HOME RULES RANKINGS HISTORY FEEDBACK FRIENDS AND FAVORITES OTHER TEAMS Teams with asterisks are not yet posted Alaska Aces Albany River Rats Amarillo Gorillas Arizona Sundogs Augusta Lynx Austin Ice Bats Bakersfield Condors Binghamton Senators Bloomington Prairie Thunder Bossier/Shreveport Mudbugs Bridgeport Sound Tigers Charlotte Checkers Chicago Wolves Cincinnati Cyclones Colorado Eagles Columbia Inferno Columbus Cottonmouths Corpus Christi Rayz Dayton Bombers Elmira Jackals Fayetteville Fire Antz Flint Generals Florida Everblades Fort Wayne Komets Fresno Falcons Grand Rapids Griffins Gwinnett Gladiators Hamilton Bulldogs Hartford Wolf Pack Hershey Bears Houston Aeros Huntsville Havoc Idaho Steelheads Iowa Stars Jacksonville Barracudas Johnstown Chiefs Kalamazoo Wings Knoxville Ice Bears Lake Erie Monsters Laredo Bucks Las Vegas Wranglers Lowell Devils Manchester Monarchs Manitoba Moose Milwaukee Admirals Mississippi RiverKings Mississippi Sea Wolves Muskegon Fury New Mexico Scorpions Norfolk Admirals Odessa Jackalopes Oklahoma City Blazers Pensacola Ice Pilots Peoria Rivermen Philadelphia Phantoms Phoenix RoadRunners Port Huron Icehawks Portland Pirates Providence Bruins Quad City Flames Reading Royals Richmond Renegades Rio Grande Valley Killer Bees Rochester Americans Rockford IceHogs Rocky Mountain Rage San Antonio Rampage South Carolina Stingrays Springfield Falcons Stockton Thunder Syracuse Crunch Texas Brahmas Texas Wildcatters Toronto Marlies Trenton Devils Tulsa Oilers Twin City Cyclones Utah Grizzlies Victoria Salmon Kings Wheeling Nailers Wichita Thunder Wilkes-Barre/Scranton Penguins Worcester Sharks Youngstown SteelHounds

Each rule has a basic value -- most are positive, but there are a handful of negative-value rules for doing good things. Second, violations may be termed "egregious". Some rules have set guidelines for egregious violations (see Rule 1, "Region" as an example), while for others it's simply a matter of me deciding that the team broke the rule worse than most teams. For egregious violations, the value is multipled by 1.5. Violations can be doubly-egregious, in which case the value is multipled by 2.25 (i.e. 1.52). In some cases violations can be triply-egregious or even worse. Region (3 pts) -- Place name is a region, not a city (e.g., "Quad City"). Automatically egregious if the region in question is a state. Automatically egregious for each other team in the same league in the same region (doubly egregious for older teams in the same league in the same region). Automatically doubly-egregious for regions larger than a state. Misspell (11 pts) -- Something in the team name is misspelled (e.g., "Komets"). Automatically egregious if the misspelling occurs in the place name. Equip-Name (4 pts) -- A piece of hockey equipment is mentioned in the nickname (e.g. "Riverblades"). Action (3 pts) -- An action performed in hockey is mentioned in the nickname (e.g., "Checkers"). Ice (9 pts) -- The word "Ice" appears in the nickname. (e.g., "IceHogs"). Kings (8 pts) -- The word "Kings" appears in the nickname. (e.g., "Riverkings") Compound (13 pts) -- The nickname is a made-up compound word (e.g., "Sound Tigers"). Ers (9 pts) -- The nickname is a made-up word ending in "-ers" (e.g., "Nailers"). Software (8 pts) -- The name has capital letters appearing in the middle of a word as if it were a software product (e.g., "FireAntz"). Singular (6 pts) -- The nickname is singular or collective (e.g., "Storm"). Wordplay (7 pts) -- Any form of wordplay is involved in the name (e.g., "Everblades"). Alliteration (2 pts) -- More than one word (usually but not always the place name and nickname) start with the same sound and/or letter (e.g., "Portland Pirates", "Cape Fear FireAntz"). Cartoon (17 pts) -- The logo features a cartoon character (e.g., the Adirondack IceHawks' bird). Note that stylized renderings of animals (such as the falcon in the Fresno Falcons' logo) are not cartoons. Anthropomorphization (10 pts) -- Human features (hands, teeth, etc.) have been given to something which ordinarily lacks these features (e.g., the Manitoba Moose logo). Anthropomorphized weather features usually are egregious simply because they look so stupid. When the object in question is a mythical creature (such as the "lock monster" in Lowell's logo), it is my discretion whether this rule applies. Irrelevance (14 pts) -- The dominant feature of the logo has nothing to do with the nickname (e.g., the turtle in the Memphis RiverKings' logo). Bears are automatically egregious (assuming they aren't relevant, of course) because they seem to be a favorite irrelevant feature among teams. Name-Logo (2 pts) -- The place name and/or nickname appears in the logo (e.g., just about every team in existence). If the name is the dominant feature, this is automatically a quadruply-egregious offense (this sounds nasty, but actually works out to only 7 pts). "Dominant feature" in such cases can be a bit of a judgment call, and I tend to rule in favor of the name not being the dominant feature. If I really can't decide, I may call it doubly-egregious and be done with it. Obvious (6 pts) -- The logo includes the word "hockey" (e.g., the Orlando Seals' logo). Automatically egregious if "pro(fessional)" is in there as well. Equip-Logo (5 pts) -- Hockey equipment appears in the logo (e.g., the stick in the Bakersfield Condors' logo). Every additional piece of equipment is egregious, although a pair of something that generally comes in pairs (skates, gloves, etc.) will count as only one item. Any creature dressed as a hockey player is automatically assumed to have a helmet/goalie mask, jersey, gloves, stick, and skates, even if some of these items are either not visible or visibly absent. This means that they are quadruply-egregious. If there's also a puck in view, it becomes quintuply-egregious. Colorful (13 pts) -- The logo either has too many colors in the logo, or inappropriate colors (e.g., the New Mexico Scorpions' logo, which by my count has seven). What constitutes "too many" and "inappropriate" are judgment calls, although teal is usually going to get dinged as inappropriate. Fortunately, the trend from overuse of teal seems to have died out. State (4 pts) -- The logo has either an outline of the state or the state flag. Texas is automatically egregious just because so damn many Texan teams do this. Fade (6 pts) -- A color "fade" effect appears in the logo. Why a special rule for this? It keeps me from having to decide how many different colors are in the fade effect, that's why. Offspring (5 pts) -- The team has the same name and/or logo as its parent team (e.g., "St. John's Maple Leafs"). Ripoff (4 pts) -- The nickname and/or logo is too similar to an older team's (e.g., "Corpus Christi Rayz"). Yucky-Logo, Cool-Logo (5 or -5 pts) -- If my general reaction to a logo is to say "Yuck!" (e.g., the Syracuse Crunch) then five points are added to the score; if my general reaction is to say "Cool!" (e.g., the Grand Rapids Griffins) then five points are subtracted. Yucky-Name, Cool-Name (4 or -4 pts) -- Same as above, but for names. You want examples? Okay, how about "Lubbock Cotton Kings" for the "yuck" and "Odessa Jackalopes" for the "cool". Local (-3 pts) -- The name has a valid connection to the town (e.g., "Norfolk Admirals"). This one is subjective and I do get the final say, but feel free to drop me a line if you think I'm unaware of the significance of a name. This page Copyright ©2003-2005 Scott D. Rhodes. All rights reserved