Jump to content

Minnesota Timberwolves


Soblito

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 742
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Too busy. Most NBA marks seem to be moving towards 'simple'. Such as the Hawks returning to the red and white or the Warriors returning to the simple logo and not the garrish 90s logo they had.

 

I think a T'Wolves rebrand would be a simple layout or wordmark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the pose of the howling wolf. If cleaned up, it could possibly be a decent 1990's NBA-esque design, but as is, it has way too much detail. Way too many outlines. A lot of unnecessary clutter. The angular style of the font also reminds me too much of the new Hornets font, although it is definitely not the same. Someone put in a lot of nice effort into this, but it'd be a downgrade/lateral move at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Way too busy, with far too many elements. The font is also rather ugly. The entire logo looks like something straight out of the late 1990's/early 2000's (and I've always hated those overly-busy animal logos from that era).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm gonna push back on this (recent) notion that logos can't have detail. Many successful logos in pro sports right now have more detail than that. When did detail become a bad thing? 

 

Yes, too much detail isn't good, but I don't think this has too much detail. If I have a criticism for this logo it's that it's sort of aping the Arizona Coyotes logo, but is even more poorly drawn. The neck/chest area feels like it doesn't line up with the head of the wolf, and the mouth has some perspective issues, and the two trees on the left don't feel necessary. But let's not handcuff ourselves into thinking that simplicity is the only way to create a good logo these days. There are bad simple logos out there just as there are good detailed logos. 

PvO6ZWJ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, McCarthy said:

I'm gonna push back on this (recent) notion that logos can't have detail. Many successful logos in pro sports right now have more detail than that. When did detail become a bad thing? 

 

Yes, too much detail isn't good, but I don't think this has too much detail. If I have a criticism for this logo it's that it's sort of aping the Arizona Coyotes logo, but is even more poorly drawn. The neck/chest area feels like it doesn't line up with the head of the wolf, and the mouth has some perspective issues, and the two trees on the left don't feel necessary. But let's not handcuff ourselves into thinking that simplicity is the only way to create a good logo these days. There are bad simple logos out there just as there are good detailed logos. 

 

I agree. This logo isn't any more detailed than the Hornets logo(s). 

 

Is it my favorite concept? No. But it's not bad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish this was the new Wolves logo.  It is thousand times better than the current one. They need to go back to the royal blue, green, and silver like they did from 1989-96.  When Nike/Jordan takes over the new NBA apparel deal next season, I really hope the Wolves have new unis by then. The current look don't excite me very well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎5‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 0:26 AM, McCarthy said:

I'm gonna push back on this (recent) notion that logos can't have detail. Many successful logos in pro sports right now have more detail than that. When did detail become a bad thing? 

 

Yes, too much detail isn't good, but I don't think this has too much detail. If I have a criticism for this logo it's that it's sort of aping the Arizona Coyotes logo, but is even more poorly drawn. The neck/chest area feels like it doesn't line up with the head of the wolf, and the mouth has some perspective issues, and the two trees on the left don't feel necessary. But let's not handcuff ourselves into thinking that simplicity is the only way to create a good logo these days. There are bad simple logos out there just as there are good detailed logos. 

 

On ‎5‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 1:45 AM, JESSEDIEBOLT said:

 

I agree. This logo isn't any more detailed than the Hornets logo(s). 

 

Is it my favorite concept? No. But it's not bad. 

 

I'm going to give this a four-day bump because it's an interesting conversation especially considering how some of the newer NBA logos have gone away from this type of design towards overly simple designs (Raptors). I don't think this is necessarily an argument against all detail, but against detail that could be executed more carefully.

 

Not to turn this into an attack on this logo individually, because there are plenty of worse concepts out there and this particular concept is close to being solid, but it is a good example of what happens when someone slaps one image (the wolf) on top of another (the ball) and doesn't bother to make sure all the pieces flow smoothly into each other. It is full of close tension points and unnecessary gaps creating numerous slivers of shapes. Bringing up the new Hornets logo, if you were to dissect the vector layering of the Hornets logo and this T-Wolves concept, the Hornets logo has 1/2 the shapes making it easy on the eyes. Of course art is subjective and one has the right to like or dislike a certain style, but the fact that this has more tension points, nodes, and gaps in spacing than the Hornets logo is objective.

 

Timberwolves Concept Critique.png

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, jaha32 said:

 

 

I'm going to give this a four-day bump because it's an interesting conversation especially considering how some of the newer NBA logos have gone away from this type of design towards overly simple designs (Raptors). I don't think this is necessarily an argument against all detail, but against detail that could be executed more carefully.

 

Not to turn this into an attack on this logo individually, because there are plenty of worse concepts out there and this particular concept is close to being solid, but it is a good example of what happens when someone slaps one image (the wolf) on top of another (the ball) and doesn't bother to make sure all the pieces flow smoothly into each other. It is full of close tension points and unnecessary gaps creating numerous slivers of shapes. Bringing up the new Hornets logo, if you were to dissect the vector layering of the Hornets logo and this T-Wolves concept, the Hornets logo has 1/2 the shapes making it easy on the eyes. Of course art is subjective and one has the right to like or dislike a certain style, but the fact that this has more tension points, nodes, and gaps in spacing than the Hornets logo is objective.

 

Timberwolves Concept Critique.png

 

 

absolutely and of course. I agree 100%, but people were discussing this like this type of logo was no longer viable and I don't think that's true. I'd take a cleaned up version of this over whatever the hell the Raptors logo is trying to do. 

 

If it were me I'd lose the ball (You can barely tell it's basketball and does the NBA have a rule that all new logos must include a basketball? What is the NBA's obsession with putting a ball in their logos?) and if I must keep the ball then I'd lose the white outline around the wolf and trees. That white outline creates most of the issues highlighted above. Also, I'd cut down one of the trees on the left and I'd enlarge the head.

PvO6ZWJ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, jaha32 said:

 

 

I'm going to give this a four-day bump because it's an interesting conversation especially considering how some of the newer NBA logos have gone away from this type of design towards overly simple designs (Raptors). I don't think this is necessarily an argument against all detail, but against detail that could be executed more carefully.

 

Not to turn this into an attack on this logo individually, because there are plenty of worse concepts out there and this particular concept is close to being solid, but it is a good example of what happens when someone slaps one image (the wolf) on top of another (the ball) and doesn't bother to make sure all the pieces flow smoothly into each other. It is full of close tension points and unnecessary gaps creating numerous slivers of shapes. Bringing up the new Hornets logo, if you were to dissect the vector layering of the Hornets logo and this T-Wolves concept, the Hornets logo has 1/2 the shapes making it easy on the eyes. Of course art is subjective and one has the right to like or dislike a certain style, but the fact that this has more tension points, nodes, and gaps in spacing than the Hornets logo is objective.

 

Timberwolves Concept Critique.png

 

 

 

5 hours ago, McCarthy said:

absolutely and of course. I agree 100%, but people were discussing this like this type of logo was no longer viable and I don't think that's true. I'd take a cleaned up version of this over whatever the hell the Raptors logo is trying to do. 

 

If it were me I'd lose the ball (You can barely tell it's basketball and does the NBA have a rule that all new logos must include a basketball? What is the NBA's obsession with putting a ball in their logos?) and if I must keep the ball then I'd lose the white outline around the wolf and trees. That white outline creates most of the issues highlighted above. Also, I'd cut down one of the trees on the left and I'd enlarge the head.

 

Yeah like McCarthy said, I was more referring to the idea that this style is no longer usable in today's league. There are definitely areas in this logo that would have to be cleaned up but the general idea isn't super busy. I might make the ball one color in addition to making the adjustments you pointed out.

 

I actually prefer what the Raptors have done but I have no problem with this style if it's done well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...
26 minutes ago, MIKE_SWITZERLAND said:

I also participated in this contest. I think the timberwolves had a good concept back in the days, therefore I picked up the old logo and made a redesign without changing the general idea. I made it to the final round but the design above won in the end. Let me know what you think. 

attachment_70891496.jpeg

Yes please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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