ksupilot

2013-2014 NHL Uniform & Logo Changes

Recommended Posts

If only the Stars had some source they could draw upon for inspiration.. something from their past, maybe... Oh, hey:

preview_695_68497.jpg

I think if the Dallas Stars get rid of the stuff near the shoulders, use their colors, that they could pull it off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why the Stars are doing all of the anniversary stuff this year. They're a season early. 93-94 was their first in Dallas.

Do lockouts count?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why the Stars are doing all of the anniversary stuff this year. They're a season early. 93-94 was their first in Dallas.

This is their 20th year in Dallas. Would be their 20th season if not the 04-05 lockout. But in terms of anniversaries, this is the 20th year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which brings up an annoying bit of inconsistency with sports teams in general; some celebrate anniversary seasons, and some celebrate anniversary years.

For instance, the Bucs celebrated 30 seasons in Tampa in 2005 (as a team that began play in 1976). Conversely, the Lightning are celebrating 20 years in Tampa this year (as a team formed in 1991-92). It's not the best example, thanks to the lockout, but it does immediately come to mind.

EDIT: Should say 1992-93. Still, celebrating 20 years in 2012-13.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which brings up an annoying bit of inconsistency with sports teams in general; some celebrate anniversary seasons, and some celebrate anniversary years.

For instance, the Bucs celebrated 30 seasons in Tampa in 2005 (as a team that began play in 1976). Conversely, the Lightning are celebrating 20 years in Tampa this year (as a team formed in 1991-92). It's not the best example, thanks to the lockout, but it does immediately come to mind.

Also, while the Mariners and Blue Jays were established in the same year, Toronto celebrated its 30th in '06, while Seattle celebrated its 35th last year.

Also, VancouverFan69: Give it up already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they haven't officially announced the new logo then what is this logo that's prominently featured on their website?

9jXtS.jpg?1

I was thinking the same thing.

We see a lot of teams ween in new logos so to speak, especially on team websites. Maybe the focus is on the Star by itself because that will be a major component of the new logo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weren't the Lightning planning on introducing more black into their uniforms this year? Has that been put on hold?

There was talk about that when they unveiled the new look in January 2011. But when they announced that they were keeping the BOLTS alternate for this season, I think that killed expectations. I forget if they actually said there'd be no changes or if it was just assumed, though.

If the Lightning want to keep the Bolts alt, then at least replace the shoulder patch with the current logo rather than the latter.

LighningThirdJersey_display_image.jpg?1282412300

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Lightning want to keep the Bolts alt, then at least replace the shoulder patch with the current logo rather than the latter.

LighningThirdJersey_display_image.jpg?1282412300

That logo is so much better than the current it's depressing! All they needed to was put that on the front of a blue jersey with simplified striping and they'd have a unique look that respects their history and 2004 cup achievement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ter7ez865egocsy6cv5d17htn.gif

I'm fond of this, as it communicates the name without words and has more going on than just a grey circle. I don't understand why their actual logo said "Tampa Bay" without saying "Lightning." Just looked half-done to me, having been used to the old logo in all its amateur-hour glory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. The map of florida is poorly rendered and it bleeds into the black and blue details on the Bolt. The 2007-2011 logo didn't need to say "Lightning" as it is represented by the icon of the bolt. That being said I'd still take it over the awful current logo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ter7ez865egocsy6cv5d17htn.gif

I'm fond of this, as it communicates the name without words and has more going on than just a grey circle. I don't understand why their actual logo said "Tampa Bay" without saying "Lightning." Just looked half-done to me, having been used to the old logo in all its amateur-hour glory.

I never gave this logo a close look before, but that lightning bolt just looks slapped on top. The bolt needs to originate from the edge of the circle, like on the original shoulder patch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ter7ez865egocsy6cv5d17htn.gif

I'm fond of this, as it communicates the name without words and has more going on than just a grey circle. I don't understand why their actual logo said "Tampa Bay" without saying "Lightning." Just looked half-done to me, having been used to the old logo in all its amateur-hour glory.

I never gave this logo a close look before, but that lightning bolt just looks slapped on top. The bolt needs to originate from the edge of the circle, like on the original shoulder patch.

According to the main site, that was the unused version. Here's the actual version:

n8ejdktph45ge887gfn2ztbhg.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ter7ez865egocsy6cv5d17htn.gif

I'm fond of this, as it communicates the name without words and has more going on than just a grey circle. I don't understand why their actual logo said "Tampa Bay" without saying "Lightning." Just looked half-done to me, having been used to the old logo in all its amateur-hour glory.

I never gave this logo a close look before, but that lightning bolt just looks slapped on top. The bolt needs to originate from the edge of the circle, like on the original shoulder patch.

According to the main site, that was the unused version. Here's the actual version:

n8ejdktph45ge887gfn2ztbhg.gif

I don't hate the new Lightning look as much as most people do on here, but I agree this would have been a better simplification of the original logo. Simplifies, but doesn't deviate too far from the existing look. Now they are trying to work some of the old elements back into the new uniforms and it just looks forced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just find the whole lighting design switch ironic. Every day people around here complain about teams that use/used black. Call it unnecessary and throw out the dumb BFBS stuff. Not only that there was nonstop complaining about the new modern edge-design jerseys. THEN, the lighting eliminated black, when to traditional striping and everyone throws a temper tantrum. Another reason to hate Nike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Lightning were black, blue, and silver from day one. Black was their base color for 18 seasons. BFBS - black for black's sake - is the unnecessary addition of black to an established color scheme. It's not a blanket declaration that teams can't wear black ever.

Don't you ever get tired of being wrong about everything?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Lightning were black, blue, and silver from day one. Black was their base color for 18 seasons. BFBS - black for black's sake - is the unnecessary addition of black to an established color scheme. It's not a blanket declaration that teams can't wear black ever.

Don't you ever get tired of being wrong about everything?

This.

BFBS is the Islanders black third.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another reason to hate Nike.

That'd almost be a relevant point if Reebok wasn't the NHL's supplier. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude is all jacked up on the Cleve. No such thing as wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another reason to hate Nike.

That'd almost be a relevant point if Reebok wasn't the NHL's supplier. :rolleyes:

Are you new around here? everything is Nike's fault.

The old Tampa Bay uniforms were a mess. The logo looked like it belonged on a gatorade bottle and the font was very awkward. The only thing the new uniforms could use is the addition of some silver. There is no need for black to be used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just find the whole lighting design switch ironic. Every day people around here complain about teams that use/used black. Call it unnecessary and throw out the dumb BFBS stuff. Not only that there was nonstop complaining about the new modern edge-design jerseys. THEN, the lighting eliminated black, when to traditional striping and everyone throws a temper tantrum. Another reason to hate Nike.

There's a difference between hating modern looks and hating some of the cluttered, fill-tool Edge garbage. This is a great example of how to look modern and good:

stanley-cup-colorado-avalanche-june-11th-19961.jpg

This is a bad way:

Sens+third+jersey.jpg

Share this post


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