OnWis97

Los Angeles NFL Brands Discussion

Recommended Posts

Someone here mentionned the buffaslug yesterday. The Rams LA logo is definitely buffaslug bad. It's not boring like the Clippers logo, it's simply ugly and overdone. Gradient, shadows, so many unneeded colors...

Share this post


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

Is this not real, or did we somehow miss this?

 

 

 

 

Huh?

 

Not trying to be rude; check the last few pages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh, I see. was the one who missed this. Not seeing a dedicated thread to the change threw me off a bit. It’s weird that we’re grouping the two LA teams together in one thread. That being said, it’s so absolutely fitting for the Chargers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the biggest problem with the Rams logo is that they forgot they were making a logo for a sports team. I feel like they were too concerned with adding symbols and "nike-speak" material instead of designing a quality mark. The logo just doesn't look like it belongs to a sports team, especially an NFL team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, FiddySicks said:

Ahh, I see. was the one who missed this. Not seeing a dedicated thread to the change threw me off a bit. It’s weird that we’re grouping the two LA teams together in one thread. That being said, it’s so absolutely fitting for the Chargers. 

The Chargers had their own thread but everyone kept talking about the Rams so we merged them XD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, FiddySicks said:

Ahh, I see. was the one who missed this. Not seeing a dedicated thread to the change threw me off a bit. It’s weird that we’re grouping the two LA teams together in one thread. That being said, it’s so absolutely fitting for the Chargers. 

 

Shared stadium. Shared thread. Them's the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know a lot of people don’t like the new Rams logos (as I’ve said, I love them), but I don’t think than anyone can deny that color wise, LA looks absolutely fantastic now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So after a day of reflection, I got some hot takes that are ready to burn.

 

It's obvious that the Rams leadership wanted to emphasize that they are the LA team, and their tenant is second banana.  Using the mothership as an example, it's easy to see why.

a0Mf2yH.png

The other large-market team in that image doesn't use imagery that invokes the team's nickname.  It's just a straight "NY".  People immediately know that is for the Giants.  Here's where their thinking is flawed though: The Giants' NY was put on the helmets in 1961 and lasted until 1975.  The return in 2000 has kept it in the public eye as the logo and helmet for going-on 20 years.  It's familiar and known and has a sort-of old school feel that has reached a sense of timelessness.

 

The Rams on the other hand have used a Rams head for a good chunk of their history.  They are THE Rams.  Hell even the website is therams.com.  The Ram Head should be the primary logo in this regard.  Let the brand define their return to Los Angeles.  The LA pandering feels exactly like that: pandering.

 

Now a comparison with the magic of "INSPECT ELEMENT":

teLEQnF.png

 

Tossing it up with others, i agree that it's VERY simple compared to the rest.  And it stands out in a somewhat not good way (While the Chargers logo just works, holy crap was that a good update).  But the Rams head being new and specifically designed for the return to the LA market helps detach from the St. Louis Rams logo and becomes solely Los Angeles Rams.  The pandering and forced justification of an odd design choice for the horn is unnecessary.  The backtracking now saying that they're is no "official" logo is a complete 180 from the forced LAHorn they were pushing throughout.  Does the Ram head need some fixing? yes.  Does it work as a standalone primary? Yes. 

 

The Rams need to stop pretending they have to be LA's team and just be the Rams and being the LA Rams will come naturally.

Share this post


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

Ok, I may have left my Chargers fandom in the dust but I still feel the need to take you to task here. 

 

This is THE perfect Chargers rebrand. Seriously, I've been posting here since 2003 and yeah. What the Chargers just did is what almost everyone here has been wanting them to do since then, if not earlier. Hell, you were one of them! Taking Dean to task for refusing to listen to fan preference. 

So now they've finally done it and all you can do is claim that the change was "tonedeaf."

 

Look, Dean's an idiot and the team's going nowhere fast under his watch, but you're being unreasonable if you can't even admit this rebrand was the right move. A broken clock is right twice a day, after all. 

 

I left my fandom behind too when they screwed over San Diego, so we're in agreement on that.

 

This would have been close to a "perfect" rebrand if the team was still in SD. Especially given the longterm demand for the powder blues there. IMO, a perfect rebrand in LA would have involved changing the team's name completely, not continuing to prop themselves up on decades of history in another city they betrayed.

Share this post


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

I don't think it would help. It's still the same basic shape. 

If anything the problem is made worse by the segmented horns. Now you have to line two different parts of the logo up over all of these unusual shapes and creases. At least the solid coloured horn covered some of it up. 

While your logic and reasoning are sound, "slitting" larger decals to help them conform to complex curves and vent holes is actually pretty standard practice.. slitting/cutting decals is essentially segmenting the decal in a similar fashion..

If I were a betting man, I'd bet that it's NOT why they decided to go with the segmented horns, but it's at least a valid assumption 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NFL Meltzer gives the new Chargers uniforms 6 Stars! ⭐ ⭐ ⭐ ⭐ ⭐ ⭐

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, FiddySicks said:

I know a lot of people don’t like the new Rams logos (as I’ve said, I love them), but I don’t think than anyone can deny that color wise, LA looks absolutely fantastic now. 

 

Eh, as long as they go gold dominant which it doesn't look like right now. Too many blue dominant teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was unexpected for me to see the Chargers change their logo and wordmark. It was very quiet and unannounced, but the changes are probably much better than what the Rams have released. I'm just glad that the fans got the colors that they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Pharos04 said:

 

The Rams need to stop pretending they have to be LA's team and just be the Rams and being the LA Rams will come naturally.

^this

 

I was just scrolling through Instagram and it struck me how the new logo did not whatsoever evoke "Rams" or even "a ram" at small scale

E4LsSxU.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, edjb93 said:

I'm just glad that the fans got the colors that they want.

 

Yeah, I'm sure they're both thrilled.

Share this post


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

I wouldn't put much stock into Twitter's opinion except that the team seemed to change gears over the past day. 

The original unveiling showed the LA/horn very prominently, with the ram head alternate as a glorified afterthought. Now not even two days later they're going "the LA/horn isn't the primary per se, we're going to use both!" 

 

That's a backtrack if I've ever seen one. And I have to believe the team has some kind of reliable data that indicates the ram head is greatly preferred. 


That could well be.  Or it could be that they just wanted to silence the loudest voices in the moment. 

 

When your primary logo isn’t on the helmet, it doesn’t really matter which of your logos is primary and which is secondary.  It’s an easy swap, and an easy swap back. 

Share this post


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

 

Yeah, I'm sure they're both thrilled.


beat me by 9 minutes.  🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Chargers logo still sucks.  It just doesn't scale well since it's so "long".  It looks great for something that goes on a helmet, but as a logo, they really should have come up with something that's a little more balanced so that it could look similar in size to other logos when used in graphics like above, and also be used in small sizes as an avatar rather than them having to make special logos just for that.

 

The more I stare at it in the graphic above, the more it looks like the Viking's mustache.  Something that used the shield, or even the "failed" LA logo that wasn't really bad, or even working an LA into the bolt might have helped it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Chargers are going to go with yellow bolts with no outline for the shoulder. 

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.