Potential Atlanta NHL Expansion Team Thread

[PredsfanJC]

The team needs to be the Atlanta Thrashers because:

• Its a great name, its the state bird
• Renaming the team this soon is a bad idea, you already have a core fanbase that relates to the team name and mascot.
• The logo needs to be the original Thrasher, but the Atlanta Flames A needs to be incorporated into the new jersey somehow. In other words, be the Thrashers, but rebranded to include the Atlanta Flames A, just like Calgary does on their alternate captains jerseys.
• You would never rename the Atlanta Braves the Georgia Braves, the A is too iconic.

 

[sneakytitz]

That's the only name I'd like less than Atlanta Thrashers. North Atlanta is still Atlanta, generically speaking, so there's no value in being beholden to hypertechnical geography. They're not now the Georgia Braves, for example, because they play in Cobb County outside Atlanta city limits.

Not to be a stickler, but their address is 800 Battery Ave SE, Atlanta, GA 30339. Until Cumberland incorporates, that will be their address.

I am in the same boat in 30340, across from 285. Until Doraville incorporates my neighborhood, which they likely never will since we're now a historic district and will fight it tooth and nail, I get to say I am in Atlanta, because my address says that.

 

[sneakytitz]

• Renaming the team this soon is a bad idea, you already have a core fanbase that relates to the team name and mascot.

This is the biggest factor. We're (almost) 13 years removed. There are still people that can't vote that remember going to Thrashers games. You'd be a fool to waste that nostalgia/brand identity.

Look no further than Thrashers nights @ Gladiators games. They've sold out both. Why? People still love the Thrashers. When they did the Flames throwbacks in 2015, they barely sold 4,000 tickets.

 

[Yukon Joe]

The team needs to be the Atlanta Thrashers because:

• Its a great name, its the state bird
• Renaming the team this soon is a bad idea, you already have a core fanbase that relates to the team name and mascot.
• The logo needs to be the original Thrasher, but the Atlanta Flames A needs to be incorporated into the new jersey somehow. In other words, be the Thrashers, but rebranded to include the Atlanta Flames A, just like Calgary does on their alternate captains jerseys.
• You would never rename the Atlanta Braves the Georgia Braves, the A is too iconic.

Calgary Flames aren't going to let you have the flaming "A" - they've been using it for too long themselves.

I wonder how much the Atlanta Flames would even really resonate anymore. They left town 44 years ago, so anyone with actual living memories of the team has to be in their 50s-60s at a minimum.

I suspect you're right the Thrashers name might have some positive vibes in that market, but it'll be up to any new owner to make that call. If you spend that kind of money on a team you might just want to decide on your own name and not get stuck with Ted Turner's leftovers.

 

[sneakytitz]

Years ago the Hawks had a City Connect alternate jersey called "Peachtree". It's one of the best jerseys I've ever seen in sports and it would make for an incredible color scheme for a team. Black, white, peach. You could call them the Georgia Peaches.

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

That stupid Falcons pick better be Atlanta's karma cost to get an NHL team back.....

 

[dj4aces]

That stupid Falcons pick better be Atlanta's karma cost to get an NHL team back.....

I don't even like the Falcons, and barely follow NFL prospects, and even I have to wonder what the hell they were thinking lol.

 

[sneakytitz]

I don't even like the Falcons, and barely follow NFL prospects, and even I have to wonder what the hell they were thinking lol.

I had to leave the NFL draft thread in the other forum on here after that pick out of embarrassment. It's like when your brother does something so embarrassing and you catch the humiliation by association. Lol.

 

[KevFu]

If you ever get the 30-for-30 made, I think it should be titled something like "$eptocluster™: Tentacles of a Sporting Disaster."

If they were the Chiefs, then "Too Many Chefs" would be a great title.

My opinion is, the "Thrashers" name is cursed. The team needs a bona fide fresh start, and the first step in that process is a new name.

Strong disagree for same reasons I said in the Coyotes thread. You have die-hards who want the Thrashers back. You don't have to "win them over" if it's the Thrashers.

I do think that a tweak would be fine, like the Jets 2.0 did. (I also long thought they should have gone with UGA Red and Ga Tech gold in their scheme, combining the two fan bases a little bit.).

As I've said many times, I was a staunch ITPer. But it's absurd to imagine that the 49ers have no problem being the "San Francisco 49ers" in Santa Clara or that both the Jets & Giants play in New Jersey, then make the leap that someone would have trouble naming an Alpharetta team "Atlanta."

It comes down to if the primary hockey audience in the area identifies with "Georgia" more than "Atlanta" or vice-versa. Neither would be sacrosanct.

You're absolutely right, but at the end of the day, it's "follow the money" -- The people providing the money for the facility are the ones deciding if Atlanta or Phoenix or Salt Lake (or Buffalo or Anaheim) is okay or not.

Glendale said "No Phoenix" to the Coyotes.
Utah said "No Salt Lake" to the MLB expansion attempt and may have to Smith (not sure if that's in the bill they passed, but he's definitely on the "don't bite the hand that feeds you" path).

The Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim is a stupid name. But that was the deal to get hundreds of millions to renovate the stadium.

Calgary Flames aren't going to let you have the flaming "A" - they've been using it for too long themselves.

Agreed, but the Thrashers wouldn't need the A to be ON FIRE. There could be some dialogue there.

 

[dj4aces]

Strong disagree for same reasons I said in the Coyotes thread. You have die-hards who want the Thrashers back. You don't have to "win them over" if it's the Thrashers.

That's why it's prefaced with "my opinion", and not "my business sense says". From a business standpoint, calling the new team "the Thrashers" makes perfect sense because it capitalizes on the nostalgia some have and it's a unique branding that isn't being used elsewhere.

One will come to find, perhaps surprisingly, that my opinions differ from what I feel is the right business decision.

 

[KevFu]

That's why it's prefaced with "my opinion", and not "my business sense says". From a business standpoint, calling the new team "the Thrashers" makes perfect sense because it capitalizes on the nostalgia some have and it's a unique branding that isn't being used elsewhere.

One will come to find, perhaps surprisingly, that my opinions differ from what I feel is the right business decision.

I'm fully on board with acknowledging that opinion may not follow business practice, and that "counter-intuitive" things exist, and just the sheer volume of variables make decisions convoluted. And even that how people FEEL is valid, (I.E. - "I don't care if it doesn't make sense to put a team in Quebec, put a team in Quebec!" or "Save the Oakland A's").


But this is one I just can't get behind. Like if you just said "I never liked Thrashers, so I'd like to see something new/different" that's totally just preference/opinion. Which is fine. I can't argue with "I think Thrashers is stupid" and you can't argue with "But I like it."

It was the the "brand is cursed" and "a fresh start is needed" that I felt compelled to argue, because those aren't preferences, but the actual business practice arguments.

Anyhow. Moving on.

 

[dj4aces]

It was the the "brand is cursed" and "a fresh start is needed" that I felt compelled to argue, because those aren't preferences, but the actual business practice arguments.

To add another layer of business here, this would also be why someone who would be a team owner would conduct research and have advisors. For all I know, Krause, Carter, or any of the other mystery unnamed groups trying to bring a team back here also didn't like the name, but those market researchers and advisors say the team should return as the Thrashers simply because it's a name the market prefers. We already know market research firms were involved in determining the best possible locations for a NHL arena in the market. It's just as likely those same firms asked folks about branding.

The fact is, you made an assumption. So, let me be clear: My opinion is just that. An opinion. It's not "a business practice argument" or anything else.

I make a conscious effort to not assume stuff. Pay me the same kindness. Hopefully this clears that up.

 

[Yukon Joe]

To add another layer of business here, this would also be why someone who would be a team owner would conduct research and have advisors. For all I know, Krause, Carter, or any of the other mystery unnamed groups trying to bring a team back here also didn't like the name, but those market researchers and advisors say the team should return as the Thrashers simply because it's a name the market prefers. We already know market research firms were involved in determining the best possible locations for a NHL arena in the market. It's just as likely those same firms asked folks about branding.

The thing about pro sports is it's inherently an emotional investment. There's a reason you don't see, I dunno, Apple, or Walmart, investing in sports franchises - it's not a great investment from a purely rational point of view. That's why you see billionaires invest personally.

The reason Bill Foley named his hockey team the Golden Knights had nothing to do with market research - it was because he was a West Point graduate, and their team is the Black Knights. He made it work for them, but it was a personal decision of the owner. Ownership in Seattle did go with the name Kraken because it was popular on social media - but it couldn't have hurt that one of the owners, Jerry Bruckheimer, was the producer behind the Pirates of the Caribbean movies.

Or Seattle is saying they'll put the name up to a fan vote, bracket-style. Even there though - ownership has pre-selected the 8 names they start with, and there' still lots of opportunity to massage the numbers as it goes (please no politics talk - an internet poll is completely different from an actual election)./

So you're probably right - from a purely marketing reason the name Thrashers would probably be best - you have potential new customers who literally grew up with the Thrashers name.

I very much doubt however that Krause, Carter, or whomever wont' have a heavy say in what the name is going to be.

 

[sneakytitz]

The thing about pro sports is it's inherently an emotional investment. There's a reason you don't see, I dunno, Apple, or Walmart, investing in sports franchises - it's not a great investment from a purely rational point of view. That's why you see billionaires invest personally.

The reason Bill Foley named his hockey team the Golden Knights had nothing to do with market research - it was because he was a West Point graduate, and their team is the Black Knights. He made it work for them, but it was a personal decision of the owner. Ownership in Seattle did go with the name Kraken because it was popular on social media - but it couldn't have hurt that one of the owners, Jerry Bruckheimer, was the producer behind the Pirates of the Caribbean movies.

Or Seattle is saying they'll put the name up to a fan vote, bracket-style. Even there though - ownership has pre-selected the 8 names they start with, and there' still lots of opportunity to massage the numbers as it goes (please no politics talk - an internet poll is completely different from an actual election)./

So you're probably right - from a purely marketing reason the name Thrashers would probably be best - you have potential new customers who literally grew up with the Thrashers name.

I very much doubt however that Krause, Carter, or whomever wont' have a heavy say in what the name is going to be.

I can't be bothered to source this because it was mentioned in this thread but Krause picked his location because it was in the middle of the former Thrashers season ticket holders heat map, similarly to how the Braves picked The Battery. He's putting his arena in the middle of his existing customer base so of course he's going to bring back the brand they paid to see years again.

Let's be honest, they could be called the Atlanta Asshats, we're still going to show up to root for them.

 

[GreenHornet]

Let's be honest, they could be called the Atlanta Asshats, we're still going to show up to root for them.

True, but let's not give anybody any ideas, eh? I mean, can you imagine the logo?

 

[KevFu]

True, but let's not give anybody any ideas, eh? I mean, can you imagine the logo?

Hey, that's why minor league baseball team names keep getting wilder and wilder! "Oh, that's ridiculous yet awesome, I'm buy some merch."

 

[dj4aces]

The "Atlanta Asshats" can be a minor league affiliate for the "Atlanta Traffic". I feel like there's a lot of marketing potential with that name!

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

Hey, that's why minor league baseball team names keep getting wilder and wilder! "Oh, that's ridiculous yet awesome, I'm buy some merch."

depends on whether Diamond Baseball Holdings is a 'monopoly' AS an ownership.... Kev.... that just added Binghamton AFTER adding POR/WOR in the offseason

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Asshat only works for the AL West.

 

[PredsfanJC]

Personally I prefer the Northpoint Mall location, but they are only a few miles apart, so it really doesn't matter. We just need this to happen.

 

[RBH]

GDPR Support

The Forsyth County Commission unanimously voted Tuesday to amend its memorandum of understanding with the development team behind The Gathering at South Forsyth, a $2 billion project anchored by an 18,500-seat arena. The amendment tweaks how much ticket revenue the county will receive from events at the proposed arena and reflects feedback given by the county’s school board, which also unanimously endorsed the project.

In the months since March, Forsyth’s development authority and school board adopted their own agreements to back The Gathering project with some tweaks to the county’s original agreement. County Manager David McKee said Tuesday’s vote to amend the county’s memorandum of understanding was like “putting belt suspenders” on the various agreements, bundling them into one package.

Forward Forsyth, the county’s development authority, in June voted to increase the amount of money the county will receive per ticket sold at the proposed arena to $2.50 — a $1 increase per ticket. The school board last month passed a resolution of support for the project, which Goldmacher said “was encouraging.”

The school board decided to change the formula used to calculate how many students will likely live in housing at The Gathering — the multiphase plan includes 1,800 apartments and 150 single-family homes. The county’s initial estimate didn’t differentiate between housing types. McKee said the new analysis estimated ”significantly less students” living at The Gathering.

In addition, the school board agreed to accept a $3 million payment from The Gathering team to build a Career Technical and Agricultural Education building at the 84-acre project site along Union Hill Road near Ga. 400. The education facility will replace a planned practice facility, which will instead be built at the county’s Denmark Drone Field park alongside cricket pitches, pickleball courts and other sports facilities.

 

[sneakytitz]

These amendments don't "poison" the deal, if you want to call it that, because they don't come into play until the NHL awards a franchise to Krause.

The likely purpose of these amendments is so that if the TAD vote fails in November (and I couldn't tell how how it's going to go though it will likely fail since that is a heavily conservative area and conservatives don't like taxes - I could be wrong though), it allows the Board to say they secured additional funding, thus helping their re-election chances.

I don't know how it is elsewhere but in Georgia public schools are largely funded through property taxes. These amendments ensure that schools still get big funding from this project without the TAD - likely in the order of $1.35 million or so a year (assuming 100 booked dates with the arena, with 75% occupancy). If the TAD passes, the Board will have secured substantial funding for the county.

My biggest takeaway from this is that Krause has big pockets/solid funding. He still has to sign off on the amendment but I am almost certain he was involved in this since this idea was broached at the initial MoU vote a few months back but not solidified after Krause's people said they weren't willing to negotiate on the fly (hence Krause's anger after the meeting).

From my standpoint, you don't potentially just give away all that money for 30 years, or whatever the term of the deal is, if you aren't confident you can make it work and not really mess with your bottom line.

 

[RBH]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1841615315450429885

 

[nhlfan79]

That guy thought the expansion process would be opened at the BoG meeting and that a franchise would be announced in December. Anyone truly plugged into what's really happening behind the scenes (with both groups) knew that timetable wasn't ever happening.

 

[aqib]

I'm fully on board with acknowledging that opinion may not follow business practice, and that "counter-intuitive" things exist, and just the sheer volume of variables make decisions convoluted. And even that how people FEEL is valid, (I.E. - "I don't care if it doesn't make sense to put a team in Quebec, put a team in Quebec!" or "Save the Oakland A's").


But this is one I just can't get behind. Like if you just said "I never liked Thrashers, so I'd like to see something new/different" that's totally just preference/opinion. Which is fine. I can't argue with "I think Thrashers is stupid" and you can't argue with "But I like it."

It was the the "brand is cursed" and "a fresh start is needed" that I felt compelled to argue, because those aren't preferences, but the actual business practice arguments.

Anyhow. Moving on.

Business practice is giving customers what they want. All that matters is what ATLANTA fans wants.

Its like with Cleveland retaining the Browns name and colors. When they Browns left in 1995, they hadn't done anything of consequence since 1964. They had 2 good years in the early 80s, and a 4 year stretch in the late 80s more notable for choking. They had 3 playoff wins in the their last 30 years in Cleveland. No one understood or liked the color scheme other than Browns fans. Its not like the Raiders where people who aren't even fans wear the gear as a fashion statement. Baltimore fans had no problem letting the Cleveland keep all that. They would have loved getting the Colts name and logo back if they could (even though that was mostly associated with crappy football after the Unitas era).

Even TNSE was considering other names but fans rallied for the Jets name. So if Atlanta gets another team if the consesus among fans is like consistent with those on this board go ahead and call them the Thrashers.