Four of the five Southeast division team names were thought up in the '90s. The 5th (Washington) is only from '74. We're back to dealing with some new designs and, consequently, greatly varying quality.
How did they turn out? You're a click away from finding out.
5th place: Tampa Bay Lightning
Aside from the annoying aspect of a singular noun team name, the Lightning have a pretty clear and easily identifiable icon to work with. Unfortunately, they appear to have decided it was so easy they'd let the owner's nephew draw it up. The first mistake: When you have an obvious symbol like lightning, you don't need to put the word "lightning" on the logo.
But then, who chose that Tampa brushed stroke font? Why is "Lightning" in another font? What's with the white outline and thin black outer outline? All of this before we even get to the unnecessarily 3D-ish bolt jammed into a circle that only serves to further obscure the text. Even aside from the expansion-ish colors, Tampa Bay is fully deserving of this last place finish.
Advice: Hire a designer next time. Dump everything and start anew with a stylistically interesting bolt.
4th place: Carolina Hurricanes
Carolina narrowly avoids the singular team name by throwing an S onto their natural disaster. Again, aside from the awful mascot idea, it would seem a Hurricane would be pretty easy to iconize. However, unlike the Lightning, the Hurricanes seemed to have hired
too many designers.
While the general idea of depicting a top-down shot of the Hurricane isn't an awful one, this version should have been dropped in the thumbnail stage. The shapes formed by the red and black jagged outer lines, and the inner black swoop are awkward, off-balance, and difficult to reconcile. The gray outline around the whole shape is a weak attempt to group the random shapes together into one solid mark. And the over-emphasized circular eye only serves to further muddle the spiral suggested the outer lines.
Advice: Two choices — a) remove the eye and inner black swoop, get rid of the jaggies, and go for a Yin/Yang-ish simplified swirl. b) Give up on this logo and do a more easily recognizable side view of a stylized tornado.
3rd place: Florida Panthers
While Florida wins for being a new team with a solid, traditional team mascot, they end up with a logo — or rather, a cartoon — that is hard to differentiate from that of the thousand high school panthers out there. To be fair, it's a well-executed and professional depiction, but it doesn't quite work as a full team logo. It's over-detailed, so it looks chaotic and a bit scraggly at smaller sizes, or when surrounded by any other colors.
It's good that the logo uses only the 4 colors, but the red is strangely over-used. Red mouth, good. Red eyes...Perhaps. Red paws? A bit stranger. Red tail tip? Did the cat just walk through a ketchup factory, or what? A few other details are weird too, though some aspects may be clearer in a larger version. What's with the bump on the top of his head? Is the cat really supposed to be cross-eyed? How does he walk around on such tiny back feet? (Just kidding on that last one.)
In any case, the strength of the Panthers name, and a reasonably strong start for such a young team bodes well for the future of the Panthers logo. It will not be a surprise if they move up in their division in coming years.
Advice: Simplify, simplify, simplify. Less angular hatching, get rid of unnecessary details, and drop most (if not all) of the red.
2nd place: Atlanta Thrashers
Thankfully the Atlanta Thrashers — new team, formed in the "extreme" era, with a seemingly ridiculous name — did not decide to team up with Thrasher magazine for a skater mascot. While Atlanta is fully justified in using the Thrasher (Georgia's state bird) as their team name and mascot, it was imperative, given the current environment, that the logo not mislead anyone as to what sort of thrasher they were alluding to. One skateboard wheel, one flail, one swiping claw, and everyone would miss the literal animal meaning.
The designers also seem to tacitly acknowledge this by leaving the Thrasher name off the logo. If you'd never heard of the Thrashers, you'd be forgiven for thinking they might just be another Atlanta Hawks team. Outside of their (wise) choice to not force the team or city name on the brand, the Thrashers logo is well drawn, and intelligently thought out. The smooth curve of the lines of the bird, combined with just the right amount of shading, create an easy to recognize, bold, dynamic mark. The beveled badge outside of the bird, seems unnecessary, however, and somewhat interferes with the comprehension of the hockey stick, and seems to be something of a crutch to justify the cropping of the animal's body.
While the hockey stick is consistently drawn in the style of the rest of the logo, and is at least somewhat appropriately incorporated, the logo would be bolder without it. All in all, this is a strong logo from a new team, and they would do well not to mess with it too much.
Advice: Drop the beveled badge, consider dropping the hockey stick, slightly thicken the blue line dividing the bottom of the head from the wing.
1st place: Washington Capitals
The Capitals luckily have a national icon to identify with, narrowly avoiding (or at least relegating to alternate logo status) the idiocy of having players represented as the tops of buildings. Washington wins this round for the overall clarity of the shape and simple execution of their drawing. This logo would be easily identifiable in silhouette form, and at postage-stamp sizes. The curve of the shoulder and swooping wings creates an active, interesting shape, and the extended claw balances the opposite wingtip without the need for exact symmetry.
The eagle is surrounded by a thin blue edge, presumably to indicate that it's moving through the sky. This seems pretty unnecessary, and somewhat blurs the otherwise sharp edges. Additionally, while the stars fill the space in the wings reasonably, and not inappropriately, the attempt to stretch and scale them proportionally doesn't quite work, considering the flatness of the rest of the illustration.
Advice: Redo the stars, also trying out white instead of gold. Remove the blue border.
Overall, a pretty weak division, though I think all of the teams have possible ways to improve their logos to match the quality of some of the better divisions in the NHL.
Congratulations, Washington, and good luck in the later rounds.
What are your rankings for the Southeast Division?