Waffles

My first thought was of Zephyr's X-Line collection from the early 2000s that made angry, 'roided up versions of college mascots:

I don't think it's too great, but it's infinitely better than the hot mess they've been using for way too long: Flames and a early 2000s bank logo swoosh!

Actress Cynthia Nixon has launched her campaign for Governor of New York, with this logo: Probably a smart move to emphasize her first name, rather than her last...

I stumbled on these two styles of NBA hats made by '47 Brand, most of which have logos I hadn't seen before (and don't seem to appear on most teams' pages on the mothership): https://www.lids.com/47-brand/style_nba-mash-up-47-mvp-cap?page=1 https://www.lids.com/47-brand/style_nba-mash-up-47-clean-up-cap I'm wondering where these logos came from - the league, the teams, the manufacturer? Are they non-canonical? Some of them I kind of like, and they all seem to at least be executed well and with an understanding of the team's overall branding.

I'm a Charlottean by marriage, and I've become a fan of the crown over the years I've been visiting. At first, I thought it was kind of dated and corporate, like Uptown Charlotte. But it really grew on me (along with the city) and I appreciate it as an ahead-of-its time, iconic work of urban branding that has and will continue to have longevity. The tourism board rebranded last year, and incorporated a version of the crown into the logos: I think they could definitely do more with the flag - something like the above to give it some contrast or dimension, or a pattern or design added to it would maybe would loosen it up a bit. I totally agree with you about the color of the flag. Charlotteans seem to identify with teal from rooting for the Hornets and Panthers, so maybe this is a tail wags the dog scenario where the city adopts the sports team colors.

This runs up against the problem of using national colors as stripes; you end up evoking the Iranian flag (or North Rhine-Westphalia if you want to get obscure) on the Mexican jersey.

I'd only been following this from the Brooklyn side so I didn't know about his back history with the fans from even before the move. It's hard to blame them for being leery of him after that. I'm still split on whether a perfect union of the Islanders and Brooklyn was ever possible even if some of the decisions had been handled differently. Certainly they messed things up, but it's hard to envision a realistic scenario where it's 2018 and Islanders fans feel at home and Brooklynites are at least beginning to identify with them.

I agree that a portion of the blame should fall on him, and I wish I'd touched on that in my post, as well has the way he phrased his comments to make it seem like it all just passively happened. I'm not sure how much of it was a fundamentally untenable situation with no good solutions, or how much of it was about the strategy he oversaw and executed, but he does need to own it, if for no other reason than that's what people with power/responsibility should do when things go bad. I hope I didn't give off the impression that I resented the Long Island fans at the games or the fun they were having. I've enjoyed the environment they create at the games I've gone to (except on weeknights when people don't make the trip in from the Island and the arena is DEAD except for pockets of visiting fans). For me, it just felt being dropped into a party where I didn't know anyone, and everyone else had been friends for decades and had their own language and common history that was foreign to me. It was fun, but in the way it's fun to go to a game in another city you're visiting. I don't know if pushing Brooklyn harder would've been a more successful strategy for them, and I don't know what it would have even entailed. Who knows if anything would have truly alienated a significant number of Long Island fans, or if they'd eventually get used to and go along with it because it was better than Quebec/Kansas Cities. It takes a long time to build a new fanbase anyway, even if they weren't going up against the the Rangers' generational equity. And very significant portion of the Barclays is not a good place to watch hockey, and that also has to come into play. I also agree about his snark toward the new arena, which gratuitously unconstructive and and unnecessary.

Staying in the tri-state area, Brett Yomark has some thoughts on his soon-to-be-former tenant: https://www.newsday.com/sports/hockey/islanders/islanders-brett-yormark-1.16958293 I can see his point, but I don't see the point in actually saying it out loud, especially with an indefinite number of years remaining in their relationship. It was an awkward arrangement from the beginning, even without factoring in the Barclays Center's massive deficiencies as a hockey venue. Yomark's team took over marketing for the Isles, and had to preemptively declare that they wouldn’t be adding Brooklyn to the depiction of Long Island on the logo, and then abandon the new goal horn they developed as an homage to the LIRR linking Brooklyn to the rest of the island. From that point on, it doesn’t seem like they were ever able to figure out how to change the game experience or the way the team was packaged to attract new fans from Brooklyn while still placating the Long Island fans who loudly demanded continuity with their traditions and culture. Contrast that with the Nets, where the same marketing department felt almost no need to preserve any continuity with their history and fans in New Jersey and got to work from a nearly clean slate to build their identity and connect with their new fanbase. You could feel it at the arena. I went to a few Islanders games as a very, very, very casual hockey fan curious to check out the team playing in my borough, and they felt like total Long Island invasions. The culture and traditions of the fans seemed fun and it was a decent environment, but it was like an impenetrable inside joke we weren’t a part of, and there wasn’t a lot for me to connect to or identify with. It seems like the only thing that worked from this shotgun wedding were the black alternate jerseys, which you see a lot of fans wearing at the games. I wonder what would have happened if Yomark had been able to make whatever changes he thought could get more Brooklyn/NYC fans. Would the Long Islanders have grumbled for a while, then gotten used to it? Or was this whole thing doomed from the start, regardless?

When the unified Korean team enters the Olympic opening ceremony, they'll be using the Korean Peninsula flag, as they did in 2006:

Agreed - it also makes it easier local fans who might be put off by the parent club (particularly in the case of a polarizing team like the Yankees) to buy in to their hometown team. A Tampa resident who wants a local minor league team to pull for, but isn't fond of the Yankees, might have trouble getting on board with a team that looks like this:

The Tampa Yankees are now the Tampa Tarpons: A great step toward making the Yankees farm system more interesting, identity-wise.

Is there some kind of FIFA regulation that all crests have to have some kind of English on it (or at least have something spelled out in the Latin alphabet)? It's weird to me when a crest or uniform representing a country and its people doesn't have any representation of the language that at least a plurality of its people use on an everyday basis, and is part of their country's culture, history, and heritage (or has it subordinate to another language like Israel's crest). That said, I like the improvements to the rendering of the crow, and I'd love to see them use it without the shield the way Liverpool does.

https://vtnews.vt.edu/articles/2017/09/vtnews-intro-main.html Virginia Tech has introduced its new school logo, which is very much inspired by the athletic logo but also is not replacing the similar athletic logo: Brand New has a good breakdown here: https://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/new_logo_for_virginia_tech.php

GLeague Icon (are they doing that too?) jerseys revealed: