Monday
Nov052007
Poll: Mighty Ducks '95 vs Mighty Ducks '03
Monday · Nov 5 · 2007 | 11:59 AM PST |  | |
MIGHTY DUCKS '95 | MIGHTY DUCKS '03 |
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 Mon Nov 5 | Poll closing date Fri Nov 9 |
07TJTRN | #1A | ANA95vANA03
Reader Comments (17)
Wish I could vote for both, but I went with the 03 logo because that sweater was super classy and I was very disappointed when they discarded it with last year's uniform switch.
Went with 03 simply because it's major fault is that it's boring rather than 95 which is just hideous.
Who the hell actually voted for the 95? Why?
the '03 logo is definitely the lesser of two evils
lol, On second thought, can I change my vote to the '95 logo? I took a second look at it and it's too funny to not vote for.
I actually think the 03 third jersey was the franchise's best.
So is this a tourney for the worst logos of all-time? what about the classic? da blues, red wings, or maple leafs.. this is just stupid
95 is sexy man. gotta vote for that. its gonna go all the way
Sorry, I can't vote for either one of these. They are both too ugly. And looking at the logos in this contest, with exception to the Flyers and Senators (which are barely different from their main logos anyway), I really don't like any of them. The sabres and rangers ones are tolerable, but certainly not good logos. The rest are pure crap.
I have to express my surprise over the reaction I'm getting from a lot of you. When you guys voted on which tournament you wanted to do after the primary logos, 2,500 votes were cast for third jersey logos — this very pool. It was only 30 votes behind the vintage tournament.
So either you were just screwing around — in which case this is what happens — or you must have been drunken-clicking again. lol
Seriously though, I'm sorry to hear some of you don't seem to be enjoying this one. I thought it would be pretty fun.
So is this a tourney for the worst logos of all-time? what about the classic? da blues, red wings, or maple leafs.. this is just stupid
And I'm not really sure I understand the question there. We did a tournament already that included the Blues, Red Wings and Maple Leafs. It was the first one.
Thanks for voting anyway!
That '95 logo may be the single silliest thing I've seen. Could you imagine being a hockey player, working your way up all the way from pee-wee to the majors, only to wear THAT on your jersey? Good thing it never saw the light of day.
hey chris, did you see the cote(?) fight against the rangers? whoever he foughts nameplate was flopping off....quality jersey construction.
That '95 logo may be the single silliest thing I've seen. Could you imagine being a hockey player, working your way up all the way from pee-wee to the majors, only to wear THAT on your jersey? Good thing it never saw the light of day.
http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com/nhl/anaheim/OlaussonAna.jpg" REL="nofollow">You sure about that?
the 95 jersey was worn only during a few games, but every time I watched some video featuring the selanne-kariya phenomenon, there were a few highlights starring the 95 jerseys...
like here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0CrARZLocc
Are people really voting for the cartoon?
I like the third jersey tournament =]
I think this is just a certain round where both of the logos arent so great.. Me? '03.
Chris: I think people are complaining about the logos themselves, not the tournament. It's widely recognized that most third jerseys are lousy, and I suspect a lot of people wanted to do this tournament mostly so they could vote against all the logos they really despise. (And vote for the one they're secretly, irrationally infatuated with.)
These are logos people love to hate.
That being the case, a WORST third logo tournament might have been more fitting. Maybe you should gather all the first-round losers from these tournaments and have a worst all time tournament. Jersey tournaments would be good too.