Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Vancouver Canucks new uniforms should look like this
#21
Nice to see unlikely allies bonding around here  . .  .

We'll hear that Savary and Harrison are golfing together in Osoyoos next.  

Bunch of miseries.  

how about this this then?   putrid yellow with this logo?

[Image: SadPoopEmoji.jpg]


and yes VIOLET. I have a shirt that colour. always get compliments. on the price tag for colour VIOLET.
matches my eyes . . .

okay scrap the last Silly
Mostly Harmless
Reply
Thanks given by:
#22
(2017-04-18, 09:16 AM)Marsh Wrote:
(2017-04-18, 12:12 AM)Highstyx Wrote:
(2017-04-17, 05:54 PM)Marsh Wrote:
(2017-04-17, 11:50 AM)Nipsy Wrote: <snip>

There comes a time when a company needs to re-invent itself, and for the Nucks, that time has come.

Maybe a name change then. "Canucks" hardly lends itself to some intimidating entity. Who needs the Canucks history?

Maybe the current colors and a blue tiger. Hell, I don't care. The re-invent has to be in the team's style, including the style of play. No more metro-civility.

 LORD NO.

or else we are like:

 [Image: serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dogbreed...9156375833]

IMNSHO 3 things define the current Csnucks: Bert's Moore incident, the Auger/Burrows clash and Daniel allowing Marchand to freely punch him. There's hope with some of the new players but I'd love it if teams said of the Canucks, what we say of the Kings and Ducks. I'm tired of the Canucks, particularly the Sedins, taking punishment with little to no pushback. Yes, it's on the players, not the logo, but west coast colors with an aggressive logo is part of that persona.

I couldn't agree less....lets look.

Bert- Nazzy was eliminated from the tight scoring race by a grinder, 2 years in a row.   The team overreacted emotionally and combined with the bad luck of a neck being broken from 1 punch and a dog pile .........I don't think this defines anything. 

Auger/Burrows --  The entire Burrows incident from the start where Smithson hit him square in the numbers while charging was overblown as a dive and the media running with that story encouraged the piss-poor referee to exact some type of "on-ice revenge"  That incident should more define the NHLOA and their boss then the Canucks.

Daniel "allowing"  Marchand to punch him.    Ok this was one incident that pisses me off.    What was Danny supposed to do?     He should have drawn a 7 minute PP as the rule book allows.      Instead he is getting punched while Marchy gazes with big brown eyes into the dreamy return look on the face of Kelly Sutherland.      Whether this was the tail end of a plentyofish encounter or an employee trying to please his boss, we shall never know, but one thing we do know is that rule book was thrown out and any "pushback" from the Canucks would have ended very badly in the penalty box and that is something that will cost you a series. 

The Canucks have not made the correct moves when it comes to toughness..   If they admired the Bruins so much they should have gotten Greggy in a trade instead of signing on Torts and trying to build beef on the 4th line.    Even though the Bruins had high picks while they were at the top of their game (thanks to Burke in TO)  they were really not that great of a team as history as shown since. Following their model was a waste of time, just as following the Oilers model would be. 

The Canucks are on the right path now whether we like it or not, and getting some high picks ALONG with some good picks is the only way to go.    The GOOD picks being more valuable than the high picks in many many cases,  = Zetterberg, Keith, Datsyuk, Pavelski and 100's more. 

The "image"  has nothing to do with any history unless you put it into context.
A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones that need the advice.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#23
(2017-04-20, 05:55 AM)shoes Wrote:
(2017-04-18, 09:16 AM)Marsh Wrote:
(2017-04-18, 12:12 AM)Highstyx Wrote:
(2017-04-17, 05:54 PM)Marsh Wrote:
(2017-04-17, 11:50 AM)Nipsy Wrote: <snip>

There comes a time when a company needs to re-invent itself, and for the Nucks, that time has come.

Maybe a name change then. "Canucks" hardly lends itself to some intimidating entity. Who needs the Canucks history?

Maybe the current colors and a blue tiger. Hell, I don't care. The re-invent has to be in the team's style, including the style of play. No more metro-civility.

 LORD NO.

or else we are like:

 [Image: serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dogbreed...9156375833]

IMNSHO 3 things define the current Csnucks: Bert's Moore incident, the Auger/Burrows clash and Daniel allowing Marchand to freely punch him. There's hope with some of the new players but I'd love it if teams said of the Canucks, what we say of the Kings and Ducks. I'm tired of the Canucks, particularly the Sedins, taking punishment with little to no pushback. Yes, it's on the players, not the logo, but west coast colors with an aggressive logo is part of that persona.

I couldn't agree less....lets look.

Bert- Nazzy was eliminated from the tight scoring race by a grinder, 2 years in a row.   The team overreacted emotionally and combined with the bad luck of a neck being broken from 1 punch and a dog pile .........I don't think this defines anything. 

Auger/Burrows --  The entire Burrows incident from the start where Smithson hit him square in the numbers while charging was overblown as a dive and the media running with that story encouraged the piss-poor referee to exact some type of "on-ice revenge"  That incident should more define the NHLOA and their boss then the Canucks.

Daniel "allowing"  Marchand to punch him.    Ok this was one incident that pisses me off.    What was Danny supposed to do?     He should have drawn a 7 minute PP as the rule book allows.      Instead he is getting punched while Marchy gazes with big brown eyes into the dreamy return look on the face of Kelly Sutherland.      Whether this was the tail end of a plentyofish encounter or an employee trying to please his boss, we shall never know, but one thing we do know is that rule book was thrown out and any "pushback" from the Canucks would have ended very badly in the penalty box and that is something that will cost you a series. 

The Canucks have not made the correct moves when it comes to toughness..   If they admired the Bruins so much they should have gotten Greggy in a trade instead of signing on Torts and trying to build beef on the 4th line.    Even though the Bruins had high picks while they were at the top of their game (thanks to Burke in TO)  they were really not that great of a team as history as shown since. Following their model was a waste of time, just as following the Oilers model would be. 

The Canucks are on the right path now whether we like it or not, and getting some high picks ALONG with some good picks is the only way to go.    The GOOD picks being more valuable than the high picks in many many cases,  = Zetterberg, Keith, Datsyuk, Pavelski and 100's more. 

The "image"  has nothing to do with any history unless you put it into context.
What does "I couldn't agree less" mean anyway? That you really agree? That you could not disagree more?

The Canucks used to accept being mauled and intimidating with their power play. When did that last work? 2012? Even if the Bert and Auger incidents were overblown, around the league they still define the Canucks. Until either the hard players are found or the team can score much more frequently, the team really has no pushback. And no desirable identity. 
A new logo doesn't create that in itself but it is a statement-much more than recycling the tainted old ones
How to start an argument on the internet: 1) Post something. 2) Wait.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#24
   
I've always liked these older Canucks uniforms, except for the weird red one at the bottom!
Reply
Thanks given by:
#25
(2017-04-20, 07:52 AM)Marsh Wrote:
(2017-04-20, 05:55 AM)shoes Wrote:
(2017-04-18, 09:16 AM)Marsh Wrote:
(2017-04-18, 12:12 AM)Highstyx Wrote:
(2017-04-17, 05:54 PM)Marsh Wrote: Maybe a name change then. "Canucks" hardly lends itself to some intimidating entity. Who needs the Canucks history?

Maybe the current colors and a blue tiger. Hell, I don't care. The re-invent has to be in the team's style, including the style of play. No more metro-civility.

 LORD NO.

or else we are like:

 [Image: serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dogbreed...9156375833]

IMNSHO 3 things define the current Csnucks: Bert's Moore incident, the Auger/Burrows clash and Daniel allowing Marchand to freely punch him. There's hope with some of the new players but I'd love it if teams said of the Canucks, what we say of the Kings and Ducks. I'm tired of the Canucks, particularly the Sedins, taking punishment with little to no pushback. Yes, it's on the players, not the logo, but west coast colors with an aggressive logo is part of that persona.

I couldn't agree less....lets look.

Bert- Nazzy was eliminated from the tight scoring race by a grinder, 2 years in a row.   The team overreacted emotionally and combined with the bad luck of a neck being broken from 1 punch and a dog pile .........I don't think this defines anything. 

Auger/Burrows --  The entire Burrows incident from the start where Smithson hit him square in the numbers while charging was overblown as a dive and the media running with that story encouraged the piss-poor referee to exact some type of "on-ice revenge"  That incident should more define the NHLOA and their boss then the Canucks.

Daniel "allowing"  Marchand to punch him.    Ok this was one incident that pisses me off.    What was Danny supposed to do?     He should have drawn a 7 minute PP as the rule book allows.      Instead he is getting punched while Marchy gazes with big brown eyes into the dreamy return look on the face of Kelly Sutherland.      Whether this was the tail end of a plentyofish encounter or an employee trying to please his boss, we shall never know, but one thing we do know is that rule book was thrown out and any "pushback" from the Canucks would have ended very badly in the penalty box and that is something that will cost you a series. 

The Canucks have not made the correct moves when it comes to toughness..   If they admired the Bruins so much they should have gotten Greggy in a trade instead of signing on Torts and trying to build beef on the 4th line.    Even though the Bruins had high picks while they were at the top of their game (thanks to Burke in TO)  they were really not that great of a team as history as shown since. Following their model was a waste of time, just as following the Oilers model would be. 

The Canucks are on the right path now whether we like it or not, and getting some high picks ALONG with some good picks is the only way to go.    The GOOD picks being more valuable than the high picks in many many cases,  = Zetterberg, Keith, Datsyuk, Pavelski and 100's more. 

The "image"  has nothing to do with any history unless you put it into context.
What does "I couldn't agree less" mean anyway? That you really agree? That you could not disagree more?

The Canucks used to accept being mauled and intimidating with their power play. When did that last work? 2012? Even if the Bert and Auger incidents were overblown, around the league they still define the Canucks. Until either the hard players are found or the team can score much more frequently, the team really has no pushback. And no desirable identity. 
A new logo doesn't create that in itself but it is a statement-much more than recycling the tainted old ones
all of that......the Auger issue was a vengeful cheating ref and should have no bearing on any Canucks identity.    The Bert punch is exactly the opposite of the Canucks identity.   We have not had a lot of punchers in the last 15 years unless you count Rypien. 

Incidents like those only define the Canucks because our illustrious rivals find any possible negative and use it to define the Canucks.   Their opinion defines nothing for me.  Icon_twisted
A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones that need the advice.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#26
(2017-04-20, 03:21 PM)shoes Wrote:
(2017-04-20, 07:52 AM)Marsh Wrote:
(2017-04-20, 05:55 AM)shoes Wrote:
(2017-04-18, 09:16 AM)Marsh Wrote:
(2017-04-18, 12:12 AM)Highstyx Wrote:  LORD NO.

or else we are like:

 [Image: serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dogbreed...9156375833]

IMNSHO 3 things define the current Csnucks: Bert's Moore incident, the Auger/Burrows clash and Daniel allowing Marchand to freely punch him. There's hope with some of the new players but I'd love it if teams said of the Canucks, what we say of the Kings and Ducks. I'm tired of the Canucks, particularly the Sedins, taking punishment with little to no pushback. Yes, it's on the players, not the logo, but west coast colors with an aggressive logo is part of that persona.

I couldn't agree less....lets look.

Bert- Nazzy was eliminated from the tight scoring race by a grinder, 2 years in a row.   The team overreacted emotionally and combined with the bad luck of a neck being broken from 1 punch and a dog pile .........I don't think this defines anything. 

Auger/Burrows --  The entire Burrows incident from the start where Smithson hit him square in the numbers while charging was overblown as a dive and the media running with that story encouraged the piss-poor referee to exact some type of "on-ice revenge"  That incident should more define the NHLOA and their boss then the Canucks.

Daniel "allowing"  Marchand to punch him.    Ok this was one incident that pisses me off.    What was Danny supposed to do?     He should have drawn a 7 minute PP as the rule book allows.      Instead he is getting punched while Marchy gazes with big brown eyes into the dreamy return look on the face of Kelly Sutherland.      Whether this was the tail end of a plentyofish encounter or an employee trying to please his boss, we shall never know, but one thing we do know is that rule book was thrown out and any "pushback" from the Canucks would have ended very badly in the penalty box and that is something that will cost you a series. 

The Canucks have not made the correct moves when it comes to toughness..   If they admired the Bruins so much they should have gotten Greggy in a trade instead of signing on Torts and trying to build beef on the 4th line.    Even though the Bruins had high picks while they were at the top of their game (thanks to Burke in TO)  they were really not that great of a team as history as shown since. Following their model was a waste of time, just as following the Oilers model would be. 

The Canucks are on the right path now whether we like it or not, and getting some high picks ALONG with some good picks is the only way to go.    The GOOD picks being more valuable than the high picks in many many cases,  = Zetterberg, Keith, Datsyuk, Pavelski and 100's more. 

The "image"  has nothing to do with any history unless you put it into context.
What does "I couldn't agree less" mean anyway? That you really agree? That you could not disagree more?

The Canucks used to accept being mauled and intimidating with their power play. When did that last work? 2012? Even if the Bert and Auger incidents were overblown, around the league they still define the Canucks. Until either the hard players are found or the team can score much more frequently, the team really has no pushback. And no desirable identity. 
A new logo doesn't create that in itself but it is a statement-much more than recycling the tainted old ones
all of that......the Auger issue was a vengeful cheating ref and should have no bearing on any Canucks identity.    The Bert punch is exactly the opposite of the Canucks identity.   We have not had a lot of punchers in the last 15 years unless you count Rypien. 

Incidents like those only define the Canucks because our illustrious rivals find any possible negative and use it to define the Canucks.   Their opinion defines nothing for me.  Icon_twisted
Not the fans and not rival posters but it has an effect on the ice with teams like LA and Anaheim and it will with teams like Edmonton, Calgary, and players like Dustin Brown and Brad Marchand. You really think the Bert and Auger incidents have no effect on the Canucks around the league? Really? A logo/uniform change alone doesn't change that but IMO re-using an old one just says "business as usual in Vancouver". They need to start from scratch, get over the gentlemanly image of the Sedins and get more players that will retaliate to chippy play. 

I want mudders, guys who'll get dirty, especially on defence. Not all, but a hell of a lot more and I want the trimmings to say that, shoes. Going back to the stick in the rink says "walk on talentless me-we are used to it". I just don't think, for example, that if you were a Canuck you'd be less than a Kesler.
How to start an argument on the internet: 1) Post something. 2) Wait.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#27
(2017-04-18, 09:16 AM)Marsh Wrote:
(2017-04-18, 12:12 AM)Highstyx Wrote:
(2017-04-17, 05:54 PM)Marsh Wrote:
(2017-04-17, 11:50 AM)Nipsy Wrote: <snip>

There comes a time when a company needs to re-invent itself, and for the Nucks, that time has come.

Maybe a name change then. "Canucks" hardly lends itself to some intimidating entity. Who needs the Canucks history?

Maybe the current colors and a blue tiger. Hell, I don't care. The re-invent has to be in the team's style, including the style of play. No more metro-civility.

 LORD NO.

or else we are like:

IMNSHO 3 things define the current Csnucks: Bert's Moore incident, the Auger/Burrows clash and Daniel allowing Marchand to freely punch him. There's hope with some of the new players but I'd love it if teams said of the Canucks, what we say of the Kings and Ducks. I'm tired of the Canucks, particularly the Sedins, taking punishment with little to no pushback. Yes, it's on the players, not the logo, but west coast colors with an aggressive logo is part of that persona.

 Or keep Biega up front and bring in Andre Pedan. We don't get any tougher when we draft D men who weigh 177 lbs.. especially when Chychrun is 6-1, 205 as in Bieksa size. Since we traded Kevin, we are poodles

  Many of then should wear uniforms with a yellow stripe down the back

 Or this:
 [Image: serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspo...795cf463db]
Phill 2:10-11 
Reply
Thanks given by:
#28
Call them the Flounders, because for almost fifty years, that's what they have done best; fumble and flounder
Phill 2:10-11 
Reply
Thanks given by:
#29
and you call Harrison negative.

wowzers, Highstyx. no sunshine in your world.

The Canucks have been a good team for about 15 of the last years by any objective measure.

the leafs have been rebuilding as long as I've been alive.
Mostly Harmless
Reply
Thanks given by:


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)