Sharks Switch to Stealth Mode with New Alternate Uniform

[SFGiants58]

23 hours ago, Gothamite said:

Ugh, that logo.  What possessed the Sharks to add all those terrible outlines?

 

 

“We have this magic tool called Adobe Illustrator. Let’s push it to its limits!” You can sum up a lot of 1990s design this way.

[habsfan1]

On 9/13/2018 at 8:12 PM, Gothamite said:

Ugh, that logo.  What possessed the Sharks to add all those terrible outlines?

 

Definitely. Not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, but six outlines (including the white one) is something that could never, ever fly in 2018.

 

The old logo is a stronger design overall. I see the appeal & why it still gets a lotta love. But them outlines, though...

[habsfan1]

They current Shark head should be Photoshopped onto the the 90s crest, tone down on the outlines, and that would be something close to the perfect logo. I could live with the orange eyeball & hockey stick, if they keep it for just the logo or whatnot...

 

 

 

 

[Morgan33]

I'll never understand what the Sharks have against bringing back grey trim.  Not only did it look far superior to the orange it made perfect sense for the teams namesake.

[FiddySicks]

A few things: 

 

1) The current Sharks primary logo is, and always has been, garbage. It’s a MASSIVE downgrade from the original logo, and that logo wasn’t really all that good anyway. 

 

2) This is an upgrade simply because it ditches that god awful shade of “orange” they use. 

[Prince Harry]

The original Sharks logo is confusing as hell to look at. The update was a very welcome change. 

 

 

[SFGiants58]

Both logos the team has used are garbage. As I keep saying, I wouldn’t mind the team tossing their entire brand in the trash bin, save for teal sweaters and the name. All the rest:

 

[Gothamite]

Nothing compares to the full-body shark.  This should be on the front of all their sweaters. 

 

 

It’s got a good balance, more or less square enough to look good there. 

 

[IceCap]

4 hours ago, Gothamite said:

Nothing compares to the full-body shark.  This should be on the front of all their sweaters. 

 

 

It’s got a good balance, more or less square enough to look good there. 

 

The fact that there’s still no hockey tape on the knob of that stick annoys me. 

[Cosmic]

20 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

The fact that there’s still no hockey tape on the knob of that stick annoys me. 

Orange tape.

[Gothamite]

4 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

The fact that there’s still no hockey tape on the knob of that stick annoys me. 

 

Agreed.  And it’s ironic - the designer screwed up all the tape on the first logo because he didn’t know any better.  Then when given a chance to later design an update to his original, he fixes the tape on the blade, but goofs up the knob. 

[greyraven8]

On 9/16/2018 at 1:29 PM, Ice_Cap said:

The fact that there’s still no hockey tape on the knob of that stick annoys me. 

 

The fact that there is still a broken hockey stick in the logo annoys me a bit.

 

At the top level of hockey you shouldn't need hockey equipment in your logo and certainly not broken stuff (if that's the shark's stick he's going to be at a disadvantage, if it's not I'm sure the ref wouldn't miss that penalty).  There can be exceptions but think the stick detracts more than adds to the logo.

 

[IceCap]

The Sharks are a bit frustrating logo-wise. I love the original logo, despite being deeply flawed. It was “the” cool logo when I was a kid. I even had a Sharks sweater and cap that are both long gone. It was just the cool thing for kids to have. 

 

I’m usually not that blinded by 90s nostalgia (I’ll readily admit the Raptors looked like garbage until their first redesign) but that original Sharks logo still has a place in my heart. 

 

The new logo fixed a lot, but not enough (the above-mentioned knob on the stick). The curved triangle, unneeded addition of organge trim, and slightly-to-anime stylings rub me the wrong way. 

 

I’ve seen two decent fixes. One that took the original logo and fixed the tape and fin issues. The other that took the current logo but placed it in a standard triangle. 

 

I think the full-body shark Goth posted is the strongest mark they have, but it still needs to be tweaked.  

[The_Admiral]

55 minutes ago, greyraven8 said:

At the top level of hockey you shouldn't need hockey equipment in your logo and certainly not broken stuff (if that's the shark's stick he's going to be at a disadvantage, if it's not I'm sure the ref wouldn't miss that penalty).  There can be exceptions but think the stick detracts more than adds to the logo.

 

1) The Skating Penguin would look silly without skates and a stick, or worse yet, be replaced by the logo for a mid-sized industrial refrigeration firm

 

2) It's the shark's opponent's stick, and while we know there's two minutes for slashing, there's nothing in the rulebook about two minutes for chomping. 

[WSU151]

1 hour ago, greyraven8 said:

 

At the top level of hockey you shouldn't need hockey equipment in your logo and certainly not broken stuff (if that's the shark's stick he's going to be at a disadvantage, if it's not I'm sure the ref wouldn't miss that penalty).  There can be exceptions but think the stick detracts more than adds to the logo.

 

 

The Islanders' "classic" look prominently features a hockey stick (and puck). 

[Chromatic]

20 minutes ago, the admiral said:

 

1) The Skating Penguin would look silly without skates and a stick, or worse yet, be replaced by the logo for a mid-sized industrial refrigeration firm

 

2) It's the shark's opponent's stick, and while we know there's two minutes for slashing, there's nothing in the rulebook about two minutes for chomping. 

 

5 minutes ago, WSU151 said:

 

The Islanders' "classic" look prominently features a hockey stick (and puck). 

There are plenty of logos that incorporate equipment that either 

A) Look great (Penguins)

or

B ) Dont but are historic (Islanders)

 

Either way you don’t need to have equipment in your logo but it isn’t an inherently bad thing either. It’s very much a case-by-case thing.

 

[greyraven8]

On 9/18/2018 at 4:15 PM, WSU151 said:

 

The Islanders' "classic" look prominently features a hockey stick (and puck). 

 

While I'm used to it to a great degree, when judged on its own in isolation the Islanders "classic" look logo (if you mean their original logo) largely is a piece of land that looks like it belongs on a Rorschach test.  If you mean the NY stick that was a third until recently that's a whole other problem.

 

The exceptions that I was thinking of that work are the Coyotes original and Penguins early one - both have full body illustrated character skating and holding stick.

 

For the Sharks in particular, if you're going towards a more realistic looking shark, the cartoonish snapping a stick in half detracts from that.  If they end up ever going with the full body shark as a primary look, I'd strongly suggest they lose the broken stick.  Just my opinion; I'm sure many or most disagree.

[Gothamite]

3 minutes ago, greyraven8 said:

While I'm used to it to a great degree, when judged on its own in isolation the Islanders "classic" look logo (if you mean their original logo) largely is a piece of land that looks like it belongs on a Rorschach test.

 

I think anyone in the area instantly recognizes Long Island. 

 

 

It’s so recognizable, in fact, that most people don’t have to look at it closely.  Which is why many are surprised to learn/realize that Queens and Brooklyn are left off. 

[Placebo]

On 9/13/2018 at 7:12 PM, Gothamite said:

Ugh, that logo.  What possessed the Sharks to add all those terrible outlines?

Plus it has always bothered me that the blade tape does not go all the way around

[greyraven8]

"I think anyone in the area instantly recognizes Long Island. 

 

It’s so recognizable, in fact, that most people don’t have to look at it closely.  Which is why many are surprised to learn/realize that Queens and Brooklyn are left off."

 

 

 

 

Not sure if most non-hockey people well outside of New York area could pick it out of lineup.  In any case it's an "ugly sister" to the shape of Arizona (or even Minnesota)

 

Some land shapes work better than others.