GFB

this was the best concept Kent State had, it just needed to be executed a little better.

The 17 looks bad because the "1" has serifs and the "7" does not.

Calling this PMS 1925 shade “magenta/pink not red” is a little harsh, IMO. It‘s unfortunate that the RGB shade the team is using is on the cooler side of the printed color... but, there’s only one shade on this “magenta” chart that is close enough to be considered near this shade of red (206) Sidebar: you can approximate a Pantone shade’s color makeup from the number. For example, if you know your typical athletic red is PMS 186 or 187 and royal blue is PMS 287, you can place a purple closer to blue or red based on their number alone (259 is closer to blue, 234 is closer to red). In this case, Pantone 1925 has more blue in it that your average red, but it’s not breaking that line around 200 PMS to get into magenta. This isn’t always the case as the Pantone libraries have expanded over the years to add new shades, but it’s generally a solid guiding principle.

“You wouldn’t understand Gateway, necessarily, if you don’t live in this region,” is some of the most baffling and backwards logic I've ever heard, especially when you consider they ended up with "City" and went out of their way to spin it as "representing all the neighborhoods of STL." They're spinning a generic name that several other teams share as being uniquely StL, while discounting an actually unique name that would have only worked for STL for being too obscure (which, it's not). I've been to St Louis once when I was 8 years old and even I know it's referenced as the Gateway to the West.

Less so for logos, but in print/social design rotated text is very en vogue.

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.

Of course... I was making a broad point, not referencing one specific team. If the basketball team has fond memories of it so if they want to use it, they can go right ahead.

Sure, and if the SFA women’s teams were named that, they would at least make sense (even if it was a pointless distinction). But instead they are the Ladyjacks which feels insulting and makes no sense.

Lumberjacks can be men or women. Bears can be male or female. Volunteers are a neutrally-gendered group. The only time it makes even a little sense is when you have a gendered-nickname like Cowboys or Minutemen; but even then, you might as well just roll with that across the board. Nobody at the University of Delaware is throwing a fit about the mens teams being called the Blue Hens and not the Blue Cocks.

Just a can-o-worms observation, but "Ladyjacks" sounds really dumb in 2020. Figure it out.

It’s a great wordmark in theory, but it could really use a pro’s touch to clean it up. For example, the awkward spacing between the outline of the A and the crossbar of the T’s is smack dab in no man’s land, the joint of the inner curve of the E is weirdly angular and all wrong, and NEW MEXICO needs to be shrunk down by about 20% because there’s more space between the W and M than between the wordmark and the edges of the crossbar.

The color balance of this sweater is absolutely beautiful.

I've never worked in apparel, but when you see something like this you have to assume that whoever is manufacturing the uniforms gave dimensions to the league and all the numbers had to be designed within those dimensions.

It's 100% intentional and you picked it out. The only bad thing about it is that whoever designed it didn't trust the idea and now the logo reads "DC - DC" for no reason.

Dallas, New York, and DC are the clear winners for me. Seattle is maybe the most bizarre professional football uniform I’ve ever seen in terms of color balance from home vs. road perspective.

This shirt made my day

Champion made the original XFL jerseys, they've become perhaps one of the most popular athletic brands over the last five years with Millenials and Zoomers, and would cost much less than merchandise deals with any of the big three.

I think you could place the St Louis logo on the back of the helmet, have the sword act as the helmet stripe, and have the wings fold around the sides of the helmet. You have the right idea for the Guardians; something in the vein of the Jacksonville Bulls, Michigan Panthers, and Memphis Pharaohs helmets:

It's a real concern, especially for a start-up league that needs the locations to anchor the franchises. I think it will come down to application... If they go out and support it with a strong secondary mark and they have a motif or identity they can carry out with the uniforms, the "V" will be a really good, flexible logo. If they don't really have any direction past this logo and it ends up on a white helmet or something, then I think it will fall into the generic, "create-a-team" pit of doom.

Wildcats is really, really poor, but the "V" with two fangs has potential as a simple/non-mascot mark for the Vipers.

These are either pictures of uniforms from the original XFL (Hitmen, Enforcers, Xtreme, Demons I believe) or stock photos.

My knee-jerk takes: As someone who cares about the helmets more than almost anything (which is where I think the original XFL did fairly well), I think St. Louis and DC have the most potential to give us a really cool helmet design.

The Cape Breton redesign is great and a huge upgrade (especially the CBE secondary mark). However, I think placing the text emphasis on EAGLES and not CAPE BRETON is a little bit of a blunder, because I can't shake this feeling like it's a stock art design on Shutterstock or a generic Create-A-Team design. That vibe may be due in part to the illustration and text styling as well, or due to the fact that Cape Breton is disconnected from the rest of the crest. I think a small change like this helps make the primary design a little less generic.

RIP

I'm almost certain that it is Prohibition.