Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
IPv6Freely

Vegas Golden Knights

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, chippa13 said:

To all who hate the name, read up on how Chicago got their's.

Named for a military unit, that was in turn named for a prominent Illinois native leader. Seems like it's not really all that similar, as there is no "Vegas" tie to the "Golden Knights" name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One more team to NHL. One completely new market area. Possible birth of tens of thousands or even more new hockey fans, possibly new ice arena for public. This is great not only for hockey, but for other winter sports exposure as well. They could have dress the team in silver and called them "Sin City Bumpkins"... this is awesome and I wish the club management a success in building this new franchise. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/30/2016 at 1:23 AM, chippa13 said:

Original Chicago owner's military unit versus Vegas owner military school. Heck, it could be how the Rangers got their name.

But in the case of Chicago, the unit was named for someone who was from the Chicago area. That is a local connection that the "Vegas" team doesn't have.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/30/2016 at 1:23 AM, chippa13 said:

Original Chicago owner's military unit versus Vegas owner military school. Heck, it could be how the Rangers got their name.

Rangers' original owner was Tex Rickard.  

As in Tex's Rangers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, they're complaining because it took many, many years to get a professional team and it seams like the Owners did not take any consideration for the city, only for the name they wanted and marketing. The last thing a city with a new team needs is the wrong name for a team. To a lot of real Las Vegans (especially natives) calling it Vegas and not Las Vegas would be like calling them the Philly Flyers, Tampa Lightning, Jersey Devils. Those are nicknames of cities, not the actual city name. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chk hrd said:

No, they're complaining because it took many, many years to get a professional team and it seams like the Owners did not take any consideration for the city, only for the name they wanted and marketing. The last thing a city with a new team needs is the wrong name for a team. To a lot of real Las Vegans (especially natives) calling it Vegas and not Las Vegas would be like calling them the Philly Flyers, Tampa Lightning, Jersey Devils. Those are nicknames of cities, not the actual city name. 

If the world can get over the Anaheim Mighty Ducks, Macon Whoopie, or Savannah Bananas then it can get over the Vegas Golden Knights. As for owners concerned about marketing, well, uuummmmmmm, it is a business. The object is to make money. There is a reason why teams change around their uniforms every few years and many switch around their thirds even more often.

At the end of the day, there is a new NHL franchise starting play in October 2017. I would think local fans would be happy but if not there are some folks north of Montreal who will gladly take the Golden Knights off your hands.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, IPv6Freely said:

I definitely agree that it's stupid, though not enough to be upset about. 

At least you're not a Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim fan...

the Angels thing is probably the most ridiculous name botch in pro sports. Granted the Angels started in LA then moved to Anaheim after 5 years or so back in 1966, but it is like Renaming "Dallas Stars" to "Minnesota North Stars of Dallas" or "Brooklyn Nets" to "New Jersey Nets of Brooklyn"... It was funny to watch reaction on Angels fans faces in OC. It was like state eminent-domain their front lawn.

Edited by Kgbeast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kgbeast said:

the Angels thing is probably the most ridiculous name botch in pro sports. Granted the Angels started in LA then moved to Anaheim after 5 years or so back in 1966, but it is like Renaming "Dallas Stars" to "Minnesota North Stars of Dallas" or "Brooklyn Nets" to "New Jersey Nets of Brooklyn"... It was funny to watch reaction on Angels fans faces in OC. It was like state eminent-domain their front lawn.

It's even funnier because of what "Los Angeles" translates to in English. And don't forget they were once the California Angels. At least that would have worked regardless of what city they moved to!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎5‎/‎2016 at 3:53 PM, chippa13 said:

If the world can get over the Anaheim Mighty Ducks, Macon Whoopie, or Savannah Bananas then it can get over the Vegas Golden Knights. As for owners concerned about marketing, well, uuummmmmmm, it is a business. The object is to make money. There is a reason why teams change around their uniforms every few years and many switch around their thirds even more often.

At the end of the day, there is a new NHL franchise starting play in October 2017. I would think local fans would be happy but if not there are some folks north of Montreal who will gladly take the Golden Knights off your hands.

Anaheims' original name was because of Disney (which is pretty much what Anaheim is known for) and the movie so that ties it to the city and gives the name some value. When they were bought, the new ownership dropped Mighty but the Duck name was already established. The Whoopie, Bananana's and other goofy named teams are minor league teams which is a far cry from a pro team. Minor leagues are well know for off names.

I guess the Canadian team can be called the Yellow Snowmen and the people are just suppose to support it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank goodness. I thought the Mighty Ducks was a marketing ploy of Disney and we already know how you feel about those being perpetrated by new owners.

Seriously, do you support the team or the nickname? If the nickname is your make or break for supporting the team then I'd question how much you really want the team in the first place. I'm starting to feel like if it wasn't the team nickname then there would be some other detail that would be the deal breaker for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was not a big supporter of getting a team from the start. The last thing the NHL and hockey needs is another Coyote or Panther problem. The team will do well here the first few years, but if they don't do well after that then what? Move them or sell them? Both will make the NHL and Las Vegas look bad. Las Vegas had a tough time supporting our minor league teams (Thunder and Wranglers). Foley said 6-7 years to become a contender for the cup. Hopefully he keeps his commitment on putting together a top notch team and lets management run it like a pro sports team, because we saw what happened in Tampa Bay when Koules tried to get involved.  After the newness wares off I hope we don't have a tough time supporting a pro team. Up until the new team was local headlines most people didn't even know we have ice rinks, let alone a hockey program here.

I guess what it feels like is the people here have put a lot of faith in Foley by purchasing enough season tickets to get the team. Instead of honoring the city with a name that means something to it, he gives it a name and image that don't connect with Las Vegas. We are more than the "what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas" image that most people think we are. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"NHL Enterprises filed applications to trademark Golden Knights, Silver Knights and Desert Knights with the United States Patent and Trademark Office on Aug. 23, 2016."

Am I the only one that thinks "Desert Knights" is an infinitely better name? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, chk hrd said:

I was not a big supporter of getting a team from the start. The last thing the NHL and hockey needs is another Coyote or Panther problem. The team will do well here the first few years, but if they don't do well after that then what? Move them or sell them? Both will make the NHL and Las Vegas look bad. Las Vegas had a tough time supporting our minor league teams (Thunder and Wranglers). Foley said 6-7 years to become a contender for the cup. Hopefully he keeps his commitment on putting together a top notch team and lets management run it like a pro sports team, because we saw what happened in Tampa Bay when Koules tried to get involved.  After the newness wares off I hope we don't have a tough time supporting a pro team. Up until the new team was local headlines most people didn't even know we have ice rinks, let alone a hockey program here.

I guess what it feels like is the people here have put a lot of faith in Foley by purchasing enough season tickets to get the team. Instead of honoring the city with a name that means something to it, he gives it a name and image that don't connect with Las Vegas. We are more than the "what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas" image that most people think we are. 

 

The "Coyote or Panther problem" has to do with one thing, performance on the ice. If the team has success on the ice then it will have success off the ice. The bottom line, winning brings fans. Outside of Toronto and Montreal, people won't line up to watch a loser night after night. I bring up this example all the time but it wasn't that long ago that the Bruins had an announced attendance of about 9,000 for a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at the senators right now. Theyre having a decent season I'd say and yet had 14,000 fans in 2 of three games I went to last week. And Ottawa is considered a top market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, IPv6Freely said:

"NHL Enterprises filed applications to trademark Golden Knights, Silver Knights and Desert Knights with the United States Patent and Trademark Office on Aug. 23, 2016."

Am I the only one that thinks "Desert Knights" is an infinitely better name? 

Personally I prefer Dessert Knights. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×