
The Utah Hockey Club, still searching for a name as they head into the 2025-26 NHL season, have announced that “Yeti” or “Yetis” is no longer an option.
As had been hinted at in recent weeks, the team has been unable to work out an agreement with Yeti Coolers to use the name in branding and merchandising. If you haven’t been following this story, The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office earlier this month refused a request by the club, citing a “likelihood of confusion” with other notable brands using the name, such as Yeti Coolers.
“They have a unique trademark that allows them to prevent the use of the word Yeti or Yetis,” asid Mike Maughan, an executive with Smith Entertainment Group. “They made a determination for the sake of their brand that they didn’t want to enter into a coexistence.”
With Yeti or Yetis off the table as a possible new name, the club has narrowed its choices to these three:
• Utah Mammoth
• Utah Hockey Club
• Utah Wasatch

At this point, the team is basically turning the naming process over to the fans who attend the next four UHC games. iPad stations will be placed throughout the arena for fans to get an exclusive look at the potential names, logos and merchandise while submitting their votes.
According to the team, “In order to protect the imagery and new potential branding, fans will only be able to vote at Delta Center during these next four home games and will not be permitted to record or take any photos of the survey. Once the data is collected, the Utah Hockey Club will analyze the results and determine whether or not they will have another round of voting.”
The team and its fans apparently favored the name “Yeti,” and worked “vigorously” with Yeti Coolers to come to an agreement, but unfortunately none was forthcoming. If you’re not familiar, Yeti Coolers is pretty much what you think it is, so it’s hard to see how there would be confusion between a hockey team and an insulated chest used to keep food and beverages cold. However, the trademark held by Yeti Coolers permits them to print “Yeti” or “Yetis” on clothing. That would therefore disallow the UHC to do the same.
“There’s nothing that came from the trademark office over the last week or so that was surprising to us in anyway,” said Maughan. “We have engaged with Yeti Coolers extensively. The NHL has also helped engage with us with them. At the end of the day, they have a trademark that allows them to print Yeti or Yeti’s on clothing. Without a coexistence agreement, we would not be able to print that.”
“We’ve replaced the name Yeti with Wasatch. It still allows us to honor the mythical snow creature idea from that with a distinctly Utah appeal,” Maughan added.
In order to make sure the team has their name and branding all set for next season, they’re putting the final three choices to the fans over the next four home games. The team expects to announce the new team name during the offseason. Wasatch, which Maughan says filled the finalist spot originally intended for Yeti, is a reference to the Wasatch Mountains, which run north to south along the east side of the Salt Lake Valley.
Fans were to begin voting at last night’s game against the Penguins, and the voting will continue for the next three games: against Columbus on Friday, St. Louis on Sunday and Philadelphia on Tuesday.
Of those choices, I like Mammoth best, although I don’t love it. What happened to Blizzard? I guess it and the other names not mentioned were not popular enough. Wasatch? Sounds really odd, almost a tongue twister. No thanks.
I have no knowledge of why “Blizzard” wasn’t among the final three, but am curious if it being similar to “Avalanche” (both in the singularity of the name and the fact that both relate to snow — either a lot of it falling from the sky or falling down a mountain) may be a factor.
Honestly I hate singular names, so Mammoth and Wasatch don’t do it for me.
Activision Blizzard is probably the real reason, they don’t have the best reputation and have a history of being involved in various lawsuits including the famous sexual harassment one.
agreed on singular names, hoping for UHC to stay at this point. kinda like WFT in the NFL, once it’s not being use lots of people realized it was kind of unique/cool
Dairy Queen said no.
Not sure if that’s a joke or serious, but I didn’t even think of the Dairy Queen issue. Yikes.
So I guess that means Utah Frostys is also a no go.
Also McFlurries was voted down. But the machines never worked anyway.
How is Utah Swarm not an option… the “hive” is literally on their state flag.
This turned into a disaster. I was hounding them on social media. They don’t listen. Should have gone with Salt Lake Stingers.
Most nobody knows what a Wasatch is. When you find out what it is you realize it is not a good name for a sports team.
They might not be competing for a Stanley Cup but they are competing with the Wild for the worst team name in the league. This news yesterday was disappointing.
Agree. Wasatch as a nickname? So the Utah “Mountain Ranges” or “Mountain Passes” (I had to look up what the word meant). Ugh.
I get the trademark issue, but what a missed opportunity for both the team and Yeti Coolers. How many hockey fans would buy the team’s stuff, and Yeti Cooler’s merch, just for the continuity? I suggest many.
Agree…and their coolers are overpriced…many competitors are just as good, way cheaper…
It became a status symbol (fad) amongst hunters and fishermen…
Colorado Rockies: “did someone say mountain range?”
Rockies were my first thought as well. I dig the Wasatch name! Anything other than Utah Hockey Club… this isn’t soccer.
Well sure. Colorado Rockies I would contend isn’t likely to confuse anyone, or to ask, “what is a Rocky?” Most are familiar with “The Rockies”. Many would likely say “What is a Wasatch?” Plus Rockies/plural flows better than Wasatch.
Well, sure, if you use a definition, rather than the actual name, it would sound silly, like the San Francisco 19th century itinerant gold prospectors, or the Cincinnati striped large predatory cats from the Indian subcontinent, or the Houston cylindrical projectiles, the New England people who are proud of their geopolitical heritage, the San Diego Spanish translation of the English for father specifically in reference to a Franciscan priest…
That said, Yeti coolers missed a big opportunity here, and UHC is losing an easy grab at a built in merch market.
LOL
That would have been great. The arena could be The Hive and fans The Swarm.
You want them to copycat the old WHL Cincinnati Stingers?
And in response to a comment below, there was a bar or club in their old arena called The Hive I seem to remember.
I guess nobody can come up with good new ideas.
Actually I think it was The Beehive. Not that I went in there being a preteen when the Stingers were active.
Utah Bees or Utah Fighting Bees would have been perfect
Utah Bees is already trademarked by the MiLB team (presently called the Salt Lake Bees) and will likely be the name of an expansion MLB team should SLC get one (which is likely). The MiLB team owners are the ones heading the MLB expansion interest group, would be the primary owners.
Given how long MLB’s St. Louis Cardinals coexisted with the NFL’s St. Louis Cardinals, I don’t buy the complaints about another team with the same name causing confusion or causing issues financially.
I really like Utah Hockey Club. Like soccer clubs, they don’t need an official nickname and can still use the yeti in their logos. They could probably still unofficially go by the “Yeti”
Those are some excellent names for a minor league hockey team. I thought Blizzard was an option too, that was probably the least objectionable out of several bad options.
Mammoths with an actual plural noun would be fine, so close yet so far
Came here to say this. I don’t understand why they aren’t offering Mammoths.
How I understand it is that either could be picked once the name is actually picked. I don’t know though
Me too
I have a feeling it’s going to be a runaway for Wasatch (bad) simply so fans can get their Yeti in the logo (good). This is why hockey isn’t a serious sport.
I guess Wasatch isn’t any stupider than Blue Jackets. I know where the Blue Jackets name comes from, so I don’t need a history lesson, but I lived in Columbus for 14 years, and very few understood that connection until it was over explained by the team.
Agreed. I understand the why but it’s still not a good name either.
And with all the U of M hatred that runs through Columbus, I have never, ever understood how the team picked blue as the primary color and literally put the word “blue” in the team name. That even one higher-up suggested it is idiotic, that it ultimately got approved is mind blowing.
LOL Block. We lived there when the team was named, and I remember someone in the paper or on the news specifically remarking that it was stupid to have “blue” in the name, and that all would recoil at “let’s go blue(s)!” I never got it either, and can’t believe it didn’t occur to anyone (it likely did).
Just remembered for the Blue Jackets, one name that was batted around was Silverbacks, as in, gorillas. As in, the Columbus Zoo connection. I always thought Black and Silver with a gorilla mascot would have been great, and the exiting ECHL team at the time, the Chill (who were beloved) were also black and silver. Swing and a miss for me.
Would the NHL have allowed that color combo with the Kings in the league?
I like Utah HC, but then have a logo/mascot that is a yeti. As another commenter said, they could do the same thing with Wasatch, but I can’t believe people actually like that more than HC.
Part good news, part bad. Yeti was a terrible name, Wasatch is worse, Mammoth and Hockey Club are… fine. Still think that black diamonds, canyons, and maybe caribou were the only solid names on that fan survey.
Utah Hockey Club is like ordering Vanilla ice cream at 31 Flavors.
Well, Vanilla is BR’s top selling flavor, with Cookies and Cream in a close second, far as I can see…
Even though theirs is not the best Vanilla out there, by far…
It’s the Pink Bubblegum you gotta look out for…..
Regardless of the choice, it will add to the relatively small group of teams in the 4 major sports with a nickname that doesn’t end in “S”.
I still think “Black Diamonds” was their best option.
Only if they get Peter Criss involved.
LOL. “Skating the ice for a livin’… Woo Ooo”. My God, that’s so awful.
Bite your tongue! That’s my favorite song of theirs!
‘out on the ice for a living….’
“They’re cross-checking with madness… in the box with you, son!” Woo Ooo…
Yeah Utah Catman (Peter is and will be the one and only catman, sorry Mr. Singer)!!! Or is it catmen??? rather tomcats
What a mess. Just pick an animal that’s native to Utah and be done with it. I don’t know, but maybe a COYOTE!
That is still the IP of the Arizona hockey franchise on hiatus.
Let’s be honest, the Arizona Coyotes are as much on hiatus as the KC Scouts are
Apples and oranges and 50 years different.
Bettman wants the PHX market desperately.
Mammoth would be the clear frontrunner for me, if not for the fact that the NLL team the Colorado Mammoth exists. I get that box lacrosse is kind of a fringe sport, but still, with the whole Utah v Colorado, SLC living in the shadow of Denver thing, it seems like a bad idea to take the name of a Denver based team, even if it is a kind of obscure sport (at the pro level).
At this point I’m kind of on the Hockey Club wagon. Such a shame, Yeti was a great name, the cooler and cup company really messed this up. Should’ve just let them do it if they throw in the sweater sponsorship at a discount.
I always thought Outlaws was the best of the choices they originally presented), but that’s just my taste. There was no trademark issue with that one so I wonder why it dropped off. Maybe they figure Outlaws to have a negative connotation OR it didn’t line up with the colors they have chosen OR it just wasn’t popular.
they put outlaws back in play and took out wasatch already.
Move the team to Hartford and call them the “Whalers” or Quebec City “Nordiques”
Utah tried and failed.
If they have to stay in Utah, just leave Hockey Club.
It’s helping them stand out.
Utah Whalers perhaps? Just as strange as Utah Jazz.
That would not be a bad name, actually. Look up “Great Salt Lake whale hoax”.
Woof! Had no idea!
Yetis was the best. Great alliterative “y” sound for Utah Yetis. I agree that Mammoth is bad due to the lacrosse team in Colorado. There is also a Mammoth Cooler brand like Yeti Coolers. I also prefer plural nouns ending in ‘s’. Maybe they should try another music style to complement Utah Jazz. Maybe the Utah Funks, Utah Discos, Utah Punks, Utah Alt-Rocks, Utah Swingers.
“We’ve replaced the name Yeti with Wasatch. It still allows us to honor the mythical snow creature idea from that with a distinctly Utah appeal,”
Or another way to word it that they left out. They can still use the identity heavily borrowed from the former WHL Kootenay/Winnipeg Ice.
link
It’s a shame the Yetis name didn’t work out, it sounded the best of the lot. I like to imagine in another timeline the hockey club would’ve not only been able to use the name but even have the cooler company as a corporate sponsor. Would’ve been extremely appropriate and be one of the only positive ad patches in sports history.
What’s wrong with Mammoths, plural?
I think Hockey Club wins, since Mammoth and Wasatch will split the vote for people who want an actual nickname. I’m not a fan of just calling it a Hockey Club. It’s too bad there isn’t a cool name for “Skiers”.
UTAH SLOPES
Unfortunately, “slopes” is also considered a racial slur against people of Eastern Asian descent.
Utah Slaloms? Doesn’t really work.
Utah Moguls? I kind of like that but it has multiple meanings besides the ski reference. Probably a turn off that mogul also means a powerful person and that could be construed with the elite class who are mostly not well liked. But a mogul is also a name for a steam locomotive. They could go with a train theme and tie it into the nearby Golden Spike national park. Actually Utah Golden Spikes is a good name but sounds too similar to the Golden Knights. Utah Spikes could work. I love short nicknames and nicknames that tie into a historical lesson.
One of the original ideas was Utah Black Diamonds
A merlin is a falcon that is native to Utah. Salt Lake Merlins or Utah Merlins would be great.
Personally, I like the idea of just staying as UHC. Soccer clubs do it all the time. Avoids any potential headache with team names in the future or annoying fans (I live in DC and went through their football name fiasco).
UHC is a hard no. Bland and boring. Mammoth isn’t bad, but I prefer names that end in s. Wasatch is interesting, but a bit confusing. Are they honoring the mountain range or some mythical snow creature? Guess I vote for Mammoth. Easier to pronounce and easier to create a visual identity.
These names are all terrible. The NHL isn’t a serious league.
Ya! Give me one of those manly names like Red Stockings or Lakers!
How about Utah Yotes? Honoring the past (Coyotes) while shortening the name to flow with “Utah”
Should have been Black Diamonds. If they actually go with “Hockey Club” that will be a complete abomination.
I see what you did there.
I retain my strong preference for Utah Hockey Club and have the team do all sorts of one-off alts like MiLB teams do with different identities until something sticks in the local community. But barring that, I rather like Wasatch. I’m hugely unimpressed with Mammoth for two reasons that lead me to suspect it’s most likely to be the new team name: 1) It’s highly generic, and 2) There is no paleontological evidence from the Late Pleistocene that wooly mammoths lived anywhere near the modern site of Salt Lake City, nor anywhere in what is today Utah. It’s a Jazz/Lakers situation.
I kind of love the idea of being the Utah Hockey Club (still waiting for an NA team to do this, and was disappointed the Commies didn’t stay WFT), go with a Yeti as their mascot, and let “Yeti” be an unofficial fan nickname, like a a lot of the european soccer clubs do (the gunners, the blues, the citizens, the red devils, etc.)
Wasatch sounds like they’re trying to trick us with misspelled sasquatch.
Might as well keep UHC, because the other two are terrible.
Because UHC is mostly associated with united healthcare
Mammoths would be great. Mammoth is terrible.
They’re still just the Arizona Coyotes in drag, at least the uniforms were cool.
There are many folks I know who them as “Shiti”.
…who refer to them…
For the life of me, I can’t understand how anyone thinks “Utah Hockey Club” is a good name. I agree that the other names are horrible as well, but if they chose “Mammoths” (plural) that would be the most tolerable.
Just start over. Now they’re rushing it. These are terrible choices. I almost would like to see Wasatch win out because it’s so awful I think the league would step in.
Mammoths and have a bunch of pregnant sister wives as their mascot!
The 1890’s called and want their polygamy jokes back.
Someone on another site just posted: “90s commercials where dudes are calling each other saying
WAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSAAAAATTTTTCCCCCCCHHHH!!!” I love this. Maybe this is the best option, if only for the comedy.
How about Wasatch Hockey Club?
There’s already a brand for pretty much every word that might lend itself to branding at this point, but mammoth is a very popular ski resort in California, and they do have a mascot mammoth, and at least currently their branding is a lightish blue and black, so it doesn’t do UHC any favors to try to compete for recognition there. Although I tend to think ANY confusion in these matters is probably not as big a problem as the companies make it seem.
That said, hockey club is just as open as wasatch, should they want to use “yeti” (or Bigfoot or Sasquatch) imagery. Either name can basically be whatever image they want to use in terms of snow/winter/nature/etc, but wasatch doesn’t sound like it would make much sense with bees, should they want to go that way visually.
I personally like hockey club, and there is always room for at least one team in each league to go ultra minimalist, I do wonder if the team/fan base will want to change that once the current trend in favor of minimalist naming subsides (I’m not sure it’s a big a trend as all that anyway, but it is refreshing when compared to MiLBs naming trends).
Wasatch pays homage to the indigenous roots of Utah as well gives them a vast range of cultural, historical options for a logo. Also most sports teams have been named odd names. For example you have the Knicks, dodgers, packers, bills, Hoosiers, Hokies, lakers, clippers, Indiana state sycamores, Canucks, and many others that have stood the test of time. I think if done correctly Wasatch would be an excellent choice for Utah to represent their franchise and state.
We need to pass an ammendment giving women’s leagues exclusive use of singular nicknames. Utah Arches would’ve been such a no-brainer
Utah Arches would be great with the requirement that NOBs have to be vertically arched.
This whole thing has become a joke. Maybe they should just go with “Jazz” so two teams in the same city could share the name. Like the St. Louis Cardinals and New York Giants back in the day. That’s a joke, BTW.
@utahhockeyclub
Hey Utah hockey fans! We listened to your feedback and dug into all the Qualtrics data from last night’s survey. For the team name, it’s clear that Outlaws should be in the mix instead of Wasatch, so we’re swapping it out.
Surveys will continue at the arena Friday, Sunday and Tuesday for you to vote for the options Utah Mammoth, Utah Hockey Club, and Utah Outlaws.
Excited to see the votes roll in!
3:50 PM · Jan 30, 2025
I never thought Yeti/Yetis was going to work from the onset. All I could think of was the coolers and coffee mugs. Mammoth is ok but plural would be even better. Outlaws is too generic and seems to have a negative connotation. Plus, when I think of outlaws Utah isn’t exactly the first place I think of. I’m surprised Blizzard was off the table. Seems like a perfect fit for an ice hockey team. Back when Minnesota was awarded an expansion franchise I mocked up a uniform for them as the Blizzard. Too bad they didn’t take my suggestion! Utah Hockey Club isn’t very inspiring to me. My problem with Wasatch is I don’t know how to pronounce it. Way-satch? Wah-satch? Maybe they should just call themselves the Dirty Sodas and be done with it.
Outlaws is now a finalist. Huh? This is going from bad to worse. Think this is just a setup to retain UHC. Ugh.
Utah Johnny Utahs
Why not embrace the historic significance of the Bonneville Salt Flats next door: Utah Racers, Salt Lake Speeders, Utah Bonnies, or some such? Seems obvious to me.