gosioux76

19 minutes ago, Maroon said:

Well this link certainly provided something I hadn't seen yet: https://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/new_name_and_logo_for_st_louis_city_sc.php

 

 

Color that secondary mark and slap it on the jersey. 

8 minutes ago, Digby said:

 

Yeah, I mean, a regular cliche of this board is that new brands take a long time. Seems unlikely that the decisions at the level of colors and fonts were still being picked less than a month ago for a new MLS team. And, again -- neither team is pulling from a well of originality on this one.

 

(incidentally I'm digging into this MPLS City stuff and it's actually cool! 7-a-side youth leagues in a community-run club, different brands for different pieces of the city, it's like a concepts thread come to life.)

Absolutely. I can't imagine MLS4TheLou putting the brakes on their unveiling in mid-July because they just saw the branding for a Minneapolis youth club and decide to start over. 

And you're right on MPLC City -- it's a really interesting organization. Reminds me a lot of nearby neighbor St. Paul Saints and the success they've had in building up an independent brand. 

27 minutes ago, Digby said:

 

That's a much sharper kit than that cut-rate Minnesota United kit I posted earlier. That said, these guys have their regular brand, that fauxback brand (which was nice!), and now this hyper-modern youth team brand. That cheapens the cries of "we're getting ripped off" to me. Still not great on STL's part, you'd think they would have checked on these things, but in fairness they've been telegraphing interest in a pinkish red for quite a while.

Or they saw these things and liked them so much they decided to just rip them off and hope nobody noticed. 

UPDATE

Alternate theory: this is an expert troll job by Minneapolis City. 

Based on their Twitter feed, this Futures team branding -- which includes four separate teams with four separate color palettes -- was released in mid-July, at almost the exact same time St. Louis City SC had initially planned their brand launch. (The original event announcement was for July 15, based upon a mobile-site page that has since been updated.)

The ownership group in St. Louis have said this brand has been ready to go for months. If that's true, who's to say Minneapolis City isn't a client of one of the 20 designers used by St. Louis, received a glimpse of the St. Louis branding, and thought, "that looks pretty nice for one of our youth sides." 

Not sure I even believe that scenario. Just pointing out that the timelines here would make it seem more complicated than it otherwise appears to be. 

Admittedly overthinking this now, but I wonder if the red strip on the right of the crest might be a tease to an eventual jersey design. 
 

I could see a vertical stripe going up the left third of the jersey, over the crest, in much the same way.

3 minutes ago, GFB said:

The colors are great; like the Cardinals, only bolder.

 

Everything else is not my cup of tea. I have a sinking feeling that the crest is going to look terribly dated in 5 years when trends change and rotated text goes out of style. 

Rotated text is in style?

18 minutes ago, UnclearInitial said:

Magenta and yellow clash pretty terribly, no? There’s definitely the potential for good kits with magenta and navy (other than the cited Cerezo Osaka, the Hamburg away Kit  a few years back was similar). But I can’t think of magenta and yellow looking pleasant next to each other in any context. This might have been the one time a straight red/blue

color scheme would have been preferable.

 

The crest is a mess, the arch isn’t easily recognizable, the rivers don’t really read as such and the floating SC with the sideways script is just terrible. The name is aggressively boring but that has become par for the course for MLS. A problem exacerbated by the City/county  divide. They need to stop trying to please everyone by going the least daring option, personally if they weren’t going to use an Olympic name I thought Gateway FC with no city name would have been great. My hope is that when inevitably change their crest they‘ll also adopt a new name.

I agree, how they employ yellow will be interesting. 

They used yellow and the red/magenta color for all of their social media videos in the run-up to the announcement, and I didn't see any issues with it. You can see it on display on the background of the team's Twitter home page. 

I said it before, I'm not in love with the name. I hate the sideways type on the crest. And I'm genuinely impressed by the colors. 

But even if the name is a bit pedestrian, and the other elements have flaws, I still applaud the St. Louis group for at least attempting something interesting with the crest and colors. I found the entire Charlotte reveal to be bland and unsurprising, and I'd much rather see a brand take risks, even if they miss. 

Watching the livestream, the blue almost looks dark purple next to this shade of red. 

8 minutes ago, WideRight said:

What exactly are the lines "below" the arch supposed to be?  Is that the confluence of the 2 rivers?  Looks more like fields of grain. 

 

Yes, I believe so. 

And the red appears to be the same magenta/deep pink-ish hue that they've been using in recent social media posts. Except there it was paired with yellow, which I wouldn't be surprised to see appear as a tertiary color. 

I love the colors. I love that they found a unique shade of red and blue that's unique to the league and fits in nicely with the city's other sports teams.

But that name. OOF. 

As I've mentioned before, this is a metro area in which the relationships between the city of St. Louis and St. Louis County can be described, at best, as fractious. There have been movements afoot for years to merge the two into one larger government entity. Naming the club "City" strikes me as a little tone deaf locally. 

There are parts the badge that works. But I'd argue that a design that forces you to place words sideways isn't a good design. Again, as I've said before, I'm a big proponent of badges that don't need words. I'd like to seethe Arch/Rivers iconography inside the badge completed, and what it would look like without the words. I think it would be a thing of beauty. 

9 minutes ago, Buc said:

 

Meanwhile, I'm looking at the colors used in that promo (which I'm legit amazed no one's mentioned yet) and wondering if that may be the new team's colorway...?

MLS4THELOU has been using variations on red, yellow and blue since they launched their expansion effort in the fall of 2019. And the stadium renderings show people dressed in red jerseys which, admittedly, isn't always a clue. But I could see how the shade of red they're using here is more pink-ish than what they've been using to this point. I'd be surprised if that's what they went with. It's almost magenta. 

It would be different for the league, certainly. 

Also, @Brian in Boston, your analysis tracks with some of the anecdotes I've heard locally in St. Louis. It's all second or third hand, but the one thing I've heard is that Stars wasn't anybody's first choice, but it was a lot of people's second choices. It's now clear to me that this probably comes directly from these focus groups. 

5 minutes ago, Brian in Boston said:

Completely unscientific survey time, gang!

So, I've been doing some digging amongst family, friends, and colleagues who call the St. Louis area home. As it turns out, six people I know participated in public meetings/focus groups that MLS4THELOU conducted last Fall on the topic of team branding. Additionally, a former college classmate works for a creative agency in St. Louis. 

The folks who were part of the public meetings/focus groups - my cousin and her husband, my godson and his roommate (both students at Saint Louis University), and two colleagues from different jobs I've held in the past - all said that a significant portion of the MLS4THELOU presentation at the events revolved around the history, legacy, and tradition of the sport of soccer in St. Louis, as well as the impact that players born and raised in Greater St. Louis have had on the growth of soccer in America. When I mentioned that Heritage Saint Louis and Saint Louis Legacy had both appeared on a recent purported shortlist of team identities, my godson, his roommate, and one of my two former colleagues all recalled that they'd heard Saint Louis Legacy mentioned as a possible team name at the sessions they'd attended. Further, my college classmate said that Saint Louis Legacy has been a potential name that he's heard bandied about in the creative community for several months.

Likewise, the "collective spirit" of St. Louisans, as well as soccer's potential to feed off of and amplify said energy and attitude, was - according to my contacts - mentioned at the public branding gatherings. So, that catchphrase has apparently been kicking around amongst the MLS4THELOU braintrust for quite some time.

All of the people I spoke to said that attendees at their respective public meetings tended to slot into one of three categories when it came to potential team names: Traditional (Saint Louis FC/SC, Saint Louis United, Saint Louis City, etc.), North American Plural (Saint Louis Archers, Saint Louis Stars, Saint Louis Steamers, etc.), and North American Modern (Saint Louis Confluence, Gateway Saint Louis, Saint Louis Legacy, etc.). When asked to select a potential team name other than their first choice, my contacts said that the vast majority of attendees at their sessions would simply shift to another team name in the same category. For instance, a proponent of Saint Louis FC would shift support to something like Saint Louis United, while a Saint Louis Archers fan would move to something akin to Saint Louis Kings, and a Saint Louis Legacy booster might stump for Gateway Saint Louis). However, when attendees were asked to specifically select a name that they'd support from outside their preferred category, supporters of Traditional and North American Modern names showed a surprising propensity to shift support to the same North American Plural identity - St. Louis Stars.

As for imagery, the Gateway Arch was - rather unsurprisingly and by a significant margin - the local landmark that my contacts say most public meeting/focus group attendees wanted to see depicted within a team logo/badge. Second to the Arch, the Apotheosis of St. Louis statue seemed to garner the most support, with some element of the city's flag design coming in third. My college classmate with the creative agency said that he's perceived a desire to include a depiction of the Apotheosis has cooled significantly in recent months, perhaps due to the controversy surrounding statuary in cities throughout the United States.

Team name support amongst the people I spoke to broke down as follows (second choice)...
 

Cousin - Saint Louis Spirits FC (Gateway Saint Louis FC)
Cousin's Husband - Gateway Saint Louis FC (Saint Louis Stars)
Godson - Gateway Saint Louis FC (Saint Louis Archers)
Godson's Roommate - Saint Louis Legacy (Saint Louis Stars)
Colleague #1 - Saint Louis Stars (Saint Louis SC) 
Colleague #2 - Saint Louis Legacy (Saint Louis Spirits FC)
College Classmate/Design Professional - Gateway Saint Louis FC or Saint Louis Legacy  
 
So, based upon my cursory examination of an exceedingly small sample, we can expect the new MLS franchise in St. Louis to be dubbed Gateway Saint Louis FC, Saint Louis Legacy, Saint Louis Spirit FC, or the Saint Louis Stars. The team's badge will feature the Gateway Arch, the Apotheosis of St. Louis, or some portion of the City of St. Louis municipal flag.

Of course, we're most likely looking at Saint Louis FC or Saint Louis United.                       

That's interesting analysis, Brian. Thanks for sharing. 

Interestingly, a prominent figure in the St. Louis soccer scene, Bill McDermott, trademarked the name Legacy St. Louis back in January. Best I can tell, he's not affiliated with team ownership. Here's the logo he trademarked. Based on this, I'd rule out Legacy. 

The armchair detective in me agrees with @Brian in Boston that it will be Saint Louis Stars FC. 

The TESS Database shows Saint Louis Stars -- both with and without the name Saint spelled out -- has an abandoned trademark. And the ICANN database shows someone registered the domain Saintlouisstars.com on June 26 and Stlouisstars.com on July 28. 

Those could certainly be domain name squatters. All of this is circumstantial evidence, and it certainly doesn't confirm anything, but they're some decent breadcrumbs to chew on. 

24 minutes ago, McCall said:

I don't know. Saying "collective SPIRIT" has me wondering. Although, I don't know the trademark situation in regards to that name, so it's purely speculation on my part.

The NBA owns the Spirits of St. Louis trademark, per the TESS database.

And calling the team St. Louis City would be remarkably tone deaf. There's a huge divide here between city of St. Louis and St. Louis County, a division many believe is a driving force in many of this region's economic and political struggles. It would be an odd choice to pick a name that could stoke that divide. 

5 minutes ago, Buc said:

 

That makes sense. Granted, I don't get to see all the things you all get to see on the ground since I'm more concerned with not getting stuck trying to maneuver a 13-foot tall 74-foot-long vehicle through there. 

 

Off to the side, out of curiosity...how prominent (and this is for anyone) does the color orange figure into the St. Louis landscape? I mean, all the bridge overpasses are gray, red and black, but in the grander scheme of things, does orange have a visibility? I know the Spirits of St Louis had orange as their primary color...guess I'm just trying to think outside the box a lil' bit.

From what I can see, there's very little orange associated with this city.

It's such a huge sports town, that almost everything color-wise is influenced by sports branding, so blue and red are clearly prominent as identifying colors for St. Louis. The XFL BattleHawks' use of Blue falls in line with that trend, as did the Rams. Had the St. Louis Browns stuck around and not moved to Baltimore, it may be a different story. But these days, I see little to no orange. 

That's why I think we'll see some kind of combo of red, blue and yellow - the colors of the city flag. RSL and Chicago use similar colors, but it's been so pervasive in MLS4THELOU branding to this point that I'd be really surprised if they went a different direction. 

On 8/1/2020 at 7:47 PM, Buc said:

...As for the club name, it seems they are dead set on spelling out the "Saint" in "St. Louis"--funny since not even the post office does that there. Any particular reason for that?

Since I moved here a year or so ago, I've noticed a fair amount of "Saint" references. Some are more recent, like Saint Louis FC and Hotel Saint Louis, but others are long-standing and, in some cases, historic organizations: Saint Louis Zoo, Saint Louis Art Museum, Saint Louis University. 

Unlike, say, St. Paul, where you rarely see the use of the word "Saint" in identifying the city, St. Louis seems to embrace both spellings equally. 

31 minutes ago, the admiral said:

 

Especially because the divide between St. Louis City and St. Louis County is a real thing. I suspect most fans of St. Louis City live in St. Louis County.

 

I thought Gateway City had a nice sound to it, kinda reminds me of Crystal Palace.

A year ago, the region was debating a highly flawed campaign to merge the city and county. (The issue remains valid; the campaign was flawed.) Had that come to fruition, this might be the one city that could’ve justified being a “United” franchise.

7 hours ago, Maroon said:

 

Oh! I've heard people suggest St. Louis City (which is fine but would seem to exclude St. Louis County and other STL metro areas, which could be a bad move), but nobody has mentioned Lou City being the full name as far as I know. I really like that. Especially since the whole movement for the team has been called #MLS4TheLou

 

But isn’t this essentially what they call back-to-back USL champions Louisville City? Would seem odd to take that name.

1 hour ago, PlayGloria said:

 

I'm with you. I personally love it, but that's because I have been eating it for over 30 years. Everyone likes the pizza they grew up on.

I think it is funny how divisive pizza styles are with people, especially provel cheese. 

And I only moved here recently. I was skeptical at first, but I've come to appreciate Imo's. It's not for everyone, and it's not something I'd order every time I eat pizza, but every now and then I crave it. 

Also, so not to fully pizza-jack this thread, MLS4TheLou released a bunch of other names that didn't make the cut.

https://twitter.com/MLS4theLou/status/1287852785552314368?s=20

Also, also: I clearly do not know how to embed a tweet in this message board, despite all my years of trying. 

26 minutes ago, WideRight said:

Pizzash!te FC

 

Anyone who has ever tried St. Louis style pizza will agree that this name is entirely appropriate.  

I actually like it. To each their own.

4 minutes ago, Maroon said:

MLS4TheLou shared some logos for some of the more outlandish/fun suggestions that came in from fans (also, for those not in the know, the local supporter group St. Louligans has been a strong proponent of Lazer Snakes)

 

 

For the record, the Louligans' support of Lazersnakes has been entirely tongue in cheek. They also make references to chupacabras in at least one of the gameday songs, so these are largely a nod to the local supporters culture. 

I've also come around to hoping they stick to red, blue and yellow. But I'd prefer they embrace red and yellow, a la Liverpool, with blue as a tertiary accent color. 

52 minutes ago, Maroon said:

I'll reiterate the Olympique St. Louis is the best option even if it's impossible. And RE: Discussions of those Olympics, the cultural and architectural impact of the St. Louis Olympics are still very present in Forest Park even independently of the actual things that happened at that event. As someone else said, it's also more a hearkening back to the era where St. Louis was a pinnacle city in the United States. 

As a St. Louis resident for a year and a half, I've come to learn that this city has a sense of nostalgia like no other. But you could also argue that all that looking backward has a lot to do with the present not being so fantastic. That said, I wouldn't mind something that embraces looking forward rather than back. 

11 minutes ago, BC985 said:

Since Mitchell & Ness puts out Spirits of St. Louis merch, someone owns and is licensing that trademark. I doubt MLS wants to go down that legal branding road, so I don’t think we’ll have to worry about Charles Lindbergh hurdles. 

The mark is owned by the NBA Properties, but prior to that it was the domain of the Silna family, the owners of the Spirits who famously struck a sweetheart deal during the NBA/ABA merger to receive one-seventh of the TV revenue generated by the four ABA teams absorbed into the NBA. 

Probably more than you wanted to know, but I'm a nerd about this stuff. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/28/sports/basketball/ozzie-silna-savvy-owner-of-the-st-louis-spirits-is-dead-at-83.html

14 minutes ago, PlayGloria said:

 

What did Charles LIndbergh do that would upset people? Honest to god, I have no idea... just curious

Many describe him as a Nazi sympathizer. Others say he was simply a "pro-German" World War II isolationist. Seems like splitting hairs to me. 

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/videos/category/history/charles-lindbergh-and-the-rise-of-1940s-nazi_1/

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/magazine-22684773/charles-lindbergh-the-nazis-and-american-isolationism

Yeah, i just assumed that it's a foregone conclusion that it will be Sacramento Republic.