually eradicate the green from their sweaters.)

To take this further (and get more specific), the NHL ain't got NEAR the visibility of the NFL or NBA--maybe not even NASCAR--in the American public conscience. As such, if there's a way they can generate some extra revenue or cast more of a spotlight on them, be it FoxTraxx or some type of corporate sponsorship (see the Arena Football League and now the WNBA), or to do something "unique and/or innovative" I wouldn't be one bit surprised if some franchise jumped on it. (This really ain't a good example, but) we all saw what the Sabres did, intruducing front numbers to their sweaters, then at least one other team (I forget which) tried it. History, tradition, its all great to hold onto for nostalgia and storytelling when it comes time to bounce your grandson or granddaughter on your knee and start telling them "back in the day" stories, but in this day and age, most of that may as well be obsolete--the corporate dollar's most likely what'll drive those types of decisions. Us sports fans (and logo/uni nerds) just gon' have to deal with it.

/that's just my two rusted Lincolns, anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think this is complete bull :censored:.

Agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or are the Carolina Hurricanes changing their colors to navy, green, and silver, and changing their name to "Hartford Whalers"?

If this was Facebook, I would have just clicked "LIKE".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or are the Carolina Hurricanes changing their colors to navy, green, and silver, and changing their name to "Hartford Whalers"?

If this was Facebook, I would have just clicked "LIKE".

I guess there's no rule that says you have to name the team based on where you play. I mean in theory the Carolina Hurricanes could call themselves the Manila Folders (I always thought this would be a good name for a team in the Philippines).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PuckDaddy introduced the idea when the Predators were slated to moved of having the Predators Hockey Club and letting them play their 40 home games at various locations on the continent. Could a regionalized version of that be ahead of us?

After giving it some thought, I think this scenario is highly possible. But I disagree that it's Nashville. I fully expect it to be Phoenix. I think the 2011/12 season in Glendale is going to be a lame-duck season as the NHL gears up to run the Coyotes as a "floating" franchise playing out their season in several neutral sites. Call them the "NHL Voyagers" or "NHL HC" have them play 7-14 home dates in places such as Quebec City, Hartford, Hamilton, Kansas City, Portland, maybe even Atlanta.

In my mind, it's not too dissimilar to when the Montreal Expos played "home" games in San Juan, or more acurately, when the Florida Bobcats of the Arena League played all of their games on the road back in 1997 or 1998.

Russian Penguins FTL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I ask a question here? Why is it that so many people seem to have it stuck in their craniums that just because a team happens to win a championship, their logos/uniforms/identity suddenly becomes "untouchable"? Let's face reality here--this ain't the '50s, '60s, or '70s here--hell even the '80s and shieet, even the early '90s. Social/media/brand awareness is higher than its ever been, and if a franchise's front office/ownership feels like an identity overhaul, to whatever extent, will drive up merchandising revenue and/or fan interest, that's just what they gon' do, championship or not. (Case in point: the aforementioned Tampa Bay Lightning just won a Cup several seasons ago, and they're rebranding their identity. Hell the daggone Stars won Lord Stanley, then proceeded to virtually eradicate the green from their sweaters.)

Not sure if this is addressed at my previous post or not, but it deserves comment. My point was never that franchises that have won championships have identities that are "untouchable." My point was simply that those franchises would need an incredibly good (read: financially unassailable) reason to do a complete overhaul of their brand. Based on what we've heard, we aren't talking about changing the shade of a particular color and redoing the color hierarchy and uniforms (a la the Lightning) or reducing the use of a particular team color (a la the Stars). We're talking about a fundamental change in the franchise's brand identity.

If you've won a championship (Stanley Cup), then you've developed an insane amount of public capital based on the recognition of that particular identity. Want to tweak the logo or the colors? Want to redo the uniforms? Fine. But I can't see the financial reasoning behind uprooting your established brand in such an unprecedented fashion. It doesn't make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I ask a question here? Why is it that so many people seem to have it stuck in their craniums that just because a team happens to win a championship, their logos/uniforms/identity suddenly becomes "untouchable"? Let's face reality here--this ain't the '50s, '60s, or '70s here--hell even the '80s and shieet, even the early '90s. Social/media/brand awareness is higher than its ever been, and if a franchise's front office/ownership feels like an identity overhaul, to whatever extent, will drive up merchandising revenue and/or fan interest, that's just what they gon' do, championship or not. (Case in point: the aforementioned Tampa Bay Lightning just won a Cup several seasons ago, and they're rebranding their identity. Hell the daggone Stars won Lord Stanley, then proceeded to virtually eradicate the green from their sweaters.)

To take this further (and get more specific), the NHL ain't got NEAR the visibility of the NFL or NBA--maybe not even NASCAR--in the American public conscience. As such, if there's a way they can generate some extra revenue or cast more of a spotlight on them, be it FoxTraxx or some type of corporate sponsorship (see the Arena Football League and now the WNBA), or to do something "unique and/or innovative" I wouldn't be one bit surprised if some franchise jumped on it. (This really ain't a good example, but) we all saw what the Sabres did, intruducing front numbers to their sweaters, then at least one other team (I forget which) tried it. History, tradition, its all great to hold onto for nostalgia and storytelling when it comes time to bounce your grandson or granddaughter on your knee and start telling them "back in the day" stories, but in this day and age, most of that may as well be obsolete--the corporate dollar's most likely what'll drive those types of decisions. Us sports fans (and logo/uni nerds) just gon' have to deal with it.

/that's just my two rusted Lincolns, anyway.

I'll second that, and I think a rebranding is less a permanent solution than it is a "we need to change things". I don't think a rebrand means that they won't change again, but rather they're going to keep changing until it works for them

examples: Mighty Ducks introduce different black third before changing name, California Golden Seals go to teal/gold before moving to Cleveland, Minnesota went to black with the STARS logo before moving south.

And I'm thinking it might be something rather minor, like 12" front numbers, even though we all know the Bruins did that a long time ago, most people consider it crazy-new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.