VDizzle12

I believe it was only used on the helmets for one season, 2002.

Thanks for the response. Knowing you worked on the new logos really helped warm me up to them, you're the best in the business. I'm glad they brought you back for the brand evolution. I did some design work while at UA and always enjoyed the huge library of logos I could pick from and the custom font. I always felt it was all top notch. But as designers I understand what it's like to look at old work and see how far we have come. Since I saw the branding every day, it was tough to see something new. Hopefully the new logo is around for a long time!

I absolutely hated the logo at first, but it's definitely growing on me. Seeing the basketball court, football field, helmets and other applications helped. I was afraid that at first the "primary" logo would always have Akron below. That seemed amateurish and cluttered. The "A" by itself is much cleaner. It's a simple lettermark, but I can see subtle references to past logos. The serifs from the motion and oval A logos, the angled lines and Z from the 2000s logos. Maybe it's a stretch and I'm just talking myself into it. But it could have been a lot worse. I'm actually going to miss the previous custom font. I'm glad they had Bosack come up with a new font for brand consistency. It's just that nothing about it seems custom to me. Like they just downloaded a free sci-fi font from Dafont. Guess the people in charge wanted a clean logo and nothing "gimmicky." I get it to some extent. If done poorly a kangaroo could feel like something out of minor league baseball. The Zips need some sort of secondary logo though. Hopefully one of the older kangaroo logos can stick around in a lesser role. Like how Alabama uses the elephant. Fear the Roo.

This is what most people believe and I get it. Along with rumors that the kangaroo and Z logos are sticking around as secondary marks. But the official announcement made it seem like this was only the athletic mark and the only one to be used moving forward. The more I look at it, the A really isn't that terrible by itself. But I'd expect that 99% of the time it will be used with a stroke and/or the super generic wordmark underneath. A mediocre logo can be saved with good applications. We'll see how it goes. EDIT: The new basketball court isn't terrible.

The script Akron was bad for many reasons. Mainly the fact that it was a stock Nike font taken directly out of a catalog, slapped on the basketball jerseys and someone liked it so much they made it the primary logo. It seems like the President and AD both like generic/boring logos, because they were involved in the UW Green Bay rebrand a few years ago. Obviously I like the Z logo above all. But, based on the past few years I'd assume the people in charge only want to be know as Akron and ignore the nickname/mascot.

I'm not sure I've ever seen a logo unveiling this universally disliked. I can understand fans being divisive, but every single reaction is negative. The problem is that the people in charge don't care enough to make it right.

I had low expectations for this and still came away pretty disappointed. New Akron Logo... They tried to force a "Z" in there. But it's not working. I think the font bothers me more than anything. So embarrassingly generic. At least it's better than the garbage they have been using the past few years.

Ah yes, the ones the Oilers said were "inspired" by the Baltimore Ravens...

Why do the Ducks want so badly to be an orange/black team? Are they trying to distance themselves from the Disney days, or do fans actually prefer orange to eggplant/jade? I always felt those colors were unique. I guess I could be biased because I watched the Mighty Ducks movies religiously as a kid.

Love the 80-ish? style thick sleeve stripes. Wish more teams would bring them back.

Love when teams say they are "proud" or "excited" about a jersey sponsor partner. They treat it like a blockbuster trade, free agent signing or new uniform unveiling. It's nothing to be proud or excited about. If selling ad space on your jersey is the only reason your team can turn a profit, there's a problem. I wish there was more backlash from casual fans, but most of them don't even care.

I've always hoped that the Rays would go back to their 90s look, but modernize it. In my mind I always pictured a solid wordmark but with gradient piping. Never actually thought an MLB would attempt something like that.

I'd assume this means the Browns will be bringing back the brownout color rush and all white throwbacks for next season. Wouldn't mind it if they actually paired the throwback with a white helmet.

The NFL should have given alternate helmets the same 5-year rule as uniforms. Now we have the Eagles wearing black for one season and then Kelly green the next. What will stop teams from switching alternate helmet colors every season?

There have been a lot of horrible NHL alternates and this is definitely one of them.

So sad. That John Clayton SportsCenter spot was one of the funniest commercials ever.

Reminds me a lot of the New Era's NFL sideline caps from 2021. But at least MLB cap logos are mostly monograms, or simpler designs. I'd assume minimalistic outlines will probably look a lot better.

James Harden of the NFL.

The inconsistencies make no sense. Wordmarks, nameplates, gradient patterns/no gradient patterns, use of black, striping, number font. It's like every single uniform is it's own separate design and doesn't make any sense with the others. I think they just sat in a room, saw a bunch of concepts and said "Nice. Let's do it all." Feels like the Rams design, but worse. I will say this makes me feel better about the Guardians rebrand. Although at least Washington didn't make it's logo a football wearing a helmet or something cheesy like Cleveland did. If I can give any advice to Washington fans, you'll get used to it eventually.

I was wondering the same thing. They don't play enough games to need 3 different uniforms. Also doesn't make sense for team USA to have two blue ones. Just seems like a waste.

That name/number font is definitely going to take some time to get used to. So much of this brand bothers me, but the G+ball logo and weird curves on the side of the C make no sense. Both have an unnecessary cartoony/minor league feel. Only thing missing is a Guardian statue swinging a baseball bat and we'll be in full Brandiose mode.

The Avs are definitely trying too hard to give blue and maroon equal weight in the brand. It's better since they removed the unnecessary black, but still could be simplified. They should never let blue and maroon touch, outline all numbers in gray and the pants/gloves should always match the color of the mountains. Sure this thinking would create a maroon-heavy white set. But honestly I don't think that's a bad thing.

Packers vs Browns throwbacks on Christmas seems like a no brainer. All white vs all green? Sign me up.

The logos all feel very generic. Very similar to some of the "create-a-team" logos in video games. As we saw in Cleveland, no matter what they do people are going to complain. There's the "never should have changed it stop being woke" people, the "that's the best they could come up with?" people and those that had their own favorites that didn't get picked. I feel like I've been asked a hundred times what a Guardian is and why they would go with that. I'd assume a large amount of people have no idea who the Redtails were.

Not sure what's worse. The Giants throwbacks being a uniform they wore last season or when the Chiefs wear a throwback, but it's just changing the facemask from white to gray.