Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

"As a primary logo, the orca isn't going anywhere"


tas

Recommended Posts

Man, we are in deep trouble, LOL... can't even reach some kind of agreement upon what we ARE, what we should LOOK LIKE, and where we COME from... :frantic:

Perhaps the Canucks organization should start asking themselves if the name (Canucks) should be kept!?

* If Yes, then start a thorough analysis of what that name/word means for the people in Vancouver/BC and launch a new logo. (Might be one of the old, but in a new shape, more into a Canuck theme)

* If No, then continue going forward with the colors and orca, but rename the franchise to Orcas, and redesign the logo into an Orcas head, with clean design and fearful teeth. Not forming a C... (This new logo could actually be really really cool and nice looking!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Stick in Rink is no less exciting than the Canadiens' CH or the Bruins' Spoked B. We don't need Aboriginal animals or any animal in general to represent the Canucks. Those original 1970/72 jerseys are a classic. Simple is more.

Then why not have a bold "V" logo with "CANUCKS" inscribed on the inside??

Otherwise, change the name to "Orcas".

The Canadians logo is meh, but I actually rather like the Bruins spoke B. The spoke circle converts it from a boring B to something with some style. But why should we care what other teams use?

Do we "need" a mammal for a logo - no. No more than we "need" a hockey rink for a logo. Both are C's for Canuck. It's just that simple. One just has more style and is applicable to where the team plays.

In the end it's really just your personal taste. The Orca logo does make sense, you simply don't like it. Not sure why you don't just say that instead of coming up with these lame excuses that it doesn't make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Canadians logo is meh, but I actually rather like the Bruins spoke B. The spoke circle converts it from a boring B to something with some style. But why should we care what other teams use?

Do we "need" a mammal for a logo - no. No more than we "need" a hockey rink for a logo. Both are C's for Canuck. It's just that simple. One just has more style and is applicable to where the team plays.

In the end it's really just your personal taste. The Orca logo does make sense, you simply don't like it. Not sure why you don't just say that instead of coming up with these lame excuses that it doesn't make sense.

You yourself has explained over and over again how badly the SIR logo fitted both Vancouver and Canucks, and then you go out on a spree telling everyone who thinks the orca is bad, how lame their excuses are!? :picard:

You never read what i wrote. The SIR was the original. Doesn't matter how bad it was, or is! There's nothing you or I can do about that! (I don't like it either!)

So, two wrongs doesn't make it right! The orca is as bad so why keep that!? (However, I think the majority of us whom dislikes it, refers to the fact that it was a pure company logo forced onto our jerseys!)

I don't dislike the idea of having an orca as our logo (representing the Pacific etc...) but then in a different shape/design, more simplified and with a haida-touch, bend like a C but with the tail fin instead of the (breaking) ice.

How about that? (The current orca represents something bad, a company logo, and is also quite ugly, if you look at it from a design-point-of-view)

PS If we want to start a tradition, going back to the SIR and keep our colors would be the very best thing to do. Even though I'm not too fond of the logo. It still is classy and our original.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically, the arguments against the orca aren't sound enough to force a change. I'll be glad if the Canucks maintain some consistency.

It's not as if any of the old looks or logos were awesome. If they were, then there would not have been a change in the first place.

Sense at last.

Honestly I can't wait for the season to start so that some people can once more realise Cups are won on the ice not on some media artist's drawing board.

Tiger Hearted's sig is so puerile it defies belief that someone could even own such childish logic. We have a great jersey, a great logo now we just need a great team and the bit of luck that goes with winning, to lift the Cup.

When we do win a Cup are we going to have all these clowns refusing to celebrate because we wore the Orca. Tragically, I actually believe some would say that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When we do win a Cup are we going to have all these clowns refusing to celebrate because we wore the Orca. Tragically, I actually believe some would say that.

I really hope you're wrong... I'm positive to a change of the logo, but that's not by far my highest priority when it comes to my beloved Canucks! I wear all jerseys/tee's, regardless of logo, with pride! :towel:

I just think the current (company) logo isn't really worthy of our colors/love :shock: (don't mind the orca, but please redesign it!)

But I get your point. Some fans refuses to wear/celebrate in specific colors/logos... :picard:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You yourself has explained over and over again how badly the SIR logo fitted both Vancouver and Canucks, and then you go out on a spree telling everyone who thinks the orca is bad, how lame their excuses are!? :picard:

You need to work on your reading skills. I never have said the SIR is a bad fit. Not once. I simply don't like it. It's bland, boring and rather generic. I've stated several times that if the Orca's C isn't relevant neither is the SIR. Both are a C for Canuck but neither image is that of a Canuck. Which is why those saying the Orca C doesn't fit is just plain stupid. They either both fit or neither does. All the reasons used that the Orca doesn't make sense also apply to the SIR....

  • An Orca isn't a Canuck. Neither is a Hockey Rink.
  • We're not the Vancouver Orca's. We're not the Vancouver Hockey Rinks either.
  • If we keep the Orca we should change the team name. Does that apply to the Rink as well? Vancouver Rinkers.
  • But the SIR forms a C for Canucks. Um, so does the Orca.
  • But the SIR reps the sport the team plays. The Orca reps where the team plays.

Do you see how lame the excuses are? How one is every bit as relevant, or irrelevant, as the other? Each lame excuse applies to both. I'd respect Tiger-Hearted's opinion far more if he simply said he didn't like the Orca logo instead of making up lame excuses that it doesn't fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You need to work on your reading skills. I never have said the SIR is a bad fit. Not once. I simply don't like it. It's bland, boring and rather generic. I've stated several times that if the Orca's C isn't relevant neither is the SIR. Both are a C for Canuck but neither image is that of a Canuck. Which is why those saying the Orca C doesn't fit is just plain stupid. They either both fit or neither does. All the reasons used that the Orca doesn't make sense also apply to the SIR....

  • An Orca isn't a Canuck. Neither is a Hockey Rink.
  • We're not the Vancouver Orca's. We're not the Vancouver Hockey Rinks either.
  • If we keep the Orca we should change the team name. Does that apply to the Rink as well? Vancouver Rinkers.
  • But the SIR forms a C for Canucks. Um, so does the Orca.
  • But the SIR reps the sport the team plays. The Orca reps where the team plays.

Do you see how lame the excuses are? How one is every bit as relevant, or irrelevant, as the other? Each lame excuse applies to both. I'd respect Tiger-Hearted's opinion far more if he simply said he didn't like the Orca logo instead of making up lame excuses that it doesn't fit.

What I see is that your own excuse is as lame as (IMO) as the ones you're accusing for having lame excuses... Don't wanna sound rude, but you're the one telling other people they have "lame excuses".

But I can still say that you haven't read my comments when you wrote your first reply;

"So if we go with stick in rink should the team be renamed "Rinkies"? The stick in rink doesn't mean "Canuck" any more than the Orca does."

Since I've never claimed anything even remotely close to this, you can't have read anything that I've written.

Feel free to get back to me when you've done that. My point is that the SIR is the original, whatever we feel about it. (Yes, I know the C is for canucks, even though the rink's got nothing to do with it)

So the excuse for keeping the orca, since it's using the same C as the SIR, is quite lame in my point of view, and once again, two wrongs doesn't make it right!

If we must keep the orca, please redesign it so it has more with our heritage (haida) to do, than a company (orca bay sports entertainment).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I see is that your own excuse is as lame as (IMO) as the ones you're accusing for having lame excuses... Don't wanna sound rude, but you're the one telling other people they have "lame excuses".

But I can still say that you haven't read my comments when you wrote your first reply;

"So if we go with stick in rink should the team be renamed "Rinkies"? The stick in rink doesn't mean "Canuck" any more than the Orca does."

Since I've never claimed anything even remotely close to this, you can't have read anything that I've written.

Feel free to get back to me when you've done that. My point is that the SIR is the original, whatever we feel about it. (Yes, I know the C is for canucks, even though the rink's got nothing to do with it)

So the excuse for keeping the orca, since it's using the same C as the SIR, is quite lame in my point of view, and once again, two wrongs doesn't make it right!

If we must keep the orca, please redesign it so it has more with our heritage (haida) to do, than a company (orca bay sports entertainment).

You really don't get it.

I'm not making excuses to oppose the SIR. I'm pointing out the lame excuses used towards the Orca also apply to the SIR. I can't make any simpler for you.

Btw, our Orca has nothing to do with the Orca Bay logo.

orca_zpslb4u6ozt.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really don't get it.

I'm not making excuses to oppose the SIR. I'm pointing out the lame excuses used towards the Orca also apply to the SIR. I can't make any simpler for you.

Btw, our Orca has nothing to do with the Orca Bay logo.

orca_zpslb4u6ozt.jpg

Yes it does! When John McCaw bought 100% of the company in 96 he also redesigned his companies logo to fit the jerseys! That was his request, and the redesign (of his own logo) was just a bad work-around to fit the letter C.

And when you write; you really don't get it! It's really lame, because your first comment was out of line, and had nothing to do with my previous comments, and now you just can't get yourself out of it.

This is pointless. You can continue to assume whatever you want, but leave me out of it, since you haven't read nor understood any of my comments when you wrote what you did. Have a nice day, I won't be bothering you anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it does! When John McCaw bought 100% of the company in 96 he also redesigned his companies logo to fit the jerseys! That was his request, and the redesign (of his own logo) was just a bad work-around to fit the letter C.

And when you write; you really don't get it! It's really lame, because your first comment was out of line, and had nothing to do with my previous comments, and now you just can't get yourself out of it.

This is pointless. You can continue to assume whatever you want, but leave me out of it, since you haven't read nor understood any of my comments when you wrote what you did. Have a nice day, I won't be bothering you anymore.

Do you know the difference between stupidity and pointing out stupidity? I'm guessing not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sense at last.

Honestly I can't wait for the season to start so that some people can once more realise Cups are won on the ice not on some media artist's drawing board.

Tiger Hearted's sig is so puerile it defies belief that someone could even own such childish logic. We have a great jersey, a great logo now we just need a great team and the bit of luck that goes with winning, to lift the Cup.

When we do win a Cup are we going to have all these clowns refusing to celebrate because we wore the Orca. Tragically, I actually believe some would say that.

You are being a bit black and white perhaps? My guess is that if the Canucks won the cup, and did it wearing their pajamas, fans would still cheer like crazy?

However for the sake of the discussion, what are some reasons the current jersey is great? The orca is huge, and having Vancouver written on it just reaks of a bit of insecurity; "for those who don't know, we are from Vancouver, we are the Vancouver NHL team, look us up please, come visit us, tourism here is great lol..." even if it is different from the orca bay logo, it still screams corporate to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://stores.ebay.ca/Rocky-Mountain-Sports-Marketing/Vancouver-Canucks-/_i.html?rt=nc&_fsub=4139992&_sid=99520500&_trksid=p4634.c0.m14.l1581&_pgn=2

This is where I get the majority of jerseys, no fakes and great prices and super fast shipping as the warehouse is in Vancouver and Kelowna.

I think customizing your jersey name isn't a bad price either. I think they charge $60? Can't confirm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it does! When John McCaw bought 100% of the company in 96 he also redesigned his companies logo to fit the jerseys! That was his request, and the redesign (of his own logo) was just a bad work-around to fit the letter C.

And when you write; you really don't get it! It's really lame, because your first comment was out of line, and had nothing to do with my previous comments, and now you just can't get yourself out of it.

This is pointless. You can continue to assume whatever you want, but leave me out of it, since you haven't read nor understood any of my comments when you wrote what you did. Have a nice day, I won't be bothering you anymore.

orca bay didn't exist until mccaw bought the team and building, and even then only existed as a parent company for the canucks, grizzlies, and gm place.

mccaw didn't own a company called orca bay that absorbed the canucks; he created a company called orca bay to manage the team's and building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can live with having our logo as an orca, but please re-design that hideous looking thing.

The orca is breaking out of the ice in the most awkward angle just trying to make it into the shape of a "C".

And get rid of the VANCOUVER on top. the jersey front is already crowded with the orca.

I like the blue/green theme though. Nice and sharp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

orca bay didn't exist until mccaw bought the team and building, and even then only existed as a parent company for the canucks, grizzlies, and gm place.

mccaw didn't own a company called orca bay that absorbed the canucks; he created a company called orca bay to manage the team's and building.

Almost correct. He first bought parts of the Griffiths company in 95, and when he bought 100% he renamed it to; Orca Bay Sports and Entertainment. When he had full ownership he also changed the canucks logo to fit his companys logo (the orcas in red, blue and black, and white background) and also changed the color theme to those exact colors! He actually got critized by NHL for making it a corporate logo and it was also widely criticized in Vancouver as well. Not until the Aquilinis (who bought 50% in 2004) bought the full company 100% in 2006 they changed the color theme back to the original blue, green and white/silver. They also changed some red, blue colors in the logo into the old ones, and added vancouver on top.

So the orca logo is very much a corporate logo which we got thanks to John McCaw.

I thought this was common knowledge!?

PS I still don't have any problems with an orca representing the Canucks, but please redesign the logo so it doesn't match the existing corporate one or it's colors. It's also quite ugly as it is, so a redesign would be very appreciated! :-)

PSS Since that very same company, now know today as the; Canucks Sports & Entertainment incorporated the teams logo (I think in 2008, may be wrong here) into their own (the company's logo) I guess there's a good reason for them NOT to change the logo, since it's not only for the team itself anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NHL teams are businesses so in theory, all logos are "corporate" from that perspective. "Mighty Ducks of Anaheim" anyone? And yes I know they aren't that anymore.

Because art and logo design preferences are personal, the arguments about liking one or the other are unresolvable really. As are the arguments about "Canucks" vs. "Whales" vs. "Hockey" vs "Vancouver" etc. etc.

And yes, I am perpetuating it by posting and rehashing arguments that have gone in circles forever so am just as guilty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I first saw the current "logo" 9aka - corporate logo) my reaction was "what the hell is this pile of crap?"

Its been around 20 years, and it still sucks.

To make matters worse, the logo was brought in to represent "Orca Bay Sports & Entertainment" a corporation that no longer owns the team.

When John McCaw sold the team, the fish head should have left with him...but it didn't.

So now, the Canucks go out game in & game out sporting a corporate logo from an owner that fans everywhere are unified in calling the worst owner we had... for some reason.

Go back to the stick & rink logo.

Or the skate logo.

I don't care which one, but the fish head must go. We aren't the Vancouver Whalers. we aren't the Vancouver Orca Bay Sports & Entertainmenters. So why have a logot depicting that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NHL teams are businesses so in theory, all logos are "corporate" from that perspective. "Mighty Ducks of Anaheim" anyone? And yes I know they aren't that anymore.

Because art and logo design preferences are personal, the arguments about liking one or the other are unresolvable really. As are the arguments about "Canucks" vs. "Whales" vs. "Hockey" vs "Vancouver" etc. etc.

And yes, I am perpetuating it by posting and rehashing arguments that have gone in circles forever so am just as guilty.

This is not really true. I started looking upp the other teams in the league, and after 15, 16 teams I stopped. Not one of the other teams has an owner which has something to do with the teams logo or name. We are alone in this. Why? Probably because the teams has been there for ages while ownerships changes.

The only team with a similar touch is the Anaheim Mighty Ducks, but that was totally different. They came into the league, with approval from the NHL as a big PR and media sensation. Bringing the mighty Walt Disney corporation into the hockey world. However, the teams logo or name, never had anything with the owenships logo or name to do! And when they got a private/new ownership in 2005, even they changed the name and logo to get out of that business.

So here we are, in 2015, and we're the only team in the league with a corporate logo and a 100% bond to our owners. (We share name and logo, with is a heritage from John McCaw in 1996!)

We are also the only team in the league with something in our logo that has got nothing to do with either the city name or the team name at all. All others has logos which refers to the either the citys name or the team name.

Then again, I still don't have a problem with an orca representing the Pacific etc... but please, get rid of the corporate and ugly design which we have now :-/ Make it a new and stand alone design for our hockey team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not really true. I started looking upp the other teams in the league, and after 15, 16 teams I stopped. Not one of the other teams has an owner which has something to do with the teams logo or name. We are alone in this. Why? Probably because the teams has been there for ages while ownerships changes.

The only team with a similar touch is the Anaheim Mighty Ducks, but that was totally different. They came into the league, with approval from the NHL as a big PR and media sensation. Bringing the mighty Walt Disney corporation into the hockey world. However, the teams logo or name, never had anything with the owenships logo or name to do! And when they got a private/new ownership in 2005, even they changed the name and logo to get out of that business.

So here we are, in 2015, and we're the only team in the league with a corporate logo and a 100% bond to our owners. (We share name and logo, with is a heritage from John McCaw in 1996!)

We are also the only team in the league with something in our logo that has got nothing to do with either the city name or the team name at all. All others has logos which refers to the either the citys name or the team name.

Then again, I still don't have a problem with an orca representing the Pacific etc... but please, get rid of the corporate and ugly design which we have now :-/ Make it a new and stand alone design for our hockey team.

I mostly agree. I guess my understanding around the logo though that it was created specifically around the team and the formation of the management company. This is different than say a team bought by McDonalds that uses the Golden Arches as the logo. The Canucks' "corporate" logo didn't really come to be in that way. When I say all logos are corporate, it is more in the realm of marketing and branding rather than the genesis of the logo per se.

Frankly there are people that hate it simply because they find it ugly. That's perfectly fine. The arguments over whether the logo matches the team name or home city gets pretty murky pretty quickly and many here have pretty polarised and unmoving views. Those are the more tiring arguments to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...