Jump to content

2014-2015 NHL Jersey/Logo Changes


Chewbacca

Recommended Posts

The logo was fine for its time, never would have made it out of the 20th century if the Jets had stayed.

True. I feel pretty safe saying that it was the best usage of forced-hockey-stick-into-letters, being that it actually kinda worked into the first letter and not some random letter in the middle. Plus, it had an actual jet in the design to take away from the "hockey-ness" of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I will admit the execution might not be the best, but to call it lazy is completely wrong

Why? In my mind, it is lazy designing. If the Canucks wanted to design the logo around the "C", then they could easily have designed a better logo (or at least a logo that is actually is instantly recognizable as a "C"). The problem is that the visual hierarchy goes:

1) hockey stick

2) ice rink (which isn't immediately recognizable either)

3) C

Compare that with say, the Flyers, who also managed to merge a "P" with a hockey puck in a fantastic design; or the Capitals, whose logo may be generic, but at least they tried to get innovative with the hockey stick.

There is nothing innovative or well designed about either the "classic" Capitals logo or current one. They didn't even have the sense to make their generic wordmark in 'Capital' letters and awkwardly trying to turn the "t" into a hockey stick (awful decision) makes it look more like an "L." The "CapiLal's" logo is an abomination. Like the current Lightning logo, it makes both iterations of the Stick n' Rink look like strokes of design genius.

The Capitals fixed their logo problem in 1995 but thanks to the "retro" trend, they are once again stuck in the design stone age. They should either adopt the "Weagle" or come up with something new. I can appreciate the need to go back to Red, White and Blue but there was no need to bring back that logo, updated or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does the Capitals' logo have to be in capital letters? Sure, the word's the same, but the contexts are completely different. Arguing otherwise is kinda just searching for something to complain about.

It's like saying this logo sucks because "Green" isn't big:

0s2fdu2ejo17tjqu4ii4zd2pl.gif

Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I'm reading here is that people want all hockey logos/creats to have a hockey puck with the team name underneath in Arial Black. Holy cow people, but calling something lazy or stupid because you don't like it is beyond stupid. I'm glad some people on this board have no say in creativity, because the world would be a boring monotonous place. :)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<< ^ How insightful of you :) >>

I was never trying to say that I didn't like the stick in rink, in fact I almost love the current version as a secondary. All I'm saying is that it needs a few tweaks before I can look at it and go "Yeah, that's a C" right away. It's just not that well developed and designed as a hidden element as, say, the H in the Whalers logo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will admit the execution might not be the best, but to call it lazy is completely wrong

Why? In my mind, it is lazy designing. If the Canucks wanted to design the logo around the "C", then they could easily have designed a better logo (or at least a logo that is actually is instantly recognizable as a "C"). The problem is that the visual hierarchy goes:

1) hockey stick

2) ice rink (which isn't immediately recognizable either)

3) C

Compare that with say, the Flyers, who also managed to merge a "P" with a hockey puck in a fantastic design; or the Capitals, whose logo may be generic, but at least they tried to get innovative with the hockey stick.

There is nothing innovative or well designed about either the "classic" Capitals logo or current one. They didn't even have the sense to make their generic wordmark in 'Capital' letters and awkwardly trying to turn the "t" into a hockey stick (awful decision) makes it look more like an "L." The "CapiLal's" logo is an abomination. Like the current Lightning logo, it makes both iterations of the Stick n' Rink look like strokes of design genius.

The Capitals fixed their logo problem in 1995 but thanks to the "retro" trend, they are once again stuck in the design stone age. They should either adopt the "Weagle" or come up with something new. I can appreciate the need to go back to Red, White and Blue but there was no need to bring back that logo, updated or not.

1) I never said the Capitals logo was good. I even called it "generic". All I said was that it was better at implementing hockey equipment into the logo because at least you can :censored:ing tell what team it's for by reading the logo.

2) The new Lightning logo has zero to do with this conversation, but because you brought it up, not only is it objectively the best logo that the franchise has ever used, it blows the stick-in-rink logo out of the ocean and into orbit. The colors may be wrong, but the design itself is fantastic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will admit the execution might not be the best, but to call it lazy is completely wrong

Why? In my mind, it is lazy designing. If the Canucks wanted to design the logo around the "C", then they could easily have designed a better logo (or at least a logo that is actually is instantly recognizable as a "C"). The problem is that the visual hierarchy goes:

1) hockey stick

2) ice rink (which isn't immediately recognizable either)

3) C

Compare that with say, the Flyers, who also managed to merge a "P" with a hockey puck in a fantastic design; or the Capitals, whose logo may be generic, but at least they tried to get innovative with the hockey stick.

There is nothing innovative or well designed about either the "classic" Capitals logo or current one. They didn't even have the sense to make their generic wordmark in 'Capital' letters and awkwardly trying to turn the "t" into a hockey stick (awful decision) makes it look more like an "L." The "CapiLal's" logo is an abomination. Like the current Lightning logo, it makes both iterations of the Stick n' Rink look like strokes of design genius.

The Capitals fixed their logo problem in 1995 but thanks to the "retro" trend, they are once again stuck in the design stone age. They should either adopt the "Weagle" or come up with something new. I can appreciate the need to go back to Red, White and Blue but there was no need to bring back that logo, updated or not.

1) I never said the Capitals logo was good. I even called it "generic". All I said was that it was better at implementing hockey equipment into the logo because at least you can :censored:ing tell what team it's for by reading the logo.

2) The new Lightning logo has zero to do with this conversation, but because you brought it up, not only is it objectively the best logo that the franchise has ever used, it blows the stick-in-rink logo out of the ocean and into orbit. The colors may be wrong, but the design itself is fantastic.

The 2007-11 logo disagrees with that statement very very much. Why change logos when no change was needed?

:wub:(dance):boogie:(bow):jawdrop::censored:(sleepz):puke::woot::sleeping::hockeysmiley::therock::oops:

I think I like smilies too much!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I have to explain to you why the new Lightning logo is a far superior mark from an objective perspective according to the principles of design, then you're not worth the time to make the post.

(I tried to make this post have a less design-snobbish tone, but after a good 10 minutes of trying, I realized it was impossible. So, whatever. I'll own up to it.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) I never said the Capitals logo was good. I even called it "generic". All I said was that it was better at implementing hockey equipment into the logo because at least you can :censored:ing tell what team it's for by reading the logo.

2) The new Lightning logo has zero to do with this conversation, but because you brought it up, not only is it objectively the best logo that the franchise has ever used, it blows the stick-in-rink logo out of the ocean and into orbit. The colors may be wrong, but the design itself is fantastic.

The 2007-11 logo disagrees with that statement very very much. Why change logos when no change was needed?

The 2007-2011 logo looked very "year 2000" looking, if you know what i mean. It had too many outlines, plus the lightning bolt was jacked up, it looked way too top heavy. The new one IMO is far superior.

tampa-bay-lightning-mobile-wallpaper1.jp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The second generation logo is my favorite because of the silver. The crests featured a material I haven't seen on any other jersey that really made it pop out on both the black and white. The logo really loses a lot when it's displayed as gray instead of the textured silver.

As for the new third, the images I have seen (told they were the final design, guess we will wait and see. They were graphics, like a style guide, not pictures of an actual jersey.) are of a predominately black jersey, same or nearly the same Bolts wordmark on the front. White stripes going down the arms and the back in a wishbone shape. Three color number font, reminiscent of the Cup era jerseys but not exactly the same. Can not recall particulars on the name font or coloration. Black helmets, black pants (could be the carryover pants with the bolt striping from the old third). The image I saw did not have any hem striping or shoulder patches, but was told those areas were subject to change. I doubt they did, particularly the hem striping. It's very odd to me that the home and away feature very little black, where this third has almost no blue.

From what I have seen I don't particularly care for it, as I like alternates that add something new to a team identity. Yes the jersey brings black back but without silver accompanying it, it feels unfinished. I do like the fact that it won't be able to be described by one of the most inane things to be born from this forum, "original six dressup." It won't be the best looking jersey in the league, won't be the worst either. Just kind of existing, which as a collector of interesting jerseys is the worst thing an alternate can do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this video, Stamkos is wearing the standard blue jersey, but his captain's c is different than normal. Rather than being outlined in black, like the jersey numbers, it is solid white (and huge). Is this just a case of a commercial messing something up? Is this what the patches would've looked like before the black outlines were added at the last minute?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.