Jump to content

Islanders confirm that they are not changing their logo


Recommended Posts

The Islanders have announced that they are not changing their logo at all upon their move to Brooklyn.

This is a big mistake. The problem with the Islanders' current logo is that the map of Long Island shows only Nassau and Suffolk Counties.

It would be only a small tweak to alter the logo to include the entire geographical island, as Discogod has demonstrated.
logo-islanders-with-bklyn-and-queens_zps

This is so well done. We can see that the S is framed by Jamaica Bay. And the I points to the approximate spot of the Barclays Center, just as the I in the current logo points to the approximate spot of the Nassau Coliseum. Casual observers wouldn't even notice a change.

A modified logo would also address the question about whether Brooklyn is a part of Long Island. For people who live outside the area, the answer is: geographically, yes; in common parlance, no. The current logo, in showing only Nassau and Suffolk Counties, reflects the colloquial use of the term "Long Island" that has been current since the 1960s.

Before that, however, it was very common to refer to places in Queens and even Brooklyn as being on Long Island. Up until the 1950s, people routinely wrote "Jamaica, L.I." and so forth on envelopes.
Long Island University was founded in Brooklyn in the 1920s. (By the way, that school's teams also play in the Barclays Center.) And Long Island City is a section in Queens; it was formerly a separate city, and was a party, along with the cities of New York and Brooklyn, to the consolidation of 1898 which created the modern New York City.
So having a logo that shows the entire geographical Long Island including Brooklyn and Queens would harken back to a time in the not-so-distant past. And, more important, it would encompass the place where the team is playing.

By retaining a logo that shows only Nassau and Suffolk Counties, the team is essentiall acknowledging that it is playing outside of its named home area, similar to the New York Giants, the LA Galaxy, the Detroit Pistons, etc. It's surprising that the Islanders would do that, instead of shifting the focus to the geographical interpretation of "Long Island", which seems like a natural considering that their arena will be at a terminal of the Long Island Rail Road.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems like it would be common sense to add the rest of Long Island - not just as a nod to the hipsters they need to draw the next five years, but also to keep those fans coming if and when they get booted and have to go crawling back to Nassau Long Island. It's like if the old California Angels' logo only had the bottom part of the state.

I guess it underscores that the Islanders were culturally from the other Long Island, never cared to appeal to Brooklyn and Queens, and it's probably a huge mistake to move there.

Also, it's interesting to think of a world where they never combined the five cities. It seems like the people largely have their own borough identity while still identifying as New Yorkers and rooting for the NY teams. But had they remained four huge cities next to each other (and Staten Island), would the landscape be different culturally and sports-wise? Would each borough essentially have its own sports teams? Would anybody outside the Bronx have became fans of the Yankees, for instance? I was surprised to read that close to 60% of the city's population is in Brooklyn and Queens, which should theoretically be Mets territory. Obviously the Yankees' storied history and the Mets' late start play a large part of them not owning the city. If the boroughs had never combined, there might not be many more Yankees fans in Brooklyn than, say in Philly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, it's interesting to think of a world where they never combined the five cities. It seems like the people largely have their own borough identity while still identifying as New Yorkers and rooting for the NY teams. But had they remained four huge cities next to each other (and Staten Island), would the landscape be different culturally and sports-wise? Would each borough essentially have its own sports teams? Would anybody outside the Bronx have became fans of the Yankees, for instance? I was surprised to read that close to 60% of the city's population is in Brooklyn and Queens, which should theoretically be Mets territory. Obviously the Yankees' storied history and the Mets' late start play a large part of them not owning the city. If the boroughs had never combined, there might not be many more Yankees fans in Brooklyn than, say in Philly.

Hmm. Interesting.

It wasn't four large cities, it was New York City, Brooklyn and a bunch of of smaller cities and towns in what became the boroughs of Queens, Staten Island and the Bronx. Had the consolidation not happened, they'd still be suburbs and still largely identify with New York City.

But with no combined city, there's no Robert Moses to face down O'Malley and the Dodgers might still be in Brooklyn today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But they have got to do something, right? I am a big fan of the Islanders' logo and uniforms, but they have to at least introduce a secondary logo reflecting that they are now in Brooklyn, right? I get the Niners not feeling the need to represent Santa Clara in their uni set, but Brooklyn is one of the hippest cities around. Brooklyn Nets gear is ubiquitous because their home is in Brooklyn (and because of Jay Z, but still...) There is no way their branding/merchandising team sits back and misses this opportunity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, it's interesting to think of a world where they never combined the five cities. It seems like the people largely have their own borough identity while still identifying as New Yorkers and rooting for the NY teams. But had they remained four huge cities next to each other (and Staten Island), would the landscape be different culturally and sports-wise? Would each borough essentially have its own sports teams? Would anybody outside the Bronx have became fans of the Yankees, for instance? I was surprised to read that close to 60% of the city's population is in Brooklyn and Queens, which should theoretically be Mets territory. Obviously the Yankees' storied history and the Mets' late start play a large part of them not owning the city. If the boroughs had never combined, there might not be many more Yankees fans in Brooklyn than, say in Philly.

Hmm. Interesting.

It wasn't four large cities, it was New York City, Brooklyn and a bunch of of smaller cities and towns in what became the boroughs of Queens, Staten Island and the Bronx. Had the consolidation not happened, they'd still be suburbs and still largely identify with New York City.

But with no combined city, there's no Robert Moses to face down O'Malley and the Dodgers might still be in Brooklyn today.

I'll just add that much of the Bronx was already part of New York City before the consolidation of 1898, owing to two separate annexations.
Also, Moses didn't so much "face down" O'Malley as ignore him. O'Malley wanted to build a new privately-funded stadium on the site of today's Barclays Center. All he needed the City government (in the person of Moses, who was commissioner of several agencies) to do was to help him consolidate the many parcels of land into one, so that no single holdout could scuttle the whole thing.
Moses, who was so powerful that he essentially lived in a world of his own creation, refused to lift a finger. He didn't grasp the significance of the Dodgers.
It was only after O'Malley had been rebuffed by Moses that he began talks with Los Angeles, and received iron-clad assurances about Chavez Ravine. By the time anyone else in the New York City government could react to this, the agreement with Los Angeles was already in place; and O'Malley had no reason to back out of an agreement with people who had treated him well, and to try again with a city government that had brushed him off.
Furthermore, once all of this became known, the idea of buying all the parcels at Flatbush Avenue and Fourth Avenue became impossible. In fact, the City couldn't offer anything at all in Brooklyn; the City's offer was a site in Flushing Meadow Park in Queens (which eventually became the location of Shea Stadium).
All of the blame for the Dodgers' move goes to Moses and not to O'Malley, whose intention was to stay in Brooklyn.
P.S. - The Giants actually wanted to leave New York; but their original intention was to move to Minneapolis. It was only after the Dodgers had signed to go to Los Angeles that O'Malley convinced Horace Stoneham that San Francisco would be a better place for his team, as that would help preserve the teams' rivalry.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, it's interesting to think of a world where they never combined the five cities. It seems like the people largely have their own borough identity while still identifying as New Yorkers and rooting for the NY teams. But had they remained four huge cities next to each other (and Staten Island), would the landscape be different culturally and sports-wise? Would each borough essentially have its own sports teams? Would anybody outside the Bronx have became fans of the Yankees, for instance? I was surprised to read that close to 60% of the city's population is in Brooklyn and Queens, which should theoretically be Mets territory. Obviously the Yankees' storied history and the Mets' late start play a large part of them not owning the city. If the boroughs had never combined, there might not be many more Yankees fans in Brooklyn than, say in Philly.

Hmm. Interesting.

It wasn't four large cities, it was New York City, Brooklyn and a bunch of of smaller cities and towns in what became the boroughs of Queens, Staten Island and the Bronx. Had the consolidation not happened, they'd still be suburbs and still largely identify with New York City.

But with no combined city, there's no Robert Moses to face down O'Malley and the Dodgers might still be in Brooklyn today.

So "New York City" at the time was present-day Manhattan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, it's interesting to think of a world where they never combined the five cities. It seems like the people largely have their own borough identity while still identifying as New Yorkers and rooting for the NY teams. But had they remained four huge cities next to each other (and Staten Island), would the landscape be different culturally and sports-wise? Would each borough essentially have its own sports teams? Would anybody outside the Bronx have became fans of the Yankees, for instance? I was surprised to read that close to 60% of the city's population is in Brooklyn and Queens, which should theoretically be Mets territory. Obviously the Yankees' storied history and the Mets' late start play a large part of them not owning the city. If the boroughs had never combined, there might not be many more Yankees fans in Brooklyn than, say in Philly.

Hmm. Interesting.

It wasn't four large cities, it was New York City, Brooklyn and a bunch of of smaller cities and towns in what became the boroughs of Queens, Staten Island and the Bronx. Had the consolidation not happened, they'd still be suburbs and still largely identify with New York City.

But with no combined city, there's no Robert Moses to face down O'Malley and the Dodgers might still be in Brooklyn today.

So "New York City" at the time was present-day Manhattan?

Right before the Consolidation of 1898, New York City consisted of Manhattan and most of the Bronx (then usually called "the Northern District"), which had been annexed part in 1874 and part in 1895. (Side note: even after Consolidation, the Borough of the Bronx was part of New York County. It wasn't until 1912 that Bronx County was created, and that the five boroughs of New York City all became co-terminous with five counties of New York State.)

As mentioned earlier, Brooklyn was a separate city. It was a city which had begun in the western part of Kings County (in the section known eventually as "Downtown Brooklyn") and which had done its own annexation, eventually absorbing all the other municipalities of Kings County and filling the entire county.

Queens was a suburban county with one city, Long Island City, and several major towns such as Flushing and Jamaica. The county of Queens included all of what is today Nassau County. It was only the western portion of Queens County that became New York City's Borough of Queens; for the entire year of 1898, Queens County was partially in New York City and partially outside of it. The parts of Queens County that were outside the Borough of Queens became Nassau County in 1899.

Richmond County on Staten Island was a collection of villages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That updated logo of the Islanders is even better than the current logo... I think it is an excellent idea to use the entire island and really nice way to have the first S be placed below that bay area... I like that placement very much so it does show the entire island and more.. I hope the Islanders does update the logo to reflect this more soon enough...

AND btw the history on the Giants and Dodgers, I often wondered about more of that but it is really interesting to see who actually was the reason why both the Dodgers and Giants left for California years ago....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It feels like the Islanders are moving to Brooklyn reluctantly. It's like there too good for Brooklyn. Do they not want new fans? How are they gonna do that if they refuse to even add Brooklyn or Queens to the logo, how hard is that? Stupid mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It feels like the Islanders are moving to Brooklyn reluctantly. It's like there too good for Brooklyn. Do they not want new fans? How are they gonna do that if they refuse to even add Brooklyn or Queens to the logo, how hard is that? Stupid mistake.

Again, I don't think that factors into it at all. I think we're thinking much more about the logo and its significance than either the team or its existing fans.

As for Moses, his negotiations with O'Malley were interesting. O'Malley first suggested Flushing Meadow, then abandoned it when Moses took the bait. The Dodgers tried playing games in New Jersey to force the city's hand, but they failed to move the needle. Then LA handed over the keys to the kingdom and he was gone in a flash.

I love how O'Malley essentially negotiated with San Francisco on Stoneham's behalf, and without his knowledge, so he'd have a moving partner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It feels like the Islanders are moving to Brooklyn reluctantly. It's like there too good for Brooklyn. Do they not want new fans? How are they gonna do that if they refuse to even add Brooklyn or Queens to the logo, how hard is that? Stupid mistake.

Yes, they are moving to Brooklyn reluctantly because they tried for years and years to build a new arena in Nassau so that they wouldn't have to settle for two-thirds of an arena in a city where their fans don't live. I'm sure they'd like new fans, but how are they going to see the ice?

PUT THE BROOKLYN IN LONG ISLAND.

23-islanders-hockey-barclays-center-4.w5

PUT THE ISLANDERS IN A HOCKEY RINK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It feels like the Islanders are moving to Brooklyn reluctantly. It's like there too good for Brooklyn. Do they not want new fans? How are they gonna do that if they refuse to even add Brooklyn or Queens to the logo, how hard is that? Stupid mistake.

Yes, they are moving to Brooklyn reluctantly because they tried for years and years to build a new arena in Nassau so that they wouldn't have to settle for two-thirds of an arena in a city where their fans don't live. I'm sure they'd like new fans, but how are they going to see the ice?

PUT THE BROOKLYN IN LONG ISLAND.

23-islanders-hockey-barclays-center-4.w5

PUT THE ISLANDERS IN A HOCKEY RINK.

my name (offcenteredscoreboard) is a joke at the fact the scoreboard at barclays is over the blue line... that being said its more of a loving joke than a hateful onebarclays.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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