WideRight

Alliance of American Football - Team Names and Logos

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Pharos04 said:

ORL-wordmark-and-logo-or.jpg

 

Why couldn't the Titans adopt more of a Greek motif again?

 

I like this one much more when it is placed in this context.  I wasn't sold on the primary by itself, but it looks very sharp when displayed this way.

 

I also really like the sun/circle in the background.  Does anyone know if that is an actual secondary logo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a rumor (not sure how much to trust it) that San Diego is the graphite & yellow logo and SLC is the double blue team.  That would make Phoenix the green, yellow & orange. 

Not sure I trust that, especially since everyone guessed wrong about the 1st four.  Nearly everyone had Memphis with the purple/gold crown and San Antonio as the black & grey.  Guess we have to wait until Tuesday to find out (or until another leak occurs.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Legends logo with the A in the crown is better that the primary with no A.

 

Right now, though, the most popular team in Atlanta is Atlanta United, and their big rival is Orlando City. OC's colors are purple and gold, and I think a lot of potential Legends supporters would come from United supporters. I think the colors could be a hard sell to those fans. United fans, at least the ones I know, won't want to wear a purple hat or shirt that could be confused with Orlando City.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Brian in Boston said:

 

Finally, as to your thoughts regarding the United Football League's branding, I couldn't agree with you less. I felt that the UFL's team branding was an absolute mess. With the possible exception of the New York Sentinels' mark, the league's logos struck me as being gaudy, gradient-laden, and overdone. And even the Sentinels' logo would have been more suited to a security firm or an anti-virus software product than a pro football franchise.

                            

 

I absolutely agree that the UFL overdid the gradients and attempts to create 3D logos, but the essential name/logos were pretty solid.   

 

California Redwoods-- I loved the "R" inside a park service arrowhead sign with a wooden feel to it as a logo.  Had the team survived beyond year 1 (the year of shared colors for all teams) I think it could have really worked as a maroon & green team, using colors similar to the national park system.  

 

Hartford Colonials-- Yes, too much beveling/gradient, but again, the use of 2 blues with metallic gold (instead of Red, White & blue) and the design of the eagle/medal was strong.

 

Omaha Nighthawks-- Pretty straightforward, the beveled O with a stealth bomber.  A solid Black & Grey & Silver design.

 

Florida Tuskers-- The name is not great, but the warthog logo and team colors were pretty solid (again, year 2-3 only).

 

Virginia Destroyers-- Another solid design, with a unique color scheme and the use of Navy ship numbers as the font was brilliant. 

 

Sacramento Mountain Lions-- I would have gone with Cougars or Pumas, but the S-cat logo was really nice.  The main problem is that it only worked on one side of the helmet, so they only put the logo on one side, and the number on the other (which is now a whole thing in the NCAA, thanks Nike (meh!)).

 

NY Sentinels-- The colors were good (Black, Grey, oxidized copper green), and the shield was OK, but I was not a fan of the generic skyscraper as a ":sentinel".

 

LV Locos-- The weakest of the bunch, no doubt. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pharos04 said:

ORL-wordmark-and-logo-or.jpg

 

Why couldn't the Titans adopt more of a Greek motif again?

 

This image is why I think the Apollos need to go with an orange helmet instead of a navy blue one.  Especially good if they can either go with a metallic or satin finish that causes the orange to glow a bit more. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Apollos are the best of the first batch!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If San Antonio is the maroon logo, based on how it looks Cavalry might be a possible name.

 

Overall, Orlando is the best of the 4 so far.  Apollos was a finalist for the Houston Texans in 2002 and my favorite option back then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the Apollos' team shop they have a hat featuring the "O" without Apollo, the bow is a highlight of the O which I think is clever.


The Birmingham Iron is my favorite of the bunch, went ahead and ordered a hoodie because I have zero self-control.
 

Share this post


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

AAF-017_ATL_MerchAd_728x90_EC.jpg

 

 

Does anyone else look at the "A" in that crown and think "old AFL logo" and "lawsuit from the NFL about it is going to make it a short-lived logo?"

 

19 minutes ago, neo_prankster said:

The Apollos are the best of the first batch!

 

I can't argue.  Of the four released thus far, it's head-and-shoulders the best.  The Memphis Express isn't bad now that I've seen it in a merchandising context, but there should be some designs that show the plane without the "E" somehow.  I'm "meh" on the Birmingham Iron, as it's a general, uninspiring look.  The Atlanta Legends is a bad name, with a bad identity and a mediocre color scheme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, WideRight said:

California Redwoods-- I loved the "R" inside a park service arrowhead sign with a wooden feel to it as a logo.  Had the team survived beyond year 1 (the year of shared colors for all teams) I think it could have really worked as a maroon & green team, using colors similar to the national park system.  

 

 

YES YES YES!  I thought of this myself and would have loved it.  More brownish-red than maroon though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I definitely get an old AFL logo vibe from that A. Makes me think of the Chief's uniform patch. But, I dunno, it's a slab serif A. I don't know how much of a fuss the NFL could legitimately raise.

 

I looked through the shop and here are some secondary logos:206645.jpg206572.jpg19_Legends_CanCooler_206620_rgb.jpg206609.jpg206680.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WideRight said:

 

I absolutely agree that the UFL overdid the gradients and attempts to create 3D logos, but the essential name/logos were pretty solid.   

 

California Redwoods-- I loved the "R" inside a park service arrowhead sign with a wooden feel to it as a logo.  Had the team survived beyond year 1 (the year of shared colors for all teams) I think it could have really worked as a maroon & green team, using colors similar to the national park system.  

 

Hartford Colonials-- Yes, too much beveling/gradient, but again, the use of 2 blues with metallic gold (instead of Red, White & blue) and the design of the eagle/medal was strong.

 

Omaha Nighthawks-- Pretty straightforward, the beveled O with a stealth bomber.  A solid Black & Grey & Silver design.

 

Florida Tuskers-- The name is not great, but the warthog logo and team colors were pretty solid (again, year 2-3 only).

 

Virginia Destroyers-- Another solid design, with a unique color scheme and the use of Navy ship numbers as the font was brilliant. 

 

Sacramento Mountain Lions-- I would have gone with Cougars or Pumas, but the S-cat logo was really nice.  The main problem is that it only worked on one side of the helmet, so they only put the logo on one side, and the number on the other (which is now a whole thing in the NCAA, thanks Nike (meh!)).

 

NY Sentinels-- The colors were good (Black, Grey, oxidized copper green), and the shield was OK, but I was not a fan of the generic skyscraper as a ":sentinel".

 

LV Locos-- The weakest of the bunch, no doubt. 

 


We'll have to agree to disagree.

 

California Redwoods - U.S. National Park Service signage meets Hanna-Barbera meets pro football. No professional sports franchise should be saddled with a logo that looks like it was meant to adorn the entrance to Jellystone Park.

Florida Tuskers - An insipid name, made worse by a logo that looked like The Lion King's Pumbaa suffering from 'roid rage. 

Hartford Colonials - In a vacuum, the Colonials' brand might have worked. However, when you're operating an alternative pro football league during the same time of year as the National Football League, and fighting for market share in the same region of the country as the New England Patriots, the argument can be persuasively made that you should do everything in your power - brand-wise - to distance yourself from the more celebrated competition. Instead, Hartford's UFL franchise elected to ape the Patriots' colonial/patriotic/Revolutionary War-themed branding, save for the color scheme. The primary logo was a textbook example of overly-complicated design, filled to the bursting point with needless detail. It looked like the marquee of a turn-of-the-century theater. 

Las Vegas Locomotives - Yes, shortening the team's name to LOCOS in order to render the nickname in the shape of a locomotive's "cowcatcher" was inspired... but, it also saddled the team with the idiotic "Locos" moniker. And how many people were injured when the train crashed into the "Welcome to Las Vegas" sign? 

New York Sentinels - A solid name and color scheme, undermined by a bland logo that wouldn't have looked out of place on the shoulder of a security-guard's uniform, or on the packaging for a computer anti-virus software product.

Omaha Nighthawks - Simple. Straightforward. Pared down in terms of design elements and palette to the point of bordering on boring. The best of the UFL's underwhelming lot by process of elimination.     

Sacramento Mountain Lions - The "S-Cat" logo was painfully contrived, which is precisely why it could only be used on the right side of the helmet while facing forward and still register as a letter "S".  

Virginia Destroyers - A solid, market-relevant name with a logo that was decent, but a bit too "fussy". The stylized, curlicue flourishes that were supposed to depict waves coming off of the "V" in the primary mark served to undermine what should have been a straight-forward, tough-as-nails military theme. I also question why it is that a team would adopt a naval-themed identity and utilize a primary logo in which the dominant colors are two shades of blue and grey, only to sport uniforms in which the dominant color is... RED. It made absolutely no sense.

In my opinion, the UFL was - top to bottom - a branding s**t-show. As far as franchise logos are concerned, the AAF already has them beat by a significant margin.    

Share this post


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

There is a rumor (not sure how much to trust it) that San Diego is the graphite & yellow logo and SLC is the double blue team.  That would make Phoenix the green, yellow & orange. 

Not sure I trust that, especially since everyone guessed wrong about the 1st four.  Nearly everyone had Memphis with the purple/gold crown and San Antonio as the black & grey.  Guess we have to wait until Tuesday to find out (or until another leak occurs.)

 

 

I could see that graphite/yellow logo being a gladiator helmet instead of beehive related. San Diego Gladiators. Just hope is doesn't resemble the Vegas Golden Knights. The double blue could be wasp/hornet/bee wings. The green, yellow & orange could be a reptile of some sort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Wings said:

 

I could see that graphite/yellow logo being a gladiator helmet instead of beehive related. San Diego Gladiators. Just hope is doesn't resemble the Vegas Golden Knights. The double blue could be wasp/hornet/bee wings. The green, yellow & orange could be a reptile of some sort.

 

PHX--Green/Yellow/Orange:  Could be snake, lizard or thunderbird or firebird logo.

SD--Graphite/Yellow:  Could be military, a trident, gladiatorial, probably not too nautical.

SLC--Blue/Sky:  Mountains/Big Sky type image, Bighorn sheep?  Something blizzard or avalanche themed (lean into the fact that they play in Utah in February)

SAN--The accidentally released logo was a shield with a cutlass/sabre sword dividing top & bottom, with an alamo inside the top half.  Silver, maroon & bright red.  Odd combo. 

          My guess is San Antonio Sabres, but could be Cavalry, Regimen, Defenders, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sabres7200 said:

Yeah I definitely get an old AFL logo vibe from that A. Makes me think of the Chief's uniform patch. But, I dunno, it's a slab serif A. I don't know how much of a fuss the NFL could legitimately raise.

 

Honestly, I give it five days before a cease-and-desist gets slapped on AAF.  The NFL is still very much using that "A" mark as part of its branding, and their use of it won't go unchallenged.  It may be a slab serif A, but it's the NFL's slab serif A thanks to the AFL-NFL merger.  The NFL could easily argue that it's a mark that causes confusion in the marketplace, and it's a position AAF nor the designer of that particular logo could readily defend without acknowledging it as a point of reference.

 

Put simply?  Grab all the stuff you can with that mark on it now - because I suspect it'll be the original Jacksonville Jaguars logo equivalent for the AAF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Mac the Knife said:

 

Honestly, I give it five days before a cease-and-desist gets slapped on AAF.  The NFL is still very much using that "A" mark as part of its branding, and their use of it won't go unchallenged.  It may be a slab serif A, but it's the NFL's slab serif A thanks to the AFL-NFL merger.  The NFL could easily argue that it's a mark that causes confusion in the marketplace, and it's a position AAF nor the designer of that particular logo could readily defend without acknowledging it as a point of reference.

 

Put simply?  Grab all the stuff you can with that mark on it now - because I suspect it'll be the original Jacksonville Jaguars logo equivalent for the AAF.

 

I think I disagree, one, because you can’t trademark the form of the letter, and two, I don’t think one 50th anniversary season would be enough to convince a court that the NFL is actively using the mark. I don’t even think there’s even enough market awareness of the AFL brand to make a case that this causes market confusion, and this coming from someone who instantly thought of the AFL when I saw that mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.