Utah State new logo

[DustDevil61]

Here's a little update: I've noticed a vehicle and a few things on the athletics website website showing some kind of copper text. In the linked threads at the start of this thread, someone mentions the possibility of some copper being used.

Maybe I'm reading into this a little too much, as it could be a wordmark/logo only color, but if Nike can keep it to a minimum (i.e., trim) use it well with the new color scheme, it could really turn out to be an awesome, unique look for the Aggies. That is, should it find a place on the uniforms.

I'll see what the people at the apparel store say about it and update.

[DustDevil61]

The official announcement of the April 28th unveiling is now up. Not much here, but if this is the gray that's coming to USU, I'm fine with it--it contrasts well with the white (something light gray doesn't do at all) and the Navy Blue.*

*After mentally comparing it with the Aggie Blue elsewhere on the page.

[andrewharrington]

Didn't Utah State already redesign their logo a number of years ago?

Seems to me Ben Barnes (from these boards) designed some logos for them a few years back.

He did. If I remember right the school liked his designs (and personally I feel that his designs are better than what was done by Nike) but the cost to implement the new logo was too great. Nike is paying the bill this time around so you gotta take what they give.

I liked his

Logos that spell out the full school or team name and include a graphic of the mascot feel very "minor league" to me. I know Utah State isn't exactly a power athletically, but still, fake it 'till you make it.

I think at least 1/3 of all D1 schools have a logo that incorporates a mascot and name. I'd much rather see that than something boring like Syracuse, Nebraska, or Tennessee which just include a generic letter.

Coincidentally, those are three of the better visual brands in college football. I'm glad you don't call the shots.

Huh? 2 of them are terrible. But I guess since 2 are adidas you have to stick up for them.

Regardless of your personal preference, the Nebraska N, the Tennessee T and the Syracuse S are three of the most well-known, successful and popular identities in college sports. There are plenty of Nike schools that have great brands, too. It's pretty ignorant to assume I'd prefer a school's brand just because it's an adidas school. Fact is, there aren't a lot of schools using modern, mascot-type logos that are generally regarded as having great visual brands.

[vmd9]

Didn't Utah State already redesign their logo a number of years ago?

Seems to me Ben Barnes (from these boards) designed some logos for them a few years back.

He did. If I remember right the school liked his designs (and personally I feel that his designs are better than what was done by Nike) but the cost to implement the new logo was too great. Nike is paying the bill this time around so you gotta take what they give.

I liked his

Logos that spell out the full school or team name and include a graphic of the mascot feel very "minor league" to me. I know Utah State isn't exactly a power athletically, but still, fake it 'till you make it.

I think at least 1/3 of all D1 schools have a logo that incorporates a mascot and name. I'd much rather see that than something boring like Syracuse, Nebraska, or Tennessee which just include a generic letter.

Coincidentally, those are three of the better visual brands in college football. I'm glad you don't call the shots.

Huh? 2 of them are terrible. But I guess since 2 are adidas you have to stick up for them.

Regardless of your personal preference, the Nebraska N, the Tennessee T and the Syracuse S are three of the most well-known, successful and popular identities in college sports. There are plenty of Nike schools that have great brands, too. It's pretty ignorant to assume I'd prefer a school's brand just because it's an adidas school. Fact is, there aren't a lot of schools using modern, mascot-type logos that are generally regarded as having great visual brands.

They are generic. Take the Syracuse S for example. Change the orange to red, you have Stanford. Change it to blue, Penn State. Change it to green, Mich State.

[Mingjai]

Fact is, there aren't a lot of schools using modern, mascot-type logos that are generally regarded as having great visual brands.

Boise State, but they need to get rid of the wordmark on their helmets. Missouri's tiger head is relatively modern.

But you're right, the most iconic mascot logos I can think of have been in use (with minor tweaks) for a long time: Texas, USC, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Florida State, SMU, and Wyoming.

[DustDevil61]

Here's the video...looks like it might entail more than just the football team (at the very end):

If so, then the probability the basketball team gets a gray alternate has jumped almost to 1.

[usuaggiefan]

It is a complete rebrand for all athletics. I've seen all of the logos now and I have to say that I am quite disappointed in the secondary bull logo. It looks like really cheap clipart. I'm hoping that the uniforms look really nice. The final draft of the new U State logo looks really nice. It's simple but works really well I think.

[cshookemHORNS]

It is a complete rebrand for all athletics. I've seen all of the logos now and I have to say that I am quite disappointed in the secondary bull logo. It looks like really cheap clipart. I'm hoping that the uniforms look really nice. The final draft of the new U State logo looks really nice. It's simple but works really well I think.

When will these be unvield?

[usuaggiefan]

It is a complete rebrand for all athletics. I've seen all of the logos now and I have to say that I am quite disappointed in the secondary bull logo. It looks like really cheap clipart. I'm hoping that the uniforms look really nice. The final draft of the new U State logo looks really nice. It's simple but works really well I think.

When will these be unvield?

April 28 at 12:30 Mountain Time is the press conference. It will be streamed live at http://www.utahstateaggies.com/.

[Ry]

[andrewharrington]

Didn't Utah State already redesign their logo a number of years ago?

Seems to me Ben Barnes (from these boards) designed some logos for them a few years back.

He did. If I remember right the school liked his designs (and personally I feel that his designs are better than what was done by Nike) but the cost to implement the new logo was too great. Nike is paying the bill this time around so you gotta take what they give.

I liked his

Logos that spell out the full school or team name and include a graphic of the mascot feel very "minor league" to me. I know Utah State isn't exactly a power athletically, but still, fake it 'till you make it.

I think at least 1/3 of all D1 schools have a logo that incorporates a mascot and name. I'd much rather see that than something boring like Syracuse, Nebraska, or Tennessee which just include a generic letter.

Coincidentally, those are three of the better visual brands in college football. I'm glad you don't call the shots.

Huh? 2 of them are terrible. But I guess since 2 are adidas you have to stick up for them.

Regardless of your personal preference, the Nebraska N, the Tennessee T and the Syracuse S are three of the most well-known, successful and popular identities in college sports. There are plenty of Nike schools that have great brands, too. It's pretty ignorant to assume I'd prefer a school's brand just because it's an adidas school. Fact is, there aren't a lot of schools using modern, mascot-type logos that are generally regarded as having great visual brands.

They are generic. Take the Syracuse S for example. Change the orange to red, you have Stanford. Change it to blue, Penn State. Change it to green, Mich State.

Your point isn't exactly relevant. It's not red, it's not blue and it's not green. It's orange, and it's quite well known and successful as the cornerstone of Syracuse's brand. I didn't say it was unique. I said it was one of the most well-known and most successful brands in collegiate athletics.

[Krona]

The late 90s "tough cow" looks an awful lot like George Lucas.

[GriffinM6]

The late 90s "tough cow" looks an awful lot like George Lucas.

The 3 up at the top are the best. I especially love the one from 1973-1990

[drdougfresh]

They are generic. Take the Syracuse S for example. Change the orange to red, you have Stanford. Change it to blue, Penn State. Change it to green, Mich State.

Your point isn't exactly relevant. It's not red, it's not blue and it's not green. It's orange, and it's quite well known and successful as the cornerstone of Syracuse's brand. I didn't say it was unique. I said it was one of the most well-known and most successful brands in collegiate athletics.

Exactly. A generic logo and a successful brand are not mutually exclusive.

[DustDevil61]

Apparently, the Brent Barnes logo has been mentioned in The Upset Blog, but it doesn't look likely to be the case. Comments at the bottom seem to flat-out deny that's the case. Another thing to note is that Charles Denson, President of Nike Brand, is a Utah State graduate and seems to be in the loop on the design.

Four days to go...I'm getting pretty excited. (And a little nervous)

[gdu]

Apparently, the Brent Barnes logo has been mentioned in The Upset Blog, but it doesn't look likely to be the case. Comments at the bottom seem to flat-out deny that's the case. Another thing to note is that Charles Denson, President of Nike Brand, is a Utah State graduate and seems to be in the loop on the design.

Four days to go...I'm getting pretty excited. (And a little nervous)

Ben Barnes was not the designer of the new Utah State logo.

[29texan]

The late 90s "tough cow" looks an awful lot like George Lucas.

The 3 up at the top are the best. I especially love the one from 1973-1990

.... eh.

[scottysprings]

I love that 64-67 logo. With some refinement that would make a great logo.

[Foxxtrot44]

I love that 64-67 logo. With some refinement that would make a great logo.

It's a good thing Utah conquered parts of southern Wyoming in 1967; so that USU could straighten out that state border by '68...

[usuaggiefan]

The 1992-1994 logo isn't 100% accurate. In all honesty, the top 3 and the one in the very center are all reproductions that I created off of poor quality images scanned in from old media guides and off of photos of old uniforms. I had decent copies of the top 3 logos but the 1992-1994 one I had to get off of a photo of a uniform on eBay (the seller wanted way too much to actually purchase it). I'm completely shocked that the new logos haven't leaked yet. They are all technically available to the public right now.