We’re now more than a month into an NHL postponement and there is still no clear timeline on when professional hockey will return. While fans of the sport have received small tidbits of news over that time, including college signings and contract extensions, the thirst for discussion has rarely been quenched.
With that in mind, we’re happy to continue our new feature: The PHR Panel. Our writing staff will give our individual takes on a question many hockey fans have been wondering about. If you’d ever like to submit a subject for us to discuss, be sure to put it in the comments.
To catch up on the previous edition, click here.
Today, with another report that the Seattle expansion franchise is close to revealing a team name, we’ll give our thoughts on what we would choose.
Q: What would you name the Seattle expansion franchise?
Brian La Rose:
Most people seem to like Kraken as Seattle’s eventual team name (and that’s what I think it will be in the end) so I’ll go in a different direction for this discussion. Let’s go back in time about 100 years back to the old days of the PCHA where there was a team called the Seattle Metropolitans. That team very quietly won the Stanley Cup back in 1917 and had a shot at another one in 1919 before the Spanish flu pandemic struck so there is some history worth celebrating.
We’ve seen a shift in recent years towards franchises embracing the past. Retro uniforms are quite popular (though I’m not advocating for the Metropolitans to go back to their old sweaters – they were a bit of an eyesore) and alumni nights in some cities are more frequent. We’ve seen an old team name revived in the past with the Ottawa Senators (who coincidentally played against the Metropolitans in the 1920 Stanley Cup Final) so there is some precedence here as well.
Yes, there could be some confusion with the team effectively sharing the same name as the Metropolitan Division. But there’s an easy fix to that – just change the name of the division which wouldn’t be a bad idea in the first place. Embrace some of hockey’s past and fix a poorly-named division at the same time? That’s a win-win situation right there.
Holger Stolzenberg:
I keep looking at all the names and there are several I like. However, whenever I see a new team coming up with a nickname (in any sport, at any level), I often find myself disappointed in generic names that don’t tie in with the city or town’s local history.
I keep hearing the name Kraken over and over again. Not sure whether that will end up being that name, but naming the Seattle franchise after a mythical creature doesn’t make much sense to me. I look at a name like the Sockeyes and I like how the name ties in with the Seattle salmon culture, while also being a name that could have a second-meaning of being punched in the eye, which seems very hockey-like in my opinion.
Granted, I’m not the one making the decision, nor should I, but I definitely am a fan of the Sockeye and hope that is what the Seattle franchise eventually goes with. Will I be disappointed if they go with anything else? No. I can even live with the Kraken, but I would rather see that name tie in with the city in a better way than a mythical creature.
Zach Leach:
The name, logo, and colors of an expansion team is more important than you might think. While merchandising and licensing are just a small fraction of a franchise’s income, the first impression created by their name and look has a far greater reaching impact. Especially in the internet age, a new club can build their fan base beyond their geographical limits by having a “cool” name, popular mascot or unique color scheme. Just look at the Premier Lacrosse League for example; the 2019 start-up had no geographical attachment and most fans were left to pick a team to root for by color and logo only, leading to a number of creative and diverse designs.
So while the Seattle expansion team has several nostalgic traditional names on the table– Metropolitans and Seals for example–as well as more locally-influenced options such as Rainiers and Emeralds, I believe the team should go in a more progressive direction and choose a name, logo, and colors that more widely appeal to North American and even global audiences and the younger generation.
To accomplish this goal, I would say that Kraken is the best option for the team name. The uniqueness and whimsical nature of the name will stand out and there is a ton of potential for a great logo and colors. I think that the Kraken is different enough from any other professional moniker out there to really drum up interest in the team via merchandise sales and publicity. If the majority opinion online is any indication, Kraken would be a hit.
In that same vein, the internet also reacted strongly to a rumor that the team’s colors could be salmon and teal, which would likely indicate the Sockeyes moniker. Has any pro team ever attempted such bold color choices? Such a move would be sure to sell a ton of merchandise that would undoubtedly turn heads. Sockeyes would also appeal to the local fan base, as would the alliteration that seems to be a theme with Seattle sports.
While it may not realistically be on the board, I will also throw out Sasquatch as a great option to draw attention to the new club. The mascot alone would be a game-changer and there is potential for a good logo. However, this does toe the line of too silly if not done properly and there is no clear color scheme either.
Gavin Lee:
Let’s get this out of the way immediately; I hate the name Kraken. I hate it. I don’t want the Seattle Kraken in the NHL. I’m probably going to be disappointed when they announce it as the team name, but I just hate it.
I get the idea behind the traditional names, especially the Metropolitans and Totems. But I don’t think I would name the new franchise those either. I would go for something new and non-alliterative.
I kind of like the idea of the Seattle Freeze. It’s a clever way to poke fun at the city—Seattle Freeze has been a way to describe the population’s standoffish demeanor for years—and could lend itself to some interesting marketing opportunities. Even that name though brings a little bit of hesitation, because of the corny connection to ice, but it might be what I go with.
Honestly, as long as it’s not Kraken I would be happy. Totems. Metropolitans. Pilots. Sockeye (or Sockeyes?). Wait, no I don’t want Emeralds or Sasquatch either. I’m a bit pickier than I thought.
on Brian La Rose statements of changing names of divisions as in the old day , would love to see Patrick, Adams,Norris, & Smythe Divisions and it would solve all problems for Metropolitans as old school name for team.
G! How ’bout these division names: Foley, EdSo, Wiedeman, Murray!
They should name them the SuperSonics. The confusion would be awesome.
i want it just because it just because of the nature of the word “supersonics” as a team name in general just sounds sick.
Seattle Whalers! It’ll never happen, but I think it would be cool.
The Canes are still part owners of that logo.
If they named the rainiers, then the state of Washington would have two teams with the same name.
And I repeat my previous submission: “The Seattle Skookum” – honoring the Chinook people of the Northwest. Second choice was the previously suggested (not by me): “The Seattle Emeralds”, using emerald green in their color scheme.
And, with regards to Gavin’s sentiment toward “Kraken” – tough to say who hates it worse, you or me! One guy had it right (previously) in adding the three-letter word to the front, making it more of an embarrassment nickname. “Sockeye” is understandable, of course, but might get slurred into Seattle FishMongers, or worse.
Mac, its me. i loathe the idea of naming them Kraken like you can’t believe. i dont like most of the other proposed ones, but Kraken is just…uck.
I believe. It’s wretched.
@DarkSide830 – Fist bump! We may be three of the few, along with @forwhomjoshbelltolls…
Seattle Thunderbirds… so what if they have a junior team naked that
Anything but non-plural names or trendy stupid names, Kraken is as stupid as Mighty Ducks, Raptors and Wild/Jazz/Heat/Avalanche/Lightning
I like the Seattle Pilots. MLB stole an old hockey team name for the Colorado Rockies. They owe the NHL one.
Plus, I want to see cheesy headlines and a rivalry with Winnipeg…
Pilots down the Jets.
Jets ground Pilots.
Also, another reason is every other name I have heard (except Metropolitans which that one I doubt MLB would allow), are not just bad, they are AWFUL. I really hope they aren’t Krakens or Sockeyes.
If they want to cash in…Seattle Sirens. Just use the Starbucks logo…assuming they pay a hefty annual fee, bigger than any stadium naming deal.
I vote Albatross. State Bird
The albatross begins with its vengeance
A terrible curse a thirst has begun
His shipmates blame bad luck on the mariner
About his neck, the dead bird is hung
The albatross and the Mariners together at last. I like it.
Am I standalone that the Kraken would be awesome? I think it’s symbolic of both child-like wonder (being mythical) and power, which is a combination that no other team has and would instantly become unique. I love the idea of the NHL in Seattle and I’m super excited for the city. I think the name is important for a first impression as stated and I hope they blow it out of the park. You’re not gonna please everybody in the end though.
I always thought being on the “ring of fire” and with Mt. St. Helens, that the Vulcans would have been a cool name for the team.
Vulcan ( Latin : Volcānus [wɔɫˈkaːnʊs] or Vulcānus [wʊɫˈkaːnʊs] ) is the god of fire [1] including the fire of volcanoes , deserts , metalworking, and the forge in ancient Roman religion and myth .
Kraken sounds like a beer league roller hockey team. Sometimes ownership shouldn’t listen to the fans chirping. I’ll cite the Toronto Raptors as a prime example.
I live on the east coast of Canada and I must say it is great that Seattle is finally getting closer to their NHL dream. Great city, ownership group and I know fans… But I hope that the name comes from the heritage and the surrounding area of the state of Washington and the Pacific Northwest. As that who will be hopefully making this team strive in years to come……
I hope they don’t name it the metropolitans because it will be shorten to METS. I cant see having two sports teams being named the MUTS oppss I meant the METS. carry on…
Alright will scrap the name Metropolitans , and go back to Seattle Hockey History with the Seattle Totems as Gavin indicated in his take on franchise name.
link to google.com:
Renegades anyone?