AHL Attendance? OKC will fill the void!

[HockeyFan4Life]

Good, then we can Leva him in Springfield.

I agree with you, but he will go where ever Anaheim sends him.

[jmlight]

Is he related to Louie Levasseur, who played for the OKC Stars?

[HockeyFan4Life]

Springfield separation official, Oklahoma City announcement coming soon

[betts]

That's exciting news for OKC. I used to be a big hockey fan, but couldn't get into the Blazers. I'll have to catch some games when the new team gets here.

[HockeyFan4Life]

There will be a announcement on Tuesday at the Myriad at 4pm.

[Centerback]

AHL in OKC http://http://www.newsok.com/oklahoma-city-lands-american-hockey-league-team/article/3438183?custom_click=lead_story_title

[rbtoliver]

i would like to see the OKC Oilers or the OKC Outlaws please never the Blazers

[Dave Cook]

Oliver...

Think about this for a moment.......let's say Oklahoma City becomes the 'Oilers' and in a few short years Tulsa joins the AHL.

I would imagine Tulsa would like to keep the name of the team they've had since 1928. What do they do? Do we have two Oilers in the same league?

As for the Blazers name, it's really amazing how many people that have a limited understanding of the hockey history in OKC that immediately identify the 'Blazers' trademark with subpar quality hockey.

Unfortunate, actually.

[LIL_WAYNE_2012_PREZIDENT]

when I hear Blazers I think of smokin Joe Burton the flaming puck logo and of course the myriad

[dmoor82]

I remember growing up and going to all The Blazers games w/ my Dad,he had good season tix.The Myriad used to be a rockin place back then!13k+ at a double-A hockey game it was nuts,one side of the arena yells GO The other Blazers!it was a good loud enviroment,great time growing up!(i am 28)so this wasnt too long ago!lol-I hope The BLAZERS name lives on!!!just sounds good!OKLAHOMA CITY BLAZERS!!!

[smooth]

i would like to see the OKC Oilers or the OKC Outlaws please never the Blazers

The reply about the Tulsa Oilers tells a good reason not to use that name. Outlaws? WAY to hick!

[z28james]

i remember those days of the blazers back then. 13k was crazy at a hockey game, and when they won the titles, those were sold out games at the Myriad were pretty cool, even if it was a beer league.

[BrettL]

I'm not too worried about what they call the team, I'll support them either way. Got my season tickets last week and can't wait till October.

[El Gato Pollo Loco!!!]

...As for the Blazers name, it's really amazing how many people that have a limited understanding of the hockey history in OKC that immediately identify the 'Blazers' trademark with subpar quality hockey.

Unfortunate, actually.

Agreed. I'm glad I learned about that history through a couple of friends. Makes me appreciate it.

[Dave Cook]

Bernie Parent - 2 Stanley Cups/2 Vezina Trophies/2 Conn Smythe - Hall of Fame
Gerry Cheevers - 2 Stanley Cups - Hall of Fame
Jean Pronovost - 391 NHL goals
Terry Crisp - 3 Stanley Cups (2 as a player, 1 as a coach)
Wayne Cashman - over a 1000 games with the Boston Bruins - 2 Cups
Glen Sather - 4 Stanley Cups as a head coach
JP Parise - 13 NHL seasons
Joe Watson - 2 Stanley Cups - longtime Philly Flyer
Ted Irvine
Ross Lonsberry - 2 Stanley Cups
Dallas Smith - 2 Stanley Cups and long-time defensive mate of Bobby Orr
Bill Goldsworthy - many years with the Minnesota North Stars
Doug Favell - 12 NHL seasons
Harry Sinden - longtime Boston GM - coached Boston to 1970 Stanley Cup
Derek Sanderson - 2 Stanley Cups - NHL Rookie of the Year
Jim Lorentz - 11 NHL seasons
Barry Wilkens - scored first goal in Vancouver Canucks history
Nick Beverley - 500 + NHL games
Ace Bailey - 2 Stanley Cups
Barry Gibbs - 11 NHL seasons
Bill Lesuk
Jimmy Harrison
Ivan Boldirev - 1000+ NHL games
Gregg Sheppard - three 30 goal seasons with Boston
Gary Doak - longtime Boston Bruin - 1 Stanley Cup
Reggie Leach - Popular Flyer - 1 Cup - scored 61 goals in 1976
Rick MacLeish - another popular Flyer - 2 Stanley Cups
Curt Ridley - former Vancouver keeper
Pat Boutette - 700+ NHL games on some very crappy teams
Mike Palmateer - a living legend in Toronto
Jack Valiquette
Tiger Williams - all-time NHL penalty minutes leader with 3,966 minutes
Blaine Stoughton - had four 43+ goal seasons (56 goals in 1980) with Hartford
And the list goes on....

No disrespect to Joe Burton and Craig Johnson....but to me...this is the legend of Oklahoma City Blazers hockey. Some very talented players have worn the 'BLAZERS' sweater.

[Jethrol]

You know, I can understand a lot of people wanting the Blazers name because it's what they know. However, I remember when the OKC Hockey team was called The OKC Stars.

People don't like change but change is what is happening. People hated it when the OKC 89rs changed to The Redhawks but now they're used to it.

To name this team The Blazers would be a monumental mistake IMO. Why? Because it's too easy for the general public to associate them with the old team. If that happens, people are very likely to say, "Meh...been there, done that" without even realizing that this is a new team that should bring a much different style of hockey to OKC. It will be faster and more intense as these guys are right below "The Show".

Now you diehard Blazer fans don't get all grumpy. I'm do not mean this to be a slight against the Blazers nor their play. But being the AHL it's going to be A LOT different than the Blazers. Therefore it needs a totally new name....not the Stars, not the Blazers, certainly not the Oilers or the Thunder.

What would my name be? How about the Chesapeake Drillers!!! lol...yes I'm kidding.

I have no ideas about the name but it really should be something unique.

[smooth]

You know, I can understand a lot of people wanting the Blazers name because it's what they know. However, I remember when the OKC Hockey team was called The OKC Stars.

People don't like change but change is what is happening. People hated it when the OKC 89rs changed to The Redhawks but now they're used to it.

To name this team The Blazers would be a monumental mistake IMO. Why? Because it's too easy for the general public to associate them with the old team. If that happens, people are very likely to say, "Meh...been there, done that" without even realizing that this is a new team that should bring a much different style of hockey to OKC. It will be faster and more intense as these guys are right below "The Show".

Now you diehard Blazer fans don't get all grumpy. I'm do not mean this to be a slight against the Blazers nor their play. But being the AHL it's going to be A LOT different than the Blazers. Therefore it needs a totally new name....not the Stars, not the Blazers, certainly not the Oilers or the Thunder.

What would my name be? How about the Chesapeake Drillers!!! lol...yes I'm kidding.

I have no ideas about the name but it really should be something unique.

To answer your concerns only takes three and a half words. It's called tradition.

I STILL do not like the names RedHawks and Stars. One reason other than tradition is Stars would be associated with the most scumbag city on the planet... Dallas. And, yes. I remember them. Just about all they amounted to was a renamed Blazers. Funny. It backfired and folded. What was the next team named? You guessed it. Blazers. Why? Tradition!

[Jethrol]

To answer your concerns only takes three and a half words. It's called tradition.

I STILL do not like the names RedHawks and Stars. One reason other than tradition is Stars would be associated with the most scumbag city on the planet... Dallas. And, yes. I remember them. Just about all they amounted to was a renamed Blazers. Funny. It backfired and folded. What was the next team named? You guessed it. Blazers. Why? Tradition!

Tradition is the very thing that the new team should avoid if it wants to appeal to long time citizens and get them re-interested in hockey. It's a new team, new and better league and it deserves a new name.

They have to compete with the new and exciting NBA team. The last thing that they can afford is to be seen by many as the old Blazer team. They need to bring in new fans that will help make them profitable. That's less likely to happen with a rigid adherence to tradition.

If we name them The Blazers, the only tradition with this new team and the other hockey teams is the name....that's all. It's perfectly OK for hockey teams in OKC to be named something different....especially when it will be a very different type of team.

There is no value in tradition in this instance. Now if this was the old Blazer's team that had moved up to a new hockey division, I would be all for keeping the old name. However, this is not the case with this team.

It's ok to embrace change....don't be scared man.

[smooth]

Tradition is the very thing that the new team should avoid if it wants to appeal to long time citizens and get them re-interested in hockey. It's a new team, new and better league and it deserves a new name.

They have to compete with the new and exciting NBA team. The last thing that they can afford is to be seen by many as the old Blazer team. They need to bring in new fans that will help make them profitable. That's less likely to happen with a rigid adherence to tradition.

If we name them The Blazers, the only tradition with this new team and the other hockey teams is the name....that's all. It's perfectly OK for hockey teams in OKC to be named something different....especially when it will be a very different type of team.

There is no value in tradition in this instance. Now if this was the old Blazer's team that had moved up to a new hockey division, I would be all for keeping the old name. However, this is not the case with this team.

It's ok to embrace change....don't be scared man.

Change is fine, however, we are discussing TRADITION! Stronger than change. BTW. I am not scared. The fact you accuse me of it makes no sense.

[Jethrol]

Change is fine, however, we are discussing TRADITION! Stronger than change. BTW. I am not scared. The fact you accuse me of it makes no sense.

I discussed the lack of tradition and how you try to mis-apply this to the new team throughout my last post....yet you ignored it all.

I accused you of being scared as a silly jibe....something that I thought would be obvious given the bulk of my previous post.

[Dave Cook]

Both of you guys bring up valid arguments.

As you can see, I'm a traditionalist. I was raised on both the old-school and new age era of Blazers hockey. I'd love to see the name return.

However, I'm not so sure the casual, 'know little about the sport' fan will be able to tell the difference. If a new name makes the difference in a 1000 or so fans, I say go for it.

As for drawing new fans, we could have named them the Ice Okies back in 1992 and we still would have drawn 12,000+ fans. OKC took to the sport.

Let's hope they take to it again in....with the Thunder right across the street.

[betts]

I consider myself a traditionalist too, and that's why I liked the idea of keeping the name "Blazers". But, I think Jethrol makes a very good point. If you're a big sports fan of any sort, you know the difference between CHL and AHL, you know what happened to the Blazers, and you know the AHL will bring a very different sort of hockey to OKC. But, to the casual observer, especially one not versed in sports, they may not know what happened, or the difference. A new team will catch people's attention, and it may well lead to an increase in attendance, as they may actually read stories to see what it's all about, rather than skipping over stories because they don't even realize OKC went a year without hockey. So, I think a new name is probably a good idea.

[dmoor82]

Ladies and Gentlemen,may I present to you, your 2010-2011 Oklahoma City Blazers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!just sounds right!

[Roadhawg]

Don't all traditions have to start somewhere? Why not start a new one?

[smooth]

Don't all traditions have to start somewhere? Why not start a new one?

You people just don't get it. You need to take a course in common sense.