Utah team nickname/colors/logo, mascot (and related marketing)

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
38,798
5,011
Auburn, Maine
The Cincinnati Stingers were not a minor-league team.
the Cincinnati Stingers definitely were a minor league team..... was the Central Hockey League a major league on par w/ the NHL..... because once the WHA Collapsed the Stingers were shifted to the that league... fun fact.... ESPN Broadcast analyst Mark Messier is the major notable former Stinger as it was his 2nd professional team...
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,368
3,573
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
There are other elements that can make a team name stupid, no matter how much time you give it. If a team name doesn't have a form (or nickname) that can be reasonably applied to an individual member of the team, it's going to sound stupid no matter how long you have it.

Travis Konecny plays for the Flyers. He is a Flyer. That works fine.
Steven Stamkos plays for the Lightning. He is a Bolt. That is tolerable.
Clayton Keller plays for the Utah Powder. What the hell is he then?

You're not wrong. It's a very "every rhombus is a rectangle but not all rectangles are rhobii" situation.

Some names start dumb and aren't dumb after decades because you're used to them (Athletics for example).

Some names start dumb and are dumb IF YOU THINK ABOUT THEM because of the decades of being used to them you just don't think about how dumb they are (LA Lakers, looking at you).

And some names start dumb and remain dumb (Orlando Magic for example).
 

the big nobody

Registered User
Jun 4, 2024
30
35
New West, BC
the Cincinnati Stingers definitely were a minor league team..... was the Central Hockey League a major league on par w/ the NHL..... because once the WHA Collapsed the Stingers were shifted to the that league... fun fact.... ESPN Broadcast analyst Mark Messier is the major notable former Stinger as it was his 2nd professional team...
Well, if you want to go down that road, there are or have been plenty of minor league or even major junior teams that had the same name as a future, present, or past NHL team. The legendary New Westminster Bruins of the 70s won four straight WHL championships with that name. It doesn't change the fact that the WHA Stingers were a major league team and the Utah NHL team should've adopted Stingers as their name.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
38,798
5,011
Auburn, Maine
Well, if you want to go down that road, there are or have been plenty of minor league or even major junior teams that had the same name as a future, present, or past NHL team. The legendary New Westminster Bruins of the 70s won four straight WHL championships with that name. It doesn't change the fact that the WHA Stingers were a major league team and the Utah NHL team should've adopted Stingers as their name.
WHAT DOES ANY OF THAT HAVE TO DO W/ Utah or the former Coyotes franchise which originally was Winnipeg.
 

No Fun Shogun

34-38-61-10-13-15
May 1, 2011
57,365
15,017
Illinois
More inane? No, but I also still hate the Wild as a team name, for that exact reason. It's not my team, so I don't have to engage with it often, but as far as I'm concerned, it's a terrible name, selected from a group of other terrible names, (White Bears was the best of the bunch, not that it matters now; what should have happened is the league should have left Minnesota the North Stars name, and had Dallas change to the Lone Stars, to set up a Red Sox/White Sox style thing.)

I do think Powder is there to make other names sound better, but you don't need as many terrible names as they have in that poll to make that point. We'll see what happens when they get down to a second round of voting.

The NHL seemingly has a history of wanting teams to exclusively own their own shorthand names. The Kansas City Scouts originally wanted to be the Mohawks, but the Blackhawks nixed that idea, and in the same vein Vegas was strongly considering either the Nighthawks, Redhawks, or Desert Hawks back in 2016 again before some behind the scenes rumblings maybe pushed them away from those.

Even if Dallas had been the Lone Stars, that likely would’ve been enough to preclude the North Stars branding getting revived.

In other words, for any future expansion or relocation, if the obvious shorthand is already taken, it’s a safe bet that they won’t allow something else like that. So, no -hawks, -wings, -stars, -leafs, etc. So if Portland gets a team, they almost assuredly won’t get to promote the Winterhawks branding to the NHL.
 

rojac

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Apr 5, 2007
13,270
3,120
Waterloo, ON
You're not wrong. It's a very "every rhombus is a rectangle but not all rectangles are rhobii" situation.

Some names start dumb and aren't dumb after decades because you're used to them (Athletics for example).

Some names start dumb and are dumb IF YOU THINK ABOUT THEM because of the decades of being used to them you just don't think about how dumb they are (LA Lakers, looking at you).

And some names start dumb and remain dumb (Orlando Magic for example).
I always liked the Orlando Magic as a name but I have no bias against names that are not plurals.
 

No Fun Shogun

34-38-61-10-13-15
May 1, 2011
57,365
15,017
Illinois


Still dumb to me that an entire offseason isn't enough time to pick a permanent name, logo, and jersey, even accounting for Fanatics assuredly having their hands full already.

Diagonal wordmark at least shows they did the bare minimum to not just be 100% lazy and have it be horizonal. So only 99% lazy there.
 

sneakytitz

Registered User
Mar 8, 2023
408
583
Atlanta, GA, USA


Still dumb to me that an entire offseason isn't enough time to pick a permanent name, logo, and jersey, even accounting for Fanatics assuredly having their hands full already.

Diagonal wordmark at least shows they did the bare minimum to not just be 100% lazy and have it be horizonal. So only 99% lazy there.


I miss the Atlanta Knights...
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
191,819
42,843
They picked the right blue considering the league has entirely too much blue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voight

Puckrobber

Backup Netminder
Feb 28, 2016
402
455
Central Oklahoma
I like 'em. We knew it would be just a 1 year placeholder until the permanent name & jersey arrived. Love the sky blue trim. Will look good with whatever the permanent name becomes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JBeast

Puckrobber

Backup Netminder
Feb 28, 2016
402
455
Central Oklahoma
I know some people are scrunching their nose at the 1 year only jerseys. But, they've gotta look better than the Devils' 3rd jersey. I like the Devils, but, woof!
 

Attachments

  • ANYNAMEANDNUMBERNEWJERSEYDEVILSTHIRDJERSEYFRONT_781x.jpg
    ANYNAMEANDNUMBERNEWJERSEYDEVILSTHIRDJERSEYFRONT_781x.jpg
    26.2 KB · Views: 1
  • Like
Reactions: Bonk and Voight

No Fun Shogun

34-38-61-10-13-15
May 1, 2011
57,365
15,017
Illinois
Their eventual games versus the Bolts will be the most boring matchup aesthetically if Tampa wears their primaries, too.

For our sake, hope the Bolts wear their black thirds both games.
 

rojac

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Apr 5, 2007
13,270
3,120
Waterloo, ON
Their eventual games versus the Bolts will be the most boring matchup aesthetically if Tampa wears their primaries, too.

For our sake, hope the Bolts wear their black thirds both games.
As long as you can tell the two teams apart, who cares what they wear?
 

Yukon Joe

Registered User
Aug 3, 2011
6,777
4,806
YWG -> YXY -> YEG
I kind of like light blue / powder blue as a uniform colour. I like that Utah is using it, wish they'd use it as more than just a minor accent.

Those jerseys are pretty plain, but by design.

But here's the question - if you're a Utah fan, do you buy one of these jerseys knowing it's only for one year? Do you buy it to show you're an "OG fan"? Or do you wait until the permanent jersey comes on sale.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Puckrobber

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad