ARMY

[nofancyname]

And they didn't just "go for" that imagery. It's been a part of the Academy for a LONG time. The modernized/modified it, but it's 100% clear where they started.

[dfwabel]

The Naval Academy chimed in

[Germanshepherd]

The Army Black Knight Cadet Corps of West Point.

[BrandMooreArt]

^ Navy makes the point i was just going to touch on. i've had a chance to go through it all now and i have no idea what to call them. they have word marks for 3 different nicknames and 2 different school/academy names.

the reason for rebranding was to create consistency across all sports and academic applications. the most surprising thing about this whole rebrand is it was done by one of the best athletic branding teams going now, and it fails to accomplish that goal. and it fails hard.

i'm not crazy about switching to ARMY WEST POINT, but if that's the direction you want to go and what you want to be known for from here on out, it has to be clear and consistent. so, ok, they're AWP now. it "is what they're all about and can not be separated from each other." so here's what Nike does: separates the 2 as often as they can. the baseball and basketball jerseys have ARMY across the chest. the football helmets have WEST POINT on the back bumpers. the application is absolute chaos and deviates completely from the primary goal.

the primary logo is OK. i get the inspiration now, but to those who arn't familiar it looks like a knight. it's a helmet and sword and shield. it's very medieval looking, but since there is a proper reasoning for using it, i can really only properly judge the logo after having lived with it for a while. we'll just have to adapt to it. the secondary A is beautiful, but again we're emphasizing ARMY and not AWP.

the typography is really great, though i'd much prefer the stencil type without the added strokes, which they do in some applications, especially using gold with a white outline; not a fan at all. the colors are as good as ever, but havent changed much. im really interested to see what they do with the special game colors and all those metallics.

the overall look of everything is very good. all those minor details in the designs i could look past enough to give Nike an A- or B+. but what they've done is actually create more confusion than ever. we have to adjust to saying ARMY WEST POINT when ARMY is featured across most the uniforms. now we have Black Knights, Cadets, and THE CORPS to add to it and Nike gave no explanation of how those would be used. taking all of their goals into mind and looking at the execution, i have to give them an F. the only thing i can do to sum it up is quote Vince Lombardi . . . "What the hells goin' on out here!?"

[Gothamite]

the primary logo is OK. i get the inspiration now, but to those who arn't familiar it looks like a knight. it's a helmet and sword and shield. it's very medieval looking, but since there is a proper reasoning for using it, i can really only properly judge the logo after having lived with it for a while. we'll just have to adapt to it.

The ignorance of outsiders is no reason not to use your traditional symbols. Agreed 100% with everything else you say, though. Great ideas, but just too much thrown against the wall.

[Cosmic]

the primary logo is OK. i get the inspiration now, but to those who arn't familiar it looks like a knight. it's a helmet and sword and shield. it's very medieval looking, but since there is a proper reasoning for using it, i can really only properly judge the logo after having lived with it for a while. we'll just have to adapt to it.

The ignorance of outsiders is no reason not to use your traditional symbols. Agreed 100% with everything else you say, though. Great ideas, but just too much thrown against the wall.

Agreed. I don't think it looks medieval at all... it's very Iron Age. And it looks great. Just because someone will think, "helmet + sword= knight", doesn't mean you shouldn't use your symbols.

Greek helmet:

[Discrim]

Wait...it's supposed to be "Army West Point" now? Strange decision, especially since I figure most folks will still call em either Army or West Point, not AWP (or USMA, but that's a bone for Buc to pick ) Kinda like Buffalo's hopefully short-lived "New York" emphasis...does anybody call those boys the New York Bulls? Honestly?

[nofancyname]

I believe that "Army West Point" will be little-used by anybody outside of SID offices.

[tBBP]

Wait...it's supposed to be "Army West Point" now? Strange decision, especially since I figure most folks will still call em either Army or West Point, not AWP (or USMA, but that's a bone for Buc to pick ) Kinda like Buffalo's hopefully short-lived "New York" emphasis...does anybody call those boys the New York Bulls? Honestly?

You asked for it....

....Far as this whole "ARMY WEST POINT" amalgamation goes: even as much as Nike loves trying to put their stamp(s) over everything they touch, I can't even put that one on the Swoosh. I read through the Army Times article and (what used to be) the Army Athletics page, and several other press releases, and that combined with what I know from my 15 years in the service, I'm left with one inescapable conclusion: that one is on the head brass of the Academy. They're the ones who got so caught up in trying to "unify" all this stuff--"ARMY", "WEST POINT", "UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY", that they ended up causing even more confusion (as head brass tends to do). They'd have done well enough just to leave the Athletics side as simply "ARMY". That's it--short, sweet, and to the point--but because of this blunder, now we done gave the other two service academies even more fodder than they already had. :angry: (I may not be in the service anymore, but I'll always be SSG Brooks at heart.)

And since I done been coerced into giving my take on all this...

...I do like the unification amongst all sports--that's always a good thing. I'll credit the Swoosh for that: when they really want to, they can hunker down and turn out a strong, concise collegiate athletic identity system. (See State, Florida and State, Oregon.) That said, when news of this broke I knew three very predictable things would come out of this: 1) an over-stenciled custom font (because old-time military, right?), 2) an even more washed-out "gold" (see Purdue and Vanderbilt, two of Nike's other black-and-gold schools), and 3) unnecessary "official" addition of anthracite gray. Lo and behold...that said, I don't hate the font; it was just too predictable. At least, however, the letters and jersey numbers actually match (especially given Nike's recent habit of concocting number fonts that match nothing else in the identity, particularly for football). I guess I can live with the khaki--'scuse me, "gold"--scuse one that shade was already in Nike's stock. I'd have personally liked to see a "brassier" gold (Army, officers, "brass", would've made a whole lot of sense--except it might've required more R&D time and effort and, well...). As for this gray thing...all I can say about that after reading that press release and inferring from such that the head brass let Nike hoodwinked then into designating their proprietary color as Army's "specialty/big-game" football uniform (seriously--go back and read it) is this: the Swoosh gon' Swoosh.

As for the new shield...that, I really like. I love the heraldic influence of it,symbolism (as has been previously stated the helmet, sword, shield and star have been a part of USMA'S iconography for well over 200 years), not to mention how versatile it is (which really became apparent after seeing it on the soccer jerseys). That said, I do have one gripe about that composition: it looks as though the helmet done stabbed itself through the forehead clean out the back of its neck, and it's because of the lighter line weight where the sword intersects the helmet, as opposed to the thicker line weight elsewhere around the helmet's edge. Had that been thicker it'd probably read clearer as the sword crossing behind the helmet as opposed to stabbing through it.

In summary (anyone who's sat through a military briefing knows those two words)...even as predictable as many elements of this athletic identity are, I do still like the unified look of the entirety of the system. I just wish they hadn't tried to unify the entirety of the USMA ARMY WEST POINT CADET BLACK KNIGHTS. Still...duty, honor, country.

Oh--and beat Navy. (As if that's gonna happen anytime soon...)

[gdu]

[tBBP]

I might have to cop me one of those.

[BrandMooreArt]

the primary logo is OK. i get the inspiration now, but to those who arn't familiar it looks like a knight. it's a helmet and sword and shield. it's very medieval looking, but since there is a proper reasoning for using it, i can really only properly judge the logo after having lived with it for a while. we'll just have to adapt to it.

The ignorance of outsiders is no reason not to use your traditional symbols. Agreed 100% with everything else you say, though. Great ideas, but just too much thrown against the wall.

Agreed. I don't think it looks medieval at all... it's very Iron Age. And it looks great. Just because someone will think, "helmet + sword= knight", doesn't mean you shouldn't use your symbols.

Greek helmet:

i agree with you guys about 50%.

no you shouldn't let ignorance of outsiders take you away from the imagery that is representative of the thing you're designing. but the whole point of and reason we design things in the first place is to communicate messages and ideas clearly. i dont think the logo does that in the best way, but again let's give it some time and live with it for a while. it might turn out to be a classic logo.

i didn't want to mention it before but since Buc already went there and i know it's not just me now, it does look like Maximus got a hold sword and put an end to whoever was wearing the helmet.

[MJWalker45]

I just don't know why it appears to be new to people when the old helmet and sword was on the previous uniforms.

[altosax29b]

Modernized and sleek, but still bold, symbolic, and unique. It's such a beautiful logo and I like it more and more every time I see it.

[hockey week]

admittedly I haven't looked through all 4 pages of this, but is there any word on what the hockey team will look like? They're suspiciously absent from the rebrand page.

[guest23]

Modernized and sleek, but still bold, symbolic, and unique. It's such a beautiful logo and I like it more and more every time I see it.

You forgot to add "harkens to the glorious past while looking boldly to the future..."

and always twirling twirling twirling.

[MJWalker45]

admittedly I haven't looked through all 4 pages of this, but is there any word on what the hockey team will look like? They're suspiciously absent from the rebrand page.

Quite a few sports are missing. Baseball, hockey and a majority of the womens sports weren't shown.

[CLEstones]

I don't know. I still can't get over the logo. I think its a great logo. It seems to balance well, its rich in identity and meaning. But it looks childish to me. Again, it just doesn't look like something the UNITED STATES ARMY would wear. I don't know if it's the sword or if everything is too round and not rigid. It just doesn't feel right. Not for the Army. Not for a group that has a international reputation of the best armed forces in the world.

I understand my opinion has to do more with the armed forces than actually the University... but... whatever. That's just how a feel.

[MJWalker45]

Looking at this rebrand makes me want to change the Army's star and square logo. It was dated upon arrival and now it's really showing it's age.

[Gothamite]

I agree - I think this logo is so good it shouldn't be limited to the Academy.