Friday, February 1, 2008

Poll: Bruins vs Kings


vs
Boston
BRUINS
Los Angeles
KINGS


REMEMBER: You're choosing the WORST logo!

Place your vote and then feel free to leave a comment as to how you came to your decision. Tell all your friends to drop in and vote! The more voices heard, the more accurate the results!

Poll opening date
Fri Feb 1
Poll closing date
Tue Feb 5

16 comments:

Z3R0SYST3MX said...

the mutated bruin on this one.

chris, please update the bracket.

Arenacale said...

That Bruins logo would be excusable for, say, 1935. Not for the 70s.

thejeffro9000 said...

That kings logo is garbage, that thing is already dated. As "shitty" as the Bruin looks, its got charm and character. Its well beyond that Kings logo, no one will remember that logo.

Darryl said...

the bear is staring into my soul.....must...click...king...logo

Emo said...

Design-wise, I like that Kings logo, but I don't think it looks like the logo for a hockey team. It looks maybe like it might be a badass mascot for a soup company or something. It also makes me think of Burger King.. you can blame aggressive advertising for that.

DaneykoIsGod said...

I didn't vote for either of these logos in the first round, so I'm kinda at a loss. Bruins, I guess.

Jason said...

Pissed off purple Santa is bad, but that poor bear is just awful.

awildermode said...

why do people keep calling a "bear"? it is obviously a TIGER!

pissed off purple santa. good one, jason!

Sephiroth said...

I can't understand what they were thinking wnen they brought up that ugly king head. The tiger is bad and looks like he is going to vomit, but the king is stupid. Also, the tiger was a shoulder logo, and the king was a well, upper left chest logo, witch is bad in the first place.

The king is dead.

derek said...

Here's something related to this Kings' logo I did quite a while ago...

http://www2.ottawasenators.com/_static/images/www/pages/luongo-300.jpg

VS

http://bp2.blogger.com/_r8tWGVHrjGI/R2BwtdwzTcI/AAAAAAAADVk/k5_5oxfvYds/s320/lu_kings.jpg

Swampy1701 said...

The bear looks like it has the Mange. I'll take a grumpy purple Burger King over a mangey bear anyday

Swampy1701 said...

Oh! Hey! What happened to freak out friday?

Daniel said...

That Kings logo has taken a lot of heat over the years, but keep in mind that, when the 3rd-jersey program was first started in 1996, the new jerseys/logos were intended to be a bit gaudy and ridiculous. So it's not really fair to criticize the purple king for being exactly what he was supposed to be.

The tiger, on the other hand, was actually supposed to be a normal shoulder logo. Ouch...

Chris said...

Oh! Hey! What happened to freak out friday?

Had to take a week off. Should be back next Friday though. Send in your stuff!

Jason said...

Are you sure the third jerseys were supposed to look bad, Daniel? Why would they do that?

Daniel said...

They weren't supposed to look BAD. Bad is in the eye of the beholder. They were just supposed to be a little more wild and "out there" than a normal jersey. If you look at some of the early 3rd jerseys (Pittsburgh, Vancouver, Los Angeles, Tampa Bay) and accept that they were intended to be a bit weird... they're actually not bad jerseys at all.