OnWis97

Los Angeles NFL Brands Discussion

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Gothamite said:

It is a serious upgrade.  Bravo, Chargers. 

 

I have no idea what any of the described changes mean but I think it looks nicer now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, spartacat_12 said:

 

The helmet horn has stayed the same (colours aside) for over 70 years. There's no need for any modernization.

 

 

Colours aside, there's the rub.

Other than that, how did you like the play Mrs. Lincoln?

Share this post


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

 

Same with CMYK. Pantone colors (Pantone Matching System/Solid colors anyway) are spot inks; only way to accurately reproduce PANTONE 285 C is to use the following formula ink mix:

  • 37.50% Reflex Blue
  • 12.50% Process Blue
  • 50.00% Transparent White

And then, print on coated paper stock. (What the 'C' indicates.)

 

CMYK values are - like RGB values - just simulations of the intended color.

 

(This is one of my many pet peeves these days...too many people think that Pantone colors are CMYK colors. No, they are spot/solid colors. There's a big difference.)

 

 

I think Reflex Blue toured with New Order in '83...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This includes my prediction for the Rams uniforms. Probably some color rush-inspired look.

 

spacer.png

Share this post


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

 

I have no idea what any of the described changes mean but I think it looks nicer now.

 

If you're actually wondering, here's what they are.

 

EUDbvRjU4AAt6om?format=png&name=medium

 

2. More natural arc

The new logo is flatter and longer. Look at the big circles in either of these logos, the new logo is on an arc that isn't as tight.

 

3. Repair misaligned cutback

This is the circled part on the old logo. The first cutback (the jagged parts of the bolt) juts into the centre (the line going through) of the logo, while you can see arc of the new logo goes straight through without touching the cut.

 

4. Balanced the width and horizontal location of the "cutbacks" for more symmetry

These are the straight lines going down through the logos. You can see on the old logo that the first set of cutbacks are quite narrow, while the second set are wide and they aren't symmetrical on the logo. The new logo makes it so both sets of cutbacks are equal and symmetrical.

 

4. Remove arduous keyline

They removed the dark blue outline, so now it only goes yellow/light blue/white instead of yellow/light blue/dark blue/white

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/26/2020 at 12:18 AM, CaliforniaGlowin said:

KD better get off his high horse and listen or this "battle for LA" will change momentum due to:
1. Rams new branding not being well received
2. Chargers new branding BEING well received
3. Rams letting some big name players go
4. Chargers possibly getting a big name QB

That could hit KD right in the wallet.

What does Kevin Durant have to do with this? And why would he care?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

A - No the horn HASN'T remained unchanged for over 70 years, colors aside. It has changed size and location on the helmet, and if you scroll back a few pages I guarantee someone has posted pictures of when the horn was more realistic, featuring 'ridges' on the helmet.

The Rams' horn last had the "realistic" ridges in 1949, over seventy years ago. It's been a smooth horn since then. Changing helmet styles and technological advancements resulted in tweaked designs here and there but the base design of the horn has remained the same since 1950.

 

4 hours ago, chakfu said:

 

Colours aside, there's the rub.

Other than that, how did you like the play Mrs. Lincoln?

This change is far more significant then a colour change. The whole shape of the horn is changing, and not for the better.

 

1 hour ago, UnclearInitial said:

What does Kevin Durant have to do with this? And why would he care?

Kevin Demoff, part of the Rams' front office who's been the "face" of the rebrand efforts since the move back to LA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, upperV03 said:

The NFL’s Sr. Creative Director posted a nice breakdown of the changes to the Chargers’ bolt logo:

 

"More natural arc"?  What the hell is the "natural arc" for a lightning bolt?  Have you ever seen a bolt of lightning with a "natural arc"?

 

Looks more like the arc in a Klingon bat'leth:

 

main-qimg-cfba56a7f0f67a69078b73756fed09

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may be the exception here, but I think there would have been value for the Chargers to use black as an accessory color.

 

It would have eliminated the need for a double-trimmed bolt on a blue background, and it would have been a reference to their 1960s logo set.

 

spacer.png

 

I would have also brought back the black helmet numbers (eliminating the need for cramped TV numbers on the swoosh-embossed mini sleeves), and I would have brought back black shoes.  I still love this look.

 

spacer.png

Share this post


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

I may be the exception here, but I think there would have been value for the Chargers to use black as an accessory color.

 

It would have eliminated the need for a double-trimmed bolt on a blue background, and it would have been a reference to their 1960 logo set.

 

spacer.png

You'd definitely be the exception. While that's not a bad color scheme in a vacuum, it doesn't fit the Chargers at all. Powder blue and gold is 100% what they should be doing, and i'm very glad to see it back full time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Punchy_Gungus said:

You'd definitely be the exception. While that's not a bad color scheme in a vacuum, it doesn't fit the Chargers at all. Powder blue and gold is 100% what they should be doing, and i'm very glad to see it back full time.

 

I'm not opposed to Powder Blue, but I HATE double trim.

 

One of the reasons the Blackhawks primary logo looks so good is that it barely has any red.  It looks great on a red background because it doesn't require a white border.

 

spacer.png

Share this post


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

The Rams' horn last had the "realistic" ridges in 1949, over seventy years ago. It's been a smooth horn since then. Changing helmet styles and technological advancements resulted in tweaked designs here and there but the base design of the horn has remained the same since 1950.

Sure - it's been a horn and will continue to be a horn. That said, it hasn't remained unchanged besides the colors. The size, shape and location have all changed. Regardless of the reason for the changes, they HAVE been changes.

 

Maybe we're in agreement and are just saying the same thing in different ways (I'm not sure that's the case). If that's the case, pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, doctorpeligro said:

 

I'm not opposed to Powder Blue, but I HATE double trim.

 

One of the reasons the Blackhawks primary logo looks so good is that it barely has any red.  It looks so good on a red background because it doesn't require a white border.

 

spacer.png

 

Well now it does. It had an extra tan outline back in the day. I own sweaters with both types of crest and I'm not 100% which is better. 

 

1000

As for the Chargers, I understand the gripe regarding the double trim. Frankly I think the white trim meant to separate the logo on a dark background is a little too thin. I think they solve that on the uniforms by always putting the bolt on a white backdrop:

 

The original home uniforms had that exact feature. 

 

878e390f6e5ca80415164c2331cf33e6.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a lot of value to trying to keep the same bolt/background combination across every uniform. The Chargers have only pulled that off a few times but when they did it was GLORIOUS:

 

e28a73c1174cb308437923709e66d6ed.jpg116614885.jpg.0.jpg

One thing the dark helmet Chargers look had over the white helmet was the you could use the blue inserts on the white jersey without changing the background look. 

Share this post


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

There's a lot of value to trying to keep the same bolt/background combination across every uniform. The Chargers have only pulled that off a few times but when they did it was GLORIOUS:

 

e28a73c1174cb308437923709e66d6ed.jpg

That one has a navy background for the helmet and pants but white for the jersey. The away jersey is a good example though.

Share this post


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

That one has a navy background for the helmet and pants but white for the jersey. The away jersey is a good example though.

 

I see what you mean. I think I should've said the bolts remain consistent. The white inserts on the home jersey don't show any extra outlining. The 90's set was the only one to have one consistent bolt/background combination on the helmet, jersey, and pants. 

Share this post


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

I apologize, when it was shown to me it looked periwinkle (light purple)

Pretty sure i smell a monday here GIFs - Get the best GIF on GIPHY

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.