Las Vegas Raiders Brand Discussion

[OnWis97]

I prefer the current "soulless" Dolphins logo, but that's neither here nor there...

 

With the pre-2013 logos, I think they essentially upgraded things without really taking away the essence of the logo.  Particularly regarding the sun in that fourth version.  All the tiny little lines were awful and must have been a nightmare for small versions and embroidery.  The fourth version looks more like a sun.  In fact, assuming they go back to the "campy" look, I hope they stick with the current sun which is the best yet.

 

So some of you that know more than I do can maybe have a better sense of whether there are analogous things that could be done to the Raider logo, which is also a bit too detailed for a helmet and embroidery, without truly changing what makes the Raiders the Raiders.

 

3 hours ago, BrandMooreArt said:

man, i don't know. obviously that logo is rough and there are plenty of reproduction issues with it. it doesn't scale down at all, its poorly drawn; it's an average at best logo. but my best advice to the team is don't touch it. i just don't think its a brand you want to go messing around with even if it meant making the identity look better. 

 

This is where I'm at.  If all 32 logos were released today, would it be one of the better ones?  I suppose not.  But the Raider brand is a bit more etched in stone than most and if they're going to touch it, it better improve it while being subtle (as was done with the Vikings logo a few years ago).  But it's probably best to be safe and leave it alone.

[Jt0323]

5 hours ago, jp1409 said:

 

This speech reminds me of another AFC team...

 

its not even the right logo though 

[CLEstones]

I wish they would add old gold to their pallet, a la Colorado Buffaloes. I love the white, black, silver, gold look. But that would require New Orleans to make their secondary color white instead of black, and their tertiary color black, in my version of the NFL.

 

Anyway, since we are on the logo discussion, I am all for improving and cleaning up classic logos.  The Dolphins new logo was a little bit too different.  I wish they would have kept the basic shape of the dolphin, jumping to the right, or kept the helmet on it.  Other than that, it would have been fine, and come to think of it, the new layout + helmet would have made things much better.  I think the Raiders should update their logo, especially since they are relocating to Los Angeles.

 

Has there ever been a precedent set where a team has an improved/cleaned up/modernized logo, and use BOTH logos?  The cleaned up as the primary and the old as a secondary?

[ColeJ]

I think that's how the Yankees ended up with so many versions of the NY.

 

The Raiders don't need to change a single thing, however. I feel like just about anything they do would be a downgrade, save for possibly cleaning up the logo only as much as the Vikings and Cardinals did... The kind of cleanup that is basically not even noticable.

[CLEstones]

10 minutes ago, ColeJ said:

I think that's how the Yankees ended up with so many versions of the NY.

 

The Raiders don't need to change a single thing, however. I feel like just about anything they do would be a downgrade, save for possibly cleaning up the logo only as much as the Vikings and Cardinals did... The kind of cleanup that is basically not even noticable.

 

In my opinion, the 3 different versions of the NY is pretty cool.  The OCD in me hates it.  However, I don't think comparing a monogram to a logo is quite apples to apples.

[BrandMooreArt]

11 hours ago, jp1409 said:

 

This speech reminds me of another AFC team...

 

 

that's certainly an argument to be made.

 

it's a different situation though. forget about the logos, think of the brands around the Dolphins and the Raiders. For Miami, the things you probably think of with them is the perfect season, back to back Super Bowl wins, Dan Marino, Shula . . . Ace Ventura. those are all things that are long gone. when you're not known for anything that transcends team history, you're not winning, and your identity is dated it's time to re-brand. that's exactly what they did– they didn't just redraw the logos, they've repositioned themselves as a luxury sports brand. the best logo to communicate that, is the current

 

what about the Raiders? what comes to mind? silver and black, Commitment to Excellence, "just win baby!", the Autumn Wind. these things are bigger than winning because they "stick" even when the team isn't winning. if you change the logo or uniform, it changes those associations that come with them and you start all over. thats why i think they should keep their ugly logo

[OnWis97]

16 minutes ago, BrandMooreArt said:

 

that's certainly an argument to be made.

 

it's a different situation though. forget about the logos, think of the brands around the Dolphins and the Raiders. For Miami, the things you probably think of with them is the perfect season, back to back Super Bowl wins, Dan Marino, Shula . . . Ace Ventura. those are all things that are long gone. when you're not known for anything that transcends team history, you're not winning, and your identity is dated it's time to re-brand. that's exactly what they did– they didn't just redraw the logos, they've repositioned themselves as a luxury sports brand. the best logo to communicate that, is the current

 

what about the Raiders? what comes to mind? silver and black, Commitment to Excellence, "just win baby!", the Autumn Wind. these things are bigger than winning because they "stick" even when the team isn't winning. if you change the logo or uniform, it changes those associations that come with them and you start all over. thats why i think they should keep their ugly logo

I agree.  I think with the Raiders coming off of, particularly for them, a fairly long streak of futility, people forget everything you just said.  But they seem to be getting better and they have to approach this with the belief that they will.  And when they do, this long-time look is the only thing that would feel right. Yeah, they had a rough decade, but they are not the Titans or Vikings.  The want the "Just Win, Baby" Raiders to be back, and they won't be as "back" with a new logo or gold trim.

[Gothamite]

48 minutes ago, BrandMooreArt said:

when you're not known for anything that transcends team history, you're not winning, and your identity is dated it's time to re-brand. that's exactly what they did– they didn't just redraw the logos, they've repositioned themselves as a luxury sports brand. the best logo to communicate that, is the current

 

The only thing I hate more than that phrase is the philosophy behind it.

 

When teams forget that they're teams, they go off the rails.

[Gothamite]

2 hours ago, CLEstones said:

Has there ever been a precedent set where a team has an improved/cleaned up/modernized logo, and use BOTH logos?  The cleaned up as the primary and the old as a secondary?

 

I can't believe that there is - if the old one is still good enough for regular use, you shouldn't have modernized it.

[BrandMooreArt]

26 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

The only thing I hate more than that phrase is the philosophy behind it.

 

When teams forget that they're teams, they go off the rails.

 

well, all the numbers suggest otherwise  without divulging too much, over the last 4 years the teams brand has been on the rise, while only having 1 winning season in the last, what, 8 years? you always need something that is bigger than team record and there is no NFL team that is "just a team" anymore. 

[OnWis97]

28 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

The only thing I hate more than that phrase ("luxury sports brand") is the philosophy behind it.

 

When teams forget that they're teams, they go off the rails.

I have not heard that phrase before and I have to confess, even with context, I don't quite follow it.

[Gothamite]

Sports history is littered with teams that can generate a short-term boost in sales by chasing hot colors or trends.

 

Show me a team that can sustain sales as only a "luxury brand".

[CLEstones]

1 hour ago, Gothamite said:

 

I can't believe that there is - if the old one is still good enough for regular use, you shouldn't have modernized it.

 

I just think the rules are different now.  In a graphic design vacuum, that makes sense, but the paradigm, in my opinion, has shifted quite a bit.

 

Its one thing for Tampa Bay to move from the Bucco Bruce logo to the Jolly Roger flag, which includes completely different logo package, color pallet, uniforms, etc.  I think a modernized version of a classic logo (Raiders), where it is still reminiscent of the classic logo, but translates better to 2017 with both technology, TV, streaming, internet, colors, and definition, is a welcomed change.  Keeping the old logo would be an interesting idea, especially since vintage/classic clothes and vintage memorabilia are such hot selling items.

[OnWis97]

11 minutes ago, CLEstones said:

 

I just think the rules are different now.  In a graphic design vacuum, that makes sense, but the paradigm, in my opinion, has shifted quite a bit.

 

Its one thing for Tampa Bay to move from the Bucco Bruce logo to the Jolly Roger flag, which includes completely different logo package, color pallet, uniforms, etc.  I think a modernized version of a classic logo (Raiders), where it is still reminiscent of the classic logo, but translates better to 2017 with both technology, TV, streaming, internet, colors, and definition, is a welcomed change.  Keeping the old logo would be an interesting idea, especially since vintage/classic clothes and vintage memorabilia are such hot selling items.

So what would be a good analogy from an actual update?

 

Maybe the Vikings?  To me that would be pointless.  Plus only dorks like us would ever notice.

 

Or the two Tampa Bay Jolly Roger flags?  I tend to agree with Gothamite that this would send a mixed message regarding the need/value to the logo update.  And it would be confusing to see the two of them exist simultaneously on merchandise...it's kind of like when I see the short-lived Iowa logo; it just seems strange to see something "kinda like" the official logo.

 

The Seahawks are a good example.  I cannot imagine seeing both logos around in an "official" capacity.

 

Regarding the Raiders, there could only be two outcomes: either it would be a Viking-like update and nobody would notice or it would be a Tampa-like update and it would create confusion.

[CLEstones]

7 minutes ago, OnWis97 said:

So what would be a good analogy from an actual update?

 

Maybe the Vikings?  To me that would be pointless.  Plus only dorks like us would ever notice.

 

Or the two Tampa Bay Jolly Roger flags?  I tend to agree with Gothamite that this would send a mixed message regarding the need/value to the logo update.  And it would be confusing to see the two of them exist simultaneously on merchandise...it's kind of like when I see the short-lived Iowa logo; it just seems strange to see something "kinda like" the official logo.

 

The Seahawks are a good example.  I cannot imagine seeing both logos around in an "official" capacity.

 

Regarding the Raiders, there could only be two outcomes: either it would be a Viking-like update and nobody would notice or it would be a Tampa-like update and it would create confusion.

 

I'm not sure Iowa is a good example.  Since the original logo was so minimalist, any deviation becomes striking.

 

I don't think Tampa Bay is a good example, as the Jolly Roger v.1 was created in the modern era which still translated well to high definition/steaming/TV/etc.  A better example would be taking Bucco Bruce and translating it into a modern version.  Even the Jacksonville Jaguars logo doesn't fit.  I'm not sure there is an actual 1:1 comparison for what I'm talking about.

 

I don't think the Vikings are an example either, as basically the only changes were thickening outlines and the previous logo was done so well, it translated nicely to present time.

 

I am thinking more along the lines of Army Black Knights, I guess.  Clean up the shield, remove the lettering, clean up the swords, possibly modify the helmet to be something different (not sure what), maybe have the black stripe take more prominence.  I'm not sure the direction, I'm not sure where the emphasis should be, but I don't think it should be an exact translation with cleaned up linework.  I think it should have something of significance changed to signify the move... something a new generation of fans could cling to.

[Ben in LA]

1 hour ago, Gothamite said:

Sports history is littered with teams that can generate a short-term boost in sales by chasing hot colors or trends.

 

Show me a team that can sustain sales as only a "luxury brand".

The Dallas Cowboys?  The New York Yankees?

[BrandMooreArt]

1 hour ago, Gothamite said:

Sports history is littered with teams that can generate a short-term boost in sales by chasing hot colors or trends.

 

Show me a team that can sustain sales as only a "luxury brand".

 

i'll share what i can from the point of view of the Dolphins. 

 

the change in ownership brought a new brand positioning for the team. a few posts above when i compared the Raiders and Dolphins brands, and the Dolphins not being known for anything relevant – the new strategy is to be known for something that isn't dependent upon on-field performance. what goes into the new strategy? what makes this a luxury brand? it's not adding new colors (they were slightly tweaked) or chasing trends (they're actually quite innovative. trend starters even).

 

to brief the philosophy, it's about offering a unique or better experience during gameday (you can't get any closer to the endzone than the seats at Hard Rock Stadium), and having that same approach to content put out. for instance, 8 new video Franchises were created in 2016 that give you daily team updates or share stories from the fans themselves. you have to offer something valuable, is the point

 

that's all really a short introduction. but there's so much more to it than football games and it's on the same premise that Apple is about more than computers (thinking different, challenging status quo, elegant design).

 

the important point is not that a select team becomes a "luxury brand" but that it becomes a brand. the Raiders have it, the Cowboys have it, and the ones that don't no one cares about unless they're winning. and winning doesn't always happen. you MUST be more than a W-L record

[Gothamite]

14 minutes ago, Ben in LA said:

The Dallas Cowboys?  The New York Yankees?

 

The Cowboys and Yankees are a brand in no small part because they have won and continue to win.  The Cowboys are in a bit of a funk, but they've still won their division four times in the past ten years.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

19 minutes ago, Ben in LA said:

1 hour ago, Gothamite said:

Sports history is littered with teams that can generate a short-term boost in sales by chasing hot colors or trends.

 

Show me a team that can sustain sales as only a "luxury brand".

The Dallas Cowboys?  The New York Yankees?

 

Neither is a luxury brand, such as Prada, Rolex, Aston Martin.

The Dallas Cowboys and the New York Yankees are successful brands; but their peers are Coca-Cola and McDonald's.  These brands are positioned as part of everyday life, as commonplace -- which is the very opposite of luxury.

[8BW14]

I found this online and thought it was an interesting concept at least:

If the Raiders do feel the need to change things up upon the move to Las Vegas I think I'd almost rather see a change like this than a cleanup job like the Vikings. 

 

Ideally they shouldn't touch a thing (except silver numbers on the white jersey) IMO, but something like this logo, with the contemporary helmet is literally a modern update to their classic logo.

 

What are everyone's thoughts?