• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by andrewharrington

  1. 14 hours ago, BigRed618 said:

    So I heard Auburn is deciding against changing their logo. Not gonna lie, I’m annoyed at this. The changes were so minor, and they made so much sense from a design and marketing standpoint, and yet people stubbornly resisted the change and the school caved into their demands. I understand that it’s  important to listen to their fans and give them what they want, but I just wonder if they even know why they didn’t want the new logo? Did they really not like it, or is this another case of people resisting change of any kind?

    Honestly, I think it’s a marketing issue more than anything, but I don’t think there’s an easy playbook for winning a situation like this.


    In today’s media snippet culture, everyone is competing for that same little shred of relevance every minute of every day, and teams just think/see “NEW!!!” and automatically move to, “Well, how do we roll this out to get our fans excited?!” without ever evaluating whether presenting to the public as new is even worth it.


    The fact is, not everything needs to be publicized in this way, and especially not if it’s just a clean-up for the purposes of better display across all media. If I saw a “New Logo!” headline and clicked the link to see a barely noticeable change like that, I’d be let down. It feels a little dishonest, like you’re trying to sell people on how important and exciting the new model is when it’s really just last year’s model with a new paint job. That doesn’t put people in a good mood, and you’ve basically set your audience up with a sour taste, and they respond by roasting you for wasting time and money on something so inconsequential to them.


    On the other hand, if you roll it out with no press release, someone somewhere is going to notice (because you have no notify vendors and licensees who put your logo on product), they’re going to put it up on Twitter, and then the narrative becomes, “They tried to sneak a new logo through like we wouldn’t notice! Get out the pitchforks!”


    It’s a lose-lose proposition these days. Great work doesn’t even guarantee success against mob mentality. It would be interesting to compare the different ways teams/companies have unveiled projects like this and see if that has a correlation to the success of the “new” logo.

    EDIT: Great insights from Clint up above as well.

  2. On 10/10/2019 at 7:36 PM, Brian in Boston said:

    ...However, there was a difference - no matter how subtly technical - between privateers, buccaneers and pirates.

    I’m confused...


    Why write several long paragraphs in apparent disagreement if your conclusion is the exact point we’re all trying to make?

  3. 15 minutes ago, Chawls said:


     How do you feel about the Bears all-white uniforms? Their stripes don’t match either. 

    The Bears’ stripes, though, are very clearly different; there’s sufficient contrast between the two patterns.


    These, on the other hand, are too similar and the end result looks unintentional, like they were ordering stock items and had to choose the closest one because they didn’t have the jersey that matched the helmet and pant pattern.

  4. 1 hour ago, duxrcool048 said:

    But it's ok for the Cowboys' color rush? People seem to really like those.


    The beautiful thing about “people” is that there are billions of individual ones who all have different preferences and opinions, so it would be more accurate to say *some* people like them.


    I’m not one of them.


    It’s a decent uniform, but if I had to guess, I would bet the reason most of those people like them is because they can’t stand the color crisis of the normal uniforms; a “good when compared to the alternative” scenario.

  5. On 10/8/2019 at 9:39 AM, GFB said:


    I stand corrected! That knowledge does makes some of the eccentricities easier to stomach and it makes the white pants that much more bizarre. Thanks for sharing.

    They are pretty historically accurate (besides the weird white pants), but I definitely think they looked better with the simpler stripe they wore when they first switched back:




    Nice hook to the helmet, and truly, in my opinion, a perfect uniform. I really like your single red stripe for the home uniform, but I’m wondering if it would work with their road jersey, given the lack of blue to balance all the red.

  6. 9 hours ago, Brian in Boston said:

    The reality, of course, is that what actually distinguished a buccaneer from a pirate is that the former - at least initially - carried a letter of marque from a government entity, granting him permission to attack and seize vessels from nations at war with the issuer. I say "initially" because it was not uncommon for buccaneers/corsairs/privateers who started out scrupulously adhering to the terms of their issued letter of marque to later engage in acts of piracy when it suited them. Likewise, it was not unheard of for governments, as a matter of convenience, to  issue letters of marque to known pirates when it suited the state's needs, thus adding an air of legitimacy to the actions of the former criminals.

    Further, those dubbed buccaneers were government-authorized privateers operating in the Caribbean.

    The point being, the notion that there were hard-and-fast styles of dress and behavior particular to buccaneers/corsairs/privateers versus pirates is nonsense.

    In any event, what seems apparent is that most of us agree that something needs to be done with the modern, football-playing Buccaneers' uniforms. They are a sartorial dumpster-fire.     

    What’s nonsense is pretending a privateer who had to report back to a commander or government official presented him or herself with the same level of dress and decorum (or lack thereof) as a career sea burglar. 🙄

  7. 8 hours ago, VancouverFan69 said:

    A Canuck is not an animal nor does it have anything to do with First Nations.

    Just so you’re aware, at the bottom of page 81 you said,

    “And how do you know Johnny Canuck is Caucasian? He could have been Native Canadian for all we know.”


    So, does the term “Canuck“ represent First Nations/Native Canadians or not? You can’t claim it both ways to support your point.


    Also, would you say a skate represents the name “Canucks?” A hockey rink? Or is Johnny the only proper representation of the name?


    I’ll take my answer off the air.

  8. 12 minutes ago, stumpygremlin said:


    The "Walking Deacon" instantly reminded me of Washburn University's Ichabod logo. They're close enough, I think, that Washburn could ask to have it changed. I say that based on Iowa vs. Southern Miss.

    Image result for washburn ichabods

    I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if they get a letter from Johnnie Walker, either.

  9. 4 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:


    I just want to see it in kelly/yellow/black for some controversy. 


    Also, if we're talking an alternate logo for the Leafs, I have a fantastic idea!




    Take the '67 leaf and combine it with the Toronto Arena's "T" insignia.

    From what I understand, anything involving a stand-alone T and leaf is legally dead on arrival because of the University of Toronto’s deep association with it.

  10. A little late, but...


    If you’re looking for tips that help you create, develop, and compose different styles, I would suggest grabbing some books and/or looking at work by people who do it at the highest level: Simon Walker, Jessica Hische, House Industries, Jon Contino, many more. Find those people online and ask them who their favorites are to build a bigger sphere of inspiration.


    If you’re primarily looking to improve the quality of your analog and/or digital drawing skills, try grabbing some images of different lettering pieces you like and recreate them. You’ll get a better feel for how to place points, pull handles, manipulate curves, etc., and it will force you to focus on the details.

    The Astute Graphics VectorScribe plugin is a tool that I find essential for building vector artwork, and especially lettering.


    Don’t hesitate to contact me if you have questions, either. I’m always willing to help as much as I can.

  11. 2 hours ago, the admiral said:

    His face can't have three colors, he looks splotchy-faced. 


    I thought maybe pewter could work as the outline color so that there's a little more of it, and that on a white helmet it would be a nice accent to call back to the old pewter helmets, but the problem then is that you have a logo where there's not very much of the team's predominant color (presuming jerseys would be creamsicle) and a whole lot of the accent colors (dark red, pewter). 




    Would this still work with orange jerseys/socks or does it demand maroon as the primary color?

    Truth be told, I think it works without the extra outline. The part that’s currently maroon already contains everything, and the extra pewter line doesn’t do anything productive; it just fills in details.


    I do agree that dark red is Washington’s thing, so I’d suggest either coloring it up like the old one (bright red base, orange skin, and white highlights), or using pewter as the base and then using orange and bright red for the face and details.

  12. spacer.png


    While the styling may have been a little dated and there was definite room for improvement, the old one was built on a solid idea that communicated something about the company without using any words, which is a really nice bonus to have in your identity.


    The new one doesn’t really communicate anything.

  13. 3 hours ago, -Akronite- said:

    I think a lot of these updates to Bruce are really well done. Unfortunately, Bruce sucks as a logo IMO. Odd dimensions and a bad concept IMO.

    Roughly square are odd dimensions, and a depiction of the actual team name is a bad concept? 


    30 minutes ago, Brian in Boston said:

    Yes, and the oversized plume in the source material looks every bit as foppishly asinine as the feather in the original "Bucco Bruce" logo. 


    As I said in my original post:

    "After all, one way to prevent your brand icon from being disparagingly compared to Errol Flynn is to refrain from embracing the costume design tropes of 1930s and '40s Hollywood swashbucklers when creating your logo. In other words, when it comes to piratical headwear, think less Captain Blood and more Pirates of the Caribbean."

    In other words, when you're creating the branding package for a professional gridiron football team, perhaps taking your sartorial cues from a 1930s cinematic swashbuckler isn't the route to go. Believe me, I'm not arguing that Johnny Depp actually possesses more machismo than Errol Flynn. Rather, I'm simply pointing out that the headwear Depp sports in his corsair flicks doesn't look as flamboyant as the chapeaux that Flynn and his co-stars most often wore in their pirate films.                  


    I think the distinction, though, is that a buccaneer was typically a government-sanctioned privateer and thus should be depicted with a little more grandeur and polish than a regular ol’ pirate, which I don’t necessarily disagree with.  It’s a tough subject to work with because nearly everyone’s understanding of pirate culture is built on tropes and stereotypes.


    I generally prefer the flag for them, though it does present its own challenges trying to keep the imagery distinct from the Raiders’ brand.

  14. On 10/2/2019 at 7:39 PM, McCarthy said:

    yeah the plume feather is weird and always was, especially the way it made their helmets look from the back,




    but when you're writing a love letter to Bucco Bruce you gotta use it to capture the same essence. 




    Here's how I'd helmet this thing, by the way


    This is looking nice. I think it’s a little too complex, especially when you start extend it to other merchandise and executions, but the style is working.


     The main thing I would look at is the eyes. He looks a bit crosseyed, but I can’t tell if it’s something as simple as moving both eye highlights to the same side instead of having them mirrored, or if the pupils themselves are positioned too far toward the center.

  15. 14 hours ago, WavePunter said:

    I wasn't commenting on the existence (or lack thereof) of shiny pants fabric.. I was simply stating that I don't recall any major manufacturer specifically commenting on the impossibility of creating shiny high-performance pants

    I think I meant to quote the post you quoted, but mistakenly quoted your response. Whoops. 🙂

  16. 2 hours ago, henburg said:

    What exactly is supposed to be bad about the Seahawks uniforms? They're visually balanced, consistent without being predictable, and use color very well. It's a unique, striking look and has ascended into the uniform set that defines the franchise IMO. 


    To me, the individual design elements aren’t very cohesive, and I think the end result is something that feels busier than it really is.


    I think the little native-inspired shape is a nice element, or at least idea to build on, but they’re using it as a subtle micro-pattern on the helmet and numbers (which is not an authentic way it would be used in native artwork), as an oversized, multi-colored sleeve graphic (which I find it a bit ugly and awkward both in terms of the scale and how it fills the space), and as a stripe on the pants (I think this is the best application, as well as the truest to the inspiration).


    That’s three different scales and three different color executions that just don’t pair that well together as a graphic package, then they’ve got green trim on only the front and back numbers, and none of these things pick up any design language from the logo to unite it.


    The numbers are aggressively unique (and I think they can be improved quite a bit), but they’re paired with generic nameplate lettering, and again, there’s nothing that links any of the uniform typography to the team branding, or vice versa.


    The whole collection just feels like a different person designed each piece, which is probably true to an extent, but I firmly believe the best way to design within an established identity is to figure out which pieces aren’t going anywhere and use those limitations as guidelines to create new elements that work *with* the existing elements; pulling everything together rather than breaking it apart.

  17. On 10/2/2019 at 11:37 AM, WavePunter said:

    I don't know for sure that they've ever officially claimed that.. I may be wrong, but I think it's just a trend


    Theoretically, a shiny fabric like that could (and probably does) exist, but of course, finish/appearance is only one characteristic, and it arguably has little effect on how a fabric might perform on a football field. Quantifiable performance characteristics like durability, stretch, structure, moisture transfer, temp regulation, weight, thickness, etc. are always going to take priority over shininess, and the fabric has to pass all those tests If you want to be confident using it on hundreds of thousands of apparel pieces.


    The biggest misconception with regard to textiles is people thinking there’s just a magic knitting or weaving machine that can churn out fabric that looks and does whatever you want, but it doesn’t work like that.


    A vast majority of the fabrics used in sportswear are sourced from textile mills, so if the ideal fabric that possesses all the characteristics you want doesn’t exist (i.e., you can’t find a mill that makes it, and will sell you the amount you want for a price that will allow you to sell the product for the price you want), then you’re basically out of luck. You have to compromise and choose another fabric or you have to develop a new one, which is a multi-year process, and even then, you still may have to compromise on something, aesthetically or functionally, if testing reveals it to be ill-suited for the activity.

  18. 2 hours ago, msubulldog said:

    Was that the only time in NFL history where the TV numbers were a different color than the regular numbers?


    The Bengals, Buccaneers, Jets, and Titans all currently have or have in the past had one or more primary jerseys with different colored TV numbers, and the Seahawks do it in a slightly different way (no trim on the TV numbers).


    The Cowboys’ old and current double star alternates as well.

  19. 2 hours ago, hawk36 said:



    One simple change to the existing royal/yellow (and the color rush) would be to use a single blue stripe on the yellow pants (basically what they have now on the white pants). Other than that, I'm not sure what I would change as changing would only be for change's sake, not for the better. 




    The pant stripe is the main thing. The simpler design does wonders.


    I’d also look at changing the shoulder insert to something simpler, like the one that USC or New England use, or even just a single loop like they use on their St. Louis jerseys. The way they have to seam together the horn, and subsequently how it gets stretched and pulled at every little stress point makes it look like butt. I’m especially intrigued by the Patriots’ shoulder insert because it’s thick in the front and tapers at the back like the helmet graphic, but because it’s not a full horn, it complements the helmet graphic rather than competing with it.


    I also wouldn’t be afraid to play with the numbers. Their classic style is unique to them, but it still has that “rec league” vibe and I think they could do better in pursuit of building a complete contemporary brand. Even something as simple as a single-color version of their St. Louis numbers would work well here.

  20. 4 hours ago, Bucfan56 said:


    I’d have to say you’re probably overthinking this whole thing just a bit 😂


    Complacency is how we get ourselves into messes like this in the first place, my friend.


    Like, even when it takes almost zero effort to get it right, we still can’t even be bothered, and that’s really sad.

  21. Again, it comes down to this:


    On one side of the scale is a shiny pair of pants.


    On the other side of the scale is a matte pair of pants that weigh half as much.


    Players will choose the latter 99% of the time, and that’s why football pants are the way they are.


    I wonder if there were people in the 1950s and 60s lamenting how the beautiful wool athletic uniforms were being replaced by “trendy” mesh, nylon, and shiny synthetics. 😂

  22. On 9/19/2019 at 12:15 PM, BringBackTheVet said:


    Disagree here.  The new rules allow for the sock to throw off the color balance of the uniform.


    Let's take the Eagles white on white for example.  If they were to wear socks that were black on top and white on the bottom, it would look good.  The black would tie into the pants stripe, and the white would balance out that black and tie the sock in with the rest of the uniform.


    If they wear all black socks (and let's face it, the majority of players are going to go solid color), then you have a uniform with a green helmet, solid white top and pants, and then out of nowhere, a solid black sock from knee to shoe.  That wouldn't look good at all to me.


    Given that they're going to wear a solid color anyway, I'd prefer all white, as it's clean, "fast", and maintains the balance of the uniform as much as possible given that there's no color there. 


    To be fair, the root of the problem in this situation is that the Eagles’ sock color of choice is black rather than green.

  23. 1 hour ago, hawk36 said:

    You'd think they've realized that they don't need to change a thing from their royal/yellow LA set. Very popular. Why risk coming up with a new look that isn't better. All that will happen is that a majority of the fans will still wear the old royal/yellow and continue to clamor for a return to those. 


    I’m sure they understand that, but I’m also sure that they understand it’s the easy way out. I don’t want to call it lazy, but it’s definitely expected and it’s not a very creative approach to the task at hand. I think going straight throwback is essentially settling for something imperfect; they’d simply be resting on their nostalgia laurels instead of actively trying to accomplish the goal of building the best brand possible. I also don’t think it accomplishes much in the way of revenue or media strategy since they’re already wearing that uniform a half dozen times every year.


    With that said, it’s obviously very easy for this process to go off the rails, and that’s the most frustrating fact to reconcile. Freshening up the Rams is, in theory, a very easy project simply because they have such great pieces to start with. You just have to know when to stop.


    Unfortunately, that’s easier said than done in the sportswear industry. 😂

  24. True, but that’s also a byproduct of a lazy colloquialism bending the inherent meaning, function, and/or symbolism in something.


    Some tridents are pitchforks, and some pitchforks are tridents, but they’re not necessarily synonyms. In these cases, the barbs are what make them fishing tridents (that’s what prevents the fish from sliding off the tines when you pull it out, whereas ag forks are typically designed to slide cleanly in and out of dirt or hay, with the spacing and number of tines varying depending on the intended function).

  25. 20 hours ago, DC in Da House w/o a Doubt said:


    And I even like Sparky’s pitchfork better than the actual pitchfork logo. The prongs look too curved for my taste, it’s never looked good to me as a stand-alone logo or on the helmet. 


    Truth be told, both logos depict a trident, not a pitchfork. They need to fix that before they do anything, because there really isn’t much ocean culture in Tempe.