2012-13 NBA Logo & Uniform changes

[SCL]

Didn't wanna start a new topic, but with Dwyane Wade's new shoe endorsement with Li-Ning, comes this new logo. I love it.

It's a "D", a "W", a "3". Can also spell out "D Wade 3".

Love logos like this.

Edit: Also not sure if this has been posted elsewhere

I gotta be honest...I'm not seeing it.

That's one overthought ugly logo.

[FooMasterX5]

Didn't wanna start a new topic, but with Dwyane Wade's new shoe endorsement with Li-Ning, comes this new logo. I love it.i

It's a "D", a "W", a "3". Can also spell out "D Wade 3".

Love logos like this.

Edit: Also not sure if this has been posted elsewhere

I gotta be honest...I'm not seeing it.

Yeah, I'm not seeing it either

[AcmePacker]

Didn't wanna start a new topic, but with Dwyane Wade's new shoe endorsement with Li-Ning, comes this new logo. I love it.i

It's a "D", a "W", a "3". Can also spell out "D Wade 3".

Love logos like this.

Edit: Also not sure if this has been posted elsewhere

I gotta be honest...I'm not seeing it.

Yeah, I'm not seeing it either

I'm thinking they were going for something like this...just my attempt haha, I like the idea, but the execution definitely is lacking a little bit. It's too much of a stretch to see everything unlike the Lebron logo that does the same thing.

[LEWJ]

You have to look at each quadrant seperately. The left one is a D or a 3. Right is an "E" Top a "W" and bottom an "A"

I like it haha...

Although I've heard comparisons to an "abstract anus"

Edit: AcmePacker beat me to it. I was gonna whip something up.

[CDixonDesign]

I'm thinking they were going for something like this...just my attempt haha, I like the idea, but the execution definitely is lacking a little bit. It's too much of a stretch to see everything unlike the Lebron logo that does the same thing.

Agreed. That might actually be the worst athlete logo i've laid eyes on.

Way to abstract, and if the first few people struggle to realize that THAT was the logo he was talking about, it needs scrapped and back to the drawing board. I honestly thought it was a "contact point" or something to that effect on the sole of the shoe...

[LEWJ]

I'm thinking they were going for something like this...just my attempt haha, I like the idea, but the execution definitely is lacking a little bit. It's too much of a stretch to see everything unlike the Lebron logo that does the same thing.

Agreed. That might actually be the worst athlete logo i've laid eyes on.

Way to abstract, and if the first few people struggle to realize that THAT was the logo he was talking about, it needs scrapped and back to the drawing board. I honestly thought it was a "contact point" or something to that effect on the sole of the shoe...

Good points

I think it's the idea I like. It is very abstract, and even took me a while to realize. Execution lacking, agreed.

[Conrad.]

Although I've heard comparisons to an "abstract anus"

ps: agreed on the above point about the execution lacking.

[AcmePacker]

I'm thinking they were going for something like this...just my attempt haha, I like the idea, but the execution definitely is lacking a little bit. It's too much of a stretch to see everything unlike the Lebron logo that does the same thing.

Agreed. That might actually be the worst athlete logo i've laid eyes on.

Way to abstract, and if the first few people struggle to realize that THAT was the logo he was talking about, it needs scrapped and back to the drawing board. I honestly thought it was a "contact point" or something to that effect on the sole of the shoe...

Good points

I think it's the idea I like. It is very abstract, and even took me a while to realize. Execution lacking, agreed.

Ya, it definitely feels like more a part of the shoe( ie. 'contact point') than an actual logo. This is kind of a downer for me because I thought their logo for Baron Davis line was pretty cool, a little cartoonish but it fit Davis well.

[mattb6]

i hate those li-ning shoes. shoulda stayed with jordan. tisk tisk

[TylerAdams417]

He took the money and signed with Li-Ning. Smart decision. His Jordan shoes were disgusting and sold poorly. Were basically going on sale after being out for less than two weeks.

In my estimation, Li-Ning had little time to prepare for signing Wade which is why his shoes suck.

I think, for the Way of the Wade 2, they'll hire a top notch designer and try to compete with the Durant's and Kobe's of the world, cause LeBron is untouchable in China.

Maybe a KD IV looking shoe that's higher cut and more support?

[jhans203]

Grantland had this story about the new NBA jerseys for this year. It's pretty fluffy with what we pretty much know, but still interesting and pretty entertaining.

[$teauA]

Does anybody else find the "BARCLAYS CENTER" blue typeface on the Nets new floor slightly annoying? I caught some of their nationally televised game on TNT last night and could not stop looking at it. The blue looks really awkward.

[CDixonDesign]

Does anybody else find the "BARCLAYS CENTER" blue typeface on the Nets new floor slightly annoying? I caught some of their nationally televised game on TNT last night and could not stop looking at it. The blue looks really awkward.

Then it's done exactly the job it was intended to do. We may not be happy, but Barclays is sitting on a high horse knowing you couldn't stop staring.

[keynote]

Speaking of Grantland, here's a nice article about the Nets' courtship of Brooklyn through their re-brand.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8522915/how-jay-z-brooklyn-nets-took-new-york-borough

It's more about the Nets' marketing strategy than it is about their logo/unis, but it does include a snapshot of all of the obligatory Brooklyn merch:

BTW, the black/white theme extends to the arena. I took my wife to the Nets/Wizards pre-season game (I'm a Wizards fan; she converted for the sake of the relationship but is regretting it), and the arena interior is startlingly dark in person. Very little splashes of color anywhere. All black seats, with dark brushed metal railings. Dark grey floors on the concourses, with (mostly) black walls. But I agree with the article's author, in that it's in the nicest basketball arena I've ever been in (of course, it's brand new, so there's that).

[The_Admiral]

That's boutique-website-calibre fawning right there.

[keynote]

That's boutique-website-calibre fawning right there.

I suppose. I know folks around here with an eye for graphic design have criticized the logo and wordmark. But as a Wizards fan who lives in Manhattan and works in Brooklyn, I can confirm that the Nets' marketing strategy has worked like *gangbusters* around here. Seemingly overnight, I see just as many Nets hats and tees as I see Knicks hats and tees - in both Brooklyn and in Manhattan. Sure, it's the "new hotness," but it's more than that.

Plenty of teams have moved to new geographies while keeping the team name. And plenty of teams have moved to new arenas within the same general geography/TV market, with or without a rebrand. The Nets' rebrand feels like it's been more successful than, say, when the Browns moved to Baltimore and rebranded as the Ravens. It's certainly more successful than when the Angels tried to rebrand to claim some of Los Angeles.

Logo geeks like us can complain about the kerning on the wordmark, but we shouldn't front: the marketing end of it has been an unmitigated success.

[SCL]

That's boutique-website-calibre fawning right there.

I believe it's a website without pretense;)

[The_Admiral]

That's boutique-website-calibre fawning right there.

I suppose. I know folks around here with an eye for graphic design have criticized the logo and wordmark. But as a Wizards fan who lives in Manhattan and works in Brooklyn, I can confirm that the Nets' marketing strategy has worked like *gangbusters* around here. Seemingly overnight, I see just as many Nets hats and tees as I see Knicks hats and tees - in both Brooklyn and in Manhattan. Sure, it's the "new hotness," but it's more than that.

Plenty of teams have moved to new geographies while keeping the team name. And plenty of teams have moved to new arenas within the same general geography/TV market, with or without a rebrand. The Nets' rebrand feels like it's been more successful than, say, when the Browns moved to Baltimore and rebranded as the Ravens. It's certainly more successful than when the Angels tried to rebrand to claim some of Los Angeles.

Logo geeks like us can complain about the kerning on the wordmark, but we shouldn't front: the marketing end of it has been an unmitigated success.

I don't care about so much about the logos or kerning (which is all pretty bad). My gripe has always been with the commodification of Brooklyn as this magical crucible of grit and individuality and community, which is peddled not so much to longtime Brooklynites themselves but to those who are privileged enough to spend their twenties on an extended field trip wherein they study poetry readings and black people before realizing they want to start families and not have their children educated in city schools. I'd like to think that real Brooklyn denizens are a little too savvy to be taken for a ride like this, thinking that the freaking Dodgers have been reborn because a team no one liked moved down the street, propped up white-people-darling Jay-Z as a pretend owner, and started selling "artisan sushi" or whatever. Probably awesome for the Lena Dunham crowd, though!

Something happened in my life where I turned into illwauk. Who knew.

[keynote]

That's boutique-website-calibre fawning right there.

I suppose. I know folks around here with an eye for graphic design have criticized the logo and wordmark. But as a Wizards fan who lives in Manhattan and works in Brooklyn, I can confirm that the Nets' marketing strategy has worked like *gangbusters* around here. Seemingly overnight, I see just as many Nets hats and tees as I see Knicks hats and tees - in both Brooklyn and in Manhattan. Sure, it's the "new hotness," but it's more than that.

Plenty of teams have moved to new geographies while keeping the team name. And plenty of teams have moved to new arenas within the same general geography/TV market, with or without a rebrand. The Nets' rebrand feels like it's been more successful than, say, when the Browns moved to Baltimore and rebranded as the Ravens. It's certainly more successful than when the Angels tried to rebrand to claim some of Los Angeles.

Logo geeks like us can complain about the kerning on the wordmark, but we shouldn't front: the marketing end of it has been an unmitigated success.

I don't care about so much about the logos or kerning (which is all pretty bad). My gripe has always been with the commodification of Brooklyn as this magical crucible of grit and individuality and community, which is peddled not so much to longtime Brooklynites themselves but to those who are privileged enough to spend their twenties on an extended field trip wherein they study poetry readings and black people before realizing they want to start families and not have their children educated in city schools. I'd like to think that real Brooklyn denizens are a little too savvy to be taken for a ride like this, thinking that the freaking Dodgers have been reborn because a team no one liked moved down the street, propped up white-people-darling Jay-Z as a pretend owner, and started selling "artisan sushi" or whatever. Probably awesome for the Lena Dunham crowd, though!

Something happened in my life where I turned into illwauk. Who knew.

I hear you. The Nets have wrapped themselves in their new home's perceived identity/brand far more than other franchises have. But that's kind of the point of the article. Teams over time sometimes adopt (or help to reinforce) their host city's identity. Blue collar cities like Detroit and Pittsburgh host teams with blue collar brands like the Pistons and the Steelers; flashy cities like NYC, Miami, and LA host teams with flashy brands like the Yankees, Heat, and Lakers.

Other teams could have tried to capture/capitalize on their host city's cachet - but either they haven't, or they've failed. One could argue that the GS Warriors tried to do a similar thing with their recent rebrand (e.g., reference the classic "The City" unis, reverting to old school color scheme, etc.), but the overall marketing push, to my knowledge, hasn't been as effective. They have a loyal fan base, but I don't know if their fan base thinks of the Warriors as cool, or uniquely Oakland/San Francisco/wherever. Perhaps their attempt to rep the entire region works to their detriment in this sense - Oakland and SF have vastly different identities).

In any event, I see tons of Brooklynites - all ages and types - rocking the new gear. Whereas most teams tend to target youth and die-hard fans with their merch, the Nets *are* going after the post-collegiate hipster tourist you've described above. Most of the hip hop references in the merch are classic hip hop - Beastie Boys, Run DMC, and older Jay-Z. That stuff intentionally skews older (I *wish* the Wizards would release some Chuck Brown/go-go inspired merch, but I digress). My wife is a tenuous Wizards fan (for my sake, basically), but she was openly lusting for the womens' Nets gear we saw at the Barclays Center. The Nets have merch that a woman in her 20s would wear; the Wizards (and most teams, frankly - even the big market teams like the Heat and Knicks) do not.

That's to the Nets' credit. They didn't create the Brooklyn aesthetic you've decried above; they've smartly exploited it.

[The_Admiral]

I hear you. The Nets have wrapped themselves in their new home's perceived identity/brand far more than other franchises have. But that's kind of the point of the article. Teams over time sometimes adopt (or help to reinforce) their host city's identity. Blue collar cities like Detroit and Pittsburgh host teams with blue collar brands like the Pistons and the Steelers; flashy cities like NYC, Miami, and LA host teams with flashy brands like the Yankees, Heat, and Lakers.

Well, the Yankees are happily the opposite of flashy, but now that that's out of the way,

Yes, the point of the article is that the Nets have couched themselves in their city's "brand." What the article misses or willfully omits is that their doing so is intrinsically pernicious in a way that, say, the Steelers being "blue-collar" isn't.