Winnipeg Jets return

[RadioGaGa 162]

I renamed this since it is fairly certain at this point it will NOT be the Coyotes that are moving.

[shotty 7]

apparently the NHL owns the name, not the coyotes.. that said, the NHL owns the coyotes too! to me it would make sense to use "jets" if the coyotes were moved BACK to 'peg, but since its ATL, the jets remain in phoenix. its a new era in pro sports in winnipeg and lets face it, the jets didnt exactly have a storied history. PLUS, what does keeping the name do to drive new apparel sales? i loved those jerseys and the name (i had a selanne jets jersey on my christmas wish list for years as a kid)... but from a business perspective, i think it makes more sense to go with a different name.

[Joshison 1]

edit: you beat me to it.. the NHL owns the coyotes..

[Leafsrule16 5]

apparently the NHL owns the name, not the coyotes.. that said, the NHL owns the coyotes too! to me it would make sense to use "jets" if the coyotes were moved BACK to 'peg, but since its ATL, the jets remain in phoenix. its a new era in pro sports in winnipeg and lets face it, the jets didnt exactly have a storied history. PLUS, what does keeping the name do to drive new apparel sales? i loved those jerseys and the name (i had a selanne jets jersey on my christmas wish list for years as a kid)... but from a business perspective, i think it makes more sense to go with a different name.

Go jets go? The white out? All the fan pages supporting the "JETS"? No matter what you call them, as long as it's not the jets, theres going to be a lot of pissed off fans. That's like saying the Flames moved away or the Oilers or any non orig. 6 team moved away and came back to be called the falcons. There has been sites up for the last 16 years, fans all over Winnipeg wanting there jets back in Winnipeg and if they call the team anything but the jets they might as well just give all Jets supporters the finger. My two cents..

[shotty 7]

what does the white out have to do with the team moniker?

[chippa13 1844]

Go jets go? The white out? All the fan pages supporting the "JETS"? No matter what you call them, as long as it's not the jets, theres going to be a lot of pissed off fans. That's like saying the Flames moved away or the Oilers or any non orig. 6 team moved away and came back to be called the falcons. There has been sites up for the last 16 years, fans all over Winnipeg wanting there jets back in Winnipeg and if they call the team anything but the jets they might as well just give all Jets supporters the finger. My two cents..

Folks will get over it. With the exception of the Cleveland Browns where the city had the rights to the name, I believe every other city that has recaptured a pro sports team has done so under a different name because either the former franchise owned the rights to the name or the name continued with the relocated team, witness the Houston Texans (Oilers), Baltimore Ravens (Colts), and Colorado Avalanche (Rockies).

[#44wannabe 4]

Anything but calling them the Jets would be crazy, and would push a lot of fans away as it's not so much the NHL they want back but their Jets.

What else would you call the team though? Winnipeg Wheat Farmers? Winnipeg Freeze? Winnipeg Roadworkers?

[chippa13 1844]

Considering that they aren't getting the Jets (Coyotes) back or starting a new franchise from scratch, it really doesn't make sense. If Winnipeg is truly the next great bastion of the NHL then they should be able to name the team the Winnipeg Jackasses and they will still be successful.

[JR Boucicaut 3759]

what does the white out have to do with the team moniker?

They were the first to do it.

Anything but calling them the Jets would be crazy, and would push a lot of fans away as it's not so much the NHL they want back but their Jets.

What else would you call the team though? Winnipeg Wheat Farmers? Winnipeg Freeze? Winnipeg Roadworkers?

They adjusted to the Manitoba Moose.

[#44wannabe 4]

To an extent, if the moose crowds are to go by an NHL franchise will not last in the 'Peg. Also, I think it's slightly different having a team in a different league. The Jets were always the NHL franchise, naming the Moose differently gave hope to the fact that the Jets may return. Had they named the AHL (or then IHL) team the Jets it would have been damning to the hope of them and could have cost the crowds. NHL = Jets only for 'Peggers, if the Moose had been named Jets i think a large number of fans would have refused as it wouldnt have been the Jets THEIR Jets - just a cheap imposter.

The AHL was sold as a totally new hockey product to avoid alienation of fans. A kind of 'The Jets are gone, but hey the Moose have moved into town. Come watch hockey's future'

[chippa13 1844]

The Moose were sold differently because the AHL is a far different animal than the NHL. With an AHL franchise the rosters are much more fluid as players are seldom with an AHL team for more than a couple of years, if that. It is much harder for an AHL team to develop and maintain crowds because there isn't that name recognition with the roster, you can't develop that attachment with the "core players". There is no face of the franchise.

[shotty 7]

They were the first to do it.

it has nothing to do with the name, is what i'm getting at.

The Moose were sold differently because the AHL is a far different animal than the NHL. With an AHL franchise the rosters are much more fluid as players are seldom with an AHL team for more than a couple of years, if that. It is much harder for an AHL team to develop and maintain crowds because there isn't that name recognition with the roster, you can't develop that attachment with the "core players". There is no face of the franchise.

you post a lot of good stuff, but every once in a while you have no idea what you're talking about. most of this post is true, but there is no doubt that mike keane was the face of this franchise for 6 seasons.

[chippa13 1844]

Mike Keane was the exception, not the rule. Veteran players that stick with an AHL franchise are few and far between.

[shotty 7]

you were speaking directly about the manitoba moose, not the ahl in general, which is why i prefaced my post.

[Chadd 916]

I'd really like to keep this topic open. (that's a hint)

[hunterphfr 12]

The Winnipeg Big F'in Ass Mosquitoes!

[shotty 7]

someone on the radio suggested "winnipeg pooh" in reference to winnie the pooh, pretty hilarious.

[oldtrainerguy28 478]

Spoke with an NHL person today should be announced for sure next week!

[yf51 0]

To an extent, if the moose crowds are to go by an NHL franchise will not last in the 'Peg. Also, I think it's slightly different having a team in a different league. The Jets were always the NHL franchise

Not always. Jets name came from a junior league. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnipeg_Monarchs_%28WHL%29

So I think it wouldn't be a terrible decision to repeat the move, and name them the Manitoba Moose. I love their logo, and would definitely buy some apparel with the Moose on it. Plus, they have mooses in Manitoba right? What about Jets name?

I am not a Manitobian to vote, but I chant for the Moose!

[jds 20]

Looks like today is the day. True North has called a press conference for noon ET in Winnipeg. Twitter is all abuzz about the impending announcement.

http://twitter.com/#!/TSNBobMcKenzie/statuses/75538295177748481

Here's the wire story so far:

The Canadian Press

WINNIPEG - The waiting is over for Winnipeg hockey fans.

True North Sports and Entertainment has scheduled a news conference for noon ET at Winnipeg's MTS Centre to make "a significant community announcement."

True North has been in negotiations with the owners of the Atlanta Thrashers to buy the NHL team and move it to Winnipeg.

Winnipeg has been without NHL hockey since the Jets moved to Phoenix in 1996.

Atlanta says goodbye to an NHL franchise for the second time. The Flames moved from Atlanta to Calgary in 1980.

[DarkStar50 679]

http://blogs.ajc.com/jeff-schultz-blog/2011/05/24/cowardly-bettman-ignoring-evidence-of-thrashers-fans/?cxntfid=blogs_jeff_schultz_blog

and Bettman blames Atlanta's demise on fans not going to watch a crappy team. this guy is such an idiot. Bring back John Zeigler. At least when he ran the NHL, only the players got screwed, not the fans, too.

[Law Goalie 147]

I think he's making a very half-assed appeal to the predominant European view of club sports: fans are supporters, and their support is what allows the club to exist. You support Liverpool or Preston North End because you live there or are from there, and your support consists (in theory) as much in financial support as in abstract flag-bearing, throat-rending support. Of course, Manchester (both City and United) are way beyond this kind of 'buy a beer to support the club' kind of actual support, but the ethos is still there: a true supporter, a member of the firm, is there through good, and bad, thick and this, believing in his heart of hearts that his ass in the seat and the beer in his belly are allowing the team to go out and sign Tevez, and that he's part of the team's success at its height, and its revival from despair. Part of the reason this exists is that the clubs (for the most part) predate the Football Association; the other closely related part is the system of promotion and demotion that, of course, doesn't really exist in North America. (You could say, I suppose, that Winnipeg as a city was 'demoted' to the AHL when their NHL franchise left, and is being 'promoted' back now, but the analogy doesn't hold: the Moose were never going to play their way out of the AHL.)

There was a little of this tradition of club support in North American professional sport, but the idea of sport as an entertainment product (which that blog neatly expresses) is now the only one really in consideration. The NHL isn't called 'The Show' for nothing: the belief on both sides of the glass is that the fans (not supporters) pay to see a good product, and, unfortunately and somewhat paradoxically, part what both sides believe is a good product is a good outcome: a win. Now, a purist will argue this isn't so: that a well-played loss by his team is better than a boring win. The trouble is that this argument doesn't have great acceptance generally. People like to win, and they like those they favour (be they friends or people they admire) to win -- and this is especially true if they don't deeply love and thoroughly understand the sport. Little by little, as this fan-driven, product-based model came to prominence, it became not only acceptable to not show up to games, but not showing up to games was seen as a way to drive improvement. Don't like empty seats?- don't play like crap next game.

I'm not saying hockey in Atlanta was a good idea, or a big hit, or that Winnipeg won't work this time around. I'm just saying that lurking in Bettman's washing his hands of Atlanta, there is a tiny tincture of truth: that if the fans had said, we'll support the Thrashers as a club, no matter what, through thick and thin, and had effectively become supporters, the team might have had a better shot at becoming the entertainment product Bettman hoped it would be when he approved the franchise. Though we deride Leaf fans for paying premiums for a mediocre product, that support guarantees (in the technical sense) that there is a chance for the team to thrive.

Ultimately, conceiving of a team as a club or a product is literally a conceit either way: it's a metaphor to govern understanding. I think the best teams maintain that club spirit while understanding that they at a certain point, the support of the supporters does become a background to larger successes. And, interestingly, this European language of 'clubs' has begun to creep back into the game: I've noticed it coming from a lot of general managers and coaches, usually in terms of things being 'good for our club,' or 'a problem for the club,' and so on.

[jds 20]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/Thrashers-still-selling-season-tickets-1-hour-be?urn=nhl-wp6063

[#44wannabe 4]

On the NHL website now NHL.com

[#44wannabe 4]

LIVE Press conference LINK