|
Post by Z on Feb 19, 2005 19:00:23 GMT -5
Ben Hatskin admitted to taking the name back in the 70s. Go here: www.msu.edu/~philpott/Hockey/hockey.names.htmlThe Lions-Lions connection is irrelevant. When the BC Lions franchise was established in the early 50s, the NFL had no real presence other than what NASCAR does, a national curiosity with a strong, loyal base in one region of the US. Until the AFL started, the NFL lost a lot of players to the CFL because the Canadian dollar was stronger, and Canadian owners paid out more. It's more likely the Lions were a generic name pulled out of a hat. Much like 'Panthers', 'Storm' or 'Thunder'. Atlanta Falcons? Idiot....Remember those mustard yellow jerseys with the black stripe worn by the World Cup team and the World Junior team? It was only a few months back. Think. 1920 Olympic Gold winning Winnipeg Falcons. Canada's first hockey gold. Anyway, my main beef with the 'Jets' name, is that it is synonymous with failure in the NHL. Consider: 96 points, 4th overall in 84/85, only to run into Gretzky and his 208 points in the second round. The fact that Gretzky chose Edmonton over Winnipeg on a mere suggestion. The Colorado Rockies moving east and forcing the Jets out of the Norris division, and away from all those teams that were so weak in the 80s. John Ferguson. The indignity of the team moving to Phoenix. At least the Nordiques went to a city that appreciates hockey. It's almost as if the NHL punished the Jets for their WHA success.
|
|
|
Post by Z on Feb 19, 2005 19:33:56 GMT -5
The Winnipeg Jets are associated with futility? When they were in the WHA, they were considered the best team in the world. No one could beat them. They came to the NHL and their team got stripped of talent. They would have won the cup at once in their first 5 years if they would have been able to keep that team together. It was the NHL whe stole the talent. I said NHL futility. The Nordiques, Whalers and Oilers were subject to the same restrictions. The Jets went from 20-49-11 in 79/80 to 9-57-14 in 80/81. That's not the NHL's fault. My point is that the organization left us with little to cheer for before being unceremoniusly dumped in the desert. If the NHL becomes a reality, why not forge a new identity rather than tying themselves to a history that went 506-660-172 (NHL Totals) for a .378 winning percentage and 2 playoff rounds? I realize there's a bit of hypocrisy with my suggesting 'Falcons' and wanting a new identity, but Al replied to my post thinking I meant the Atlanta Falcons. And I assume he's from Winnipeg, so that speaks to the memory the Falcons have left behind. I miss the Jets, I can't even watch the Stanley Cup Finals, let alone the season or playoffs since they left, but let's face it. The NHL edition of the Winnipeg Jets were a lousy team. They seemed to get skunked by everything. The dispersal draft, John Ferguson, Wayne Gretzky and the Oilers, the Rockies moving east and moving the Jets from a weak division to a strong one, etc. All in all it's a kind of bad mojo or something. Maybe it's because we believed the 70s Jets could have beat the 70s Canadiens handily, and the hockey gods frown on that. I don't know. But I do know the NHL Jets sucked, and a new Winnipeg franchise in the NHL is still a new Winnipeg franchise in the NHL, whether they're called the Jets, the Falcons or the Pink Posies. Okay. I can't even stomach that last one at all.
|
|
Al
Rookie Member
Posts: 30
|
Post by Al on Feb 19, 2005 20:14:50 GMT -5
Atlanta Falcons? Idiot....Remember those mustard yellow jerseys with the black stripe worn by the World Cup team and the World Junior team? It was only a few months back. Think. 1920 Olympic Gold winning Winnipeg Falcons. Canada's first hockey gold. Remember the team that won three avco cups in the 70' AND beat the soviet team (something that the NHL all stars couldn't even do). Why not name our new team after them? Because they did crappy in their NHL years?
|
|
|
Post by KillerBrew on Feb 19, 2005 20:25:44 GMT -5
I wouldn't say the Jets were a lousy team, they just had alot of bad luck. Like you said, had a 96 point season, 4th overall, only to run into Gretzky and his record setting 209 points. Making the playoffs 11 out of 17 seasons aint bad either. Only made it out of the first round twice. Oh well, still gave us great memories. At least we had it better than Hartford. Poor Hartford.
|
|
|
Post by joelzillmanwpg on Feb 19, 2005 20:41:25 GMT -5
I wouldn't say the Jets were a lousy team, they just had alot of bad luck. Like you said, had a 96 point season, 4th overall, only to run into Gretzky and his record setting 209 points. Making the playoffs 11 out of 17 seasons aint bad either. Only made it out of the first round twice. Oh well, still gave us great memories. At least we had it better than Hartford. Poor Hartford. We had a chance to be Stanley Cup contenders twice. First, the NHL stripped the Jets to the bone in 1979, when they entered the NHL. Otherwise, I am positive the Jets would have made a run at the cup. Then in 1991, the Hockey News voted Winnipeg and Detroit as the two top young teams. The difference was that Detroit had the cash to sign all the draft picks and rookies they had, and immediately became the top team in the NHL in the 90's. The Jets had to trade away most prospects simply because they could not afford them.
|
|
|
Post by joelzillmanwpg on Feb 19, 2005 20:42:29 GMT -5
Shouldn't be the Jets. Ben Hatskin stole the name from the NFL team, which sounds like a 6 year old came up with it, anyway. If I had to pick a name, it would be 'Falcons'. Or perhaps 'Aces'. Should casino revenues be used to support the team. I also like 'Warriors'. THe Jets name came from signing Bobby Hull (aka "the Golden Jet"). Haskin even asked for permission from the NY Jets to use the name. ALl 3 names you have chose are either being used today, or have been used in the past: - Altanta Falcons (NFL)
- Quebec Aces (AHL)
- Golden State Warriors (NBA)
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Feb 19, 2005 22:19:30 GMT -5
I believe I also brought this up and I totally agree. I miss the Jets as they were when they left in 1996. The Cleveland Browns weren't exactly winning any Super Bowls in recent memory either. So just because the Jets didn't win a Stanley Cup title as the old team, it doesn't mean anyone such avoid the Jets name associated with a new one. New team, new chapter, new hope in the city of Winnipeg... that's the spirit all fans should feel with a new Winnipeg Jets team.
To me, I don't let name association with the team name bother me. The thing is that regardless of the success and in some years the lack of it, the name "Winnipeg Jets" is so identifible with the city, it's difficult for me to feel that another name would be more fitting for the fans and the community to relate to with the new team.
I did say in another thread to just bring back the 1996 uniforms with very slight modifications to modernize the last logo (such as detailing... like outlining by adding a color for eye appeal) and colors. See the post I left in Luke's thread about "new jersey/logo design", I believe.
|
|
|
Post by jets4ever on Feb 19, 2005 23:00:59 GMT -5
I wouldn't say the Jets were a lousy team, they just had alot of bad luck. Like you said, had a 96 point season, 4th overall, only to run into Gretzky and his record setting 209 points. Without Dale Hawerchuk.
|
|
|
Post by vivianmb on Feb 22, 2005 23:25:44 GMT -5
you know the wpg jets were named after the ny jets?i read somewhere the first owner was good buds with ny jets owner sonny werblin,and used the name as a tribute or something.
|
|
|
Post by Z on Feb 23, 2005 2:28:57 GMT -5
I wouldn't say the Jets were a lousy team, they just had alot of bad luck. That's my point exactly. They were a hard luck team in the NHL. Gretzky was 50-50 and leaning Winnipeg before his agent stepped in. If the Rockies never moved to New Jersey, the Jets would have stayed in the Norris division with a bunch of teams that could never really string together good seasons. How much success could they have had in there? When the WHA folded, they stripped Hartford, Quebec and Edmonton too. Only Hartford truly sucked worse. Sure the Jets had good seasons, all ended by runs of bad luck, as opposed to being outright bad. It's all bad luck. I'm not so sure that's better than just being bad outright. Why do people go back to 30 year old glories? People outside Winnipeg, Edmonton and Quebec probably don't remember the WHA too well. The Maple Leafs won a bunch of Stanley Cups in the 60s too, in 2005 no one really cares too much. Part of my thinking is the idea of 'New NHL, new team for Winnipeg', new this, new that. Okay, go all the way, then with a new nickname too. WHA has been dead for nearly 30 years, the Jets left almost 10 years ago. It's all old news. To the guy who made the point about Detroit and Winnipeg being the most promising young teams in 1991, the Jets never actually lost any key guys until the Selanne trade. Davydov, Bautin, Mironov and Ulanov were too soft or incompetent. Essensa was average at best. Predictions like that are 100% accurate. Yeah right. If you simulate the entire season on EA's NHL 94, the Winnipeg Jets ALWAYS finish with the best record. That 30 game winless skid during the Tim Cheveldae era, sure backed up all those accolades. Tellin' ya. The NHL gods must have frowned upon the Jets for WHA successes or signing Bobby Hull or something.
|
|
|
Post by AO8/EM71 on Feb 23, 2005 2:30:07 GMT -5
Yes but remember, for everything the Hockey Gods take away they give something back...
|
|
|
Post by Z on Feb 23, 2005 2:48:21 GMT -5
Oakland got more than their name back when they got back into the NFL, they got the Raiders back. Chances are we won't get the Coyotes back so we have to look to other cities who got their names back. Cleveland is my gold standard for a city that a league took care of. They got to keep their name and records and retired numbers. (And their colors) Currently the NHL is keeping the name Jets warm for us. I cannot see why they would keep us from resurrecting it. It would be more money in their pockets in the long run to give it back to us. Many teams that moved kept their names. The LA Dodgers kept their name dispite moving from Brooklyn. The Giants as well. Don't forget the Minneapolis Lakers moving to LA. (Even though their retired numbers from Minnesota and their claim to championships won by that incarnation of the Lakers were revoked.) The Colts to Indy, the Rams in St. Louis and every city the Cardinals have moved to. However, that didn't happen in our case so the name Jets is very much within our reach if we could just get back in the league. The Raiders never changed nicknames in the first place, why wouldn't they keep their name? Espescially when you consider it was all just Al Davis trying to get concessions and better leases from the people in LA and Oakland. Technically, when Art Modell moved the Browns to Baltimore, the NFL folded the Cleveland Browns and granted Baltimore an 'expansion' franchise. Since expanding the NFL was always a priority, Cleveland was given a conditional franchise providing someone could come up with the cash. The NHL had no such warm and fuzzy spot for Winnipeg. Odd bit of trivia: I don't think the NBA has ever actually lost a nickname. Minneapolis Lakers to Los Angeles. Philadelphia Warriors to San Francisco. New Orleans Jazz to Salt Lake City. San Diego Clippers to Los Angeles. Charlotte Hornets to New Orleans. Milwaukee Hawks to St. Louis Hawks to Atlanta. Vancouver Grizzlies to Memphis. Brooklyn/New York Nets to New Jersey. Kansas City Kings to Sacramento. San Diego Rockets to Houston.
|
|
|
Post by bigchris on Feb 23, 2005 4:37:12 GMT -5
The Buffalo Braves technically folded and resurfaced as the San Diego Clippers. This franchise death is what ushered in the salary cap in the NBA.
|
|
|
Post by bigchris on Feb 23, 2005 4:39:21 GMT -5
Other such name changes include
Te Cincinatti Roylas becoming the Kansas City/Omaha Kings. Syracyuse Nationals becoming the Philadelphia 76ers The Denver Rockets changing their name to the Nuggets to accomidate the NBA/ABA merger. The Washington Bullets becoming the Wizards.
|
|
|
Post by JETStender on Mar 6, 2005 1:16:38 GMT -5
Lets stick to the facts on this one. The NHL owns the name "Winnipeg Jets" and the NHL Jets' logos. With the way all this vintage stuff rakes in the cash it would be in the NHL's best intrest not to let us use Jets, however I seriously doubt that if the name Jets is overwelimingly supported they'd let use use it again.
The only reason Colorado used the avs is because the Rockies are already the Baseball's nickname. It would be stupid to have 2 teams called the Colorado Rockies.
As for Minnesota and Atlanta, the leauge would not allow the name North Stars or Flames because those respective teams kept their nicknames when they moved.
|
|
|
Post by hockeyplease on Apr 2, 2005 11:35:09 GMT -5
but there would be a difference between the stars and the north stars but that would be kinda weired
|
|
|
Post by Pitbull on Apr 2, 2005 11:40:37 GMT -5
Yeah. No one has taken the Jets name or anything close to the Jets name.
Oh yeah, what's a Blue Jacket? I thought it was a jacket that is blue. LOL. While we try to keep our name, I think others should think about redoing theirs.
|
|
|
Post by ottawasenators on Jun 13, 2005 18:05:41 GMT -5
The Ottawa Senators kept their name and it was over half a century that the name was out of use!
|
|
|
Post by joelzillmanwpg on Jun 14, 2005 10:10:20 GMT -5
Yeah. No one has taken the Jets name or anything close to the Jets name. Oh yeah, what's a Blue Jacket? I thought it was a jacket that is blue. LOL. While we try to keep our name, I think others should think about redoing theirs. I would choose "Blue Jakets" over "Mighty Ducks" anyday!
|
|
|
Post by dreamcatcher on Jun 14, 2005 11:33:22 GMT -5
If the NHL ok'd a relocation of a franchise to Winnipeg, and we asked for the name back, Bettman and Co. would give the name back to the new owners here in Winnipeg for next to nothing or a nominal transfer fee.
They are not making huge piles off the Jets........although it continues to sell well.
An attorney in Winnipeg checked into the availability of the Name rights last year.
If it turns out that the majority of Winnipeggers want the name the Winnipeg Jets back, I see no reason at all for this to be a stumbling block.....
|
|