Really? Did they have to?
What the berkeley is a Golden Knight. I like the logo but the name sucks donkey balls. Couldn't have gone with Desert Knights?
Really? Did they have to?
What the berkeley is a Golden Knight. I like the logo but the name sucks donkey balls. Couldn't have gone with Desert Knights?
Looks like it was just a idea for a name.
http://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/18114686/nhl-how-vegas-golden-knights-got-their-nickname
They're the Army's parachute demonstration team.
Appleseed wrote: They're the Army's parachute demonstration team.
That's what I thought this was going to be about too
STM317 wrote:Appleseed wrote: They're the Army's parachute demonstration team.That's what I thought this was going to be about too
Me too. What's the issue?
At least it's not the golden showers.
Seeing as I live in THE SILVER STATE, the choice of "Golden Knights" makes no sense whatsoever.
I'll probably go see them when they play the Red Wings, though!
I had to google it...I guess this is about the name for the new NHL hockey team in Las Vegas?
Las Vegas seems like a weird place to have a hockey team anyway.
If they wanted something fitting the city, perhaps:
Drunk Sweaty Gambling Addicted Hooker
Or they could have gone with:
aircooled wrote: They should have gone with:
Perfect!
stuart in mn wrote: I had to google it...I guess this is about the name for the new NHL hockey team in Las Vegas? Las Vegas seems like a weird place to have a hockey team anyway.
I am of the belief that the existence of natural ice should be a prerequisite for an NHL franchise. You don't have to use it (natural ice sucks to skate on most of the time) but it has to happen. So, all Canadian cities (we'll give Vancouver a pass here), Boston, NY, Chicago, Denver - you guys are good. Florida, California, Nashville...no. Send the boys home to places that want them like Waterloo.
Somehow, though, Vegas is a completely artificial place. And given the magpie tendencies of the city, having gold in the name makes perfect sense. Either that or call them the Bedazzled Swarovskis or something.
It's a good logo.
Las Vegas actually should be a decent place for an NHL franchise. Despite warm weather teams typically having trouble getting fans, the fact that it is in Las Vegas should mean that fans will go. Besides that, it has a population of... what, 2 million in the area? And with no professional teams there (major professional) they should be the big draw.
I know my dad would make an effort to go whenever he is there on a trade show.
I have a natural bitterness for expansion teams anyway being a Canadian, but mostly I was disappointed in the name. They had a "golden" opportunity to make a play on any number of themes and in the end they opted for lame.
I thought the name was bad enough already.
Margie
Silver something would have been better.
At least it's better than The Rumble Ponies
Keith Tanner wrote: I am of the belief that the existence of natural ice should be a prerequisite for an NHL franchise.
Keith, you're right about so many things, but you may be off base here. There are lots of transplants in the area from colder climates. At the game I went to last week ('Canes and Habs) there were as many Montreal sweaters in the stands as there were for the 'Canes. Granted, attendance isn't all that great, but many people in the area are attached to our franchise. Plus, you can walk up the night of the game and get a ticket to see a team like Montreal play. Try that in their home stadium.
I will be intrigued with attendance numbers there. Flying to Vegas from here can be a pretty cheap thing, so it might be first choice for people out of major markets to see a game. It could easily be folded into a boys weekend of peelers, gambling, Ferrari driving and hockey.
Slightly related: It was fun this past baseball season to see the huge number of Blue Jays jerseys in the crowd when they played in Seattle.
bearmtnmartin wrote: I have a natural bitterness for expansion teams anyway being a Canadian...
By that rational, there would only be 6 teams. The upside would be that I'd get to see the Hawks play the Wings more than twice a year.
Appleseed wrote:bearmtnmartin wrote: I have a natural bitterness for expansion teams anyway being a Canadian...By that rational, there would only be 6 teams. The upside would be that I'd get to see the Hawks play the Wings more than twice a year.
The rivalry is dead. I really would like to trade Nashville for Detroit.
Although Nashville is an awesome city, and I might visit there and see a hawks game. And Nashville is berkeleying awesome this year (just you wait, I know they're not so hot right now, but just you wait... they're going to be a team to beat)
In reply to Appleseed:
Well just mostly the fact that that Canada is sort of the talent pool for the American league nowadays. I may change my mind if the Canucks ever figure their E36 M3 out.
bearmtnmartin wrote: In reply to Appleseed: Well just mostly the fact that that Canada is sort of the talent pool for the American league nowadays. I may change my mind if the Canucks ever figure their E36 M3 out.
Canada has the players, but no one to buy the product. Do you want the NHL at all?
The rivalry dies when people like you let it die.
Did we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbour? No! Nothings over till we say it is.
Detroit still sucks.
In reply to Appleseed:
Agreed! also chicago.
You'll need to log in to post.
