BrandMooreArt

2017 Miami Dolphins Creative

Recommended Posts

Just now, dbofox said:

What if they sleeve striped matched the others?  But, yes, exactly with the orange and leave the blue to the logo.

 

That would be my only tweak as well. I've always felt the 5-stripe sleeves are a bit generic. Even though the colors are unique, the Saints, Browns etc have used the same shoulder stripes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Skape7 said:

 

As a big Dolphin fan, I've enjoyed seeing your creative throughout the year. I can definitely see the modern Miami influence and I think it came across well. But considering that the Dolphins are a South Florida team, did you consider adding Fort Lauderdale and WPB to your moodboard and design influences? At this point, it almost feels like the Dolphins are more of a Broward team than a Miami team considering where the stadium is located and practice facilities in Davie.

 

we sell Miami. same for the Super Bowl or nearly any other business around. i live in Davie but i tell people back home in Indiana "i live in Miami". the city has its own brand and connotations and Miami is where we want to "be" and what corporate sponsors want to be associated with. its also more familiar to the broader fanbase— this is an international brand with fans all over teh world and Miami is the best area to place the team for many reasons.

 

but i think more importantly, the Dolphins are involved in the entire South Florida community. theres events, fund raisers, youth programs, etc that take place all over Dade and Broward counties and i think thats what really matters most. we push the Miami look for the big picture, but i think we do want to be recognized in our backyard as the "south florida team" at heart.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, BrandMooreArt said:

 

we sell Miami. same for the Super Bowl or nearly any other business around. i live in Davie but i tell people back home in Indiana "i live in Miami". the city has its own brand and connotations and Miami is where we want to "be" and what corporate sponsors want to be associated with. its also more familiar to the broader fanbase— this is an international brand with fans all over teh world and Miami is the best area to place the team for many reasons.

 

but i think more importantly, the Dolphins are involved in the entire South Florida community. theres events, fund raisers, youth programs, etc that take place all over Dade and Broward counties and i think thats what really matters most. we push the Miami look for the big picture, but i think we do want to be recognized in our backyard as the "south florida team" at heart.  

 

I can understand that... But as a native of Fort Lauderdale I just always get the sense that ever since they moved to Joe Robbie Stadium, the Dolphins had more of a Broward base than a Miami one... To me, the Heat are quintessentially Miami now with a stadium right in the heart of Miami. Their whole vibe is also much more modern Miami. Dolphins still carry that legacy of the old-timers, and that seems to align more with what Broward is today than what Miami became.

Share this post


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

What if they sleeve striped matched the others?  But, yes, exactly with the orange and leave the blue to the logo.

 

definetely gon give it a shot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just stumbled across this thread via another Dolphins forum I frequent. Very interesting stuff. As a fellow designer, I've really enjoyed the evolution that we've watched the brand endure the past few years. It's come a very long way, so kudos to you all, and keep up the good work!

 

And Mr. Moore - Congratulations on landing my dream job lol. Designing for the Dolphins was something I dreamed about since I first started design school. All my school projects were Dolphins related, and the other designers all looked at me sideways for it haha (I guess football isn't always popular in design school - oh well). It must be awesome to be able to be a part of developing that brand, congrats on the job well done. I look forward to watching it continue to grow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


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

* thumbs up *

 

OUaFNkZ.jpg

This is great never really thought of this that way but love it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just can't help but feel like we're comparing apples and Jupiter here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cosmic said:

I just can't help but feel like we're comparing apples and Jupiter here.

 

patience. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, BrandMooreArt said:

* thumbs up *

 

OUaFNkZ.jpg

 

So, in other terms:

 

Quote

 

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand the "United States as a brand" analogy. The comparison is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of branding expertise most of the comparisons will go over a typical observer's's head. There's also Bryan's's lack of concern for history's nuances, which is deftly woven into his screed - his personal philosophy draws heavily from random branding texts, for instance. The branding experts understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these comparisons, to realize that they're not just silly- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike the "United States as a brand" analogy truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the genius in Bryan's's generic catchphrase "start a brand" which itself is a cryptic reference to some random Phil Knight quote. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Jesse Bryan's genius unfolds itself on this podcast. What fools... how I pity them. ?

 

And yes by the way, I DO have a "branding knowledge" tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies' eyes only- And even they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand.

 

 

I like your work, but believing in a statement like that set you up perfectly for a Rick & Morty copypasta. You may think Bryan was being insightful, but I think it's cheesy and a little insulting to the nuances of the history. But that's just me as a historian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

So, in other terms:

 

 

I like your work, but believing in a statement like that set you up perfectly for a Rick & Morty copypasta. You may think Bryan was being insightful, but I think it's cheesy and a little insulting to the nuances of the history. But that's just me as a historian.

 

you take this far too seriously. just live your life, man. :)

Share this post


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

 

you take this far too seriously. live your life, man. it might work out, it might not :) 

 

It’s kind of a dangerous way of interpreting history, when you think about it. Reducing the founding of the United States to “creating a brand” is just equating nationalism and marketing. By that logic, you could argue that all sorts of nations “created a brand” through ideas, such as the oppression of minorities, physical territories, and religious ideologies. That’s a silly extension of “branding theory.” 

 

We historians have to take it seriously, and saying things like that misses so many nuances (e.g., the founders were hemorrhaging money from failed land speculation ventures and facing insurrection from urban workers). When people hear “creating a brand,” they will probably ignore the troubling undercurrents that brand may have.

 

I really don’t want to bust your balls over this (you’re a really talented guy, and you’ve done wonders with the Dolphins’ branding and media presence), but ideas like the ones above are both flippant and a little anti-intellectual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

It’s kind of a dangerous way of interpreting history, when you think about it. Reducing the founding of the United States to “creating a brand” is just equating nationalism and marketing. By that logic, you could argue that all sorts of nations “created a brand” through ideas, such as the oppression of minorities, physical territories, and religious ideologies. That’s a silly extension of “branding theory.” 

 

We historians have to take it seriously, and saying things like that misses so many nuances (e.g., the founders were hemorrhaging money from failed land speculation ventures and facing insurrection from urban workers). When people hear “creating a brand,” they will probably ignore the troubling undercurrents that brand may have.

 

I really don’t want to bust your balls over this (you’re a really talented guy, and you’ve done wonders with the Dolphins’ branding and media presence), but ideas like the ones above are both flippant and a little anti-intellectual.

 

i read every word, and i understand where you’re coning from, but . . . maybe not  miss the forest for the trees, eh? :)

Share this post


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

 

i read every word, and i understand where you’re coning from, but . . . maybe not  miss the forest for the trees, eh? :)

 

Meh, I guess it's ok to have a little fun in this regard. Just as long as you don't reduce the complex history to just "branding" and think critically about the implications of equating nationalism and branding, you should be good. Please tell me that you acknowledge some of the unfortunate implications of equating those two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

Meh, I guess it's ok to have a little fun in this regard. Just as long as you don't reduce the complex history to just "branding" and think critically about the implications of equating nationalism and branding, you should be good. Please tell me that you acknowledge some of the unfortunate implications of equating those two.

 

the high majority of what i post/share (on any platform) is to get people to think, to challenge a status quo, or to just engage in a discussion; even if not with me directly, but amongst yourselves. the only thing i really hope for is, unless i say so directly (and sometimes i do) i have no absolute answers. and most importantly, i would hope to spark someones imagination. if you dont agree, thats cool too :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BrandMooreArt said:

 

the high majority of what i post/share (on any platform) is to get people to think, to challenge a status quo, or to just engage in a discussion; even if not with me directly, but amongst yourselves. the only thing i really hope for is, unless i say so directly (and sometimes i do) i have no absolute answers. and most importantly, i would hope to spark someones imagination. if you dont agree, thats cool too :)

 

Sparking discussion is all well and good (seeing as how we're doing it now), but you didn't answer my question. Do you acknowledge that equating "branding" and nationalism has some unfortunate implications, and do you see history as more than just "branding?" Don't blow it off with some smiley. That's a little condescending to people who disagree with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

Do you acknowledge that equating "branding" and nationalism has some unfortunate implications, and do you see history as more than just "branding?" 

 

of course; and overlap.

 

like i said, "don't miss the forest for the trees". and don't think that a brand is just a color and a logo, but more importantly a set of beliefs. and if you really like the work coming from the Miami team, ask yourself why that is without any judgement, or expectation, or comparison. stare at it and ask "why does this make a connection with me?"

 

i expect, and hope, you find that it exceeds any expectations for what an NFL team is supposed to be. not talking about myself, but the entire team— they've shown you more than what you thought was possible, not for the sake of it, but because it is a reflection of the core belief system that is only beginning to be shared. and hopefully, thats something you, or anyone, might like to be a part of. and if not? that's fine too— there's not a single idea that connects with everyone in the world. but if you don't start with why you do something, you're only chasing style, which is fleeting; it never lasts. might that be applied to history as well?

Share this post


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