Los Angeles NFL Brands Discussion

[BrandMooreArt]

the expectations on the logos for 2016 are completely unrealistic. Guest pointed to the production timeline for apparel which is part of this, but i disagree that it would simply be easy to adopt a throwback uniform for 2016, just because they wore them in 2015. its all part of the same system. even if they could produce the throwback uniform for 2016, they probably cant produce the apparel and so it makes no difference.

what they have done is the only thing that could be done. they will keep what they have now, change the name, and just service the business with what they can. that probably includes using the LA Rams mark where they can (web / 2016 campaign) and the primary in other places.

that said, i do feel 2019 is too far away to await a change. it would be great to have everything roll out together (stadium and identity) but in this case, i would shoot for a 2017 identity change. that is something Nike could do and starts building the new brand ASAP, rather than putting a 3 year hold on it. Jeff Fisher may not even be the coach when this happens - teams are so quick to make personel changes, but want to wait 3 years to roll out the LA Rams identity? makes no sense

[WavePunter]

I agree.. I think they could recolor the current uniforms royal and yellow for 2016 if they really wanted to, but absolutely shouldn't enter 2017 in the navy/gold currents, regardless of what they wear in 2016

[Cosmic]

the expectations on the logos for 2016 are completely unrealistic. Guest pointed to the production timeline for apparel which is part of this, but i disagree that it would simply be easy to adopt a throwback uniform for 2016, just because they wore them in 2015. its all part of the same system. even if they could produce the throwback uniform for 2016, they probably cant produce the apparel and so it makes no difference.

what they have done is the only thing that could be done. they will keep what they have now, change the name, and just service the business with what they can. that probably includes using the LA Rams mark where they can (web / 2016 campaign) and the primary in other places.

that said, i do feel 2019 is too far away to await a change. it would be great to have everything roll out together (stadium and identity) but in this case, i would shoot for a 2017 identity change. that is something Nike could do and starts building the new brand ASAP, rather than putting a 3 year hold on it. Jeff Fisher may not even be the coach when this happens - teams are so quick to make personel changes, but want to wait 3 years to roll out the LA Rams identity? makes no sense

The reason we have all of this speculation is that the timeline on much of that merchandise/apparel has already been reset by the move; anything that has "St. Louis" already has to be thrown out. If they can make "LA Rams" anything in time for the 2016 season, then they have time to do a palate swap on the current logos to bring back the classic colors.

[AndrewG70]

Here's a concept I did, blending several eras in Rams history.

[Ben in LA]

^^Change that gold to "Lakers gold" and I'm good. Love the overall concept as well.

[Cosmic]

Can teams do one-offs in the preseason? I think it'd be fun for the Rams to throw back to their red and yellow uniforms as a nod to their USC landlords. Not the greatest brand move, but fun.

[Captain Tsubasa]

I already posted upthread, but this is a really nice look for the Rams (if they can't go to yellow/royal blue):

It just occured to me that those are almost LAFC colors, while the blue and yellow is almost the same color scheme like LA Galaxy. Maybe they saw LAFC's launch and the favorable feedback to it and it got them thinking "well, navy and gold ain't so bad after all..."

[BJ Sands]

I already posted upthread, but this is a really nice look for the Rams (if they can't go to yellow/royal blue):

It just occured to me that those are almost LAFC colors, while the blue and yellow is almost the same color scheme like LA Galaxy. Maybe they saw LAFC's launch and the favorable feedback to it and it got them thinking "well, navy and gold ain't so bad after all..."

I highly doubt the re-launch of a second team in MLS has anything to do with the Rams' branding.

[Captain Tsubasa]

I highly doubt the re-launch of a second team in MLS has anything to do with the Rams' branding.

Agreed. Anyway, it was just some random thought that crossed my mind.

[hawk36]

I do love the Rams-head logo, but the rest of the marks are weak.

I have never liked this one:

The horned-R is just a bit too cute. The letters are over-designed with extra fussy angles. And the shortness of the word seems accentuated by both its height and the pointless underscore.

This has always been a far superior wordmark:

Totally agree. And, the LA Rams logo is so synonymous with the team in LA I think it HAS to be used.

As for the timeline not allowing for production of the new look for uniforms, I don't buy it. They've been planning this move for 4 years and knew good and well this was coming. Common sense would say they would have banked on being able to move this year and had the uniforms ready. Worst case, they aren't allowed to move and they wear the blue/yellow in St. Louis. There is something else at play here (like the owner wants gold, not yellow).

[guest23]

if they were smart they would have slotted them #32 on the prod schedule to account for this...by far the easiest change would be navy/yellow as most of the yellow would be an accent and likely applied via screening/printing etc

at this point anything is possible...the league has clearly shown a willingness to make drastic change on the fly and money is obviously no concern of stan's

[BrandMooreArt]

the expectations on the logos for 2016 are completely unrealistic. Guest pointed to the production timeline for apparel which is part of this, but i disagree that it would simply be easy to adopt a throwback uniform for 2016, just because they wore them in 2015. its all part of the same system. even if they could produce the throwback uniform for 2016, they probably cant produce the apparel and so it makes no difference.

what they have done is the only thing that could be done. they will keep what they have now, change the name, and just service the business with what they can. that probably includes using the LA Rams mark where they can (web / 2016 campaign) and the primary in other places.

that said, i do feel 2019 is too far away to await a change. it would be great to have everything roll out together (stadium and identity) but in this case, i would shoot for a 2017 identity change. that is something Nike could do and starts building the new brand ASAP, rather than putting a 3 year hold on it. Jeff Fisher may not even be the coach when this happens - teams are so quick to make personel changes, but want to wait 3 years to roll out the LA Rams identity? makes no sense

The reason we have all of this speculation is that the timeline on much of that merchandise/apparel has already been reset by the move; anything that has "St. Louis" already has to be thrown out. If they can make "LA Rams" anything in time for the 2016 season, then they have time to do a palate swap on the current logos to bring back the classic colors.

swapping logos isn't as time consuming as creating a piece with new colors. weather or not NE and Nike are capable of serving their apparel lines with throwback colors or not im not sure. i would guess no. but here's the latest in NFL Shop - not a lot has to be thrown out.

[4_tattoos]

Maybe the reason the Rams did not start the rebranding process earlier was because they were not 100% certain/confident that they'd get the green light to relocate for 2016. Only reason I can think of.

Or maybe Rams management is just lazy *shrug*

[ARTnSocal]

Honestly I am happy the way the Rams are handling this.

I know people want them to change right away but they need to get

You're one of the few then.

Go have a look all over social media and you'll see the overwhelming criticism they're receiving for using the St. Louis colors and wordmark and only changing the wording from St. Louis to Los Angeles.

Yeah I know I might be in the minority but let the Rams get this right. The Rams are not just trying to satisfy the old LA Rams fans but also reach new fans that remember those old LA teams too!! My point being we got a lot of social media outrage to change the the Clippers logo after they got sold. They listened, did a rush job and look what we got!! Patience is sometimes a good thing.

Did the Rams eliminate the gold pants or have they just not worn them the last few years??

I think they were dropped officially, but I could be wrong. But it might be a good time to break them out. After all, what could be more LA than the golden glitz and bright lights?

They were officially dropped, but I suspect those aren't subject to the same regulations and could be reintroduced at any time.

I believe so too, along with making the throwbacks their primaries rather than alternates and producing a white jersey for road games.

If they take to the field next season looking like 'St. Louis' it's very poor marketing on their part

So you think it was bad marketing when they moved to St. Louis and kept the LA colors and uniforms for the first few years there??

No I didn't, but these are different times in a different situation. The only thing St. Louis kept were the colors and uniforms, if you'll remember they immediately changed the logo/wordmark to disassociate themselves from Los Angeles.

http://content.sportslogos.net/logos/7/178/full/4603.gif

When the Oakland Raiders moved to LA in 1982 everything stayed the same but the wordmark and logo always said Raiders, it didn't say Oakland before they arrived in Los Angeles. Only the Raiders logo in 1963 had 'Oakland' on it.

The St. Louis Rams did change the wordmark and team logo after moving to St. Louis, and the team colors around 5-6 years later, so that's why I strongly feel that the Rams should be discarding anything that has St. Louis identity on it, and with immediate effect.

The Rams already have the royal blue and bright yellow jerseys as the alternates which is used as their throwback, all they need is a white one for road games, and they could easily switch back to the wordmark used in 1994. I just don't see how that could be such a major ordeal for Nike and the NFL.

[BBTV]

I think when the Rams moved to St. Louis, the royal and yellow were simply associated with the "Rams" brand - not "LA Rams" specifically.

This situation is a little different though. The navy and gold is definitely associated with the "St. Louis Rams". Had they moved to say San Antonio, then that would be one thing, but since they're going back to a place where they were once before and never wore navy and gold, they really should change it up right away and leave St. Louis in the rear view (might even help STL fans get over it a little bit faster if the team that's in LA doesn't look like their club.)

[Sport]

Is there any way the Rams could bump the throwbacks up to full-time status, wear the royal blue and yellow for the 8 home games next year (plus any road games where the home teams wear white) and then wear the navy and gold white uniforms on the road when they have to?

What would stop them from doing that? Does the league have rules against wearing two wildly different home and road uniforms? Cowboys obviously excluded. The NFL's one helmet rule wouldn't apply in this case, they'd just have to switch out the helmet decals.

[TBGKon]

Looks like the Rams may stick with the gold: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000623189/article/rams-unveil-new-logo-during-la-news-conference

Just a placeholder until an entirely new set can be put together, likely in time for 2017.

Keep in mind, after relocation, it took the Tennessee Oilers/Titans a whole year to get their new motif created and unveiled.

Titans didn't rebrand until the new stadium opened up...

[bowld]

From the Ram's season ticket request website-

1. What will we be called? Will we have a new logo or uniforms?

We're officially the Los Angeles Rams. Our logo and uniforms will remain the same. The only thing that will change in 2016 is our location.

[Quillz]

the expectations on the logos for 2016 are completely unrealistic. Guest pointed to the production timeline for apparel which is part of this, but i disagree that it would simply be easy to adopt a throwback uniform for 2016, just because they wore them in 2015. its all part of the same system. even if they could produce the throwback uniform for 2016, they probably cant produce the apparel and so it makes no difference.

what they have done is the only thing that could be done. they will keep what they have now, change the name, and just service the business with what they can. that probably includes using the LA Rams mark where they can (web / 2016 campaign) and the primary in other places.

that said, i do feel 2019 is too far away to await a change. it would be great to have everything roll out together (stadium and identity) but in this case, i would shoot for a 2017 identity change. that is something Nike could do and starts building the new brand ASAP, rather than putting a 3 year hold on it. Jeff Fisher may not even be the coach when this happens - teams are so quick to make personel changes, but want to wait 3 years to roll out the LA Rams identity? makes no sense

The reason we have all of this speculation is that the timeline on much of that merchandise/apparel has already been reset by the move; anything that has "St. Louis" already has to be thrown out. If they can make "LA Rams" anything in time for the 2016 season, then they have time to do a palate swap on the current logos to bring back the classic colors.

swapping logos isn't as time consuming as creating a piece with new colors. weather or not NE and Nike are capable of serving their apparel lines with throwback colors or not im not sure. i would guess no. but here's the latest in NFL Shop - not a lot has to be thrown out.

I think one of the reasons a lot of NFL teams use debranded logos (i.e. no city name) is that it's much easier to make changes, especially if a team does end up relocating.

[jrodsep]

To be honest I don't know what people like so much from the original navy and gold scheme. It looked to dark with the gold pants and it would look drab with nike's matte gold color for fabrics.

Their greatest success came with royal and yellow, and they should get special permission to use the throwbacks as much as they can at home.

But something tells me this is all a quick buck scheme from management/NFL to try and get rid of as much navy/gold merchandise before they announce the change back to yellow/royal.