New Sacramento Kings Logo Unveiled

[Popmart]

1 minute ago, Ice_Cap said:

You say this like it's a bad thing.

This one. Which i quite like:

[BBTV]

I want to love the lion logo but I can't get past the crown.  Maybe after they officially unveil it in color and explain it will look more natural but for now it just looks odd.

[kroywen]

Guess this one would fit in "Unpopular Opinions," but I would actually prefer if the Kings moved back to the powder blue and red scheme. It's far superior to the muddled purple-and-black look (always disliked having those two dark, fairly similar colors next to one another - they drag each other down), and there's not a single other team in the Big 4 currently using that color scheme.

[Old School Fool]

I always liked the old Kings logo. I am totally down for this.

[MCM0313]

34 minutes ago, kroywen said:

Guess this one would fit in "Unpopular Opinions," but I would actually prefer if the Kings moved back to the powder blue and red scheme. It's far superior to the muddled purple-and-black look (always disliked having those two dark, fairly similar colors next to one another - they drag each other down), and there's not a single other team in the Big 4 currently using that color scheme.

I don't think that opinion is too unpopular. I like that color scheme, and I also like the idea of purple and powder blue together, and I like the idea of all three together. 

 

As long as they don't also add navy. Then they'd somehow turn into the Tennessee Titans. Yech!

[OnWis97]

16 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

1.  ...  My only real criticism (considering we haven't yet seen the colors) is the crown.  They really need to explain what they were going for there.  It's not abstract enough to be abstract - there looks like some "trying to hard" symbolism there.  The two white gaps that go down and to the left are really annyoing to look at.

I am really surprised to not see more comments like this.  The old crown looks much better.  The two narrower rectangles (and white gaps referred to above) are kinda confusing.  The crown seems to have random shapes sticking out of it for no reason.

[DustDevil61]

4 hours ago, Weezy34 said:

 

I was gonna say the same thing about the ball lines until I noticed there may be an "S" hidden in there? Not sure if it was on purpose or not

 

 

I meant the Lion-dribbling-the-basketball logo:

 

 

I think the ball here would work better without lines, where the lion has nothing inside the silhouette besides his eye. It would also play up the simplicity and maybe subtlety. But the logo could even work better without the basketball.

[Old School Fool]

30 minutes ago, DustDevil61 said:

 

I meant the Lion-dribbling-the-basketball logo:

 

 

I think the ball here would work better without lines, where the lion has nothing inside the silhouette besides his eye. It would also play up the simplicity and maybe subtlety. But the logo could even work better without the basketball.

 

The lines on the ball are the same exact lines in the primary logo. That's pretty cool consistency.

[jr79]

Only gripe is that the heraldic lion is hard to pull off without looking like so many other logos around the world. How well it stands out will depend on how the colours are used.

 

 

[FiddySicks]

4 hours ago, kroywen said:

Guess this one would fit in "Unpopular Opinions," but I would actually prefer if the Kings moved back to the powder blue and red scheme. It's far superior to the muddled purple-and-black look (always disliked having those two dark, fairly similar colors next to one another - they drag each other down), and there's not a single other team in the Big 4 currently using that color scheme.

 

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. 

 

 

[Cosmic]

12 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

1.  My initial thoughts when seeing these in b&w on my phone screen (rather than a proper monitor) was OMG THIS IS AWESOME.  My thoughts now are OMG THIS IS SO CLOSE TO BEING AWESOME.  My only real criticism (considering we haven't yet seen the colors) is the crown.  They really need to explain what they were going for there.  It's not abstract enough to be abstract - there looks like some "trying to hard" symbolism there.  The two white gaps that go down and to the left are really annyoing to look at.

My first thought (bear in mind that I know pretty much nothing about Sacramento) was that they were going for a double entendre of crown/mountains. I think it works pretty well as that, but apparently Sac is not in the mountains.

[Old School Fool]

The crown is just some old design holdover from the 70's. It's unique and I prefer they keep it that way.

 

Bucfan56 says they're switching to something when the team sucked but Sacramento never thought their team sucked enough to stop selling out games. The team itself is an anomaly. Any other sports team would just fall apart after constant lack of success, a tiny arena and constant relocation threats. It's the team that will not die. In my opinion the logo serves itself as a tribute of the franchise history as a whole dating all the way back to Rochester.

[JQK]

It's a three point crown in the front, and two points in the back. The lines there are differentiating between the front points and the back points.

 

Took me until yesterday to realize that.

[kroywen]

4 minutes ago, JQK said:

It's a three point crown in the front, and two points in the back. The lines there are differentiating between the front points and the back points.

 

Took me until yesterday to realize that.

I didn't realize that until just now. Considering how few of us have, I'd say it's a poor design.

[The Wolf Within]

12 hours ago, MCM0313 said:

So you think the Bills and Oilers looked the same in the '90s? I can sort of see your point but I think the shade they used in the '80s made it stand out from the crowd...if only they'd just used powder blue and not complicated it with all that royal.

 

I honestly don't follow any sports other than basketball, so I don't really know what they looked like. But with as many teams use red white and blue in the NBA, it'd be a shame for a team to choose to become another rwb team instead of doing something different.

[The_Admiral]

If the Kings wanna go retro, they should update the old Comedy Central-style Cincinnati Royals logo:

 

 

Maybe lose the grin, but have a crown and Sacramento skyline rising from California.

 

 

[BBTV]

logos like that only work if your skyline has any iconic buildings or a recognizable shape.  Not sure that anyone outside of California would recognize anything about the Sacramento skyline.

[OnWis97]

1 hour ago, JQK said:

It's a three point crown in the front, and two points in the back. The lines there are differentiating between the front points and the back points.

 

Took me until yesterday to realize that.

I can see it but I pretty much have to force myself.  It is kinda like the Padres gap in the D.  I guess it indicates a drop shadow in the S.  I think they tried too hard with that one.

[eRay]

I thought we all saw the three points in front and the two in the back. Guess I was wrong. The weird blocks are kind of acting like a shadow. It makes total visual sense to me  but I'll admit it does look a little funky. I still love everything about this. They've hit a home run in my mind. Now to the colors...all options seem to have a tiny flaw except for just sticking with what they have now. Purple/Lt. Blue would look good but I think an NBA team with a marketing department will force Black to be part of that palette, just like Milwaukee did. That would essentially just leave them replacing their current Silver with Lt. Blue. I think Purple fits them way too well to consider going straight throwback, and I think Purple/Red would be a mistake unless they lean heavily on a Purple and Gray scheme and use Red just for trim. I don't know, I'm up in the air. I guess replace silver with light blue and call it a day.

[MCM0313]

19 minutes ago, eRay said:

I thought we all saw the three points in front and the two in the back. Guess I was wrong. The weird blocks are kind of acting like a shadow. It makes total visual sense to me  but I'll admit it does look a little funky. I still love everything about this. They've hit a home run in my mind. Now to the colors...all options seem to have a tiny flaw except for just sticking with what they have now. Purple/Lt. Blue would look good but I think an NBA team with a marketing department will force Black to be part of that palette, just like Milwaukee did. That would essentially just leave them replacing their current Silver with Lt. Blue. I think Purple fits them way too well to consider going straight throwback, and I think Purple/Red would be a mistake unless they lean heavily on a Purple and Gray scheme and use Red just for trim. I don't know, I'm up in the air. I guess replace silver with light blue and call it a day.

If they replace silver with light blue, I hope they emphasize the light blue a lot more than they currently do silver.