NHL 2012-2013: Possible Uniform Changes

[Webhamster]

Besides, that misses the point. The problem with the name Lone Stars is due to the fact that "Lone" signifies there can only be one of whatever it's describing. Thus "Lone Stars" is not only incorrect, but it's a terrible name for a team.

Just had to...

[VancouverFan69]

Could the same be said of "North Stars" since there's only one north star? I guess Minnesota would be stuck with a singular name if the Minnesota North Star ever hit the ice.

Actually there's more then one north star.

Besides, that misses the point. The problem with the name Lone Stars is due to the fact that "Lone" signifies there can only be one of whatever it's describing. Thus "Lone Stars" is not only incorrect, but it's a terrible name for a team.

Anyway the "why can't there be two teams with Stars in their name? We have the Red Sox and the White Sox after all" doesn't really work. The Red Sox and White Sox got their names before sports branding really came into its own. The fact that both of those teams in the same league have similar names is a relic of a bygone era. It wouldn't be permitted to happen in the 21st century.

Sorry, but Lone Stars is not a terrible name by any means. It actually makes a lot of sense. Even Minnesota fans who long for the North Stars any day over the Wild have suggested this. Texas is the Lone Star state and renaming the Stars as the "Lone Stars" would be another way of renaming them the "Texans". Because the club has used the Stars name and won a Cup with it, it's a way of keeping the Stars name while giving Minnesota back their true classic identity.

You talk about sports branding. Well, even in the era of so-called "branding", an NHL team was allowed to name themselves after a Disney movie, "The Mighty Ducks". Add more insult to injury, Anaheim didn't use Anaheim Mighty Ducks, they used Mighty Ducks OF Anaheim, which was idiotic, moronic, and just plain stupid. If the NHL can allow a team to use such a joke of a name, they can allow two teams to use the same partial name which sound way more professional. Lone Stars is no different than Red Wings or Blue Jackets.

[VancouverFan69]

This is VERY wishful thinking but I always thought how great for hockey it would be if BOTH the Minnesota Wild and the Dallas Stars did a rebrand together. The name "Wild" is a horrible joke of a major league team name while "Stars" is way too generic. If baseball's American League can have both the Red SOX and the White SOX, there should be no reason why the NHL cannot have both the North Stars and the Lone Stars? Both franchises can share the North Stars' history '67-'03. The North Stars would be a kelly/forest green and athletic gold team and Dallas could be a kelly green and black team. With two green teams including a revived North Stars brand and an improved Dallas brand, the NHL marketing machine would be rolling in the dough and hockey fans in both Minny and Dallas would be the biggest winners.

Disagree.

First of all, the name "Lone Stars" is an oxymoron. It's a lone star or multiple stars. The name might be generic but it's etched into the Stanley Cup.

The Wild may have an awful, minor league name but they have a spectacular logo and colour scheme. If only they utilized them properly on their jerseys, they'd be among the best looking teams in the league. Put the primary logo front and centre on simple clean jerseys that use Green, Red, Gold and White. No phatom shoulder yokes, no circular logos, no scripts and no "wheat" anywhere outside the logos.

Looking good is one thing and it's important. However, sounding good is just as important. I have a collection of NHL jerseys and I wore my early 80s green North Stars on St. Patrick's Day. Every where I went throughout the day, I received so many compliments on how sharp my North Stars jersey looked. I told people exactly what I've been saying in my recent posts and they agreed wholeheartedly. The Wild may have a splendid logo and forest green, gold, and red do look good together but sorry, the Wild is a bushleague name and it should be restricted to the likes of arena football, indoor soccer, and NLL lacrosse.

[Sport]

Lone Stars is a terrible name by every means.

Not sure what the Mighty Ducks has to do with this, but the Red Wings and Blue Jackets names make sense grammatically. You talk about jokes of a name. People would laugh at the league that allowed the Lone Stars in. "Stars" is perfectly representative of Texas on its own.

Do you understand the definition of the word "Lone"?

[IceCap]

Could the same be said of "North Stars" since there's only one north star? I guess Minnesota would be stuck with a singular name if the Minnesota North Star ever hit the ice.

Actually there's more then one north star.

Besides, that misses the point. The problem with the name Lone Stars is due to the fact that "Lone" signifies there can only be one of whatever it's describing. Thus "Lone Stars" is not only incorrect, but it's a terrible name for a team.

Anyway the "why can't there be two teams with Stars in their name? We have the Red Sox and the White Sox after all" doesn't really work. The Red Sox and White Sox got their names before sports branding really came into its own. The fact that both of those teams in the same league have similar names is a relic of a bygone era. It wouldn't be permitted to happen in the 21st century.

Sorry, but Lone Stars is not a terrible name by any means. It actually makes a lot of sense. Even Minnesota fans who long for the North Stars any day over the Wild have suggested this. Texas is the Lone Star state and renaming the Stars as the "Lone Stars" would be another way of renaming them the "Texans". Because the club has used the Stars name and won a Cup with it, it's a way of keeping the Stars name while giving Minnesota back their true classic identity.

You talk about sports branding. Well, even in the era of so-called "branding", an NHL team was allowed to name themselves after a Disney movie, "The Mighty Ducks". Add more insult to injury, Anaheim didn't use Anaheim Mighty Ducks, they used Mighty Ducks OF Anaheim, which was idiotic, moronic, and just plain stupid. If the NHL can allow a team to use such a joke of a name, they can allow two teams to use the same partial name which sound way more professional. Lone Stars is no different than Red Wings or Blue Jackets.

McCarthy already covered the problems with the name Lone Stars, why it's NOT like the Blue Jackets or Red Wings, and why the Mighty Ducks have nothing to do with this at all.

As for old time fans in Minnesota wanting the North Stars name back? I'm sympathetic, I appreciate the history, and I personally think the 1988-91 set is one of the best uniform sets in the history of the NHL.

All of that being said, those old time fans need to realize that the North Stars moved and they're never coming back. I appreciate the history of the game. I truly do, but there's a line. It's like when my dad complains about the Rams being in St. Louis, the Cardinals in Arizona, and the Colts in Indianapolis. There's an appreciation for the history and legacy of a team, and then there's an inability to move on. The North Stars are gone, and that's that.

Besides, I applaud the Dallas Stars for maintaining the legacy of the North Stars. Save for the Calgary Flames (who kept as much of their old identity as possible upon moving) the Dallas Stars have been the best of the relocated NHL teams when it comes to honouring their past incarnation. It would be a shame to tell them they now have to share their past with a team that's not really part of that legacy.

Heck, I'm not even completely ok with the new Winnipeg team using the Jets name. At least they've made the effort to emphasize that they're not the Jets 1.0 team though. What you're suggesting would be to take the history of the current North Stars/Stars team and tack it onto a 2000s expansion team for nostalgia's sake. Sorry, that's wrong.

[Morgan33]

Looking good is one thing and it's important. However, sounding good is just as important. I have a collection of NHL jerseys and I wore my early 80s green North Stars on St. Patrick's Day. Every where I went throughout the day, I received so many compliments on how sharp my North Stars jersey looked. I told people exactly what I've been saying in my recent posts and they agreed wholeheartedly. The Wild may have a splendid logo and forest green, gold, and red do look good together but sorry, the Wild is a bushleague name and it should be restricted to the likes of arena football, indoor soccer, and NLL lacrosse.

Like I said before I don't care much for the name but it means one of the greatest primary logos in the history of the sport sticks around, I'll take it. I know Retro is really "in" right now and the main consensus on these boards is that every team should look backwards but...

Besides, I applaud the Dallas Stars for maintaining the legacy of the North Stars. Save for the Calgary Flames (who kept as much of their old identity as possible upon moving) the Dallas Stars have been the best of the relocated NHL teams when it comes to honouring their past incarnation. It would be a shame to tell them they now have to share their past with a team that's not really part of that legacy.

That was true until 2007/08 when they flushed their identity down the toilet for long sleeved, collegiate basketball jerseys. Luckily they will be rectifying this decision in a few years.

[VancouverFan69]

Could the same be said of "North Stars" since there's only one north star? I guess Minnesota would be stuck with a singular name if the Minnesota North Star ever hit the ice.

Actually there's more then one north star.

Besides, that misses the point. The problem with the name Lone Stars is due to the fact that "Lone" signifies there can only be one of whatever it's describing. Thus "Lone Stars" is not only incorrect, but it's a terrible name for a team.

Anyway the "why can't there be two teams with Stars in their name? We have the Red Sox and the White Sox after all" doesn't really work. The Red Sox and White Sox got their names before sports branding really came into its own. The fact that both of those teams in the same league have similar names is a relic of a bygone era. It wouldn't be permitted to happen in the 21st century.

Sorry, but Lone Stars is not a terrible name by any means. It actually makes a lot of sense. Even Minnesota fans who long for the North Stars any day over the Wild have suggested this. Texas is the Lone Star state and renaming the Stars as the "Lone Stars" would be another way of renaming them the "Texans". Because the club has used the Stars name and won a Cup with it, it's a way of keeping the Stars name while giving Minnesota back their true classic identity.

You talk about sports branding. Well, even in the era of so-called "branding", an NHL team was allowed to name themselves after a Disney movie, "The Mighty Ducks". Add more insult to injury, Anaheim didn't use Anaheim Mighty Ducks, they used Mighty Ducks OF Anaheim, which was idiotic, moronic, and just plain stupid. If the NHL can allow a team to use such a joke of a name, they can allow two teams to use the same partial name which sound way more professional. Lone Stars is no different than Red Wings or Blue Jackets.

McCarthy already covered the problems with the name Lone Stars, why it's NOT like the Blue Jackets or Red Wings, and why the Mighty Ducks have nothing to do with this at all.

As for old time fans in Minnesota wanting the North Stars name back? I'm sympathetic, I appreciate the history, and I personally think the 1988-91 set is one of the best uniform sets in the history of the NHL.

All of that being said, those old time fans need to realize that the North Stars moved and they're never coming back. I appreciate the history of the game. I truly do, but there's a line. It's like when my dad complains about the Rams being in St. Louis, the Cardinals in Arizona, and the Colts in Indianapolis. There's an appreciation for the history and legacy of a team, and then there's an inability to move on. The North Stars are gone, and that's that.

Besides, I applaud the Dallas Stars for maintaining the legacy of the North Stars. Save for the Calgary Flames (who kept as much of their old identity as possible upon moving) the Dallas Stars have been the best of the relocated NHL teams when it comes to honouring their past incarnation. It would be a shame to tell them they now have to share their past with a team that's not really part of that legacy.

Heck, I'm not even completely ok with the new Winnipeg team using the Jets name. At least they've made the effort to emphasize that they're not the Jets 1.0 team though. What you're suggesting would be to take the history of the current North Stars/Stars team and tack it onto a 2000s expansion team for nostalgia's sake. Sorry, that's wrong.

We are going to have to disagree here. Winnipeg bringing back the Jets name was the right move. The old Jets were deeply beloved by the fans. If the league had had its financial house in order back in '95, the team would have never left. Also, if the Wild could re-brand themselves as the North Stars, it would make even more sense, due to the fact the franchise started in Minnesota. The Jets 2.0 team started in Atlanta, not in Winnipeg. Also, if Seattle ever re-enters the NBA, they get to keep the SuperSonics name and share the same club history with the Oklahoma City Thunder. Also, the North Stars were beloved a lot more in Minnesota than the Flames were in Atlanta. Furthermore, the Flames name goes well with Calgary, ie. Alberta oil and gas, '88 Winter Olympics and the Olympic Flame, and the colours say "Calgary".

Overall, I believe teams can be reincarnated, especially if they have had a positive history with their fans. I totally agree 110% with your dad. The Rams name belongs in LA and the Colts name belonged in Baltimore. Re-locating teams can learn from the Cleveland Browns. You and I had this discussion earlier regarding the NHL Rockies and MLB Rockies. I will give you that one for sure. But when there are teams that have enjoyed a strong fanfare in their respective cities, only to be ripped out of them due to corporate greed, the team name and colours, especially ones that sound and look good respectively, and its history should remain behind for the next available franchise.

As for the North and Lone Star name suggestions, check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_nickname#cite_note-ELT-66

[IceCap]

Actually I think what the Cleveland Browns did was a mistake, one of the worst made in recent pro sports history. It's forever muddled how relocation works.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't like relocation in and of itself. That being said, when it does happen, I prefer it for the team in question to keep their history, legacy, and intellectual property. We fans like to think we're part of a team's history. That's all well and good as we're caught up in the moment of watching. It's fine, it's part of the experience. Really though, we're just along for the ride. Teams are private entities, they don't belong to us or the city. They're private businesses and should be allowed to take their own history and intellectual property with them if they move.

Sorry, just how I see it.

As for the North and Lone Star name suggestions, check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_nickname#cite_note-ELT-66

I get that Texas is named the Lone Star State. Look at the flag though. Only one star. That's because the word "lone" means single, one, it's alone, it's by itself. It would seem rather silly if Texas went with the name "the Lone Star State" while having a flag with two or more stars. Or think about it like this. It would be silly if Texas and another state collectively called themselves the Lone Star States.

Same concept here. If you play for the Detroit Red Wings you're a Red Wing. That's fine. If you play for a team called the Dallas Lone Stars you'd be a Lone Star. Being a Lone Star would imply that you're alone, you're the only one. Yet you have a team of Lone Stars. Which doesn't make any sense.

So while the Lone Star State may be a fine nickname for the State of Texas, it doesn't make for good name for a sports team.

[BigBubba]

Yeah, let's have two teams names the "Stars" with pretty much the same colour schemes. And they can share histories, too! So - actually, instead of making a sarcastic comment, I'll let you figure out what's wrong with that yourself.

There's a difference between Disney naming their team after their movie, because they owned both. Dallas/Minny are different organizations. There's no way Dallas would let Minny choose that name, and even if, there's no way they'd change their name to accommodate them. Green/black and gold is tied with the Dallas/Minny franchise, so if the Wild rebranded as the North Stars and took a colour scheme from Dallas' history, that would just be wrong. That would be exactly like the Thrashers rebranding with the Flames' old colours.

I've been ripped before for wanting the Jets 2.0 to completely separate themselves from the Phoenix Jets and thinking it's dumb for the Senators to hang banners of the old Sens, but I still stand by my opinions for the same reasons.

[sportstar1212]

As much as I'd like to see the North Stars come back, I understand it can't work out. Besides, I'm happy with the Wild name, logos, uniforms, etc.

[The_Admiral]

I'm not happy with it at all, and avoid calling them "the Wild" out loud or in print whenever I can. "We're playing Minnesota tonight." "They have some good goaltending on Minnesota." "I don't think Minnesota has won a freaking game since November."

As such, they should just wear the tailed Minnesota script home and away. Now that's something you can steal back from the Stars!

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

I agree that they have one of the best packages in the NHL. Quite possibly the best logo. But the name is just brutal. I hate singular names but I can live with Avalanche and Lightning, as they are actually physical things. Wild is just stupid. It's like XXtreme or Mayhem or other stupid names that minor league teams use. I think that even if they went back to the North Stars name, and kept their entire package, but emphasized the Star in this logo more:

Maybe make the star bigger and gold in color and the moon cream (which makes more sense anyways).

[SenatorJake]

This is VERY wishful thinking but I always thought how great for hockey it would be if BOTH the Minnesota Wild and the Dallas Stars did a rebrand together. The name "Wild" is a horrible joke of a major league team name while "Stars" is way too generic. If baseball's American League can have both the Red SOX and the White SOX, there should be no reason why the NHL cannot have both the North Stars and the Lone Stars? Both franchises can share the North Stars' history '67-'03. The North Stars would be a kelly/forest green and athletic gold team and Dallas could be a kelly green and black team. With two green teams including a revived North Stars brand and an improved Dallas brand, the NHL marketing machine would be rolling in the dough and hockey fans in both Minny and Dallas would be the biggest winners.

Sigh... I would love for this to happen, but it probably never will. I doubt Dallas would ever unedergo a rebrand considering the Dallas Stars name is etched onto the Stanley Cup.

I also doubt that the NHl would allow two teams to share a franchise history. Honestly, if the Wild simply adopted the green, black & yellow colour scheme and changed their logo to something that more closely resembles the North Stars logo, I would be placated.

Like I said before I don't care much for the name but it means one of the greatest primary logos in the history of the sport sticks around, I'll take it. I know Retro is really "in" right now and the main consensus on these boards is that every team should look backwards but...

I vehemently disagree with pretty much all of your opinions, and this case is no exception.

The North Stars logo & jersey is about 100x better than what the Wild currently wear.

[SCL]

Yeah, let's have two teams names the "Stars" with pretty much the same colour schemes. And they can share histories, too! So - actually, instead of making a sarcastic comment, I'll let you figure out what's wrong with that yourself.

There's a difference between Disney naming their team after their movie, because they owned both. Dallas/Minny are different organizations. There's no way Dallas would let Minny choose that name, and even if, there's no way they'd change their name to accommodate them. Green/black and gold is tied with the Dallas/Minny franchise, so if the Wild rebranded as the North Stars and took a colour scheme from Dallas' history, that would just be wrong. That would be exactly like the Thrashers rebranding with the Flames' old colours.

I've been ripped before for wanting the Jets 2.0 to completely separate themselves from the Phoenix Jets and thinking it's dumb for the Senators to hang banners of the old Sens, but I still stand by my opinions for the same reasons.

The league gave Robert Neagle (Wild's first owner) the option of using the North Stars name, whether Bettman's mind has changed since then I am not sure.

[The_Admiral]

He was right to decline it; to have had the North Stars and regular Stars would've been confusing and dumb. The whole thing is especially silly because it never should have had to come to any of that in the first place. I'm of that bold opinion that if you run a hockey league in North America, you should try really hard to be in Minnesota and not let bad owners fail so spectacularly that they drive fans into the arms of high school sports. WTF, all parties involved.

The Wild's logo should be a horse running away from a barn door being closed.

[williamherbert]

"Lone Stars" is no worse than "Maple Leafs" (should be "Maple Leaves"). "Stars" is probably the most boring name in North American professional sports, but they chose it so they can live with it.

[SenatorJake]

I want this to be the Minnesota Wild's logo.

That is all.

[SCL]

If North Stars isn't possible then I hope for a rename at some point, I say go with Moose again and give the current wildlife bearcat treatment to a Moosehead instead...

and Norm Green still sucks

[philly97flyer]

I want this to be the Minnesota Wild's logo.

That is all.

Looks familiar...

Concept from my fantasy league for a Dallas Stars affiliate

[SenatorJake]

I want this to be the Minnesota Wild's logo.

That is all.

Looks familiar...

Concept from my fantasy league for a Dallas Stars affiliate

That's pretty awesome. I really like what you did there.

I did not design the logo I posted, by the way. It's from a series of NHL logo mash-ups on some guy's blog. I suggested he do a hybrid of the Wild & North Stars logos, and this is what he came up with.