There is no way the Wild should use the North Stars jerseys, they are different franchises. Yes I understand being nostalgic about them but that fact remains, the Wild and the North Stars are different franchises and the North Stars still exist in Dallas. No member of the North Stars has a connection to the Wild save the fact they are both Minnesota's team. McRae, Broten, Modano didn't play for this franchise, they played for Dallas. While the North Stars are a part of Minnesota hockey history, they are not part of the Wild's history and I'm glad they have distanced themselves from it. They should be trying to make their own stamp on this state and not trying to cling to the past. Some have brought up the Twins using the Millers jerseys and wonder why the Wild doesn't do the same with the North Stars. For me that question is simple, the Milers don't exist anymore, the Stars do. The Wolves don't wear old Minneapolis Lakers jerseys, but I've seen the L.A. Lakers wear them and they should, they are a part of that organization. It's a different "franchise" per se but the same organization. The same goes for the North Stars/Dallas Stars, same organization but two different "franchises" which is likely why Dallas does the "founded in 1993" thing because it is true. The Dallas Stars franchise was founded in 1993, they are just a part of a larger organization that started with the North Stars. I understand getting upset at the "founded in 1993" thing but it is well within their rights to do that.
I for one think Winnipeg screwed up in going back to the Jets name because the "history" didn't come with it. The Jets leader in career points is not Dale Hawerchuk it's Ilya Kovalchuk. Bobby Hull's number is not retired for them, it's hanging in Phoenix and that's why Evander Kane can wear it. It's why they couldn't go back to the old Jets jerseys, they don't own them, Phoenix does.
Like I said, I'm all for celebrating the North Stars contribution to Minnesota hockey but when it comes to the Wild, the North Stars are dead.
I couldn't disagree with you more, but the cool thing is, we can all still be friends.
There is no way the Wild should use the North Stars jerseys, they are different franchises. Yes I understand being nostalgic about them but that fact remains, the Wild and the North Stars are different franchises and the North Stars still exist in Dallas. No member of the North Stars has a connection to the Wild save the fact they are both Minnesota's team. McRae, Broten, Modano didn't play for this franchise, they played for Dallas. While the North Stars are a part of Minnesota hockey history, they are not part of the Wild's history and I'm glad they have distanced themselves from it. They should be trying to make their own stamp on this state and not trying to cling to the past. Some have brought up the Twins using the Millers jerseys and wonder why the Wild doesn't do the same with the North Stars. For me that question is simple, the Milers don't exist anymore, the Stars do. The Wolves don't wear old Minneapolis Lakers jerseys, but I've seen the L.A. Lakers wear them and they should, they are a part of that organization. It's a different "franchise" per se but the same organization. The same goes for the North Stars/Dallas Stars, same organization but two different "franchises" which is likely why Dallas does the "founded in 1993" thing because it is true. The Dallas Stars franchise was founded in 1993, they are just a part of a larger organization that started with the North Stars. I understand getting upset at the "founded in 1993" thing but it is well within their rights to do that.
I for one think Winnipeg screwed up in going back to the Jets name because the "history" didn't come with it. The Jets leader in career points is not Dale Hawerchuk it's Ilya Kovalchuk. Bobby Hull's number is not retired for them, it's hanging in Phoenix and that's why Evander Kane can wear it. It's why they couldn't go back to the old Jets jerseys, they don't own them, Phoenix does.
Like I said, I'm all for celebrating the North Stars contribution to Minnesota hockey but when it comes to the Wild, the North Stars are dead.
Trust me, if Winnipeg didn't go back to the Jets name, there would've been a riot of epic proportions in downtown Winnipeg. That's how attached to the name folks here are.
As a STH for both franchises I would say that the Wild have already broken out of the North Stars shadow -- which I never thought it would be all that hard to. The Wild as an organization is much better run now than the North Stars ever were. However, I would also say that today's NHL is a far more friendly place to grow a franchise then it was back on the 60's and 70's so the North Stars deserve a lot of credit for selling the NHL to this community. In this sense the Wild have mostly built onto a foundation that the North Stars created.
The REAL test for the Wild will be in the future (hopefully far into it) when the Xcel Center will no longer be seen as "fit" home for the franchise. At that time will the Wild have enough influence here to get a new arena constructed? The key for the Wild will be to maintain fan support and strong ownership to act as a repellant against carpet baggers like Norm Greed from stepping into the picture.
Ditto, we were STH's for both and the Gophs.
I grew to love the Wild name. I think the name is pretty awesome actually. (not at first tho).
The red and green imo is horrible. They should change it to green and white with a tiny bit of red just for me
But I do love the Wild!
The difference for me, to this day was the era was so special, 1980' and Broten cemented my love for the NS's, I was a fan before that, but that 1980' Gold put me over the top for MN Hockey. To this day I have a Broten NS jersey I wear on special occasions only.
Odd, go to a Stars/Wild game and its probably the only game you'll see the home crowd wearing the jersey of the visiting team and rooting against that visiting team, I always thought thats just odd, in a cool-unique way.
There is no way the Wild should use the North Stars jerseys, they are different franchises. Yes I understand being nostalgic about them but that fact remains, the Wild and the North Stars are different franchises and the North Stars still exist in Dallas. No member of the North Stars has a connection to the Wild save the fact they are both Minnesota's team. McRae, Broten, Modano didn't play for this franchise, they played for Dallas. While the North Stars are a part of Minnesota hockey history, they are not part of the Wild's history and I'm glad they have distanced themselves from it. They should be trying to make their own stamp on this state and not trying to cling to the past. Some have brought up the Twins using the Millers jerseys and wonder why the Wild doesn't do the same with the North Stars. For me that question is simple, the Milers don't exist anymore, the Stars do. The Wolves don't wear old Minneapolis Lakers jerseys, but I've seen the L.A. Lakers wear them and they should, they are a part of that organization. It's a different "franchise" per se but the same organization. The same goes for the North Stars/Dallas Stars, same organization but two different "franchises" which is likely why Dallas does the "founded in 1993" thing because it is true. The Dallas Stars franchise was founded in 1993, they are just a part of a larger organization that started with the North Stars. I understand getting upset at the "founded in 1993" thing but it is well within their rights to do that.
I for one think Winnipeg screwed up in going back to the Jets name because the "history" didn't come with it. The Jets leader in career points is not Dale Hawerchuk it's Ilya Kovalchuk. Bobby Hull's number is not retired for them, it's hanging in Phoenix and that's why Evander Kane can wear it. It's why they couldn't go back to the old Jets jerseys, they don't own them, Phoenix does.
Like I said, I'm all for celebrating the North Stars contribution to Minnesota hockey but when it comes to the Wild, the North Stars are dead.
I fully agree with you. I don't know the history of the Jets name, though. Winnipeg may well have had rights to the name, much like Hartford could still name a new team the Whalers.
I think the Wild have done things right with honoring the North Stars' legacy, but not including it in theirs.
I fully agree with you. I don't know the history of the Jets name, though. Winnipeg may well have had rights to the name, much like Hartford could still name a new team the Whalers.
I think the Wild have done things right with honoring the North Stars' legacy, but not including it in theirs.
I would have preferred if they had brought the name back, but since they decided not to, I think this is now the right way to go. That said, I think they have now established their own history well enough that they could do something like wear the North Stars jerseys in a WC without it seeming like they were trying to be the Stars, rather than just honor them.
Reading through this thread, I'm just glad that I moved to Minnesota in '94, so I don't have all this North Stars baggage.
i get the nostalgia. the North Stars was the team my great uncle would watch whenever they could get the broadcast in northern Iowa.
I moved up here in 98.
The only time I would ever consider the idea of going back to the old name would be if Dallas ever relocated/contracted. The two teams should never co-exist.
i get the nostalgia. the North Stars was the team my great uncle would watch whenever they could get the broadcast in northern Iowa.
I moved up here in 98.
The only time I would ever consider the idea of going back to the old name would be if Dallas ever relocated/contracted. The two teams should never co-exist.
And that's why I wouldn't want to see North Stars jerseys in a Winter Classic. The franchise still exists in Dallas, it's not our team/jersey anymore.
Granted my dad was but i was not alive long enough to really remember the North Stars, but he isn't bothered by the two different franchises. The North Stars are the team to remember and love, and the Wild are a seperate entity we are just not falling back in love with, so to me i don't see the need of needing to step out of any North Star shadow, love them both and remember them both, and thanfully with the Wild we can still create those new memories.
It needs saying, because apparently no one will admit to it:
The "North Stars" name is one of the worst in the history of professional sports. It's stupid, pointless, and significantly worse than the Wild. The jerseys and logos are fitting for that name, poorly designed, ugly, boring uniforms.
Why do people like the North Stars name and logo? Because it was their team for quite some time, and was what they learned to live with. Eventually it became part of the culture. The same is true of the Flyers, Rangers, Canucks, Avalanche, and Wild. It's fine to think the Wild is a stupid name, or to dislike their jersey, or think things should have been different. However, if you ever find yourself comparing the North Stars equivalent to this team, you're not making any argument other than "it's not what we had before."
It needs saying, because apparently no one will admit to it:
The "North Stars" name is one of the worst in the history of professional sports. It's stupid, pointless, and significantly worse than the Wild. The jerseys and logos are fitting for that name, poorly designed, ugly, boring uniforms.
Why do people like the North Stars name and logo? Because it was their team for quite some time, and was what they learned to live with. Eventually it became part of the culture. The same is true of the Flyers, Rangers, Canucks, Avalanche, and Wild. It's fine to think the Wild is a stupid name, or to dislike their jersey, or think things should have been different. However, if you ever find yourself comparing the North Stars equivalent to this team, you're not making any argument other than "it's not what we had before."
It needs saying, because apparently no one will admit to it:
The "North Stars" name is one of the worst in the history of professional sports. It's stupid, pointless, and significantly worse than the Wild. The jerseys and logos are fitting for that name, poorly designed, ugly, boring uniforms.
Why do people like the North Stars name and logo? Because it was their team for quite some time, and was what they learned to live with. Eventually it became part of the culture. The same is true of the Flyers, Rangers, Canucks, Avalanche, and Wild. It's fine to think the Wild is a stupid name, or to dislike their jersey, or think things should have been different. However, if you ever find yourself comparing the North Stars equivalent to this team, you're not making any argument other than "it's not what we had before."
I agree with everything you said except I did love the Colors. The logo wasnt anything special but the bright green and yellow was great.
It needs saying, because apparently no one will admit to it:
The "North Stars" name is one of the worst in the history of professional sports. It's stupid, pointless, and significantly worse than the Wild. The jerseys and logos are fitting for that name, poorly designed, ugly, boring uniforms.
Why do people like the North Stars name and logo? Because it was their team for quite some time, and was what they learned to live with. Eventually it became part of the culture. The same is true of the Flyers, Rangers, Canucks, Avalanche, and Wild. It's fine to think the Wild is a stupid name, or to dislike their jersey, or think things should have been different. However, if you ever find yourself comparing the North Stars equivalent to this team, you're not making any argument other than "it's not what we had before."
Some thing to keep in mind in this discussion, the Wild have now been existence for longer then the period MN was without a team in the NHL. Right now it is 12 years (11 plaing years). The North Stars were her for 26 years. The Wild are aproaching being here half as long as the North Stars.
IMO as a somewhat impartial viewer they are 2 sepearate franchises and should be treated as such. It's not a one or other thing.
Last edited by Iowa Wild Fan: 07-08-2012 at 06:48 PM.
It needs saying, because apparently no one will admit to it:
The "North Stars" name is one of the worst in the history of professional sports. It's stupid, pointless, and significantly worse than the Wild. The jerseys and logos are fitting for that name, poorly designed, ugly, boring uniforms.
Why do people like the North Stars name and logo? Because it was their team for quite some time, and was what they learned to live with. Eventually it became part of the culture. The same is true of the Flyers, Rangers, Canucks, Avalanche, and Wild. It's fine to think the Wild is a stupid name, or to dislike their jersey, or think things should have been different. However, if you ever find yourself comparing the North Stars equivalent to this team, you're not making any argument other than "it's not what we had before."
It needs saying, because apparently no one will admit to it:
The "North Stars" name is one of the worst in the history of professional sports. It's stupid, pointless, and significantly worse than the Wild. The jerseys and logos are fitting for that name, poorly designed, ugly, boring uniforms.
Why do people like the North Stars name and logo? Because it was their team for quite some time, and was what they learned to live with. Eventually it became part of the culture. The same is true of the Flyers, Rangers, Canucks, Avalanche, and Wild. It's fine to think the Wild is a stupid name, or to dislike their jersey, or think things should have been different. However, if you ever find yourself comparing the North Stars equivalent to this team, you're not making any argument other than "it's not what we had before."
Why I personally like the "North Stars" name:
It's a nickname that's uniquely Minnesotan and fits in the fabric of the area. The North Star state, l'etoile du nord, they are things which like the Twins (Twin Cities) and Gophers (the Gopher State) and to an extent the Timberwolves and Vikings pay an homage to Minnesota. I like little historical touches and nods to state nicknames or events in names and that happens with the North Stars.
__________________
Blog: First Round Bust: A Cast of Thousands celebrating a rather dodgy track record of Minnesota Wild Drafting.
"Will beats skill when skill doesn't have enough will."
-Doug Woog
It's a nickname that's uniquely Minnesotan and fits in the fabric of the area. The North Star state, l'etoile du nord, they are things which like the Twins (Twin Cities) and Gophers (the Gopher State) and to an extent the Timberwolves and Vikings pay an homage to Minnesota. I like little historical touches and nods to state nicknames or events in names and that happens with the North Stars.
Even if we accept "North Star" as a decent reference for the team (which is a serious stretch) you're still dealing with one of the big complaints about the Wild: pluralization. Even though they were always referred to as the North Stars, that actually makes absolutely no sense. There is only one North Star at any given point in time (currently it's Polaris) and pluralizing it is a non sequitor. It would also be just as out of place as "Wild" in the league as nearly every other team name refers to an animal (Ducks, Panthers, Senators) or generic noun (Capitals, Hurricanes, Jets). There are exceptions (Blues is a specific and I'm not sure what exactly a Flyer is supposed to be) but those wouldn't make the North Stars name any less out of place.
While I can see an argument for "homage to the location" it's not exactly a compelling argument. It doesn't make the "Blues" name less silly sounding. The Maple Leafs have been around long enough for them to be accepted into the lexicon with the vast majority not understanding the significance. If a team came in today with a name like Canucks or Les Habitants people would have far more issue than with a name like Wild. Perhaps most importantly as a distinction, the majority of the league doesn't understand the reference in North Stars. Contrast that with the Islanders (whose name clearly denotes their difference from the Rangers) or the Blues and the name is a sore thumb even amongst those it's supposed to be similar to.
It's the reason why I like it and that's just it, my reason. Couldn't care less if you agree or disagree because at the end of the day it's just an opinion and rationale.
It's the reason why I like it and that's just it, my reason. Couldn't care less if you agree or disagree because at the end of the day it's just an opinion and rationale.
This ^^^
Whether or not the Wild have now gotten out of the shadow that once was the Northstars is irrelevant. It is what it is to each and every one of us rubes. Some have serious childhood memories of the Northstars, while others have very little. I could care less what anybody else thinks about this subject. My feelings on this subject are what they are, and when you get right down to it, that's all that matters.
It's the reason why I like it and that's just it, my reason. Couldn't care less if you agree or disagree because at the end of the day it's just an opinion and rationale.
But you've completely missed the point. The point isn't that North Stars is a stupid name (which it is). The point is that the rationale people have created for calling the Wild a stupid name is far more damning to the name they prefer. In other words, all that rationale is impossible for those people to actually use.
But you've completely missed the point. The point isn't that North Stars is a stupid name (which it is). The point is that the rationale people have created for calling the Wild a stupid name is far more damning to the name they prefer. In other words, all that rationale is impossible for those people to actually use.
No, I ignored your point to make my own. There's a difference.
It's a thread of opinion and everyone has a different one. I like the North Stars name because I'm a fan of having history and something that is unique to the area in a name that represents it. That's all I care about. Haven't said one thing (up to now) about the Wild or my own opinions on the name of the current Minnesota NHL team. Likely won't.
