University of Buffalo

[Buffalo]

Typography is AWFUL!

 

 

[MCM0313]

Hopefully they get rid of the BFBS crap and go back to a simpler blue-and-white color scheme.

[Cosmic]

41 minutes ago, MCM0313 said:

Hopefully they get rid of the BFBS crap and go back to a simpler blue-and-white color scheme.

This update is pretty much everything I wanted in a rebrand:

 

- Focus more on Buffalo.

- Seems to signal a blue-white focus, but they have been painting a lot of things black at the stadium.  I would also be OK with gray taking the place of black; there is minor precedent.

- Gets rid of the nose ring (at least in the primary), which only serves the purpose of making a real bull more docile.

 

I'm very interested to see what the football helmets look like, because they seem to have a lot of the chrome decaled, nose ringed bull helmets laying around.

[Cosmic]

5 hours ago, MC Buffalo said:

University of Buffalo

Nobody says this.

[Cosmic]

The athletic rebrand is part of a university-wide "freshening" (I'll call it, as it's not much change for the academic side).  There's pretty detailed branding page.  There's twelve secondary colors named, and not one of them is black.  Here's hoping the athletic side doesn't go rogue, as they're selling this as unifying the university's brand.

 

 

 

@ARTnSocal, you've been gone too long!  There's North, South, and Downtown campuses now. 

[YelichGraphics]

At least theres no State of New York crap on it. The one downfall to living in Buffalo especially education wise is its located in New York.

[YelichGraphics]

Its like a mix of the chicago bulls and dukes old devil logo

[dfwabel]

57 minutes ago, Cosmic said:

The athletic rebrand is part of a university-wide "freshening" (I'll call it, as it's not much change for the academic side).  There's pretty detailed branding page.  There's twelve secondary colors named, and not one of them is black.  Here's hoping the athletic side doesn't go rogue, as they're selling this as unifying the university's brand.

 

 

 

@ARTnSocal, you've been gone too long!  There's North, South, and Downtown campuses now. 

Basically, now that the AD who started the "New York Bulls"New York Bulls Initiative" Initiative", which gave them the former branding left for UCF, we can drop it.

 

In retrospect, I really see why then-AD Danny White tried to be branded as the "Cal of the East".

[Cosmic]

1 minute ago, dfwabel said:

Basically, now that the AD who started the "New York Bulls"New York Bulls Initiative" Initiative", which gave them the former branding left for UCF, we can drop it.

 

In retrospect, I really see why then-AD Danny White tried tried to be branded as the "Cal of the East".

It was admirable goal, but I think it had some fatal flaws.  I think we're better off trying to be a smaller Pitt than a smaller Cal.

[4_tattoos]

Good update. But I can't help but think of the Chicago Bulls & The Rock when I see that new bull head logo.

[AnPheitseog]

Finally can be proud of my Alma mater again and resume cheering for their athletics.

 

It is sad to see the old bull gone, but i do l'île this update, and glad to see the terrible NY mark gone. 

 

I can deal with, and even in some ways like, the "New York Public Powerhouse" line.

 

Nothing should replace the interlocking UB though. 

[the_grateful_ted]

It's a pretty simple modern, minimalistic update, which I'm totally fine with. Literally anything would be better than what they had before

[burgess]

The men's club hockey team has been on point recently.  This is their look since last year (basically took on Air Force's look):

 

[Cosmic]

Looks like they'll be using the new bull at least as an alt helmet, but they'll still be using an unfortunate amount of black. Like a mainly black bull head on a white helmet.

 

For an athletic department that is not very financially independent, they should really follow the lead of the rest of the university. I think the rebrand info listed twelve tertiary colors to be used in addition to the blue and white... black was not even among those.

[WavePunter]

On April 12, 2016 at 0:54 PM, Cujo said:

 

Early-stage CTE in exchange for having textbooks thrown at you. What a deal!

Never had a textbook thrown at me and I played two sports in college and won a national title in wrestling.. You get an education that others are paying tens of thousands of dollars per year for.. If you want to pay the athletes, that's fine, but quit giving them scholarships.. If they got paid, then had to turn around and pay their tuition, room and board, fees, etc, they'd be in the same boat anyway.. They're getting their education paid for, as well as an opportunity to possibly have a future as a professional athlete.. That alone is well worth it imo..

[rams80]

On 4/12/2016 at 10:45 AM, GoGamecocks29 said:

Money shouldn't go to the players AT ALL.  They're being indirectly paid through free tuition, room/board, meals, marketing (if you're a good enough player), and etc. Another big thing is that even the athletes on the non-revenue teams can all graduate without mountains of student debt.

 

That's not true at all.  The NCAA scholarship allowances don't come close to covering all of the tuition costs for non-revenue athletes.

[rams80]

On 6/13/2016 at 5:32 PM, WavePunter said:

Never had a textbook thrown at me and I played two sports in college and won a national title in wrestling.. You get an education that others are paying tens of thousands of dollars per year for.. If you want to pay the athletes, that's fine, but quit giving them scholarships.. If they got paid, then had to turn around and pay their tuition, room and board, fees, etc, they'd be in the same boat anyway.. They're getting their education paid for, as well as an opportunity to possibly have a future as a professional athlete.. That alone is well worth it imo..

 

That's the story anyway.  The reality is that athletes, especially football players learn less than your average business student who gets drunk 7 nights out of 7, and are basically discouraged to do more than the bare minimum to stay eligible. (granted they will get the kind of academic assistance that the rest of the student body could really use to do that, but do they actually "learn" anything when they get the kind of assistance they do?)

 

And it is kind of disgusting to see schools rake in millions and not use it to benefit the students at all except in terms of building new athletic facilities.

 

/Works at an NCAA FBS institution and therefore probably has a much better idea of how things work nowadays in modern college athletics than a lot of the people "liking" the "free education is payment enough" argument.

[WavePunter]

8 hours ago, rams80 said:

 

That's the story anyway.  The reality is that athletes, especially football players learn less than your average business student who gets drunk 7 nights out of 7, and are basically discouraged to do more than the bare minimum to stay eligible. (granted they will get the kind of academic assistance that the rest of the student body could really use to do that, but do they actually "learn" anything when they get the kind of assistance they do?)

 

And it is kind of disgusting to see schools rake in millions and not use it to benefit the students at all except in terms of building new athletic facilities.

 

/Works at an NCAA FBS institution and therefore probably has a much better idea of how things work nowadays in modern college athletics than a lot of the people "liking" the "free education is payment enough" argument.

there are some pretty intelligent student-athletes out there, especially football players who take their academics seriously.. the student-athletes know exactly what they're getting themselves into when they come to college.. there are probably some amazing players who leave college early to enter the NFL draft, and the loss of that star player could potentially cost the university  a ton of money if they struggle the following season and don't become bowl-eligible or whatever... the fact of the matter is that there's not a problem with the rules or the compensation.. there's a problem with those who try to skirt around the system.. i work in athletics at an NCAA D2 institution, and was a 2-sport athlete while in college (football and wrestling), so i'm also pretty familiar with the way things work.. these athletes are getting tens of thousands of dollars in scholarship money per year.. THAT IS PAYMENT!!! they get to spend it on their education instead of on cars and "swag" at the mall, but it's a monetary payment nonetheless.. they are also housed and fed, and usually given at least some form of apparel.. the NCAA sets eligibility requirements, and yes - some do the bare minimum to stay eligible - but the bare minimum to stay eligible is still higher than the bare minimum to stay in school.. you have tons of regular business students who get drunk 7 nights out of 7, and are barely hanging on to academic probation.. you have FAR MORE students who fail out or maintain lower GPA's than those required to remain eligible in the general student population.. the percentages may be slightly heavy on the student-athlete side, but in terms of numbers alone, athletes arent anwhere near the number of college failures as regular students.. and in terms of where the school uses the money, guess what the student athletes want... NICE FACILITIES!!! if you don't think facilities plays a huge role in the recruiting race, you're sadly mistaken.  running an athletic department is like running a business, and it's about making money.. i have absolutely ZERO issue with the athletic program making money off of its teams.. if the schools weren't able to make money, they'd discontinue the programs - which is a thought i find disgusting.. the schools aren't obligated to field a football program, nor are they obligated to pay the student athletes extra "salary" money just for doing well.. it may be all coaching anyway.. should the student athletes be rewarded for great coaching? not really...  i think the NCAA's restrictions are a bit extreme, and i think the athletes should be able to market themselves and make money as they see fit from outside sources (such as selling an old jersey or participating in a paid appearance or autograph signing), but they don't deserve paychecks from the school... if that's the case, then high school athletes deserve paychecks as well.. it just gets fishy when you start to open that unneccesary can of worms..

[rams80]

Here's the thing.  Colleges and Universities give out free or cut-rate educations for students all the time.  There are two crucial differences though.

1.  Those students can work at jobs during the summer and school year to get money for other things they may need.  NCAA Division I athletes, especially revenue sport athletes, can't.

 

2.  The vast, vast, majority of those students don't earn the college or university in question millions of dollars in revenue for their actions and will not after they graduate.  So it's probably fine that they don't get pay over the top (but some still do!  Look at graduate assistants!)

 

I'd also add that since you mentioned it, maybe high schools should be setting aside some of the gate money for student scholarships (CTE is cumulative) or at least use it to defray the participation fee that is increasingly in vogue at the high school level.

[guest23]

23 minutes ago, WavePunter said:

there are some pretty intelligent student-athletes out there, especially football players who take their academics seriously.. the student-athletes know exactly what they're getting themselves into when they come to college.. there are probably some amazing players who leave college early to enter the NFL draft, and the loss of that star player could potentially cost the university  a ton of money if they struggle the following season and don't become bowl-eligible or whatever... the fact of the matter is that there's not a problem with the rules or the compensation.. there's a problem with those who try to skirt around the system.. i work in athletics at an NCAA D2 institution, and was a 2-sport athlete while in college (football and wrestling), so i'm also pretty familiar with the way things work.. these athletes are getting tens of thousands of dollars in scholarship money per year.. THAT IS PAYMENT!!! they get to spend it on their education instead of on cars and "swag" at the mall, but it's a monetary payment nonetheless.. they are also housed and fed, and usually given at least some form of apparel.. the NCAA sets eligibility requirements, and yes - some do the bare minimum to stay eligible - but the bare minimum to stay eligible is still higher than the bare minimum to stay in school.. you have tons of regular business students who get drunk 7 nights out of 7, and are barely hanging on to academic probation.. you have FAR MORE students who fail out or maintain lower GPA's than those required to remain eligible in the general student population.. the percentages may be slightly heavy on the student-athlete side, but in terms of numbers alone, athletes arent anwhere near the number of college failures as regular students.. and in terms of where the school uses the money, guess what the student athletes want... NICE FACILITIES!!! if you don't think facilities plays a huge role in the recruiting race, you're sadly mistaken.  running an athletic department is like running a business, and it's about making money.. i have absolutely ZERO issue with the athletic program making money off of its teams.. if the schools weren't able to make money, they'd discontinue the programs - which is a thought i find disgusting.. the schools aren't obligated to field a football program, nor are they obligated to pay the student athletes extra "salary" money just for doing well.. it may be all coaching anyway.. should the student athletes be rewarded for great coaching? not really...  i think the NCAA's restrictions are a bit extreme, and i think the athletes should be able to market themselves and make money as they see fit from outside sources (such as selling an old jersey or participating in a paid appearance or autograph signing), but they don't deserve paychecks from the school... if that's the case, then high school athletes deserve paychecks as well.. it just gets fishy when you start to open that unneccesary can of worms..

 

For being a former student-athlete, this statement lacks any sort of thought structure that would be necessary to put forward a cohesive argument. Sure if you want to riff on uniforms for a few lines of text, knock yourself out with an ellipsis or two, but this comes off as rambling.

 

To compare a D2 experience to even a D1 mid-major is complete night and day. Bring in a power 5 football factory program into the discussion and it's not even worthy of comparison it's a complete joke. UNC is a perfect example (there are others) of creating a farcical educational experience in creating a fraudulent academic experience, thus creating a de facto semi-pro environment where the athletic department exploited the labor of it's athletes in order to reap hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue that primarily benefited a select few.

 

The concept of student-athlete as it pertains to big time college sports died in the 1980's once tv money got involved.