The Golden Knights would seem to be more about owner Bill Foley—the Knights part is a nod to his alma mater, the U.S. Military Academy at West Point—than us. And when he tried to prove the opposite by shortening the team down to the Vegas Golden Knights—partly, he says, because locals often drop the “Las” in casual conversation—he committed an even bigger faux pas. So what if Nevada is the state that produces the most gold, which outranks silver (and hence no Silver Knights)? Now, locals are grumbling and the Army is investigating “what the way ahead would be” out of concern for its own Golden Knights parachute team. Hockey is a tough enough sell here without Foley fumbling the puck. –Mike Prevatt

If a hockey team’s name needs to be explained, it missed the mark. Las Vegas has waited a long time for its first major league sports franchise and deserves a name with a little more flash and relatability. The Golden Knights could be the moniker of any squad in North America, but no one thinks of Las Vegas as just any old city. Playing it safe (or myopic) with this first impression means missing out on a first chance to connect with fans that live here in a more meaningful way; fortunately there will be many more opportunities. –Brock Radke

It’s not great but it’s also hardly deserving of the freak-out I’ve witnessed the past few days. People saying they won’t ever go to games now? Obviously they didn’t care about the team enough in the first place. Ninety percent of sports-team names are dumb. Whatever. –Spencer Patterson

I have no real beef with the team’s name, though if you look at things through the lens of feudalism—which I’ve done a lot recently—it makes us subservient to the [LA] Kings. But I don’t like that they’re calling themselves the Vegas Golden Knights when they’ll be playing all their home games in Clark County. They should call themselves the Unincorporated Golden Knights. –Geoff Carter