In this edition of the hotstove we share our thoughts on the Las Vegas Golden Knights' team name and logo.
The NHL's 31st franchise has been officially revealed...the Las Vegas Golden Knights! https://t.co/WHWqDlRTha #TSNHockey pic.twitter.com/z9eF1yTc1X
— TSN Hockey (@TSNHockey) November 23, 2016
Todd Cordell
I don't love the Golden Knights as opposed to just Knights but there would be legal issues if they tried to go with the latter so I'll give them a pass there.
I will say I like the logo. It's not flashy but it's sharp and is a lot different than the logos were used to seeing. It almost has more of a junior logo, or EA Sports NHL custom team logo, feel as opposed to a professional logo. It's different but I really like it.
Adam French I really don't have a strong opinion on this. I don't really care to be honest. The Las Vegas Strippers would have been good. Or the Las Vegas Cash For Golds. If a team can be called the "Redblacks," then I think any stupid name is valid. With regards to the logo...it's fine. Though it makes me think of the Centurion from that Ottawa playoff game. Speaking of, I think I will go watch that video and laugh for a little.
Love the logo, dislike the name.
If the franchise wanted to be involved with something that was medieval then knights was a good choice but why 'golden' knights? If that was the best addition to describe the Knights was enough thought put into it?
Dark Knights (There will be many as an expansion franchise or is that too close to Batman?) Barbarians (People often act like them whilst in Vegas) Monks (It is 'sin city' so perhaps some piety is in order)
Now if something edgy or suggestive were desired with some alliteration what about words starting with 'V'?
Villains Vipers
You could open that up to other letters too with old west themes:
Bandits Posse Shooters Bulls Stallions Outlaws Railheads Locos Rebels Rattlers Miners Varmint (need to license Yosemite Sam for logo though)
I think there are far better names than the couplet of "Golden Knights" and it required some serious marketing effort put into it but why not Knights?
If there can be the NY and Winnipeg Jets, the BC and Detroit Lions, clearly there could be a duplicate name for the Las Vegas franchise that would be much improved than Golden Knights.
James Tanner It's a pretty boring, corporate, focus-grouped and inoffensive name. It won't bug anyone and it sounds like the kind of thing where you put a random colour in front of a generic name so you don't get sued by anyone.
For that reason alone I give it a huge thumbs down and several disparaging remarks.
That being said, this is coming from a guy who cheers for a team named after a type of leaf and whose mascot is a polar bear.
In all honesty, I don't think I could care any less what they called their team. My main criticism is that it shows no imagination and that is the hallmark of people who buy a hockey team out of corporate greed.
This ends any hopes I had of the team being owned by an eccentric billionaire who would have kicked off his entry to the league by naming his team something weird and possibly stupid.
Instead we get another boring corporate entity. Any owner worth their money would have at least considered naming the team the Las Vegas Cowabunga Boys.
Recent posts: Thoughts on Burns' long-term deal with the Sharks?