FRIENDS AND FAVORITES
Teams with asterisks are not yet posted
Bridgeport Sound Tigers
Fort Wayne Komets
Grand Rapids Griffins
Greenville Swamp Rabbits
Hartford Wolf Pack
Henderson Silver Knights
Kansas City Mavericks
Knoxville Ice Bears
Lehigh Valley Phantoms
Orlando Solar Bears
Pensacola Ice Flyers
Quad City Storm
Rapid City Rush
Rocket de Laval
Roanoke Rail Yard Dawgs
San Antonio Rampage
San Diego Gulls
San Jose Barracuda
South Carolina Stingrays
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
- Misspell (11 pts) -- Something in the team name is misspelled
(e.g., "Komets"). Automatically egregious if the misspelling occurs in the
- 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.,
- Kings (8 pts) -- The word "Kings" appears in the nickname.
- 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"
- 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
- Wordplay (7 pts) -- Any form of wordplay is involved in the name
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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