XFL 2023 Logos, Names and Uniforms

[LogoFan]

1 hour ago, MJWalker45 said:

I just remember Arlington's secondary being the previous primary logo which should still be on the helmet. 

 

Amen.  The current one looks like a sports energy drink logo. 

[GDAWG]

50 minutes ago, LogoFan said:

 

Amen.  The current one looks like a sports energy drink logo. 

 

If someone had shown me the primary Renegades logo without any context, asking me what I think this logo meant, I would have said "that's a really cool looking Esports Team logo."

[GDAWG]

The Vegas one is weird......why not use an actual Viper head?

[HOOVER]

 

 

Very lackluster announcement.  The Arlington, DC, Orlando, San Antonio, and St Louis secondaries are better than their primaries.  

You can see these logos on new apparel here:  https://shop.xfl.com/collections/t-shirts-1

I'm not sure what Vegas is doing with that secondary.  Seattle's is stupid, too.  

Again, just a giant overall fail with this rebrand.  As soon as we knew they were not keeping Arlington's primary, I knew this would be an overall failure.  

 

[HOOVER]

And to further pile on at how bush league this has been, they couldn't even order up "team" product for their coaches, which has the UA logo on the right chest and the left chest open for the team logo, instead heat pressing, not embroidering or screen printing, logos on "retail" product, which has the UA logo on the left chest.  Oh, except for Becht, who apparently wasn't good enough to get a UA top for this photo: 

 

[MJWalker45]

8 hours ago, Volt said:

And to further pile on at how bush league this has been, they couldn't even order up "team" product for their coaches, which has the UA logo on the right chest and the left chest open for the team logo, instead heat pressing, not embroidering or screen printing, logos on "retail" product, which has the UA logo on the left chest.  Oh, except for Becht, who apparently wasn't good enough to get a UA top for this photo: 

 

I wonder if these are older pictures because Hines Ward has been wearing a Brahmas polo with the logo on the left like normal this week.

[bowld]

Someone have an explanation of why LAS VEGAS is using a Fleur-de-lis?

Nothing says Las Vegas Vipers like a Fluer-de-lis

[leopard88]

1 hour ago, bowld said:

Someone have an explanation of why LAS VEGAS is using a Fleur-de-lis?

Nothing says Las Vegas Vipers like a Fluer-de-lis

 

That is my question too.

 

It also looks vaguely like a top view of a  scorpion (with a few legs missing), which could be fitting for Las Vegas  . . . but has nothing to do with the team name.

[HOOVER]

6 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

I wonder if these are older pictures because Hines Ward has been wearing a Brahmas polo with the logo on the left like normal this week.

They are older, but still…if you’re going to announce team logos, colors, and gear…have the proper gear ready for that launch, especially for your coaches to wear.

[TBGKon]

We've seen most of these, but there are a few more secondary logos too.

 

 

[Brave-Bird 08]

What on Earth is that Vegas logo? 

 

Did nobody stop to ask "hey what is the purpose of this"

[GDAWG]

25 minutes ago, Brave-Bird 08 said:

What on Earth is that Vegas logo? 

 

Did nobody stop to ask "hey what is the purpose of this"

 

The answer is probably no and Dany Garcia, Dwayne Johnson and Redbird Capital think it's a good idea.

[Sykotyk]

At first I thought it might be inspired by the Redbird Capital logo. But, either one they're using look nothing like that.

 

 I agree. I can't think what that fleur-de-lis with a spearhead(?) going through it has anything to do with Vegas or snakes in general. A fleur-de-lis that's a snakehead would've been kinda cool even if unexplainable. But this, is just odd. Everything about the Vegas team feels like such a swing and a miss.

[WideRight]

9 hours ago, TBGKon said:

We've seen most of these, but there are a few more secondary logos too.

 

 

 

Houston is solid (too bad their uniforms are laughably bad).  Arlington is fine as it was Dallas's old one.  I like changing the DC shield into a pentagon, makes sense.  And those are all the nice things I can say.  Orlando = boring.  San Antonio=poorly executed.  St. Louis = too angular, like a rejected idea for a Transformer.   Seattle, I get what they are going for, but not really related to dragons at all, more to sea serpents maybe.   Las Vegas makes no sense at all.  Maybe when they were scrambling to find a stadium in Las Vegas they flirted with the idea of moving them to Louisville or New Orleans.  That is the only thing that would make sense here.  They had a perfectly good viper head to use and they do this?

 

I am still very unimpressed with the XFL.  But my style taste leans towards traditionalist (pretty heavily) so I am always going to be a USFL guy anyway. 

[MJWalker45]

On 2/10/2023 at 9:36 AM, bowld said:

Someone have an explanation of why LAS VEGAS is using a Fleur-de-lis?

Nothing says Las Vegas Vipers like a Fluer-de-lis

Because they had 4 logos for Stm Louis and none for Vegas?

[tBBP]

13 hours ago, WideRight said:

 

Houston is solid (too bad their uniforms are laughably bad).  Arlington is fine as it was Dallas's old one.  I like changing the DC shield into a pentagon, makes sense.  And those are all the nice things I can say.  Orlando = boring.  San Antonio=poorly executed.  St. Louis = too angular, like a rejected idea for a Transformer.   Seattle, I get what they are going for, but not really related to dragons at all, more to sea serpents maybe.   Las Vegas makes no sense at all.  Maybe when they were scrambling to find a stadium in Las Vegas they flirted with the idea of moving them to Louisville or New Orleans.  That is the only thing that would make sense here.  They had a perfectly good viper head to use and they do this?

 

I am still very unimpressed with the XFL.  But my style taste leans towards traditionalist (pretty heavily) so I am always going to be a USFL guy anyway. 

 

Does it seem to you that the USFL is more of a "legit" spring league whereas XFL3.0 is more of a "gimmick" league?

[GDAWG]

1 hour ago, tBBP said:

 

Does it seem to you that the USFL is more of a "legit" spring league whereas XFL3.0 is more of a "gimmick" league?

 

All the USFL did was modernize the old uniforms of the 80's, although they changed the Maulers to black and yellow this year (they need to make those jerseys though slightly different than the Steelers) and made the Showboats blue, yellow and white due to the fact that there was already too much red in the league, even though they were replacing the Tampa Bay Bandits, who had red.  

 

All the XFL had to do was to keep the logos and colors of the Renegades, Dragons, Battlehawks, Defenders and Roughnecks (with minor tweaks to the Roughnecks), but they didn't do that.  They went too grandiose with it.  

[WideRight]

4 hours ago, tBBP said:

 

Does it seem to you that the USFL is more of a "legit" spring league whereas XFL3.0 is more of a "gimmick" league?

 

I would not say "legit" is the measure here.  The only real way to know which league is more legit, as in more likely to last for multiple seasons, is to see the funding invested in it, the business plan, and then to have some assurance that if things go south (bad ratings, bad attendance) the investors won't pull out. These leagues are going to hemorrhage money for at least 3-5 years before they become profitable, if they ever do.  When the bill start piling up, as they did with the USFL, WLAF, XFL 1.0, etc., do the networks and investors have the fortitude to stick it out.   A quick way to tell is to see what happens with teams that go 0-10 or 1-9.  the tendency, and a bad sign, is for leagues to bail on those cities and start relocating franchises in hopes of getting a 1st year boost in interest in a new place.  that is a sure sign of a league that lacks the fortitude to endure the tough years. 

 

So, it is impossible for us to say which league has the capacity to endure those tough years.   But here is what I can say:

 

1. I trust the leadership at FOX/NBC to not make rash decisions on this more than I trust the Rock and his ex-wife. 

2. While I don't like the slow roll out of team locations in the USFL, if this league is TV driven and not attendance reliant, then it makes some financial sense to do it this way, but I will be annoyed if by 2024 we don't have 8 teams in 8 cities, and ideally 12 teams in 12 cities. 

3. In the same vein, I understand why the XFL has 3 teams in Texas.  I am not a fan of Texas personally, and tend to root against their teams, so it is another reason I lean towards the USFL

4. I find the design, the look of the teams, in the XFL  too WWE/Monster Energy Drink.  Now, I am in my mid-50's and fall into the "football was better before 2000" crowd, so I prefer the nostalgia and style of the USFL to the XFL, but maybe millenials or Gen-z want their pro sports teams to look and feel like e-sports or something Red Bull invented. I don't so I prefer the USFL.   

5. I am also a huge, HUGE USFL geek (the real USFL: 1983-1985) so the new USFL hits me where it counts. 

 

Honestly, for me it is similar to two new soda companies coming out, one selling a version of a classic root beer or classic cola, the other selling some form of Mountain Dew with CBD and Sriracha in it.  I know where my preference lies, but others may prefer the 2nd soda, and perhaps one of the soda companies simply has more capital behind it, or better management, or hits an untapped market better than the other.  I just cannot say.  I can only say that I prefer the one over the other purely as a matter of taste. 

 

 

I

 

[GDAWG]

24 minutes ago, WideRight said:

 

I would not say "legit" is the measure here.  The only real way to know which league is more legit, as in more likely to last for multiple seasons, is to see the funding invested in it, the business plan, and then to have some assurance that if things go south (bad ratings, bad attendance) the investors won't pull out. These leagues are going to hemorrhage money for at least 3-5 years before they become profitable, if they ever do.  When the bill start piling up, as they did with the USFL, WLAF, XFL 1.0, etc., do the networks and investors have the fortitude to stick it out.   A quick way to tell is to see what happens with teams that go 0-10 or 1-9.  the tendency, and a bad sign, is for leagues to bail on those cities and start relocating franchises in hopes of getting a 1st year boost in interest in a new place.  that is a sure sign of a league that lacks the fortitude to endure the tough years. 

 

So, it is impossible for us to say which league has the capacity to endure those tough years.   But here is what I can say:

 

1. I trust the leadership at FOX/NBC to not make rash decisions on this more than I trust the Rock and his ex-wife. 

2. While I don't like the slow roll out of team locations in the USFL, if this league is TV driven and not attendance reliant, then it makes some financial sense to do it this way, but I will be annoyed if by 2024 we don't have 8 teams in 8 cities, and ideally 12 teams in 12 cities. 

3. In the same vein, I understand why the XFL has 3 teams in Texas.  I am not a fan of Texas personally, and tend to root against their teams, so it is another reason I lean towards the USFL

4. I find the design, the look of the teams, in the XFL  too WWE/Monster Energy Drink.  Now, I am in my mid-50's and fall into the "football was better before 2000" crowd, so I prefer the nostalgia and style of the USFL to the XFL, but maybe millenials or Gen-z want their pro sports teams to look and feel like e-sports or something Red Bull invented. I don't so I prefer the USFL.   

5. I am also a huge, HUGE USFL geek (the real USFL: 1983-1985) so the new USFL hits me where it counts. 

 

Honestly, for me it is similar to two new soda companies coming out, one selling a version of a classic root beer or classic cola, the other selling some form of Mountain Dew with CBD and Sriracha in it.  I know where my preference lies, but others may prefer the 2nd soda, and perhaps one of the soda companies simply has more capital behind it, or better management, or hits an untapped market better than the other.  I just cannot say.  I can only say that I prefer the one over the other purely as a matter of taste. 

 

 

I

 

 

the main issue with the Maulers is venue.  Do they want to go to Acrisure?  Or do they want to go the smaller soccer stadium that seats 5,000?  Those are the only two options in Pittsburgh when they do move.  

[MJWalker45]

48 minutes ago, GDAWG said:

 

the main issue with the Maulers is venue.  Do they want to go to Acrisure?  Or do they want to go the smaller soccer stadium that seats 5,000?  Those are the only two options in Pittsburgh when they do move.  

I don't see any way the league moves into a 5000 seat stadium. If they can't get Acrisure, just keep them in Canton and rename the team. It's easier to fill, but it's a rougher sell TV wise when trying to show games from there. 

 

Imagine how many people would get turned off if half the time you show the whole field you have to show that sideline.