bartodell

FC Cincinnati

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, rams80 said:

Food Lion FC will never die.

Different logo. But it feels like it a Supermarket emblem.

 

5 hours ago, McCarthy said:

 

 

 

 

As a fan, I'm not a fan. It's fine and I'm sure it'll grow on me. It's better than the mark it's replacing (NOT A HIGH BAR), but you kind of expect something to wow you to make the jump to MLS tier aesthetics and this doesn't. The Lion is once again limited to the bottom where its size will be difficult to view at badge size or social media size etc etc. Not sure why they insist on giving FC such prominence in the visual hierarchy in their badges. The lion is better than the old one and was rendered by someone with some aptitude which is why I would've liked to see it bigger and the visual center of the badge. I think that part will be useful in other applications, but I'm not sure how it'll look on it's own on, say, a tshirt, a stadium tarp, a hat, etc by itself. 

 

The striping is sort of reminiscent of the original uniforms, which is cool, if intentional, though I see no indication that this was. I think it would've looked better with orange in the FC block and blue where the lion is placed. The double blues do nothing for me. I think that font is gonna look dated real quick. 

 

The only really good part that jumps out to me is the name is now Football Club Cincinnati. Not futbol, and definitely not fussball. Good decision that rights a weird wrong they made by going with Futbol in the first place. 

 

 

 

This was interesting though: "

FC Cincinnati, a name that immediately resonated with the region and took hold both nationally and internationally, remains. However, the words from which “FC” is shortened have changed.

“Football Club Cincinnati” – the team’s full written name – will take the field in MLS. The name is to be shortened to FC Cincinnati on first reference. “FCC” is acceptable on second reference, as is “FC Cincy” if necessary. “FC” is not an acceptable reference at any time.

NOTE: The much-speculated name Fussball Club Cincinnati – or Fußball Club Cincinnati using the German character – is the formal, legal name of the club and its business units. It is not to be used in any sporting references to the team, or in any public discussion."

 

What's the reasoning for having a different legal name for the club?  

The five-side shield looks a bit 'fat' compared to just using a roundel or a regular parallel-sided shield.

 

Also, that name argument is ridiculous. Either use Football Club or use the german spelling. You already went with a spanish spelling. Ridiculous. Glad the Crew are sticking around, because I'd hate the only Ohio team to be this cookie-cutter bland.

 

5 hours ago, Bucfan56 said:

Wow, this is trash. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, xbhaskarx said:

This from the other thread is actually pretty cool:

 

DrprrJ6WwAEmFMa.jpg:large

 

I like the new look and Im glad they still have a lion. A twitter user actually noticed some subtle nods to Cincinnati. The lions tail forms a C. The lions back follows the rough outline of the Ohio River. The lion is divided into seven segments, a nod to the "seven hills" of Cincinnati. (In reality Cincinnati has more than seven hills but its folk lore).

 

so, half the lion is in Kentucky?

 

i don't believe all these things are designed into the logo, but lets go ahead and give them the benefit of the doubt. the 7 hills, the 3 feathers, the city on the rise and all that is actually designed into the crest— how lame are those ideas? honestly, the only thing more frustrating than these nonsense "explainers" is the complete lack of substance itself. and with so many ideas in one place, you'd think they would stumble upon one that has some depth. the "fighting German griffin" is pretty close, i think that would have been enough to run with. but, who's going to look at the wing and say "oh yea, 3 because of the years" or "the city name is angled because "we're movin' on up". is that an idea that will last 50 years? the entire thing feels so dead in concept.

 

i can't stand the typography, but i will say the overall aesthetics of the crest is pretty cool. as someone who really loves 60s/70s auto branding, im reminded of that (Gulf or Mobile 1) and i do like the hint of a German influence as well. to me it feels like they made a really good moodboard, had a good direction in mind, then completely lost themselves in cheesy symbolism that doesnt even read without the help from an info graphic. from the same group (i think, not 100% on this) that worked on Juventus and Inter Miami, it seems like a classic case of too many cooks in the kitchen; or an inept final decision maker. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry guys. I don’t see anything wrong with this. I love the colors, the winged lion is bada$$, and the lettering doesn’t overpower the rest of the logo. It’s all good from where I’m sitting.

 

Also as someone from a Catholic family, I never considered a winged lion as a strictly Christian symbol. It reminds me more of King Moonraiser from that old Rudolph movie.

Share this post


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

 

so, half the lion is in Kentucky?

 

i don't believe all these things are designed into the logo, but lets go ahead and give them the benefit of the doubt. the 7 hills, the 3 feathers, the city on the rise and all that is actually designed into the crest— how lame are those ideas? honestly, the only thing more frustrating than these nonsense "explainers" is the complete lack of substance itself. and with so many ideas in one place, you'd think they would stumble upon one that has some depth. the "fighting German griffin" is pretty close, i think that would have been enough to run with. but, who's going to look at the wing and say "oh yea, 3 because of the years" or "the city name is angled because "we're movin' on up". is that an idea that will last 50 years? the entire thing feels so dead in concept.

 

i can't stand the typography, but i will say the overall aesthetics of the crest is pretty cool. as someone who really loves 60s/70s auto branding, im reminded of that (Gulf or Mobile 1) and i do like the hint of a German influence as well. to me it feels like they made a really good moodboard, had a good direction in mind, then completely lost themselves in cheesy symbolism that doesnt even read without the help from an info graphic. from the same group (i think, not 100% on this) that worked on Juventus and Inter Miami, it seems like a classic case of too many cooks in the kitchen; or an inept final decision maker. 

 

 

I believe this was done by Interbrand, but I think it was the Cincinnati office so likely different people within the same company handled this one. If that's the same agency that did Juventus and Inter Miami.

 

I hate to revise another designer's work after the fact, but the Ohio River thing could've been accomplished, could've been more clear, and just looked better if they'd used the wavy lines from the city flag and placed that in the upper left blue section. Then include the FC along with CINCINNATI in the middle band. Then you don't need to bend the lion's back to match the shape of the river, you can just make it a normal, attractive swoop. I think that would give it better balance with the lion in bottom section, too. Not sure why FC needs to be specially sequestered like it is. 

 

All this symbolism is great, but only if it also looks good. If it doesn't look good then you've compromised design for something that isn't even perceptible unless it's explained. I do like the C tail. I think that's the right amount of "hidden" while still being visually cool looking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For all those defending the RBNY logo, there's a reason I called out this one, from 2006:

 

bl74ky7m7fy27oxap4qkffgdt.gif

 

and not its replacement, introduced in 2008:

 

i9ni847kriagxdlb7xewa6dl8.gif

 

Small details, but still a substantial upgrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, McCarthy said:

All this symbolism is great, but only if it also looks good. If it doesn't look good then you've compromised design for something that isn't even perceptible unless it's explained. I do like the C tail. I think that's the right amount of "hidden" while still being visually cool looking. 

 

I think the whole thing does look pretty good.  I certainly don't think they've compromised design to add the symbolism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

I think the whole thing does look pretty good.  I certainly don't think they've compromised design to add the symbolism.

 

I was talking in general when logo design gets into heavy Nike Speak and we get to stuff "the wings are the 3 years it took to get to MLS" are fine, but it only works if it looks good first. Conversely, you can put something in a logo just because it looks good and it doesn't need additional meaning heaped upon it. I think on the whole this looks pretty good. Other issues with some of their choices aside, the lion is well-rendered and the whole mark is well-balanced and sturdy. My one gripe in the case of compromising design to mash in symbolism is craning the lion's back to represent the Ohio River. Nothing would've been lost if that little detail had been left out in favor of a more naturally curved line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, xbhaskarx said:


Silly Pablo. That's not the Lion of St. Mark. It's King Moonracer from the beloved Rankin-Bass stop motion animation television Christmas special Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer.

The depiction of King Moonracer is included in the FC Cincinnati badge because the name Rudolph - as in Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer - is of Germanic origin, and Cincinnati is a very Germanic city. Exceedingly Germanic. In fact, it only officially became part of the State of Ohio in August of 1962. Prior to that, the city was an exclave of the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia.

Further, the 7 points on King Moonracer's crown, the 3 feathers on his wing, his 4 paws, the 1 sword he wields, and the 5 sides of the soccer ball panel-shaped badge on which he is emblazoned all add up to 20... the number of playthings that Rudolph, Hermy, and Yukon Cornelius encounter on the Island of Misfit Toys in Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer. Just as those toys - Charlie-in-the-Box, an airplane that can't fly, a rocking-dalmatian, a wind-up mouse in a set of nesting clown dolls, a pair of faceless tin soldiers, a winged bear, a push-up toy cat, a sailboat, a blue car, a pink fire engine, a scooter for Jimmy, a dolly for Sue, a spotted elephant, a choo-choo with square wheels on its caboose, a water-pistol that shoots jelly, a bird that swims, a cowboy who rides an ostrich, a boat that can't stay afloat, and a bicycle without handlebars - became "a sackful of joys for millions of girls and for millions of boys", so too is FC Cincinnati a source of tremendous happiness for the soccer supporters of Cincinnati.       

Which is why King Moonracer's tail forms a "C" in the logo. That "C" is a nod to FC Cincinnati's Managing Owner and CEO:  Carl H. Linder III, the Santa Claus who'll make every match day Christmas in Cincy!!!

Seriously though, in my opinion, one of Major League Soccer's best team logos. (Painfully-strained marketing-speak aside, of course.)           

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, GFB said:

...There have been plenty of logos since '96 that I'm personally not too crazy about (Orlando City, Montreal, and Vancouver for example), but at least they are professionally rendered...

 

You definitely don’t want to see the vector artwork. Trust me when I say those are no better.

 

I think this lion has some really nice parts, but the whole is not up to the caliber of the good pieces. The typeface, though (the straight versions, at least), I think is great for what they’re going for with this club. The angled counters and terminals perfectly evoke the checkered flag of Bavaria, which was the first thing I saw in the type (I’m also familiar with Cincinnati's rich German influence, so take that for what it’s worth). I also love how this design choice could potentially stoke an intense rivalry with Columbus if they end up staying, given the Crew’s own positioning as an Anglo-German club since their redesign.

Share this post


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

 

I was talking in general when logo design gets into heavy Nike Speak and we get to stuff "the wings are the 3 years it took to get to MLS" are fine, but it only works if it looks good first. Conversely, you can put something in a logo just because it looks good and it doesn't need additional meaning heaped upon it. 

 

FWIW, i would advise the opposite- start the an idea (what am i communicating?) then a concept (how do i communicate it) then stylize it (whats it look like?). 

 

because i think starting with the aesthetics is how you actually get to a logo like this. “its a cool lion, but why did we do it?”. “oh the wings have 3 feathers, so...” dont try making something look good first; try communicating something meaningful, then style it appropriately and with craftsmanship. not to say that wont lead to too many ideas in one place too (Inter Miami, possibly) but at least your logo has a reason for being

 

(apologies if thats not what you were getting at, i may have interpreted this wrongly) 

Share this post


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

 

FWIW, i would advise the opposite- start the an idea (what am i communicating?) then a concept (how do i communicate it) then stylize it (whats it look like?). 

 

Yes I agree, however, if you can't find a way to stylishly communicate the idea then I don't mind if the idea is left out if it means that the artwork can be executed in a more visually pleasing way once it's not constrained by those parameters. Example: Nobody would've held it against the artist if the Lion's back didn't bend to look like the Ohio River, but since it does it makes the lion's back look kind of weird. Symbolism drove the visual there and the visual suffered for it, slightly. (I'm nitpicking because I do think they gave it a good try)

 

Quote

because i think starting with the aesthetics is how you actually get to a logo like this. “its a cool lion, but why did we do it?”. “oh the wings have 3 feathers, so...” dont try making something look good first; try communicating something meaningful, then style it appropriately and with craftsmanship. not to say that wont lead to too many ideas in one place too (Inter Miami, possibly) but at least your logo has a reason for being

 

I think they definitely started with aesthetics here because they were updating an existing property to fit the club's MLS needs and they knew they'd want to include a winged lion holding a sword, which almost certainly means they worked backwards and retrofitted meaning after it was settled on the look of the lion with minor adjustments here and there to better fit what they were trying to express. I mean if they'd drawn the lion with four feathers they would've found some way to justify it. I think we both agree here. 

 

What's more important is the question - how it looks or what it means? Ultimately it's a visual piece and it's primary function is to communicate who the team is and ultimately become the representative of all the feelings your brand wants to demonstrate. All of that can happen without the number of feathers being ascribed any value. You can achieve a good looking logo that's loaded with meaning, you can achieve a good looking logo devoid of any meaning besides "winged lion look cool", but you can also make a piece of :censored: because you sacrificed aesthetics to have something loaded with meaning. Recently I think some looks in sports have suffered in quality because this newish idea that each stroke needs a reason for being and not just because "hey, man, we're the Philadelphia Eagles and our logo is this badass looking eagle". To me that's a pretty good reason for being. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gothamite said:

For all those defending the RBNY logo, there's a reason I called out this one, from 2006:

 

bl74ky7m7fy27oxap4qkffgdt.gif

 

and not its replacement, introduced in 2008:

 

i9ni847kriagxdlb7xewa6dl8.gif

 

Small details, but still a substantial upgrade.

See, I prefer the 2006 version. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it. They made some adjustments to their USL logo. Cleaned up the St. Mark the Evangelist lion a bit and made the overall logo a bit more big league. Definitely was a fan of the FC Cincinnati USL look, like this one too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, McCarthy said:

 

Yes I agree, however, if you can't find a way to stylishly communicate the idea then I don't mind if the idea is left out if it means that the artwork can be executed in a more visually pleasing way once it's not constrained by those parameters. Example: Nobody would've held it against the artist if the Lion's back didn't bend to look like the Ohio River, but since it does it makes the lion's back look kind of weird. Symbolism drove the visual there and the visual suffered for it, slightly. (I'm nitpicking because I do think they gave it a good try)

 

 

I think they definitely started with aesthetics here because they were updating an existing property to fit the club's MLS needs and they knew they'd want to include a winged lion holding a sword, which almost certainly means they worked backwards and retrofitted meaning after it was settled on the look of the lion with minor adjustments here and there to better fit what they were trying to express. I mean if they'd drawn the lion with four feathers they would've found some way to justify it. I think we both agree here. 

 

What's more important is the question - how it looks or what it means? Ultimately it's a visual piece and it's primary function is to communicate who the team is and ultimately become the representative of all the feelings your brand wants to demonstrate. All of that can happen without the number of feathers being ascribed any value. You can achieve a good looking logo that's loaded with meaning, you can achieve a good looking logo devoid of any meaning besides "winged lion look cool", but you can also make a piece of :censored:because you sacrificed aesthetics to have something loaded with meaning. Recently I think some looks in sports have suffered in quality because this newish idea that each stroke needs a reason for being and not just because "hey, man, we're the Philadelphia Eagles and our logo is this badass looking eagle". To me that's a pretty good reason for being. 

 

 

 

 

i believe its the balance of both that make great design. Ferrari and Herman-Miller have the same philosophy: "a thing is not good if its not both effective and beautiful". and i think you basically laid that out here. i agree with the Eagles example; that's a perfectly fine logo. but i think there's another level to all this that includes things like the Whalers logo, Seahawks, or Texans. i suppose it's not fair to say every logo needs to reach that level but, im also not ok with average, you know? and with logos like Cincy here, theres a sense of working really hard to get to average, even if the process itself and client and everyone who has a say about it caps it at some point, the end product is still the end product

Share this post


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

 

i believe its the balance of both that make great design. Ferrari and Herman-Miller have the same philosophy: "a thing is not good if its not both effective and beautiful". and i think you basically laid that out here. i agree with the Eagles example; that's a perfectly fine logo. but i think there's another level to all this that includes things like the Whalers logo, Seahawks, or Texans. i suppose it's not fair to say every logo needs to reach that level but, im also not ok with average, you know? and with logos like Cincy here, theres a sense of working really hard to get to average, even if the process itself and client and everyone who has a say about it caps it at some point, the end product is still the end product

 

We're on the same page. This is a perfectly fine mark made by some people who know their way around design, but it's also leaves a lot to be desired. A podcast I listen to a lot would call it a "Gentleman's 6". My issues aren't even with the lion. I like the lion. I keep looking at that big blue space housing the small FC and think "what could've been?" especially when their press release asks media not to refer to the team as just "FC". Well then why'd you make a special area of the logo just for those letters, ya goofs? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This league is really turning me off with uncontrollable expansion along with all the copycat European brand names. FC this. United that. 
Boy do I ever miss the NASL with the likes of the NY Cosmos, Toronto Blizzard, LA Aztecs and Tampa Bay Rowdies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, VancouverFan69 said:

This league is really turning me off with uncontrollable expansion along with all the copycat European brand names. FC this. United that. 
Boy do I ever miss the NASL with the likes of the NY Cosmos, Toronto Blizzard, LA Aztecs and Tampa Bay Rowdies.

 

FC Edmonton, Minnesota United FC, North Carolina FC, Puerto Rico FC, Miami FC :) (I know what you mean, just being funny)

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.