Habs change to single logo design at center ice

Do you prefer the new single Habs logo at center ice or the old two-logo design?


  • Total voters
    88

yianik

Registered User
Jun 30, 2009
10,677
6,125
No wonder Molson and Bergevin get along so well. MB seems inordinately occupied with picking up bottom pair D and bottom line forwards, and Molson is changing logos and hot dogs.

Better change that " Drive for 25 " to " 25 by 2055 ".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Runner77

Habaneros

Habs Cup champs 2010
Oct 31, 2011
16,504
6,938
I think it looks better.

It's like putting on a pair of jeans,then putting on your underwear....make any sense???? lol

The logo should cover the red line..not the line covering over top of the logo...no reason for that at all...
 

OldCraig71

Registered User
Feb 2, 2009
35,109
54,834
No one cares
Based on the way that things are going, will a logo change really mean anything? This season is going to make last year look like the 92-93 cup run. Good lord.
 
  • Like
Reactions: snakeye

PhysicX

Registered User
Nov 17, 2010
7,888
6,341
MTL
All that's missing is another red line crossing the red line to mark our logo with an X for the fan experience to be improved tenfold.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Runner77

NobleSix

High Tech Low-Life.
Apr 20, 2013
16,914
15,932
CyberSpace
www.ilovebees.co
It's like putting on a pair of jeans,then putting on your underwear....make any sense???? lol

The logo should cover the red line..not the line covering over top of the logo...no reason for that at all...

Meh, I like the one big logo. The red line thing doesn't bother me.

I think the two logo design looked stupid.
 

V13

Fire Sell Tank
Sep 21, 2005
13,930
1,839
M1 Habsram
That's fine

Hughes , Lafreniere and Kotkaniemi will visually all look better taking faceoffs on a big logo :naughty:

:sarcasm:
 

nilan30

Registered User
Jan 14, 2004
2,324
987
I really don't mind the big logo in the middle of the ice.

It's actually pretty common in the league to have a big logo.. cut in half by the red line.
tumblr_mvc6l2Ccso1qbh6tho1_500.gif


Ours actually blends well with the red line.

It's minor and it's been talked about before but it would be cool if all teams could pick their colours on the boards. It seems like 90% have the red on top and all have the yellow on the bottom. It was pretty cool when the Forum had red on top and blue on the bottom. Today's rinks are all so cookie cutter that you can't always tell what rink pictures are taken in. Boston's works well with the black on top and yellow on the bottom
 

Deebs

There's no easy way out
Feb 5, 2014
16,847
13,458
That's fine

Hughes , Lafreniere and Kotkaniemi will visually all look better taking faceoffs on a big logo :naughty:

:sarcasm:

I can't see us having a realistic shot at LaFreniere as we'll improve too much in the next two years, but Hughes is a legitimate possibility next year....but I get what you're saying :)
 

Adriatic

Registered User
Feb 27, 2004
6,525
4,096
It's minor and it's been talked about before but it would be cool if all teams could pick their colours on the boards. It seems like 90% have the red on top and all have the yellow on the bottom. It was pretty cool when the Forum had red on top and blue on the bottom. Today's rinks are all so cookie cutter that you can't always tell what rink pictures are taken in. Boston's works well with the black on top and yellow on the bottom
Ya that would be cool, it's probably some rule mandated by the league or something to have yellow at the bottom. This is the NFL syndrome to have everything uniform and identical in every arena..really hate that. That's the one thing I really like about baseball, the ballparks colors and field sizes are different from city to city.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Laurentide

ArtPeur

Have a Snickers
Mar 30, 2010
13,585
11,373
I can't see us having a realistic shot at LaFreniere as we'll improve too much in the next two years, but Hughes is a legitimate possibility next year....but I get what you're saying :)

Trade away Price, Patch, Petry, Weber, Byron + anyone else that is over 28yo (and has value) for picks, prospects and tank all the way. Put Alzner on the top pairing and let him play 30min/game with 2min on each PP
 

Gamimenos

Registered User
Apr 28, 2009
3,221
1,304
[MOD]

At least this change doesn't make it clearly look worse. An argument can be made. If MB's face was there, it would just be a clear downgrade.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Laurentide

Registered User
Mar 24, 2018
3,271
3,449
Edmonton, Alberta
Ya that would be cool, it's probably some rule mandated by the league or something to have yellow at the bottom. This is the NFL syndrome to have everything uniform and identical in every arena..really hate that. That's the one thing I really like about baseball, the ballparks colors and field sizes are different from city to city.
The thing I hate the most (and the first thing I would change if I were in charge of the NHL) is the player benches on the same side of the ice. All it does is create a stupid, needless traffic jam during line changes. This is a league-mandated thing and it's origins ironically come from a franchise that doesn't even exist anymore: the Hartford Whalers.

Back in the 80's, the Whalers played in the Adams Division with the Habs, Nords, Bruins and Sabres. In that era, divisional play was huge; you played your divisional rivals 8 times during the season and in the first two rounds of the playoffs. Home ice advantage was a thing. But the Whalers didn't have it in the Hartford Civic Center where the players benches were on the same side of the ice while the penalty box was on the other. All of their divisional rivals had the home team bench and penalty box on one side while the visitor bench was on the other. The Forum, Boston Garden, Le Colisee and the Aud in Buffalo were all configured this way (and the Garden and Aud also had smaller-than-regulation 200' x 85' size rinks to boot)

So the Whalers complained about the "unfair" advantage to the league and the NHL, in its infinite stupidity, instead of telling the Whalers to change the configuration of the benches at the Civic Center (which they probably couldn't unilaterally do since they were merely tenants and didn't own the arena) they told the other 20 teams in the league to change to the Whalers model. Prior to this, there was no rule and the placement of the benches and penalty boxes varied from rink to rink. Maple Leaf Gardens always had both team's benches on the same side of the rink, for example.

This is how we wound up with back-up goalies having to sit by the Zamboni entrance because there was no more room on the bench for them - because the visiting team's bench was barely bigger than the old penalty box.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Runner77

Adriatic

Registered User
Feb 27, 2004
6,525
4,096
The thing I hate the most (and the first thing I would change if I were in charge of the NHL) is the player benches on the same side of the ice. All it does is create a stupid, needless traffic jam during line changes. This is a league-mandated thing and it's origins ironically come from a franchise that doesn't even exist anymore: the Hartford Whalers.

Back in the 80's, the Whalers played in the Adams Division with the Habs, Nords, Bruins and Sabres. In that era, divisional play was huge; you played your divisional rivals 8 times during the season and in the first two rounds of the playoffs. Home ice advantage was a thing. But the Whalers didn't have it in the Hartford Civic Center where the players benches were on the same side of the ice while the penalty box was on the other. All of their divisional rivals had the home team bench and penalty box on one side while the visitor bench was on the other. The Forum, Boston Garden, Le Colisee and the Aud in Buffalo were all configured this way (and the Garden and Aud also had smaller-than-regulation 200' x 85' size rinks to boot)

So the Whalers complained about the "unfair" advantage to the league and the NHL, in its infinite stupidity, instead of telling the Whalers to change the configuration of the benches at the Civic Center (which they probably couldn't unilaterally do since they were merely tenants and didn't own the arena) they told the other 20 teams in the league to change to the Whalers model. Prior to this, there was no rule and the placement of the benches and penalty boxes varied from rink to rink. Maple Leaf Gardens always had both team's benches on the same side of the rink, for example.

This is how we wound up with back-up goalies having to sit by the Zamboni entrance because there was no more room on the bench for them - because the visiting team's bench was barely bigger than the old penalty box.
Ya uniformity is the worst. I would let teams decide all of that stuff, rink sizes, bench placement, board colors. I don't think we would be able to tell what rink the games were being played in if it wasn't for the logo on the ice. Just awful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Laurentide

groovejuice

Without deviation progress is not possible
Jun 27, 2011
19,277
18,222
Calgary
Trade away Price, Patch, Petry, Weber, Byron + anyone else that is over 28yo (and has value) for picks, prospects and tank all the way. Put Alzner on the top pairing and let him play 30min/game with 2min on each PP

So we'll end up with 5 more dwarves with bloodlines and mysterious attitudes? Awesome.
 

Laurentide

Registered User
Mar 24, 2018
3,271
3,449
Edmonton, Alberta
Ya uniformity is the worst. I would let teams decide all of that stuff, rink sizes, bench placement, board colors. I don't think we would be able to tell what rink the games were being played in if it wasn't for the logo on the ice. Just awful.
Yep, I miss the old Boston Garden, Memorial Auditorium in Buffalo and Chicago Stadium, which all had smaller than average rinks and built teams specifically designed to play in them. The "big bad Bruins" aren't nearly as big or as bad on the TD Garden's 200' x 85' rink as they were on the old Garden's postage stamp-sized 191' x 83' rink (Buffalo's was 196' x 85' while Chicago's was a ridiculous 185' x 85')
 
  • Like
Reactions: Runner77

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad