mr.nascar13

New Sacramento Kings Logo Unveiled

Recommended Posts

That light blue and burgundy (or whatever it is) is beautiful.  Yeah, purple and gold makes the most sense for Kings, but to hell with it.  That is too nice (and unique).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Not the USFL, but the WLAF.

3269-707Fr.jpg14197-108Fr.jpg

Really?! Man, I've got my would-be NFL challengers mixed up! Those are very sharp helmets!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MCM0313 said:

Really?! Man, I've got my would-be NFL challengers mixed up! Those are very sharp helmets!

 

The helmets were indeed beautiful, as was the colour scheme.

And also note that the WLAF wasn't a would-be challenger to the NFL; it was the NFL's own project.  In order to make the association with the NFL clearer, the league later became known as NFL Europe.  (Though I think the original name was better.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole "Sac" moniker really is a common term around here when referring to the city. I mean yeah I get it because HAHAHABALLS!1!, but the shortened version is nice, because Sacramento really is too much of a mouthful. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:upside:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

The helmets were indeed beautiful, as was the colour scheme.

And also note that the WLAF wasn't a would-be challenger to the NFL; it was the NFL's own project.  In order to make the association with the NFL clearer, the league later became known as NFL Europe.  (Though I think the original name was better.)

Gotcha. Why did I think the Knights were part of USFL? Did USFL ever have a New York- or New Jersey-based team?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MCM0313 said:

Gotcha. Why did I think the Knights were part of USFL? Did USFL ever have a New York- or New Jersey-based team?

The Generals.

 

They were owned by Donald Trump originally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AAO said:

 

That had the ugly script throwback, numerals, number on the chest above the wordmark and weird pattern and trim. The hues were also different. That's why it was poorly received *AND Shiny fabric* A combination for disaster

 

With the new logos and wordmarks, they can pull it off much better

 

 

Or they could have a purple road, black alternate, and keep the gold as trim and accent colors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to do any updates with red and blue. I really doubt they'll head that direction..plus it's not making sense because those were primarily Cincy/KC days

 

 

54 minutes ago, AAO said:

And here's how these uniforms could play out.. I hope. I'm not sure that they'd put "SAC" on a uniform..but they need at least one uni with the home city name. Sacramento's too long, unless you condense it. Which no wordmark in their new brand is condensed. All extended. I'm expecting something conservative with minor new/different nuances

np18hx.jpg

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

The helmets were indeed beautiful, as was the colour scheme.

And also note that the WLAF wasn't a would-be challenger to the NFL; it was the NFL's own project.  In order to make the association with the NFL clearer, the league later became known as NFL Europe.  (Though I think the original name was better.)

 

The WLAF was not officially affiliated with the NFL the first couple of years.  A couple NFL owners had investments in WLAF teams, but there wasn't an official partnership between the leagues. The NFL only invested in the league when all of the teams were in Europe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a hunch since I barely know anything about the NBA: Could it be those lot could do a Clippers and only change logos,since the colours are staying largely the same,according to an article on the main site?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/24/2016 at 2:28 AM, Bucfan56 said:

 

Problem is, those colors represent the worst stretch of basketball the Kings have had in Sacramento, and are pretty much the embodiment of the cheapness and downright AWFUL management of the owners (Believe it or not, there really was a time when the Kings were even more poorly run then they are now or during the Maloof era). They only wore powder blue because some jenky local print shop screwed up their order and instead of getting them reprinted, the owners just said, meh, just give us a discount and we'll keep em! I know quite a few Kings fans out here, and I seriously haven't run across a single one who's been here through the full stretch that actually wants those colors to return. 

 

 

 

That's an awesome story if true.  Has Paul Lukas, or any other "authority" validated it?  Sounds like you're saying the Kings were supposed to get Royal blues, but got Powder blues instead and we're like "OK!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, WSU151 said:

 

The WLAF was not officially affiliated with the NFL the first couple of years.  A couple NFL owners had investments in WLAF teams, but there wasn't an official partnership between the leagues. The NFL only invested in the league when all of the teams were in Europe.

 

Are you sure?  This New York Times article from 1992 says "The World League was formed in 1989 by a unanimous vote of N.F.L. owners to expand American football to Europe and offer a developmental league for N.F.L. prospects."  And this 1991 Los Angeles Times article calls the NFL the WLAF's "parent company".  Both of these articles are from the period when there were teams in the U.S. and Canada as well as in Europe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AAO said:

That's aggressive. It's really not an issue

Here's the other two purported possibilities:

 

9vd3s1.jpg

 

2s6apow.jpg

 

I don't like either. 2006 Utah Jazz all over again without the navy

 

Purple and old/metallic gold is the most viable route

 

 

I love that purple and light blue scheme. Such a unique color scheme. If I'm not mistaken, I don't think those two colors have ever been the main two in a color scheme for one the North American professional sports teams, have they?

 

But out of curiosity, with the dark purple and gold scheme, would adding red to it as a tertiary help it? I've always associated purple, gold and red as a good Royal-themed color scheme. Plus, it'd help differentiate the Kings from the Lakers even more so (not that their colors are really similar that at all. Two completely different shades).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Are you sure?  This New York Times article from 1992 says "The World League was formed in 1989 by a unanimous vote of N.F.L. owners to expand American football to Europe and offer a developmental league for N.F.L. prospects."  And this 1991 Los Angeles Times article calls the NFL the WLAF's "parent company".  Both of these articles are from the period when there were teams in the U.S. and Canada as well as in Europe.

 

I stand corrected - good finds.  I always remember a Sports Illustrated article that featured the start up of the WLAF, and I always thought it was independent.  The players were never affiliated with NFL teams until the switch to NFL Europe.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it was reported earlier today that the colors are purple, silver and white. No black 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is wrong with Purple, Silver and Black anyways?  It's a perfectly attractive scheme that is pretty rare among sports teams.  First the hockey team, of the same name, ditches it and now Sacramento follows.  The scheme minus black would be acceptable but still a downgrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite wanting the Kings' colors back, I'm actually not in favor of changing color schemes,. That said, the Nuggets need something that's theirs and theirs alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, bowld said:

I believe it was reported earlier today that the colors are purple, silver and white. No black 

 

Some black is needed to break things up, but Purple/Silver as-is isn't bad, either. I'd also be on the Purple/Silver/Gold* bandwagon as well; those 3 colors are the most regal colors one can think of and could work well together IMO.

 

*Metallic Gold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hendocfc said:

Just a hunch since I barely know anything about the NBA: Could it be those lot could do a Clippers and only change logos,since the colours are staying largely the same,according to an article on the main site?

 

I seriously hope not, because the template is hands down the worst part of their current set. But knowing the Kings, that wouldn't surprise me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JESSEDIEBOLT said:

 

Yeah I get that. Kind of a weird situation tho, since Cali has so many teams. I don't think it'll be a big deal if they go the gold route.

 

Yeah, that would be like saying Boston and Washington, DC couldn't have vaguely similar color schemes in anything. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.