We've been on a quest to determine which NHL team has the best and worst logos.
Now we're moving onto goalies! We're pitting mask against mask
with the goal of determining the best. And you can vote!
Also check out: Tournament of Hockey Logos
 |  | |
BRUINS | 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 |
| Atlantic |
|
| Northeast |
|
| Southeast |
|
| Central |
|
| Northwest |
|
| Pacific |
|
| Vintage |
|
16 comments:
the mutated bruin on this one.
chris, please update the bracket.
That Bruins logo would be excusable for, say, 1935. Not for the 70s.
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.
the bear is staring into my soul.....must...click...king...logo
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.
I didn't vote for either of these logos in the first round, so I'm kinda at a loss. Bruins, I guess.
Pissed off purple Santa is bad, but that poor bear is just awful.
why do people keep calling a "bear"? it is obviously a TIGER!
pissed off purple santa. good one, jason!
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.
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
The bear looks like it has the Mange. I'll take a grumpy purple Burger King over a mangey bear anyday
Oh! Hey! What happened to freak out friday?
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...
Oh! Hey! What happened to freak out friday?
Had to take a week off. Should be back next Friday though. Send in your stuff!
Are you sure the third jerseys were supposed to look bad, Daniel? Why would they do that?
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.
Post a Comment