If the NHL moves back to Winnipeg, should they still be called the "Jets"?

Question

I've always thought there should be a hockey team called the Glaciers

Answer 1

ABSOLUTELY! If I could find a Jets jersey, I'd BUY ONE! They should come back with the same uniforms and everything!!!

Answer 2

It's not going to happen. My pick would be to move the Yotes back and salvage the franchise records and history. That is the equivalent of Bettman admitting that the Southern conquests were a mistake. It will not happen under his watch. Winnipeg would have to build a new barn. They would be building it as a risk, hoping that a franchise could move there. I don't think taxpayers would sign on to shelling out dead money. Money is what it's all about. If franchises become available, there will be US investors that will be fighting for the revenue. The biggest interested market will probably get the nod. Winnipeg is the 8th largest metropolitan area in Canada at 695K people. That would make them about #16 or 17 in the States. Houston, San Antonio, San Diego, Indianapolis and San Fransisco have larger market bases and are missing an NHL franchise. The league will continue to look at the potential fans instead of those already in place. The Pens were recently on the market. Kansas City and Hamilton were both ahead of Winnipeg in the running. Hamilton is basically the same size as Winnipeg, but the Province of Ontario almost has 10 times the population of Manitoba. Hamilton will probably get a team first. Toronto could realistically support 2 teams. I know that riles up Leaf fans, but enough would break away. Die hard blue and white or not. I think the Jets coming back is a long ways away. It will take new league leadership, new investment capital and the right combo of seller/buyer. Or Bettman can trump my whole answer by expanding to 34 teams next year. My head hurts just thinking about it.

Answer 3

Absolutely, in fact Winnipeg is a team I think deserves to get back in the NHL. And the name Jets should be retained because of its classic origin. However most teams even if they come back to a certain city will not have the same name as they did before. Then again I don't have any ideas for a new name nonetheless.

Answer 4

Would love to see Winnipeg campaign to get hockey back to their city, but wouldn't have the same name though. Like the other user said Minnesota didn't get their old name back, and neither did Atlanta.

Sorry, but I'm not feeling the name Glaciers for a hockey team. It's doesn't sound intimidating (not that it has to be) but their logo would be garbage.

Answer 5

No, they won't be called the Jets anymore. Look at Minnesota when they got their hockey team back. The name is nowhere near stars, or sun, or anything that has to do with astronomy. If Winnipeg decides that they want a hockey team again (they have to lobby the NHL for it first, the league won't just give them one), it'll be something completely different.

Answer 6

There is legal logistics that make the names unlikely. Even though the franchise retires the name when it moves, they still have rights to the old name.

A local minor team is called the Glacier Kings. They have a Sasquatch with a hockey stick logo.

Answer 7

Hockey is a sport that has a great deal of tradition. The reason that Minnesota did not get back the name (North)Stars and Atlanta did not get back the name Flames is that other NHL teams were using the names. No one is using the name Jets so I feel if they do get a team back they should use it.

Answer 8

i do like the 'jets' and keeping with tradition, but the glaciers is a good name too. maybe florida should relocate to winnipeg! it's a great hockey town and i hope to visit it one day!

Answer 9

Why the hell not? Everytime I hear of Minnesota, I think of the North Stars, not the Wild. It would be cool to see a team in Winnipeg again, but I doubt it will happen.

Answer 10

No they will need a new name. Glaciers is kinda cool but slow. I think Snow Leopards would be better.