CXLIX - FINAL thoughts on the Arizona Coyotes
- Thread starter Tom ServoMST3K
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Mightygoose
Registered User
GKJ
Global Moderator
- Feb 27, 2002
- 195,125
- 44,845
Under the proposal to transfer the Old Jets history to the current Jets, it would become recognized that the Jets started in 1972 in the WHA, joined the NHL in 1979, suspended operations for three years in 1996, reactivated as the Atlanta Thrashers in 1999, and returned to Winnipeg in 2011.
Trashpass
Registered User
- Dec 21, 2019
- 512
- 824
So is the Coyotes name available to Utah now? Coyotes sound so much better than any of those other available choices.
Yukon Joe
Registered User
I don't know if the NHL ever really recognizes WHA stats/history. Just as an example I went to the Oilers website (the only remaining, unrelocated WHA team), went to team statistics - they only go back as far as 1979.
But I think the proposal would be that Jets 2.0 get the history from 1979-1996, the franchise suspended for 15 years until returning in 2011. The Atlanta history is a separate franchise, now suspended.
That being said I would love to see the Jets do a retro Thrashers jersey at least one time - playing the Flames of course.
I think the Thrashers history will remain with the Jets.
The next NHL team in Atlanta won't be called the Thrashers which I think is for the best especially since I want the Thrashers brand to be acquired by Atlanta's baseball team.
Yukon Joe
Registered User
The baseball team already has an identity. The thing about the Braves is the same as with the Chicago Blackhawks. There's nothing inherently wrong with the name "Braves". It's the logo and the chanting and the tomahawk chop that gets really cringey. If you took away the native american imagery you could still rock the name "Braves".
Even if the Braves decided to change identities - why on earth would they pick up the name from the former hockey team?
Plus - I wouldn't rule out an Atlanta 3.0 being called the Thrashers. There are at least some hockey fans with a positive association to the name. That'll be up to the new owners though, not you or I.
The idea is to continue the bird theme of Falcons and Hawks. There are plenty other birds in Georgia a new Atlanta NHL team can use as their name.
Smirnov2Chistov
Fire Greg Cronin!
I hate to be a conspiracy theorist on this - but I find this surprising how 'quickly' he jumped out of this Arizona project now that everything seems to lead to nowhere.
As a person (and a fan who wants the state to succeed in hockey) from the outside, it looks like he purposefully wanted to tank the Arizona team to look for an out?
Again, tin foil hat is on!
As a person (and a fan who wants the state to succeed in hockey) from the outside, it looks like he purposefully wanted to tank the Arizona team to look for an out?
Again, tin foil hat is on!
Yukon Joe
Registered User
But he is apparently the one who insisted on the right to re-purchase a franchise. He continued with the land auction process. I'm pretty sure if he just wanted out the NHL would have let him just get out (in fact no reason to think they really wanted him as a partner).
Simplest explanatin is sometimes the correct one - after being turned down in the Tempe vote, and now being turned down in the land auction - he'd just had enough.
I hate to admit it, but this was one of my first thoughts as well. The league did this whole silly thing with legal fictions abounding just for the reactivation to go up and smoke in under two months
Nope, they took the lazy way out and went with nothing for this year.
Trashpass
Registered User
- Dec 21, 2019
- 512
- 824
I know for this season, but the Coyotes name wasn't available to them in the future because the owner kept all the rights for that name. So I was wondering since he has now backed out would the name be up for grabs for Utah to use. I'm dreading the name Yeti
because I know that's what will win.
GKJ
Global Moderator
- Feb 27, 2002
- 195,125
- 44,845
They’re not picking up the Coyotes. That’s Arizona’s name.
Boris Zubov
No relation to Sergei, Joe
That name is so toxic it should be shelved permanently, even in AZ.
All fhia nonsense about names. 
A name is just a string of characters that labels something. That's it
A name is just a string of characters that labels something. That's it
AZDesertKnight
Deactivated Coyotes Fan
100% It’s cancer..
Just make kachina style jerseys if a team returns under a different brand.
Llama19
Registered User
It is quite laughable...that the author of this article...
used a picture of Xavier Gutierrez...likely thinking it was Alex Meruelo...
looselyaffiliatedwithcchawkley.substack.com/p/failing-arizona-meruelo-washes-hands
used a picture of Xavier Gutierrez...likely thinking it was Alex Meruelo...
looselyaffiliatedwithcchawkley.substack.com/p/failing-arizona-meruelo-washes-hands
sneakytitz
Registered User
If Krause gets the expansion, yes they will. And I won't say a thing further.
Yukon Joe
Registered User
I feel like the name of a team following a relocation is actually a kind of dumb tradition.
I mean it maybe works for the Raiders, who have had a long-time national following and identity, so it makes sense for the name to follow them from Oakland to LA to Oakland to Vegas.
But otherwise? I don't care how many years later, the LA Lakers or Utah Jazz still sound kind of weird. I think there's a reason why in the NHL team names have NOT followed the franchise after a relocation (in fact I can't think of a single time it has, though probably someone will bring up some 1930s example I'm not thinking of).
(as I think about it I can think of lots of examples of minor or junior hockey - but there it more comes down to not wanting to pay for all new jerseys)
I mean it maybe works for the Raiders, who have had a long-time national following and identity, so it makes sense for the name to follow them from Oakland to LA to Oakland to Vegas.
But otherwise? I don't care how many years later, the LA Lakers or Utah Jazz still sound kind of weird. I think there's a reason why in the NHL team names have NOT followed the franchise after a relocation (in fact I can't think of a single time it has, though probably someone will bring up some 1930s example I'm not thinking of).
(as I think about it I can think of lots of examples of minor or junior hockey - but there it more comes down to not wanting to pay for all new jerseys)
