NHL 2012-2013: Possible Uniform Changes

[The_Admiral]

The Jets own the rights to the Jets and don't own the rights to the Thrashers, so it's not really the same.

I always thought "Renegades" would be a good Dallas hockey name, would've matched the Mavericks well.

[VancouverFan69]

Do you really think that having the Wild change their name back to North Stars is a silly thing? For your information, I am more than okay with having the North Stars back and having the Stars, not the LONE Stars, exist at the same time. The idea of "Lone Stars" was just an idea - a Texas concept of the North Stars because Texas is the Lone Star State and Minnesota is the North Star State.

I do. It's the same to me as Winnipeg naming the Thrashers the Jets. It's not the same team. Throw out a vintage jersey every now and then, but the North Stars are the Dallas Stars, just as the original Jets are the Coyotes. Gotta move on from the past.

If something had worked in the past, there isn't no reason why it cannot be resurrected. Not to get off topic, but here's an example: the Vancouver Whitecaps of MLS are not the same franchise that played in the NASL, '74-'84. However, both chapters of those teams have been combined. On the back of the 'Caps jerseys, it says "Since 1974".

However, I do agree with you about moving on. However, to see Minnesota use a terrible minor-league name like "Wild" is an insult to long time sports fans. What would be a nice name for Minny would be "Moose", their old International League team, just before it moved to Winnipeg. Moose is plural for the same word and it would have far more credibility for an NHL team name. I'm just glad that Winnipeg brought the Jets' name back.

[RedSox44]

I mean, he has "69" in his username. He's clearly not the brightest bulb in the box.

For your information, "69" just happens to be my birth year buddy. And to insult me just because you disagree with my ideas regarding the North Stars, Wild, Stars, whatever, just shows absolutely no class. Disagree with me - fine. Come across like a troll and insult me?? Not very bright on your part. I'm not the "brightest bulb"? I think you better "lighten up" my friend.

How come your quotes keep messing up?

Anyway,

First off, I'm sorry. Whenever people use "69" in their usernames online, it normally a reference to the sex act, and almost never a reference to their birth year. I mean, I wasn't actually born in 1944 (for the record, 44 was Jason Bay's number back when he played for the Red Sox, and the first thing that came to mind when I was choosing my username). My time on the Internet has taught me to be cynical when it comes to usernames, especially ones with "69" in them (14-year-olds like "LAWLZ 69 IS SO FUNNY!!!!! THAT'S WHAT UR MOM DID 2 ME!!!!")

And I get the joke you're trying to make in regard to the lightbulb comment (I'm talking about the "lighten up" comment), but the person who should lighten up is you. Stop taking things so seriously. I mean, this is the Internet. People will criticize you, people will make fun of you, people will call you stupid and worse. Take it in stride, ignore it, carry on, be the bigger person (than I, in this case).

But seriously. Whenever I see 69 in a username, it's nearly always a 14-year-old pervert who thinks he's way funnier than he actually is. I'm sorry for assuming.

[VancouverFan69]

I mean, he has "69" in his username. He's clearly not the brightest bulb in the box.

For your information, "69" just happens to be my birth year buddy. And to insult me just because you disagree with my ideas regarding the North Stars, Wild, Stars, whatever, just shows absolutely no class. Disagree with me - fine. Come across like a troll and insult me?? Not very bright on your part. I'm not the "brightest bulb"? I think you better "lighten up" my friend.

How come your quotes keep messing up?

Anyway,

First off, I'm sorry. Whenever people use "69" in their usernames online, it normally a reference to the sex act, and almost never a reference to their birth year. I mean, I wasn't actually born in 1944 (for the record, 44 was Jason Bay's number back when he played for the Red Sox, and the first thing that came to mind when I was choosing my username). My time on the Internet has taught me to be cynical when it comes to usernames, especially ones with "69" in them (14-year-olds like "LAWLZ 69 IS SO FUNNY!!!!! THAT'S WHAT UR MOM DID 2 ME!!!!")

And I get the joke you're trying to make in regard to the lightbulb comment (I'm talking about the "lighten up" comment), but the person who should lighten up is you. Stop taking things so seriously. I mean, this is the Internet. People will criticize you, people will make fun of you, people will call you stupid and worse. Take it in stride, ignore it, carry on, be the bigger person (than I, in this case).

But seriously. Whenever I see 69 in a username, it's nearly always a 14-year-old pervert who thinks he's way funnier than he actually is. I'm sorry for assuming.

I accept your apology. However, when someone disrespects me, internet or no internet, I will hold that person accountable. And it takes a bigger person to stand up to those who disrespect me or anybody else. I have absolutely no problem with people who disagree with me. Having our own opinions is what makes each of us unique. If we all shared the same opinions, we would be like a bunch of NHL teams who go with BFBS, not distinctiveness.

Now, I see that one of your favourite logos is the Mets logo. The Mets are one of my favourite MLB teams. Now, if I were a huge die-heart Mets fan, I could easily use "Mets69" as my username because '69 was the year of the "Miracle Mets". I know all about the sexual connection with 69 and it's unfortunate. It happens be a cool number.

**By the way, my congratulations on beating the Curse of the Bambino and winning those World Series in '04 and '07.**

[The Giant Pacific Octopus]

I've been a Stars fan since 1979.

I remember when they were moving down to Dallas the media was speculating they were going to be called the Dallas South Stars. (It was a mix of "Lone Stars" and "South Stars". I'm going by the Canadian media here since I live in the GTA. I'm not sure what the Dallas media was speculating.). I always thought South Stars would have been cool. It made perfect sense as the team was going from the one of the most Northern states in the continental U.S.A. to one of the most Southern.

I thought the announced name of simply "Stars" was too dull and generic. I wouldn't mind a change to South Stars.

Minnesota's farm team back in the 1960's and 1970's were the Memphis South Stars.

[VancouverFan69]

I've been a Stars fan since 1979.

I remember when they were moving down to Dallas the media was speculating they were going to be called the Dallas South Stars. (It was a mix of "Lone Stars" and "South Stars". I'm going by the Canadian media here since I live in the GTA. I'm not sure what the Dallas media was speculating.). I always thought South Stars would have been cool. It made perfect sense as the team was going from the one of the most Northern states in the continental U.S.A. to one of the most Southern.

I thought the announced name of simply "Stars" was too dull and generic. I wouldn't mind a change to South Stars.

Minnesota's farm team back in the 1960's and 1970's were the Memphis South Stars.

That's an idea. Did you also become a Wild fan? (See how stupid that sounds?? Lol) If you are a fan of the North Stars' successors, what is your take on the "Wild" name? Would you re-brand them the North Stars and or would you go with my secondary idea, "Minnesota Moose" but with the Wild's original look?

[evanmaldonado]

I guess to me Wild isn't a stupid name because I love their identity, as well as it being all I know (didn't become a sports fan until 02), so I don't get the love affair with the North Stars. I also hated how that logo only had one star

[VancouverFan69]

I guess to me Wild isn't a stupid name because I love their identity, as well as it being all I know (didn't become a sports fan until 02), so I don't get the love affair with the North Stars. I also hated how that logo only had one star

That's more than okay. Lol. The North Stars' N-Star crest had an arrow at the end that pointed to "The North Star".

By the way, I love Man City's sky blue uniforms. Was disappointed when they didn't wear them here in Vancouver against the Whitecaps in last year's friendly.

[Morgan33]

How about the Stars remain the Stars...

[IceCap]

If something had worked in the past, there isn't no reason why it cannot be resurrected.

I agree. The problem is that the North Stars aren't dead. They're the Dallas Stars, using a variation of the team's last North Stars logo, wearing a variation of the North Stars' colour scheme, and (essentially) using the same name. The North Stars identity never really died, so it cannot be resurrected.

However, to see Minnesota use a terrible minor-league name like "Wild" is an insult to long time sports fans.

You're certainly free to dislike the name Wild, but how is it an insult? It's a bad name, but it's not offensive or derogatory. I don't see how anyone could be insulted by it.

Anyway the name Wild is terrible, but the team more then makes up for it with an excellent logo and colour scheme. While their uniform designs are all over the place I can't say I've ever really disliked a sweater of theirs. The Wild identity is worth keeping, the logo and uniforms are strong enough to overcome the name.

[Sport]

I keep re-reading this "Stars is too generic a nickname" idea and I don't agree. They're the only team in the big 4 named the Stars. There's very few collegiate teams named the Stars. AND, they play in Texas where the name Stars works better than it did in Minnesota.

This guy is trying to correct a problem that doesn't exist.

[BigBubba]

Why would Dallas change their organization's 45-year old name to accommodate the Wild changing theirs for no other reason but to try to claim their history?

[JQK]

Why would Dallas change their organization's 45-year old name to accommodate the Wild changing theirs for no other reason but to try to claim their history?

They've only had the name since 1993. 19 years.

[BigBubba]

Why would Dallas change their organization's 45-year old name to accommodate the Wild changing theirs for no other reason but to try to claim their history?

They've only had the name since 1993. 19 years.

Stars/North Stars is close enough. It's still their name.

[NYYNYR]

Man, the Caps sure love their retro third jersey (Winter Classic); they wear it every single away game. It looks great, so I'm not complaining. Are they just getting their money's worth because it's not a true "alternate" (in the same vain as the Sabres jersey???)

[Morgan33]

They've only had the name since 1993. 19 years.

Rebranding the entire identity right before the 20th anniversary would be a huge blunder on the Stars part. 19 years is a long time in hockey. Put it this way, the Sabres were in Blue and Gold for 26 years and when they changed that, it was seen as blasphemy

[_RH_]

So the official concepts had the shoulder logos upside down (first two)?

[Sodboy13]

Two Pre-Edge jerseys had it, not like it was commonplace. Also the scripts on some of those concepts looks very similar to the one on the current. Not trying to argue just legimately curious what year those concepts are from. Anybody know for sure?

The concepts are from 2001. The Wild were planning to roll out a third jersey for the '02-'03 season (note the "02" sleeve numbers), but held off for a season and introduced their red alternate in '03.

[VancouverFan69]

If something had worked in the past, there isn't no reason why it cannot be resurrected.

I agree. The problem is that the North Stars aren't dead. They're the Dallas Stars, using a variation of the team's last North Stars logo, wearing a variation of the North Stars' colour scheme, and (essentially) using the same name. The North Stars identity never really died, so it cannot be resurrected.

However, to see Minnesota use a terrible minor-league name like "Wild" is an insult to long time sports fans.

You're certainly free to dislike the name Wild, but how is it an insult? It's a bad name, but it's not offensive or derogatory. I don't see how anyone could be insulted by it.

Anyway the name Wild is terrible, but the team more then makes up for it with an excellent logo and colour scheme. While their uniform designs are all over the place I can't say I've ever really disliked a sweater of theirs. The Wild identity is worth keeping, the logo and uniforms are strong enough to overcome the name.

The name Wild is an insult to the intelligence of long time sports fans. For example, I'm a fan of the Canucks - therefore, I'm a Canucks fan. What if you were a fan of the Wild?? You would be a Wild fan. See how ridiculous that sounds? Most diehard fans who scream and cheer are "wild" and rabid fans, no matter who they root for. "The fans are going wild here at the Excel Energy Center!" REALLY???

Now, as much as I stand by my North Stars resurrection hopes, I did mention another idea in an earlier post - the Minnesota Moose. Now, THAT'S a great alternative to the North Stars 2.0. It was the name of Minnesota's International League team before it moved to Winnipeg. It's a double M name, the plural version is the same as the singular form, and the animal is found in northern Minnesota. I would use the Wild's current colour scheme but with forest green as the primary dark colour - home uniforms and block numbers on the whites. I also liked the last moose head logo of the Manitoba moose and it would fit perfectly on the front. If anybody is willing to do a concept, I'm all eyes. The Moose vs the Blackhawks. The Moose vs the Bruins. The Moose vs the Sabres. Minnesota fans would LOVE it and it would take a lot more of the sting out of missing the North Stars, which I know many fans still do.

[oddball]

If something had worked in the past, there isn't no reason why it cannot be resurrected.

I agree. The problem is that the North Stars aren't dead. They're the Dallas Stars, using a variation of the team's last North Stars logo, wearing a variation of the North Stars' colour scheme, and (essentially) using the same name. The North Stars identity never really died, so it cannot be resurrected.

However, to see Minnesota use a terrible minor-league name like "Wild" is an insult to long time sports fans.

You're certainly free to dislike the name Wild, but how is it an insult? It's a bad name, but it's not offensive or derogatory. I don't see how anyone could be insulted by it.

Anyway the name Wild is terrible, but the team more then makes up for it with an excellent logo and colour scheme. While their uniform designs are all over the place I can't say I've ever really disliked a sweater of theirs. The Wild identity is worth keeping, the logo and uniforms are strong enough to overcome the name.

The name Wild is an insult to the intelligence of long time sports fans. For example, I'm a fan of the Canucks - therefore, I'm a Canucks fan. What if you were a fan of the Wild?? You would be a Wild fan. See how ridiculous that sounds? Most diehard fans who scream and cheer are "wild" and rabid fans, no matter who they root for. "The fans are going wild here at the Excel Energy Center!" REALLY???

Now, as much as I stand by my North Stars resurrection hopes, I did mention another idea in an earlier post - the Minnesota Moose. Now, THAT'S a great alternative to the North Stars 2.0. It was the name of Minnesota's International League team before it moved to Winnipeg. It's a double M name, the plural version is the same as the singular form, and the animal is found in northern Minnesota. I would use the Wild's current colour scheme but with forest green as the primary dark colour - home uniforms and block numbers on the whites. I also liked the last moose head logo of the Manitoba moose and it would fit perfectly on the front. If anybody is willing to do a concept, I'm all eyes. The Moose vs the Blackhawks. The Moose vs the Bruins. The Moose vs the Sabres. Minnesota fans would LOVE it and it would take a lot more of the sting out of missing the North Stars, which I know many fans still do.

Your lame argument that has no credibilty is more of an insult to long-time sports fans than the name Wild is. To say, "I'm a fan of the Wild" or "I'm a Wild fan" is no more ridiculous than saying I'm a Hurricane fan (Carolina or Miami U.), a "Heels fan" (UNC), "Oil Fan" (Edmonton) or a "Rox fan" (Colorado Rockies).