BBTV

For what it’s worth, here’s the version we used in ‘94. This one probably has more similarities to the Greyhound logo despite the obvious differences in shading. EDIT: Here's a Greyhound that may have been from the timeframe at least the '94 logo was in use. I really don't know - the general shape is pretty much the same and there was clearly inspiration. This logo is much closer due to the line over the front leg around the neck - but the Whippets version doesn't have the rear line, and instead has chest detail. IDK - it was most likely a stock dog that whatever company provided the decals had and they said "put that dog in front of a D". I think the current version is a way more custom mixing of vintage dog with modern D - but I really don't know. The new "D" could be straight out of a catalog for all I know.

It's really not (but maybe it is?), though there's obviously a lot of similarities so the comparison makes sense - like there is with a lot of animal mascots (how many ways can you draw a racing dog?) The Whippet logo is much thicker in the hip/loin area, has much different shading, a different ear shape, only one visible right foot, and the tail flows directly from its back, as opposed to the Greyhound logo where the tail looks placed more like where a real dog's tail would be. I'm fairly certain that version of the Whippets dog is actually one from half a century or more ago that they brought back to put on the modern D. Maybe it was a copy of Greyhound's logo from way back when - I hav no idea.

"The Muckleshoot Casino was among the Kraken’s very first sponsors, hammering out the partnership in summer 2019 when the expansion squad was still known as NHL Seattle and announcing a deal in October of that year. The casino has signage throughout Climate Pledge Arena and the “Muckleshoot Casino Power Play” also gets announced over the public address system whenever the Kraken begin a man advantage. " https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/kraken/kraken-announce-groundbreaking-partnership-with-muckleshoot-tribe/

Those are great! I wonder if any "Phoenix Eagles" merch exists from when the owner basically lost the team gambling and a Phoenix group was a whisker away from taking it.

My high school - the Whippets. I'm assuming this is unique and not stolen. Way back when I played, we had a decal for the first time. It was the same dog as seen here, but bigger, and in front of a block D (it overlapped the whole letter). The company that made them never sent the reverse-facing dog ones, so we could only use them on one side of the helmet. Also, we didn't have any BFBS facemask nonsense. Oh - and for some reason - maybe manufacturer limitations at the time - our blue on the helmets was closer to the Broncos old blue, so not a light blue, but lighter than the blue that was on our uniforms. We were told we could have that blue or navy. So kinda like how the Giants and Rams used to have navy, we would have looked the same had we not gone with the lighter version.

Help me out here - why is it culturally relevant? I'm not sure why there's a need to force a flag into some of these logos. If it was a longer word then maybe it'd be fine, but given that it's only 3 letters, it dominates the mark and IMO looks awful. As someone else mentioned, USA hockey pulled it off, but I can't think of another good example. Regarding the other countries - are designers (or at least consultants) that actually have first-hand knowledge - whether being natives or at least having lived there - involved in these? Or are there just a bunch of white American guys drafting these up and using Wikipedia for their knowledge of each country? I literally had just looked that up. According to this listing on Dick's, it's "OT Sports". But in the item description, it lists "Nike logo" as a (lol) "style / team spirit". https://www.dickssportinggoods.com/p/ot-sports-mens-puerto-rico-white-world-baseball-classic-jersey-22otsmwbcprtrcwhtmlb/22otsmwbcprtrcwhtmlb STYLE AND TEAM SPIRIT Textured graphic name and number Nike® logo ADDITIONAL DETAILS Brand : OT Sports

I imagine they'll sell a lot of them to NBA players too. I might be wrong about this, and feel free to correct me, but I believe that's only a military thing - specifically a US Army thing - and anything else is just trying to emulate that, and may or may not actually be in adherence to flag code. What's weird to me (not that it's technically wrong, just that it doesn't follow my own personal logic) is that they're in the Latin letters of their English exonyms, rather than a transliteration or phonetic representation. So like Japan is using J rather than Nippon / Nihon (Latin phonetic spelling). I get that there can't be what we would consider strict transliteration rules for character-based written languages, or syllabic ones like Hangul, so maybe they're simply like "whatever, it's just easier this way" to use their official Western name, represented in English. In general, nearly all the letter-based ones suck, especially since there's so much iconography from each country that could be used to make an awesome logo. I guess they wanted to shy away from some of that so that they can have trademarkable logos, but they could have done better. USA is in the bottom 3 - at best - of the bunch. A real shame.

What if the power 5 created and sold a “Saturday red zone” package? That would print ,money, no?

“Absorption” isn’t how ,Oder. North American sports work. Their franchise agreements might be totally different, and even if one league bought the other”s ip, it’d still be a new team with new people. It’s not like 50 guys and a front office simply move over.

According to his profile, he's in Singapore. So while English is an official language, it may be taught differently and/or used differently, so maybe let's cut him a break. *though my personal experience in Singapore with people from various backgrounds is that their English was perfect, but that's a relatively small sample size.

Here's something on the matter from the Georgia High School Association warning high schools about stealing logos. It appears that the GHSA has partnered with some design firm to help schools out, so some of this might have come from that firm. Either way it's a good read. https://www.ghsa.net/five-things-high-schools-use-college-logos-need-know Some excerpts (the linked article provides way more context): 3. The “15% Rule” does not exist. The idea that altering a college logo by “15%” as a means of protecting a high school from legal action is widespread as an understood fact. It is, however, a bogus concept. ... When a college enforces its rights in its logo, it generally does so by these three standards, not by an arbitrary “15% different” determination. 4. Colleges are not “stepping on the little guy.”... Trademark law obligates institutions to protect their valuable intellectual property. ... ...Failure to protect their marks can result in the loss of the legal right to do so, thus rendering useless the very idea of building and protecting a brand in the first place. EDIT: Here's another link to a very interesting story about a school that was sued by a company that manages collegiate licenses for many universities on behalf of University of Arizona. It turns out that the high school actually uses the Kansas State wildcat logo in 99% of it's material, but KSU isn't represented by this license-management firm, so the high school only got sued for minimal usage of an Arizona mark. So often times, it's not the schools themselves that are looking out for logo thefts, but "license managers" that own the licensing rights to dozens or hundreds of entities and have the resources to protect their clients. Interesting stuff!! https://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/highschool-prep-rally/dallas-high-school-sued-using-college-logo-actually-151136477.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAEBnxIiXlMJ6UBJKbRY2w4IqU_e7xSrAbndEReoxRQIk6Lj79T_dlYBUG7VeUI9Akp-R_9N-XlgTgWq4oINuWOo1OLJjSi950j_jgldYXwpfIBImssVBjNiZ52i8L_PyOEOvuQmkQPxoWT-YHheQLTgps0Hcsax26XziPfdHlTdJ

Good call on the North Stars. I guess I forgot all about it because I liked it so much (the pre-solid-black version) and didn't have any negative feelings towards it. The solid-black ST^RS version was total ass, at least while the team was still in Minnesota. But yeah that slightly predates the Devils switch as well. I kinda put the Kings in a different category since it was pretty obvious they were mimicking the Raiders and essentially rebranding the whole franchise as the flashy "Hollywood" team with Gretzky. I almost view it as a whole new team, but that doesn't change that they definitely added black to sell merch.

I was drawn to NHL hockey in the '80s due to the extremely simplistic logos (I could draw all but the Blackhawks nearly perfectly on my paper-bag schoolbook covers) and bright colors. You had the Flyers in orange, Devils in red and green, Nordiques in light blue and red, North Stars and Whalers in kelly green and yellow/blue respectively, etc. The Devils change may have been the beginning of the bfbs era of pro sports. If not the beginning, then near it. The timeline doesn't match up exactly, but their garden-state neighbor Jets also unnecessarily added black. Tangentially related, the thread where we all tried to draw the blackhawks logo from memory was great.

Or, people would rather gamble on football, so these leagues provide some football for people to gamble on. I have no idea how much (if anything) is bet on these games right now, but if the leagues can achieve some stability, maybe that'll be the purpose they serve.

Reminds me of a time I was in Costa Rica (I think) and bumped into a guy that was wearing what looked like a super awesome maroon Phillies cap, but with a version of the P I'd never seen before, and the logo was inside a shield or roundel or something. I asked him where he found it and he replied as best he could (he was Dutch) that he had no idea what cap it was, his name is Peter and he simply liked the P and as far as he was concerned, it meant Peter. It was likely not a Phillies hat after all. I then stole the hat right off his head, kneed him in the groin, and ran away. Exactly 50% of this post is true. I'll let you decide which part to believe.

As long as players are sitting as frequently as they are for "load management" reasons, and teams have "scheduled losses", there shouldn't be any exhibition games. Fans are going to pay when they buy a ticket and those guys decide to sit a game that maybe they wouldn't have because they played in the ASG.

that actually is how the law works, which is why bigger colleges and NFL teams make a lot of these schools sign licensing deals, even if it's only for $1. There's an old thread somewhere about this and how teams have to enforce their trademarks (when they're made aware of misuse) or they can lose the right to do so in the future. The NFL apparently did make a blanket statement in 2010 that covers them, by saying that they "support football on all levels and do not have an issue with high school and youth teams using NFL team logos," said Brian McCarthy, director of corporate communications for the NFL." , however I believe there's still instances where they have gone after amateur teams and made them sign the $1 deal. I think there's also rules that say something like (my wording here) "you can use our logos, but you don't own them so you can't alter them or we'll get'cha". I have no evidence of that other than the vague recollection of one of our professionals here explaining it. There are more recent cases of colleges going after high schools - I want to say it was Wisconsin? Here's an NYT article about it: https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/27/sports/football/27logos.html Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/21/AR2010102106526.html Old CCSLC thread (NOT the one I was referencing above, but the first one that came up in my search... and I don't feel like waiting another hour before the search tool lets me try again.) https://boards.sportslogos.net/topic/92079-nfl-and-major-college-program-stance-on-amateur-teams-using-their-logos/

It's not "Michigan's" design. I think that would fall into the category of "free use" unless Michigan was somehow able to TM an uber-traditional design that lots of pro and amateur teams have used since helmets started being painted in the first place. It's a little lacking for effort, but I don't take issue with it the same way I would with someone recoloring MSU's spartan logo and calling it a day.

I don't know how educators can teach kids not to steal, and to be creative, and then steal other people's work for their sports uniforms. It's basically like "remember kids, stealing is bad, unless you don't have the budget to make it yourself".

Speaking of the Jets: What is up with this? The light-green numbers are also shown as being worn in other seasons, and they appear to be intentionally colored that way, as you can see in this image where there's a white jersey with normal-green numbers.

They wore red for 26ish seasons, so there's an entire generation of people that grew up only knowing those. I was alive during the white helmet era, but only remember the red ones from when I started watching in the mid-late '80s. So for roughly the first 24 years of my football-watching and football-card-collecting life, they were in red lids. The biggest - and probably only argument that I can see against the red helmets being considered a co-correct helmet for them would be to look at the Jets. The Jets wore green for longer than white, and I only ever knew them in green, but I always knew that their "right look" was white. Probably due to all the iconic photos of Namath, or maybe due to how much 60s/70s Jets stuff appeared in pop culture (like the Wonder Years). But it's one of those things where there's no "rule". The only really "wrong" uniforms for the Bills are the red helmets with blue facemask (and blue road pants), and the CFL uniforms they wore in the 00s. The only "right" uniforms for the Jets are the white-helmeted ones with the oval logo.

there’s obviously not much - if any - data available on if there’s a viable path to the NFL from either of the US leagues, but I’d imagine that playing a style that’s closer to NFL would be beneficial - at least for certain positions. Of course none of that matters if the leagues fold half-way through.

I'd argue the exact opposite. In fact, I'll die arguing the exact opposite.

Wile I'm sure broad daylight on gameday would be a safe walk, the Chester Transportation Center isn't a place I'd ever go for fun. Also since they run a shuttle bus, maybe it's not that close (not sure.) I actually didn't know that the Wilmington/Newark line had a stop near Chester Transportation Center (so thanks for that knowledge), but even still there's multiple other hops whether bus or subway for most people to get to one of the departing stations and it could be well over an hour just to get to a game (I'm actually pretty lucky that I'm along the Broad Street Line.) I'm also not sure most city folk would want to take regional rail, but it's a necessary evil (one I use 3 times a week unless I'm lucky enough to catch an Amtrak commuter train.) Ideally I'd love to see one of these teams play at Franklin Field, but that may be a pipe dream.