By Pete McGrath
Moving from French to Russian this week on the name, I figured I should give some other countries besides French Canada some love. While I've covered cities, sweaters, and TV deals, I have not covered the actual on ice product. That's what I'll cover this time.
I have to tie up some loose ends though from my last post however. As I said last time, it is pivotal that the NHL expands the TV footprint of the game. One of the best ways to do this is to PUT THE GAMES ON TV!!!!! Currently, due to the leagues broadcast agreement with VS., local broadcasts cannot be shown, even if your club isn't on the Versus schedule. That twelve year old in D.C. with the Ovechkin poster on the wall needs to be able to see his favorite player on TV. Also, the league needs to be more proactive in cases like Chicago, when Bill Wirtz refused to broadcast home games when the United Center wasn't sold out. Which leads to my next point.
Last time I suggested a pay to play system for the Stanley Cup to ramp up the intensity on the ice. Also I suggested a promotional stunt of having the money on the ice for the presentation. That idea was pretty unpopular, but I think people missed the point. I also wanted owners to pay up at the beginning, with the thought process that the financial incentive to win will eliminate the league's shitty absentee owners. While maybe the ante up/pay to play idea isn't a winner, I think all leagues should adopt what I'll call the Wirtz-Sterling rule (named for Donald Sterling of LA Clippers fame.) The rule should be that if an owner has shown a pattern of poorly operating a franchise, then they should have to sell the team. I think ten-fifteen years is a fair judgement call in this case. The Blackhawks play in the second biggest market after Toronto, but they are an afterthought in that city because of the Wirtz family's poor ownership. A strong Chicago franchise is important for any league, and the NHL needs to be more proactive in the future.
Shitty owners aside, the league needs to fix the shcedule. Every club should play each other at least twice. After the Stanley Cup last year, the Wings-Penguins match up should be a hot ticket in Pittsburgh. However, there is not Wings-Pens game in Pittsburgh, which is stupid. The league shouldn't try to create division rivalries where there are none- (I have a tough time getting amped up for Wings-Blue Jackets six times a year) A schedule set up like the NBA's would be fine. As it stands now, the Wings only play the Leafs, Habs, Bruins and Rangers once a year. Those original six match ups deserve at least two games. Also, to pick up the intensity of some games, add more home and home series. Home and homes allows the hatred from the night before to still be fresh in a player's mind, boiling over to the next game creating a more intense match up. How cool would it be to see Wings-Habs home and home, for the fans and the players?
The league has made some positive rule changes to combat the boring New Jersey style trap of the 90s. To me, hockey is the ultimate players game. Not to say good coaching isn't necessary, but hockey coaches cannot call in the pitches, nor can they signal in or draw up set plays. The league was heading in a dangerous direction for a while, but I think they righted the ship with some key rule changes. Most importantly, they brought back the tag-up rule for offsides. I like the no line change rule after icing, and I never liked the two line pass rule. Clutching and grabbing had to go as well. I'm glad the league let the players who can skate play. But they also need to make sure the league doesn't lose it's toughness. Also, I must say the shootout is pretty cool. I thought it was stupid before they had it, but now I am converted. I would rather five shooters go than three, but it's a cool way to end a regular season game.
That being said, the league better not think about touching the sudden death/golden goal OT in the playoffs. There is nothing more intense that playoff hockey, and nothing puts me on the edge more than overtime in the playoffs. The best way to improve the regular season is to try get the intensity to that playoff level. Obviously unlimited sudden death OT is a stupid idea during the regular season, but why not get rid of the OT loss and make every shootout either 2 points or zero. That way clubs wouldn't sit back and play for the 1 point at the end of regulation, but would play hard for the win.
The league has to ease up on their fighting rules. I remember when it would be Wings-Leafs in the early 90s, and as much as I wanted to see Yzerman and Gilmour match up, I really wanted to see Domi and Probert drop the gloves. First of all, nobody gets up for popcorn during a fight. Fights are cool to watch (as the popularity of MMA and Ultimate Fighting shows). Hockey fights have always been much more honorable than other sport's fights- no one spiking anybody (Marcus Vick) and no sucker punches then running away (Carmelo Anthony). Hockey players fight face to face. Hockey fights also ratchet up the intensity of a game, and can give a club something to rally around. The Wings kicked off that Stanley cup run in 97 by beating the crap out of the Avs at Joe Louis in a late regular season game. I think fights are a necessary evil in a way as well. I do not want there to be bench clearing brawls every night, but a good fight to get the bad blood out is ok. I also believe that there would be less cheap shots if fights were legal, because players would eventually have to answer to an enforcer. Let the players police their own game- because while a millionaire isn't going to care about a fine, a punch in the face still hurts no matter how much money you're making. Long story short, Gordie Howe hat tricks are good for hockey.
The league should also go back to the three official system. With players being as big and fast as they are now, it gets crowded out there with four other skaters. Also, you have one official with a close view of the play not making the call, and the guy far away from the play calling a penalty. That really burns a hole in my panty hose. Perhaps give linesman a little more power, but please go back to three officials. Also, at certain times the league takes safety too far. It is a crime against all of my fashion principles that something as glorious as Kerry Fraser's hair is now underneath a helmet. In the NHL's Mount Rushmore of beautiful flowing manes of hair, Kerry Fraser's immovable bouffant helmet doo is a definite shoo in. For the record, I nominate Barry Melrose, Marc Crawford, and Mike Babcock to also be blow-dried, combed, and sprayed into stone. If they let him go helmetless however, the league should probably buy carbon credits to offset all the CO2 and make Kerry Fraser officiated games more environmentally friendly.
The league should also empower officials to call the diving penalty more often. While hockey will never be like soccer, where players fake injuries for calls all the time, I wouldn't mind seeing the occasional player get thrown into the box for a dive.
When it comes to goalies, I have some gripes with the rules. Let the goalies play the puck- that stupid trapezoid thing doesn't really do anything. Also, if goalies play the puck more, they often time create chances/goals by sending an awkward pass up the boards (think Osgood against the Sharks). Passing with goalie equipment is hard, so let goalies screw up and create scoring chances that way. I also hate the delay of game penalty for sending a puck over the glass. I find that rule arbitrary and stupid, and it's not like that was a problem in the league prior to the rule change.
As much as Sean Avery drives me up the wall, I thought his screen against Brodeur was hilarious and should remain legal. What was illegal about it? While annoying, he also can't see the puck behind him so he can't make a deflection, nor can he get out of the way of a shot, meaning it's not a perfect play. Also, that's when a defenceman on the Devils needs to get the sand out of his vagina and knock him on his ass. Once again, let the players police their own game. Brodeur should have cussed out his defencemen after that play because they should've taken care of the matter in front themselves.
One last thing, I firmly believe in the touch up icing rule. I realize it takes longer, and I realize that every other league the play is blown dead after the puck crosses the goal line. But that rule separates the men from the boys to me. Much like getting both feet down in the NHL, the longer three point line in the NBA, and wood bats in MLB, I think this is a rule that separates the amateurs from the pros. Plus when a game is close, seeing two players hustle down the ice going after the puck is fun to watch, and shows who wants it more.
That's it for now. Next time I'll cover some other stuff that I forgot.
Showing posts with label If I Ran the NHL. Show all posts
Showing posts with label If I Ran the NHL. Show all posts
Monday, November 3, 2008
Friday, October 24, 2008
If I ran the NHL Part Trois
By Pete McGrath
This edition will cover some of the league's marketing and its TV Deals. Through the years I've always heard people say about hockey on TV "But I can't see the puck." Nothing made me cringe as much as those words (until I saw the stupid light up puck the league tried out). I don't follow that logic. I have never had that problem my entire hockey watching life. So if you can't see the puck, I am not writing this for you.
The NHL has always been a distant fourth in the four major professional team sports in the United States. What the NFL shows every league out there is that dragging your season out all year is not the key to success. The NFL thrives on TV money because every game is a big deal, and seeing as how their TV contract is bigger than all of hockey's revenue put together, it safe to say they were right. So what the NHL needs to do is get more people to watch the game, both in person and more importantly on TV (that's where the money really is). Here are my ideas.
First thing the NHL needs to do is grow the game at a grassroots level. I went to college in Cleveland, and I was shocked at how little people knew about hockey there. Steve Yzerman who is basically canonized here in Detroit is unheard of in Cleveland. People who are rabid Browns, Indians, and Cavs fans (it's not that they don't like sports) literally do not know who he is. Aside from the occasional Sabres fan, the only people that cared about hockey that were not from Detroit were people that had actually played the game through high school.
For this reason, I believe the best thing the league can do for its long term success is get kids to play hockey. Kids in America usually play Little League as a right of passage, high school football is a big deal all over the country, and often people play at least intramural basketball through their college years. The NHL needs to sponsor and facilitate the construction of as many rinks and the formation of as many youth leagues as possible. In Canada, the game of choice is always hockey, weather its watching or playing. The United States will never be as hockey crazy as Canada, but part of the reason people appreciate their NHL clubs so much in Canada, Minnesota, Detroit, and other Northern American cities is that a large part of the populous played the game "back in the day," or still plays in a weekend beer league. Long story short, the nicest arena in America occasionally full of fans won't be worth much in the long run if there aren't a bunch of little rinks in the area full of kids playing the game.
Getting back to putting the game on TV, the NHL made a terrible mistake by signing the TV contract with Versus. Versus is rookieball compared to ESPN. The camera is too close to the ice,
the set looks like a high school doing the video announcements, and Brian Engbloom's mullet sucks compared to Barry Melrose's. Mullets notwithstanding, the global reach of ESPN is simply incredible. ESPN's brand name is worth more than any other channel out there. ESPN is in every basic cable package, is on in every sports bar, and every college guy's dorm room is tuned to ESPN. Versus simply isn't always available.
I realize that Versus offered 60 Million year instead of revenue sharing- but that comes out to 2 million a team, which is for all practical purposes pocket change. This is like turning down the unpaid internship at the best company in your field to work for McDonald's and make some money. Yeah you get a little money upfront, but you are killing your future. Get back on ESPN because that way fans who have never seen you before might. People watching something else on ESPN like Sports Center might forget to change the channel and give hockey a shot. Versus generally has hunting shows on all day, so the NHL isn't getting a whole lot of lead in viewers. Also, Versus simply isn't as widespread channel as ESPN. Any basic cable package has ESPN and ESPN 2. The same cannot be said for Versus, which has left a lot of people who actually want to watch hockey shit out of luck because their cable package does not carry the channel. In conclusion, the NHL needs to pad its resume and take its unpaid internship. The exposure gained from being on ESPN can only help the league.
The league needs to realize that it shouldn't try to out NBA the NBA. Instead the league should embrace and market those quirky things that make the NHL and its players so great. One of my favorite traditions in hockey is the playoff beard. However, come playoff time you hardly ever hear about it. They should market the hell out of this. My product placement gears were turning on this one- why don't they have Gillette sponsor a contest for the best beard in the playoffs? That seems like a no brainer for me.
I was also upset when Bettman changed the Wales and Campbell conference to East and West, along with directional names for the divisions as well. I thought it was cool that the divisions were named after people, and it was unique to hockey. While they can keep the current alignment of teams, think of two people to name two divisions after and bring the old way back. If anything it'll put the league in the news for a bit and will generate publicity just like David Stern did with the NBA dress code a few years back.
These days, when I watch a baseball team celebrate in the locker room I can't tell if they won their division or the World Series. However, hockey players know whats up. They don't touch the Campbell Bowl or the Wales Trophy, because the Stanley Cup is the only true championship. The league needs to let the folks out there know about this great superstition. Market the conference championships as the "Don't Touch the Trophy/Bowl" series.
The NBA is expanding aggressively throughout the world, and the NHL needs to do the same. I don't think the league needs to put teams in different countries, because due to travel that wouldn't be prudent. Players will go to play in the league with the best competition, and that will be the NHL for some time. For example, while Brazil and Argentina produce the world's best soccer players, and their national teams compete for the World Cup (and win it often), nearly all of the players play professionally in Europe. So I do not foresee the need for European teams in hockey (or basketball for that matter).
What the NHL could do though is have each NHL team partner up with a European or Asian city and play a series of games there before the season begins. It would be like having a sister city or a pen-pal for fans from both towns. Have each club play two or three games in one city, that way people can connect to one team, and this way the league can really expand its international footprint. The league already has international players, why not make more money off the international fans.
Back here in America, the league should do something similar by playing more neutral site games, or have some teams have a secondary city. The example that always comes to mind is Green Bay playing one game in Milwaukee every year. Obviously clubs like Detroit, Montreal, Toronto, etc, do not need to do this. However, it would be good for Columbus (if they don't move the team) to maybe play a couple games a season in Cleveland or Cincinnati. Maybe have the Blues play a couple games a year in Kansas City, the Kings in San Diego, the Sharks in Portland etc. If you're having trouble filling up your arena, you might as well take your act on the road where the novelty of a pro hockey game might give you a sellout at the gate. Also, you can get people in those cities to become fans of your club as well, selling more merchandise and getting more people to watch the games on TV.
The league needs to also think a little outside the box in terms of marketing. I got this idea from the World Series of Poker. Relatively speaking the winner's share of any modern trophy really isn't that much (compared to their contracts). For instance, the winner's share of the World Series Trophy was $308,235.75. Now three hundred grand ain't bad, but for guys with the contracts they have now that's chump change. Here's the idea, the league should have every team, and perhaps the NHLPA, ante up for the right to play for the cup in the beginning of the season. Have a couple sponsors (I'm talking about you Labatt) match the money, so this way the winner's share is around 3-4 million bucks per player. And no losers share either- just like the superstition says, conference championship does not count, only by winning the Stanley Cup are you a true champion. I realize that the Cup itself should be a worthy enough goal for any player, but this is really meant to motivate the owners just as much as the players. There are many owners that are doing a terrible job running their teams and are happy to just sit back and collect the revenue sharing. They won't be anymore. Lastly, World Series of Poker style, try to bring all the cash out on the ice as a photo op. I really feel this would be a great publicity stunt for the league, and will help the league out on the operational level by getting more teams to compete as well.
The league needs to do a better job of promoting its video games. While NHL 94 on Sega is widely considered to be a masterpiece, the games since have failed to have that sort of crossover success. Video games are big business these days, and hockey is a sport that translates very well to video games. The league needs to use its flagship game as one of its chief marketing tools the way the NFL does with Madden. If you're not going to play the sport, you should at least play the video game. Also, for an old school guy like me, package the most modern game with an emulator for the 94 version with today's players and rosters. Show the pizza boy/Sega scene from Swingers in the commercial then cut to a similar scene of guys hanging out and giving each other shit playing the modern game, and give a tag about how hanging with the guys never changes no matter what game you're playing.
Also, put Don Cherry on TV. People in Detroit and Buffalo love watching Ron McLean try to keep Don in check. Weather people love Don Cherry or think he's a moron, people still watch Coach's Corner. Also, I love his Fu Manchu playoff beards and crazy suits. Some of what he says I don't agree with, but there is no question that he cares deeply about hockey. Also, in a world of vanilla sportscasters, Don Cherry is refreshing as someone who speaks his mind. Perhaps the NHL should name it's aforementioned video game franchise after Don Cherry. Perhaps EA Sports should call the game Rock 'em Sock 'em Hockey. Just a thought.
Anywho, that's all I got for now. I'll cover game rules, rivalries and schedules next time.
This edition will cover some of the league's marketing and its TV Deals. Through the years I've always heard people say about hockey on TV "But I can't see the puck." Nothing made me cringe as much as those words (until I saw the stupid light up puck the league tried out). I don't follow that logic. I have never had that problem my entire hockey watching life. So if you can't see the puck, I am not writing this for you.
The NHL has always been a distant fourth in the four major professional team sports in the United States. What the NFL shows every league out there is that dragging your season out all year is not the key to success. The NFL thrives on TV money because every game is a big deal, and seeing as how their TV contract is bigger than all of hockey's revenue put together, it safe to say they were right. So what the NHL needs to do is get more people to watch the game, both in person and more importantly on TV (that's where the money really is). Here are my ideas.
First thing the NHL needs to do is grow the game at a grassroots level. I went to college in Cleveland, and I was shocked at how little people knew about hockey there. Steve Yzerman who is basically canonized here in Detroit is unheard of in Cleveland. People who are rabid Browns, Indians, and Cavs fans (it's not that they don't like sports) literally do not know who he is. Aside from the occasional Sabres fan, the only people that cared about hockey that were not from Detroit were people that had actually played the game through high school.
For this reason, I believe the best thing the league can do for its long term success is get kids to play hockey. Kids in America usually play Little League as a right of passage, high school football is a big deal all over the country, and often people play at least intramural basketball through their college years. The NHL needs to sponsor and facilitate the construction of as many rinks and the formation of as many youth leagues as possible. In Canada, the game of choice is always hockey, weather its watching or playing. The United States will never be as hockey crazy as Canada, but part of the reason people appreciate their NHL clubs so much in Canada, Minnesota, Detroit, and other Northern American cities is that a large part of the populous played the game "back in the day," or still plays in a weekend beer league. Long story short, the nicest arena in America occasionally full of fans won't be worth much in the long run if there aren't a bunch of little rinks in the area full of kids playing the game.
Getting back to putting the game on TV, the NHL made a terrible mistake by signing the TV contract with Versus. Versus is rookieball compared to ESPN. The camera is too close to the ice,
the set looks like a high school doing the video announcements, and Brian Engbloom's mullet sucks compared to Barry Melrose's. Mullets notwithstanding, the global reach of ESPN is simply incredible. ESPN's brand name is worth more than any other channel out there. ESPN is in every basic cable package, is on in every sports bar, and every college guy's dorm room is tuned to ESPN. Versus simply isn't always available.
I realize that Versus offered 60 Million year instead of revenue sharing- but that comes out to 2 million a team, which is for all practical purposes pocket change. This is like turning down the unpaid internship at the best company in your field to work for McDonald's and make some money. Yeah you get a little money upfront, but you are killing your future. Get back on ESPN because that way fans who have never seen you before might. People watching something else on ESPN like Sports Center might forget to change the channel and give hockey a shot. Versus generally has hunting shows on all day, so the NHL isn't getting a whole lot of lead in viewers. Also, Versus simply isn't as widespread channel as ESPN. Any basic cable package has ESPN and ESPN 2. The same cannot be said for Versus, which has left a lot of people who actually want to watch hockey shit out of luck because their cable package does not carry the channel. In conclusion, the NHL needs to pad its resume and take its unpaid internship. The exposure gained from being on ESPN can only help the league.
The league needs to realize that it shouldn't try to out NBA the NBA. Instead the league should embrace and market those quirky things that make the NHL and its players so great. One of my favorite traditions in hockey is the playoff beard. However, come playoff time you hardly ever hear about it. They should market the hell out of this. My product placement gears were turning on this one- why don't they have Gillette sponsor a contest for the best beard in the playoffs? That seems like a no brainer for me.
I was also upset when Bettman changed the Wales and Campbell conference to East and West, along with directional names for the divisions as well. I thought it was cool that the divisions were named after people, and it was unique to hockey. While they can keep the current alignment of teams, think of two people to name two divisions after and bring the old way back. If anything it'll put the league in the news for a bit and will generate publicity just like David Stern did with the NBA dress code a few years back.
These days, when I watch a baseball team celebrate in the locker room I can't tell if they won their division or the World Series. However, hockey players know whats up. They don't touch the Campbell Bowl or the Wales Trophy, because the Stanley Cup is the only true championship. The league needs to let the folks out there know about this great superstition. Market the conference championships as the "Don't Touch the Trophy/Bowl" series.
The NBA is expanding aggressively throughout the world, and the NHL needs to do the same. I don't think the league needs to put teams in different countries, because due to travel that wouldn't be prudent. Players will go to play in the league with the best competition, and that will be the NHL for some time. For example, while Brazil and Argentina produce the world's best soccer players, and their national teams compete for the World Cup (and win it often), nearly all of the players play professionally in Europe. So I do not foresee the need for European teams in hockey (or basketball for that matter).
What the NHL could do though is have each NHL team partner up with a European or Asian city and play a series of games there before the season begins. It would be like having a sister city or a pen-pal for fans from both towns. Have each club play two or three games in one city, that way people can connect to one team, and this way the league can really expand its international footprint. The league already has international players, why not make more money off the international fans.
Back here in America, the league should do something similar by playing more neutral site games, or have some teams have a secondary city. The example that always comes to mind is Green Bay playing one game in Milwaukee every year. Obviously clubs like Detroit, Montreal, Toronto, etc, do not need to do this. However, it would be good for Columbus (if they don't move the team) to maybe play a couple games a season in Cleveland or Cincinnati. Maybe have the Blues play a couple games a year in Kansas City, the Kings in San Diego, the Sharks in Portland etc. If you're having trouble filling up your arena, you might as well take your act on the road where the novelty of a pro hockey game might give you a sellout at the gate. Also, you can get people in those cities to become fans of your club as well, selling more merchandise and getting more people to watch the games on TV.
The league needs to also think a little outside the box in terms of marketing. I got this idea from the World Series of Poker. Relatively speaking the winner's share of any modern trophy really isn't that much (compared to their contracts). For instance, the winner's share of the World Series Trophy was $308,235.75. Now three hundred grand ain't bad, but for guys with the contracts they have now that's chump change. Here's the idea, the league should have every team, and perhaps the NHLPA, ante up for the right to play for the cup in the beginning of the season. Have a couple sponsors (I'm talking about you Labatt) match the money, so this way the winner's share is around 3-4 million bucks per player. And no losers share either- just like the superstition says, conference championship does not count, only by winning the Stanley Cup are you a true champion. I realize that the Cup itself should be a worthy enough goal for any player, but this is really meant to motivate the owners just as much as the players. There are many owners that are doing a terrible job running their teams and are happy to just sit back and collect the revenue sharing. They won't be anymore. Lastly, World Series of Poker style, try to bring all the cash out on the ice as a photo op. I really feel this would be a great publicity stunt for the league, and will help the league out on the operational level by getting more teams to compete as well.
The league needs to do a better job of promoting its video games. While NHL 94 on Sega is widely considered to be a masterpiece, the games since have failed to have that sort of crossover success. Video games are big business these days, and hockey is a sport that translates very well to video games. The league needs to use its flagship game as one of its chief marketing tools the way the NFL does with Madden. If you're not going to play the sport, you should at least play the video game. Also, for an old school guy like me, package the most modern game with an emulator for the 94 version with today's players and rosters. Show the pizza boy/Sega scene from Swingers in the commercial then cut to a similar scene of guys hanging out and giving each other shit playing the modern game, and give a tag about how hanging with the guys never changes no matter what game you're playing.
Also, put Don Cherry on TV. People in Detroit and Buffalo love watching Ron McLean try to keep Don in check. Weather people love Don Cherry or think he's a moron, people still watch Coach's Corner. Also, I love his Fu Manchu playoff beards and crazy suits. Some of what he says I don't agree with, but there is no question that he cares deeply about hockey. Also, in a world of vanilla sportscasters, Don Cherry is refreshing as someone who speaks his mind. Perhaps the NHL should name it's aforementioned video game franchise after Don Cherry. Perhaps EA Sports should call the game Rock 'em Sock 'em Hockey. Just a thought.
Anywho, that's all I got for now. I'll cover game rules, rivalries and schedules next time.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
If I Ran the NHL Part Deux
By Pete McGrath
NHL Sweaters and Mascots Edition
As the NHL has expanded a lot recently, I think choosing cool team names and designing effective logos is key to getting a town to rally around its team, and the NHL’s poor choices has hampered their progress in certain cities. I’m going to go team by team in this column and provide my two cents on their mascot/team colors/jerseys/logo/ and feel free to comment.
I am old school when it comes to uniforms in sports. I believe in simple uniforms, simple color combinations, and simple logos that stand the test of time.
Here are some pitfalls that many uniforms fall into:
Too Many Colors- Pick two colors for your team color and stick with them. Notre Dame, the Yankees, the Lakers, and the Celtics have simple color schemes, and that’s why their unis work.
The house team effect- If you’ve ever played house hockey, one year your sweater might be green, while the next year it might be blue, so it was always prudent to buy black pants and gloves. However at the NHL level, you should be able to afford gear that matches your jersey.
Black proliferation- If black was not originally one of your two colors, do not all the sudden make it one. Do not make it part of your jerseys piping or trim. Also, the black alternate jersey thing has become a bit tiresome. This is kind of similar to the house team effect.
The Rbk system effect. Reebok re-designed a lot of jerseys recently, adding stupid piping at the top of the sweaters and taking the trim off the bottom. Trim on the bottom is important though, because hockey sweaters are meant to be un-tucked. With no trim on the bottom it looks like an un-tucked button down dress shirt- A.K.A. bad.
The Clip art effect- When a logo is obviously computer generated, and looks cheaply done; like a school kid doing a project for class. Clip art logos generally have too many colors as well, corresponding to an earlier pitfall.
Generic/stupid mascots- A cool mascot to me is one that embraces the town’s heritage or is unique in general. Not one that sounds focused grouped or like an arena football team.
Teal- Teal sucks.
Without further adieu, here are the teams:
Anaheim Ducks – I remember when I first saw the jerseys in D2, back when the team was the Mighty Ducks. While I’m glad the team is just the Ducks now and have gotten rid of that terrible early nineties color combo of purple and teal, the current uni’s could use some work. The logo is still a bit cartoony and cheesy. However, at least Charlie Conway doesn’t have to take on the Hawks and Iceland wearing this anymore.
Atlanta Thrashers – I for a while was of the belief that the team name Thrashers was stupid. However, upon doing research I’ve learned that the Thrasher is the state bird of Georgia and was selected by the fans, so I guess that can stay. But the logo and the current jerseys got to go. The logo has too many colors for it to be effective, and it too falls into that clip arty category. The jerseys, with the word Atlanta going down one shoulder are terrible, and the person who designed them should be shot.
Boston Bruins – Any original six team automatically has a cool mascot to me. This team is a case study of why you only need two colors besides white. The simple color scheme and simple logo is all you need. Also, give the club kudos for the new alternate jerseys with the throwback logo.
Buffalo Sabres - I was glad to see they got rid of the black and red jerseys from the 90s. But the Sabres really need to go back to their old logo of the crossed swords with a buffalo in the middle. Simple, effective, with a unique color combination of blue and yellow made their old jersey a beauty. The current slug/Donald Trump’s hair logo is stupid. Also, get rid of the dumb pit stripes, and give me the jersey that Pat Lafontaine wore.
Calgary Flames – Flames is a solid name for a team, and the flaming C logo is effective as well. However, this is a classic example of black getting in the way of a perfectly fine uniform. The black pants and gloves make the club look like a house team, and the black trim is obnoxious. Go back to the red and yellow uni’s of Mike Vernon’s day (or at least give me an update). Also, maybe have some fun with the trim. Maybe have flame trim at the bottom of the jersey or on the socks.
Carolina Hurricanes – I really wish there weren’t so many weather related mascot’s in this league, but of the three I like the Hurricanes the best. The logo is really simple, and has only two colors. I could do without their current alternate jerseys. The triangle behind the logo is stupid, and the hockey stick flagpole looks dumb as well. I like where their heads at though with the hurricane flag idea for an alternate logo, but that is actually a gale flag. Tweak this a bit, put it on a red jersey, and it could work. The black jersey thing is a little played out at this point.
Chicago Blackhawks – Great mascot, great logo, great alternate logo, great jerseys, even cooler throwback jerseys, and as a Wings fan, it pains me to say this, but I think they have the best unis in the league.
Colorado Avalanche – To go from the Quebec Nordiques’s kickass unis to this ugly ass uniform was a disaster. They have maroon and blue with jerseys, maroon and blue and grey socks, but black gloves, pants, and helmets making them a victim of the house team effect and the too many colors effect. The logo is kind of clip arty as well, but at the same time I don’t have any better ideas for an avalanche logo. The trim on the jerseys really needs to be fixed up though. Maybe they could just start all over and name the team the Colorado Turtles.
Columbus Blue Jackets – I always assumed a blue jacket was a type of bumblebee, and never understood why their logo has all the stars on it. Evidently the Blue Jacket name comes from the Civil War soldiers from Ohio, which actually makes it a decent mascot if the logo reflected this. They need to make this part of the logo and embrace the civil war heritage (it would be nice to see a northern based Civil War mascot to combat the Rebels and Vols of the world). If that doesn’t work, just change the team name to the Buckeyes to fool Columbusians into showing up to the games.
Dallas Stars – Not a bad mascot, not bad colors, but it just could’ve been so much cooler. Remember, this team is descendant from one of the all time great team names in sports, the Minnesota North Stars. While I really think it was the height of stupidity for the NHL to move a team out of Minnesota, I will give Dallas its props for embracing its team and hockey as a sport. But how cool would it have been if they were the Dallas Lone Stars, not just the Stars?
Detroit Red Wings – Number two in the league for my money- a great simple logo with just two colors and a simple jersey design. This jersey just shows how less is more sometimes. All logo designers and jersey color picker outers need to pay attention to this jersey.
Edmonton Oilers – A good mascot that makes sense in the oil rich area of Edmonton. The logo has always been simple and effective to me, but I could do without the piping on their current jerseys. They changed from blue and orange to navy and burnt orange a few years back, but word on the street is that they’re wearing their old throwback unis for a few games. I think they should go back to these all the time because after all, if you won five cups in them, why change the unis?
Florida Panthers – A middle of the road mascot, and not a bad logo. The red, navy and gold color scheme is a bit busy however. Just black and white would look pretty badass if you ask me.
Los Angeles Kings – The LA Kings have a solid mascot with a solid color scheme. Purple is the color of royalty after all. The current crown logo isn’t bad, but I have to say I liked the coat of arms logo they just changed from a little bit better.
Minnesota Wild – This team name sort of prompted this column. What the fuck is a Wild? Evidently it’s some saber tooth tiger shaped thing with trees on it, which looks eerily similar to the Nashville logo. They should’ve gone with the Minnesota Fighting Saints as a tribute to the WHA team, or furthermore stuck it to Dallas for moving by calling the team the North Stars. Anything but the Wild- it sounds like an Arena Football League team. Once again, there are two many colors and too much crap going on in the logo. Get rid of the gold, change the logo, and change the team name. However, the Wild’s success (every single game sold out) despite their atrocious logo and sometimes lackluster play on the ice illustrates the need for the league to put teams in hockey cities, and further proves my theory from my last post.
Montreal Canadiens – Great team name, great logo, great sweater, no further discussion or links needed.
Nashville Predators – Predators isn’t a bad mascot, but it’s very generic. Once again I wish the league did a better job of embracing a city’s culture and was more creative with the team mascot. Nashville is known for its music, so the Nashville Musicians or something along those lines would’ve been pretty cool. The uniform is a bit busy for my tastes, and I won’t even bother providing a link to the deplorable alternate jersey.
New Jersey Devils – This club made a wise decision changing its colors from green and red to black and red. The Christmas decorations ensemble did not look very tough, and was kind of contradictory to naming the club the Devils. The logo is actually deceptively cool. The NJ with the stylized horns and tail is simple but nicely done.
NY Islanders – This is one of the cooler team names in the league. Jets, Mets, and Islanders fans are generally Long Island folks, so the team name and the logo really embraces the community. There was a brief period where the club fell victim to the teal craze of the nineties, but now their unis are for the most part back on track. Once again, the uniform is a little busy with the lines on the shoulders, but I can live with that. The Chevron patch on the shoulder representing the club's four Stanley Cups is really cool. In any event, I guess a solid uniform still does not prevent you from signing Alexei Yashin to a terrible contract.
NY Rangers – Once again it’s an Original Six team, so of course the unis and the team name are cool. The classic Rangers script across the front of the sweater hasn’t been changed in years, and it doesn’t need to be. The alternate sweater has to go though. A marquis franchise with classic uniforms should not have to resort to selling alternate jerseys. Also, extra kudos for pulling off the collar laces so well.
Ottawa Senators – The league had the right idea for this club by reviving the Senators mascot from back in the day. The color scheme of red and black works well, and I liked the original logo as well. While technically speaking the logo is of a Centurion, not a Senator, it still fits and was a good logo. The new logo is a bit cartoony to me. Also, once again the pit stripes have got to go. A team with an old school crest and an old school history deserves a simple straightforward jersey. This old bumblebee sweater isn’t have bad either.
Philadelphia Flyers – The logo and the mascot are classics. They’re original and name rolls off the tongue because it features alliteration. I have one request- go back to the orange jerseys. The black jersey is very played out, and the orange was sharp and unique– very few clubs in any sport have orange jerseys. Plus you can’t see the black logo on the black background.
Phoenix Coyotes – While I do mind hockey in Phoenix, I do not mind the mascot or the team colors. The Coyotes wisely changed their color scheme from black, green, red, tan, and a bunch of other colors on the crest to a simple dark red and white. The logo is also much simpler and better. This may come as a surprise thought but I actually liked their old Native American style trim on the old sweater (just the trim though). I thought it was unique to the team and a cool tribute to the Native population in the area. This sweater also fell victim to the RBK edge uniform though by losing its bottom of the jersey trim. Fix that, and you got a really cool jersey, but I would rather this team move back to Winnipeg.
Pittsburgh Penguins – Pittsburgh has a cool thing going with all their clubs being black and gold in color scheme, in tribute to the City of Pittsburgh’s flag. This club did a terrible thing when they got rid of the skating penguin logo for the more streamlined flying penguin logo with the stripes. Just like how Pat the Patriot is cooler than the Flying Elvis logo that the Patriots use on their helmets now, the skating penguin was better and needed to come back. It’s back, but the Penguin’s gold isn’t the yellow gold it used to be. They should go back to those colors to match the Steelers and Pirates, and add some trim at the bottom of the jersey.
San Jose Sharks – You can thank this team for kicking off the teal craze of the nineties. I loved seeing my beloved Pistons where teal. Thanks.
St. Louis Blues – One of the coolest and most unique mascots in all of sports. This team and the former New Orleans Jazz are the only two big league clubs named after a type of music. With their current sweater, they have shades of navy and royal blue. Pick a shade of blue, and stick with it. Also, maybe use those alternate jerseys with the Gateway Arch on the crest full time.
Tampa Bay Lightning – The last of the weather related mascot clubs in the league. Not a terrible name, but not that good of one. It would have been really cool to me if they did some sort of cigar related theme with Tampa being nicknamed Cigar City, but I guess that wouldn’t fly in this day and age. The logo itself is a little clip arty again, and I could do without the lightning bolts on the pants, but I can live with it. What I’m really pumped for is the new alternate sweater, which is blue instead of black, and features a script bolts across the chest like the Rangers jerseys. Nicknames and abbreviations on jerseys are always cool to me, and I like this jersey a lot.
Toronto Maple Leafs – A great mascot that is unique to hockey, a simple two color scheme (or should I say colour scheme), and a simple jersey. Simply timeless and classic, and no links required.
Vancouver Canucks – Every league has one I guess, Oregon in NCAA football, the Houston Astros in MLB, and of course the Vancouver Canucks in hockey. They have gone through more ugly uniforms than any other team in the league, and still haven’t gotten it right. The notorious V stripes, the Star Wars/spaghetti bowl/flying skate logo, the atrocious orca logo, and now back to the hockey rink logo with the atrocious orca logo with a script Vancouver over the top. This club just doesn’t get it, but they should go back to the ugly V stripe sweaters. At least those were so bad they were good. You Google the Canucks unis on your own- I’m getting lazy and I don’t want to find twenty links to all of their god-awful jerseys. By far and away the worst unis in the league.
Washington – I always liked the pick of Capitals as the team mascot- a solid nod to the team’s hometown. For the new Rbk unis, they did a really nice update of their old sweaters. The pit stripes for whatever reason look good on this sweater, and the team was wise enough to add some trim at the bottom of the jersey, which really makes them look like game jerseys, not practice jerseys. I think on this particular entry I proved that I am not a complete curmudgeon when it comes to jerseys.
While it was fun for me to come up with all the links and bullshit about all the unis/team names in the league, at the end of the day this series of entries is about the business end of the NHL. Strong mascot choices and merchandise sales are good business, and the league has done a poor job of making these choices over the years. Some choices have been missed opportunities, and some have been flat out awful. However, this is also one of the easiest things the league can fix. My next article will cover the league’s exposure on TV and marketing, which will be critical to the league’s future success.
NHL Sweaters and Mascots Edition
As the NHL has expanded a lot recently, I think choosing cool team names and designing effective logos is key to getting a town to rally around its team, and the NHL’s poor choices has hampered their progress in certain cities. I’m going to go team by team in this column and provide my two cents on their mascot/team colors/jerseys/logo/ and feel free to comment.
I am old school when it comes to uniforms in sports. I believe in simple uniforms, simple color combinations, and simple logos that stand the test of time.
Here are some pitfalls that many uniforms fall into:
Too Many Colors- Pick two colors for your team color and stick with them. Notre Dame, the Yankees, the Lakers, and the Celtics have simple color schemes, and that’s why their unis work.
The house team effect- If you’ve ever played house hockey, one year your sweater might be green, while the next year it might be blue, so it was always prudent to buy black pants and gloves. However at the NHL level, you should be able to afford gear that matches your jersey.
Black proliferation- If black was not originally one of your two colors, do not all the sudden make it one. Do not make it part of your jerseys piping or trim. Also, the black alternate jersey thing has become a bit tiresome. This is kind of similar to the house team effect.
The Rbk system effect. Reebok re-designed a lot of jerseys recently, adding stupid piping at the top of the sweaters and taking the trim off the bottom. Trim on the bottom is important though, because hockey sweaters are meant to be un-tucked. With no trim on the bottom it looks like an un-tucked button down dress shirt- A.K.A. bad.
The Clip art effect- When a logo is obviously computer generated, and looks cheaply done; like a school kid doing a project for class. Clip art logos generally have too many colors as well, corresponding to an earlier pitfall.
Generic/stupid mascots- A cool mascot to me is one that embraces the town’s heritage or is unique in general. Not one that sounds focused grouped or like an arena football team.
Teal- Teal sucks.
Without further adieu, here are the teams:
Anaheim Ducks – I remember when I first saw the jerseys in D2, back when the team was the Mighty Ducks. While I’m glad the team is just the Ducks now and have gotten rid of that terrible early nineties color combo of purple and teal, the current uni’s could use some work. The logo is still a bit cartoony and cheesy. However, at least Charlie Conway doesn’t have to take on the Hawks and Iceland wearing this anymore.
Atlanta Thrashers – I for a while was of the belief that the team name Thrashers was stupid. However, upon doing research I’ve learned that the Thrasher is the state bird of Georgia and was selected by the fans, so I guess that can stay. But the logo and the current jerseys got to go. The logo has too many colors for it to be effective, and it too falls into that clip arty category. The jerseys, with the word Atlanta going down one shoulder are terrible, and the person who designed them should be shot.
Boston Bruins – Any original six team automatically has a cool mascot to me. This team is a case study of why you only need two colors besides white. The simple color scheme and simple logo is all you need. Also, give the club kudos for the new alternate jerseys with the throwback logo.
Buffalo Sabres - I was glad to see they got rid of the black and red jerseys from the 90s. But the Sabres really need to go back to their old logo of the crossed swords with a buffalo in the middle. Simple, effective, with a unique color combination of blue and yellow made their old jersey a beauty. The current slug/Donald Trump’s hair logo is stupid. Also, get rid of the dumb pit stripes, and give me the jersey that Pat Lafontaine wore.
Calgary Flames – Flames is a solid name for a team, and the flaming C logo is effective as well. However, this is a classic example of black getting in the way of a perfectly fine uniform. The black pants and gloves make the club look like a house team, and the black trim is obnoxious. Go back to the red and yellow uni’s of Mike Vernon’s day (or at least give me an update). Also, maybe have some fun with the trim. Maybe have flame trim at the bottom of the jersey or on the socks.
Carolina Hurricanes – I really wish there weren’t so many weather related mascot’s in this league, but of the three I like the Hurricanes the best. The logo is really simple, and has only two colors. I could do without their current alternate jerseys. The triangle behind the logo is stupid, and the hockey stick flagpole looks dumb as well. I like where their heads at though with the hurricane flag idea for an alternate logo, but that is actually a gale flag. Tweak this a bit, put it on a red jersey, and it could work. The black jersey thing is a little played out at this point.
Chicago Blackhawks – Great mascot, great logo, great alternate logo, great jerseys, even cooler throwback jerseys, and as a Wings fan, it pains me to say this, but I think they have the best unis in the league.
Colorado Avalanche – To go from the Quebec Nordiques’s kickass unis to this ugly ass uniform was a disaster. They have maroon and blue with jerseys, maroon and blue and grey socks, but black gloves, pants, and helmets making them a victim of the house team effect and the too many colors effect. The logo is kind of clip arty as well, but at the same time I don’t have any better ideas for an avalanche logo. The trim on the jerseys really needs to be fixed up though. Maybe they could just start all over and name the team the Colorado Turtles.
Columbus Blue Jackets – I always assumed a blue jacket was a type of bumblebee, and never understood why their logo has all the stars on it. Evidently the Blue Jacket name comes from the Civil War soldiers from Ohio, which actually makes it a decent mascot if the logo reflected this. They need to make this part of the logo and embrace the civil war heritage (it would be nice to see a northern based Civil War mascot to combat the Rebels and Vols of the world). If that doesn’t work, just change the team name to the Buckeyes to fool Columbusians into showing up to the games.
Dallas Stars – Not a bad mascot, not bad colors, but it just could’ve been so much cooler. Remember, this team is descendant from one of the all time great team names in sports, the Minnesota North Stars. While I really think it was the height of stupidity for the NHL to move a team out of Minnesota, I will give Dallas its props for embracing its team and hockey as a sport. But how cool would it have been if they were the Dallas Lone Stars, not just the Stars?
Detroit Red Wings – Number two in the league for my money- a great simple logo with just two colors and a simple jersey design. This jersey just shows how less is more sometimes. All logo designers and jersey color picker outers need to pay attention to this jersey.
Edmonton Oilers – A good mascot that makes sense in the oil rich area of Edmonton. The logo has always been simple and effective to me, but I could do without the piping on their current jerseys. They changed from blue and orange to navy and burnt orange a few years back, but word on the street is that they’re wearing their old throwback unis for a few games. I think they should go back to these all the time because after all, if you won five cups in them, why change the unis?
Florida Panthers – A middle of the road mascot, and not a bad logo. The red, navy and gold color scheme is a bit busy however. Just black and white would look pretty badass if you ask me.
Los Angeles Kings – The LA Kings have a solid mascot with a solid color scheme. Purple is the color of royalty after all. The current crown logo isn’t bad, but I have to say I liked the coat of arms logo they just changed from a little bit better.
Minnesota Wild – This team name sort of prompted this column. What the fuck is a Wild? Evidently it’s some saber tooth tiger shaped thing with trees on it, which looks eerily similar to the Nashville logo. They should’ve gone with the Minnesota Fighting Saints as a tribute to the WHA team, or furthermore stuck it to Dallas for moving by calling the team the North Stars. Anything but the Wild- it sounds like an Arena Football League team. Once again, there are two many colors and too much crap going on in the logo. Get rid of the gold, change the logo, and change the team name. However, the Wild’s success (every single game sold out) despite their atrocious logo and sometimes lackluster play on the ice illustrates the need for the league to put teams in hockey cities, and further proves my theory from my last post.
Montreal Canadiens – Great team name, great logo, great sweater, no further discussion or links needed.
Nashville Predators – Predators isn’t a bad mascot, but it’s very generic. Once again I wish the league did a better job of embracing a city’s culture and was more creative with the team mascot. Nashville is known for its music, so the Nashville Musicians or something along those lines would’ve been pretty cool. The uniform is a bit busy for my tastes, and I won’t even bother providing a link to the deplorable alternate jersey.
New Jersey Devils – This club made a wise decision changing its colors from green and red to black and red. The Christmas decorations ensemble did not look very tough, and was kind of contradictory to naming the club the Devils. The logo is actually deceptively cool. The NJ with the stylized horns and tail is simple but nicely done.
NY Islanders – This is one of the cooler team names in the league. Jets, Mets, and Islanders fans are generally Long Island folks, so the team name and the logo really embraces the community. There was a brief period where the club fell victim to the teal craze of the nineties, but now their unis are for the most part back on track. Once again, the uniform is a little busy with the lines on the shoulders, but I can live with that. The Chevron patch on the shoulder representing the club's four Stanley Cups is really cool. In any event, I guess a solid uniform still does not prevent you from signing Alexei Yashin to a terrible contract.
NY Rangers – Once again it’s an Original Six team, so of course the unis and the team name are cool. The classic Rangers script across the front of the sweater hasn’t been changed in years, and it doesn’t need to be. The alternate sweater has to go though. A marquis franchise with classic uniforms should not have to resort to selling alternate jerseys. Also, extra kudos for pulling off the collar laces so well.
Ottawa Senators – The league had the right idea for this club by reviving the Senators mascot from back in the day. The color scheme of red and black works well, and I liked the original logo as well. While technically speaking the logo is of a Centurion, not a Senator, it still fits and was a good logo. The new logo is a bit cartoony to me. Also, once again the pit stripes have got to go. A team with an old school crest and an old school history deserves a simple straightforward jersey. This old bumblebee sweater isn’t have bad either.
Philadelphia Flyers – The logo and the mascot are classics. They’re original and name rolls off the tongue because it features alliteration. I have one request- go back to the orange jerseys. The black jersey is very played out, and the orange was sharp and unique– very few clubs in any sport have orange jerseys. Plus you can’t see the black logo on the black background.
Phoenix Coyotes – While I do mind hockey in Phoenix, I do not mind the mascot or the team colors. The Coyotes wisely changed their color scheme from black, green, red, tan, and a bunch of other colors on the crest to a simple dark red and white. The logo is also much simpler and better. This may come as a surprise thought but I actually liked their old Native American style trim on the old sweater (just the trim though). I thought it was unique to the team and a cool tribute to the Native population in the area. This sweater also fell victim to the RBK edge uniform though by losing its bottom of the jersey trim. Fix that, and you got a really cool jersey, but I would rather this team move back to Winnipeg.
Pittsburgh Penguins – Pittsburgh has a cool thing going with all their clubs being black and gold in color scheme, in tribute to the City of Pittsburgh’s flag. This club did a terrible thing when they got rid of the skating penguin logo for the more streamlined flying penguin logo with the stripes. Just like how Pat the Patriot is cooler than the Flying Elvis logo that the Patriots use on their helmets now, the skating penguin was better and needed to come back. It’s back, but the Penguin’s gold isn’t the yellow gold it used to be. They should go back to those colors to match the Steelers and Pirates, and add some trim at the bottom of the jersey.
San Jose Sharks – You can thank this team for kicking off the teal craze of the nineties. I loved seeing my beloved Pistons where teal. Thanks.
St. Louis Blues – One of the coolest and most unique mascots in all of sports. This team and the former New Orleans Jazz are the only two big league clubs named after a type of music. With their current sweater, they have shades of navy and royal blue. Pick a shade of blue, and stick with it. Also, maybe use those alternate jerseys with the Gateway Arch on the crest full time.
Tampa Bay Lightning – The last of the weather related mascot clubs in the league. Not a terrible name, but not that good of one. It would have been really cool to me if they did some sort of cigar related theme with Tampa being nicknamed Cigar City, but I guess that wouldn’t fly in this day and age. The logo itself is a little clip arty again, and I could do without the lightning bolts on the pants, but I can live with it. What I’m really pumped for is the new alternate sweater, which is blue instead of black, and features a script bolts across the chest like the Rangers jerseys. Nicknames and abbreviations on jerseys are always cool to me, and I like this jersey a lot.
Toronto Maple Leafs – A great mascot that is unique to hockey, a simple two color scheme (or should I say colour scheme), and a simple jersey. Simply timeless and classic, and no links required.
Vancouver Canucks – Every league has one I guess, Oregon in NCAA football, the Houston Astros in MLB, and of course the Vancouver Canucks in hockey. They have gone through more ugly uniforms than any other team in the league, and still haven’t gotten it right. The notorious V stripes, the Star Wars/spaghetti bowl/flying skate logo, the atrocious orca logo, and now back to the hockey rink logo with the atrocious orca logo with a script Vancouver over the top. This club just doesn’t get it, but they should go back to the ugly V stripe sweaters. At least those were so bad they were good. You Google the Canucks unis on your own- I’m getting lazy and I don’t want to find twenty links to all of their god-awful jerseys. By far and away the worst unis in the league.
Washington – I always liked the pick of Capitals as the team mascot- a solid nod to the team’s hometown. For the new Rbk unis, they did a really nice update of their old sweaters. The pit stripes for whatever reason look good on this sweater, and the team was wise enough to add some trim at the bottom of the jersey, which really makes them look like game jerseys, not practice jerseys. I think on this particular entry I proved that I am not a complete curmudgeon when it comes to jerseys.
While it was fun for me to come up with all the links and bullshit about all the unis/team names in the league, at the end of the day this series of entries is about the business end of the NHL. Strong mascot choices and merchandise sales are good business, and the league has done a poor job of making these choices over the years. Some choices have been missed opportunities, and some have been flat out awful. However, this is also one of the easiest things the league can fix. My next article will cover the league’s exposure on TV and marketing, which will be critical to the league’s future success.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
If I Ran the NHL
By Pete McGrath
As a hockey fan, I will always watch my beloved Detroit Red Wings. However, the NHL still has its problems. This will be an ongoing series of my proposals for building a stronger NHL.
League Alignment/Team Locations
The NHL has made some questionable team location calls over the years. Cities that have a large hockey friendly populations (Minnesota’s twin cities, Quebec, Hartford, and Winnipeg) lost their teams. The league moved or added expansion franchises in many places with no snow and no history of ice hockey, and small cities at that. Here is my team-by-team analysis of which clubs need to move, and where they should go.
Columbus-
Ohio is not really a hockey state. Despite being up north, despite being close to Hockey loving cities like Pittsburgh, Buffalo, and Detroit, folks in Ohio pretty much think about football and the Buckeyes all the time. However, what really makes no sense about the Blue Jackets is putting it in a city with so much sports competition already there. Columbus is the home of The Ohio State University. OSU has a huge football program, and pretty high profile Hockey and Basketball programs all competing during the NHL’s season. Only the Bruins have more in city competition for Hockey fans dollars, and Boston has a much larger hockey fan base, and the Bruins have a much longer tradition. Columbus as a location was always a stumper for me.
Atlanta-
Atlanta is a terrible sports city. I think it has something to do with a lot of people recently moving there. People didn’t grow up Atlanta fans, so they really haven’t embraced any of their teams. The Braves have empty seats during the playoffs for crying out loud. The Thrashers need to be in a city that will truly embrace them, and Atlanta is not that city.
Florida-
Miami is a city that only cares about the Dolphins, and football in general. Sure people showed up for the Heat when Shaq was in town, but you could tell that the American Airlines center was packed with fair-weather fans. People in Miami can go to the beach, go to the club, go to fashion show, and if they do want to see sports, it’s football they want to see. In any event, the state of Florida does not need two hockey teams.
Nashville-
Nashville has fielded some decent teams over the past couple years. However, filling up their arena has been an uphill battle for the Predators. Nashville is a relatively small metro area with very little hockey history, and it shows. To be honest, I don’t see why the team was put here in the first place. There are lots of bigger metro areas with more hockey interest, and with better arenas that would have made more sense.
Anaheim/Los Angeles-
The Los Angeles metro area does not need two hockey teams. Los Angeles is not a good sports town. Dodger fans are known for showing up late and leaving early. If So Cal really cared about sports, wouldn’t they have an NFL team by now? Here’s the tough part- which team to move? Anaheim has had some success, but I highly doubt that anyone in Anaheim really cares. The Kings are the team that needs to stay in town. They play downtown at the Staples Center, and if they were halfway decent they could be somewhat of a glamour franchise of the league, much like the Lakers are for the NBA. While the NHL needs to have a presence in this market, they do not need two.
Phoenix-
The Coyotes have not really caught on in Phoenix, as with the rest of the clubs in town. Phoenix is seemingly western version of Atlanta- a growing city where no one is actually from there. Maybe people care about the Suns, but I doubt anyone gives a shit about the other teams. Hockey in the desert is just a stupid idea, and the club’s abysmal attendance record over the years makes the evidence very clear.
Carolina-
I never really understood this move. Hartford to Carolina seemed like a lateral if not a downgrade of a move by owner Peter Karmanos. To go from one small city in the North where it snows and people actually care about hockey to another small city in the South where people do not care about hockey (or know what it is) was a bit of a stumper to me. Carolina has hovered in the bottom half, usually the bottom third of league attendance even though the team brought home a cup. This points to a team that should relocate.
Where to?
Winnipeg-
A new arena downtown, a rabid and starved hockey fan base, and it’s in Canada where people actually care about hockey. If you ever saw the white outs the Jets fans pulled off in the playoffs, you knew this town loved its team. It has the arena now, so give them a shot. Phoenix had their chance and they blew it. Give Winnipeg their Jets back.
Hamilton-
Another city in Canada that would be a great fit for a big league club is Hamilton. While it’s close to Buffalo and Toronto, Hamiltonians used to have an NHL club way back in the day, and would assuredly embrace another if it moved to town. Once again while it’s a smaller area, it is in Canada where hockey is king and faces competition from no other sports. The arena would need renovation, but that wouldn’t be a problem here.
Cleveland-
If keeping a team in Ohio, Cleveland would be a better location because it is a bigger metropolitan area and would be more receptive to a professional club. Natural rivalries could be created with Pittsburgh, Detroit, and Buffalo. Also, this old Cleveland Barons logo is pretty cool. Perhaps an arrangement could be worked out where they play a few home games in Columbus and Cincinnati, much like the Packers playing a few home games in Milwaukee, which was successful in making the Packers not just Green Bay’s team but Wisconsin’s team. The Cleveland Barons need to become Ohio’s team, but they will always be second fiddle in Columbus to the Buckeyes. A nice arena in downtown Cleveland doesn’t hurt either.
Houston-
This may seem like a stupid idea to some, but hear me out. While Houston Texas is not exactly a hockey hotbed, Houston is actually a big city. If trying to expand the footprint of the league to cities that are not traditional hockey markets, they should at least be big markets. Houston is a large metro area full of cash and sponsorship opportunities from oil companies, and a nice arena is already in place. An interstate rivalry with Dallas could and should spring up. Name suggestions: Houston Aeros, the name of the current AHL team and former WHA team.
Portland-
Portland is an affluent, growing metro area with only one other professional team in town. Portland is not located in the middle of a desert. While town residents were weary of building a new stadium for a potential Florida Marlins move, it has an arena currently in place. This arena also has a cool name- the Rose Garden. Not a lot of people know this, but the Portland Rosebuds were the first American hockey team to compete for Lord Stanley’s Cup in 1915. Portland Rosebuds would be a cool name for the current team as well, as I think it would be nice to see a new team without some sort of stupid animal logo or natural disaster motif.
Seattle-
Seattle as a city gets a bad wrap. Many a columnist, including S.I.’s Rick Reilly, mailed in a “Seattle is a town of wine and latte drinking, Volvo driving, smug elitists especially up against blue collar archetype Pittsburgh” type column. But look at the music this town has given us – Jimi Hendrix (the best to ever pick a guitar up), Alice in Chains, Heart, Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, Duff McKagan of Guns’n’Roses, among many others. A town that rocks this hard would enjoy a hockey team, especially after the Sonics took off for Oklahoma City. Maybe Key Arena isn’t perfect, but within a few years, Seattle would probably be willing to renovate or build a new one. Another brief history lesson- while the Portland Rosebuds were the first American club to compete for the Stanley Cup, the Seattle Metropolitans a year later in the 1916 were the first American team to win it. One last bit of advice- try to get Bill Gates to own the team.
Kansas City-
Hockey tried and failed once in K.C. in the form of the Kansas City Scouts. While it didn’t work out in the seventies, Kansas City deserves another chance. Kansas City is a good sports town, with Arrowhead Stadium known for being one of the NFL’s loudest. I’m sure when the Royals were halfway decent, people showed up at Kauffman Stadium too. Anyway, the Sprint Center has been built downtown and the city does not have a tenant. This means any team that wishes to become the new Kansas City Scouts (please stick with that name) can hammer out a sweetheart lease, which is pivotal to any franchise’s success. Also, since there are no hoops teams in K.C., the hockey team will have winter sports options all to itself.
Thanks for reading. My next entry will be on team names/logos/jerseys and come with a ranking of NHL uniforms.
As a hockey fan, I will always watch my beloved Detroit Red Wings. However, the NHL still has its problems. This will be an ongoing series of my proposals for building a stronger NHL.
League Alignment/Team Locations
The NHL has made some questionable team location calls over the years. Cities that have a large hockey friendly populations (Minnesota’s twin cities, Quebec, Hartford, and Winnipeg) lost their teams. The league moved or added expansion franchises in many places with no snow and no history of ice hockey, and small cities at that. Here is my team-by-team analysis of which clubs need to move, and where they should go.
Columbus-
Ohio is not really a hockey state. Despite being up north, despite being close to Hockey loving cities like Pittsburgh, Buffalo, and Detroit, folks in Ohio pretty much think about football and the Buckeyes all the time. However, what really makes no sense about the Blue Jackets is putting it in a city with so much sports competition already there. Columbus is the home of The Ohio State University. OSU has a huge football program, and pretty high profile Hockey and Basketball programs all competing during the NHL’s season. Only the Bruins have more in city competition for Hockey fans dollars, and Boston has a much larger hockey fan base, and the Bruins have a much longer tradition. Columbus as a location was always a stumper for me.
Atlanta-
Atlanta is a terrible sports city. I think it has something to do with a lot of people recently moving there. People didn’t grow up Atlanta fans, so they really haven’t embraced any of their teams. The Braves have empty seats during the playoffs for crying out loud. The Thrashers need to be in a city that will truly embrace them, and Atlanta is not that city.
Florida-
Miami is a city that only cares about the Dolphins, and football in general. Sure people showed up for the Heat when Shaq was in town, but you could tell that the American Airlines center was packed with fair-weather fans. People in Miami can go to the beach, go to the club, go to fashion show, and if they do want to see sports, it’s football they want to see. In any event, the state of Florida does not need two hockey teams.
Nashville-
Nashville has fielded some decent teams over the past couple years. However, filling up their arena has been an uphill battle for the Predators. Nashville is a relatively small metro area with very little hockey history, and it shows. To be honest, I don’t see why the team was put here in the first place. There are lots of bigger metro areas with more hockey interest, and with better arenas that would have made more sense.
Anaheim/Los Angeles-
The Los Angeles metro area does not need two hockey teams. Los Angeles is not a good sports town. Dodger fans are known for showing up late and leaving early. If So Cal really cared about sports, wouldn’t they have an NFL team by now? Here’s the tough part- which team to move? Anaheim has had some success, but I highly doubt that anyone in Anaheim really cares. The Kings are the team that needs to stay in town. They play downtown at the Staples Center, and if they were halfway decent they could be somewhat of a glamour franchise of the league, much like the Lakers are for the NBA. While the NHL needs to have a presence in this market, they do not need two.
Phoenix-
The Coyotes have not really caught on in Phoenix, as with the rest of the clubs in town. Phoenix is seemingly western version of Atlanta- a growing city where no one is actually from there. Maybe people care about the Suns, but I doubt anyone gives a shit about the other teams. Hockey in the desert is just a stupid idea, and the club’s abysmal attendance record over the years makes the evidence very clear.
Carolina-
I never really understood this move. Hartford to Carolina seemed like a lateral if not a downgrade of a move by owner Peter Karmanos. To go from one small city in the North where it snows and people actually care about hockey to another small city in the South where people do not care about hockey (or know what it is) was a bit of a stumper to me. Carolina has hovered in the bottom half, usually the bottom third of league attendance even though the team brought home a cup. This points to a team that should relocate.
Where to?
Winnipeg-
A new arena downtown, a rabid and starved hockey fan base, and it’s in Canada where people actually care about hockey. If you ever saw the white outs the Jets fans pulled off in the playoffs, you knew this town loved its team. It has the arena now, so give them a shot. Phoenix had their chance and they blew it. Give Winnipeg their Jets back.
Hamilton-
Another city in Canada that would be a great fit for a big league club is Hamilton. While it’s close to Buffalo and Toronto, Hamiltonians used to have an NHL club way back in the day, and would assuredly embrace another if it moved to town. Once again while it’s a smaller area, it is in Canada where hockey is king and faces competition from no other sports. The arena would need renovation, but that wouldn’t be a problem here.
Cleveland-
If keeping a team in Ohio, Cleveland would be a better location because it is a bigger metropolitan area and would be more receptive to a professional club. Natural rivalries could be created with Pittsburgh, Detroit, and Buffalo. Also, this old Cleveland Barons logo is pretty cool. Perhaps an arrangement could be worked out where they play a few home games in Columbus and Cincinnati, much like the Packers playing a few home games in Milwaukee, which was successful in making the Packers not just Green Bay’s team but Wisconsin’s team. The Cleveland Barons need to become Ohio’s team, but they will always be second fiddle in Columbus to the Buckeyes. A nice arena in downtown Cleveland doesn’t hurt either.
Houston-
This may seem like a stupid idea to some, but hear me out. While Houston Texas is not exactly a hockey hotbed, Houston is actually a big city. If trying to expand the footprint of the league to cities that are not traditional hockey markets, they should at least be big markets. Houston is a large metro area full of cash and sponsorship opportunities from oil companies, and a nice arena is already in place. An interstate rivalry with Dallas could and should spring up. Name suggestions: Houston Aeros, the name of the current AHL team and former WHA team.
Portland-
Portland is an affluent, growing metro area with only one other professional team in town. Portland is not located in the middle of a desert. While town residents were weary of building a new stadium for a potential Florida Marlins move, it has an arena currently in place. This arena also has a cool name- the Rose Garden. Not a lot of people know this, but the Portland Rosebuds were the first American hockey team to compete for Lord Stanley’s Cup in 1915. Portland Rosebuds would be a cool name for the current team as well, as I think it would be nice to see a new team without some sort of stupid animal logo or natural disaster motif.
Seattle-
Seattle as a city gets a bad wrap. Many a columnist, including S.I.’s Rick Reilly, mailed in a “Seattle is a town of wine and latte drinking, Volvo driving, smug elitists especially up against blue collar archetype Pittsburgh” type column. But look at the music this town has given us – Jimi Hendrix (the best to ever pick a guitar up), Alice in Chains, Heart, Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, Duff McKagan of Guns’n’Roses, among many others. A town that rocks this hard would enjoy a hockey team, especially after the Sonics took off for Oklahoma City. Maybe Key Arena isn’t perfect, but within a few years, Seattle would probably be willing to renovate or build a new one. Another brief history lesson- while the Portland Rosebuds were the first American club to compete for the Stanley Cup, the Seattle Metropolitans a year later in the 1916 were the first American team to win it. One last bit of advice- try to get Bill Gates to own the team.
Kansas City-
Hockey tried and failed once in K.C. in the form of the Kansas City Scouts. While it didn’t work out in the seventies, Kansas City deserves another chance. Kansas City is a good sports town, with Arrowhead Stadium known for being one of the NFL’s loudest. I’m sure when the Royals were halfway decent, people showed up at Kauffman Stadium too. Anyway, the Sprint Center has been built downtown and the city does not have a tenant. This means any team that wishes to become the new Kansas City Scouts (please stick with that name) can hammer out a sweetheart lease, which is pivotal to any franchise’s success. Also, since there are no hoops teams in K.C., the hockey team will have winter sports options all to itself.
Thanks for reading. My next entry will be on team names/logos/jerseys and come with a ranking of NHL uniforms.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
