Jump to content

Los Angeles NFL Brands Discussion


OnWis97

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, JQK said:

Historical context.

Outside of the royal blue and yellow, what exactly is historically contextual about this rebrand? It looks extremely modernized, not classical. The logos look like app icons.

Quote

Clean.

That's because we only have the logo package so far, not the actual uniforms. It's easy to call something even mediocre "clean" if there's no context besides the logos themselves.

 

Quote

Better than the branding it is replacing...

Highly debatable; the STL-era stuff at least looked like the branding of a sports franchise instead of a tech company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 12k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 minute ago, JQK said:

Historical context. Clean. Better than the branding it is replacing...

I don't see the "bad" here... but i mean.... if that's your opinion, cool...

 

To each their own, but I think even with the historical context, they missed the mark.  Honestly, I'm not sure it's even an upgrade from the previous Ram head logo.  You probably could have made some minor color updates and called it a day, and while disappointing, it'd still be a better look.  But whatever BRING ON THE JERSEYS 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, hawk36 said:

It's what they get for 1) waiting so long and 2) screwing up the logo in the first place. Their only hope is to come out with a uniform that closely resembles the throwbacks and then they begin to downplay the Good Morning LA logo. 

 

I am hoping they actually stay away from the throwbacks and instead go for a Yellow Home Primary with White Pants. It would be unique in the NFL. Then they can have a White Away Primary and keep the Blue Throwbacks as their alternate. 

 

14 hours ago, colortv said:

People have begun receiving more merchandise:

 

krybf9z7q0x41-jpg.36211

 

I've been on board with this logo from day one. It could have been better, but I think it's a huge improvement over the previous Ram Head logo. 


My biggest issue with it is the grey ear. It would look much better if they just kept it white. From the pictures I can't really notice as much of the "Sunset Orange" in the horns. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Ridleylash said:

Outside of the royal blue and yellow, what exactly is historically contextual about this rebrand? It looks extremely modernized, not classical. The logos look like app icons.

That's because we only have the logo package so far, not the actual uniforms. It's easy to call something even mediocre "clean" if there's no context besides the logos themselves.

The history of Los Angeles Rams logos, ranked from worst to first ...

 

The Ram Head Logo is clearly a nod to this logo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ramsker said:

The history of Los Angeles Rams logos, ranked from worst to first ...

 

The Ram Head Logo is clearly a nod to this logo. 

If "clearly" is "the same general idea", sure. Both are ram heads in a charging position. Except one's at a 3/4th angle and one's in profile, one has black lines and the other does not and one has an open mouth with teeth and a tongue, while the other doesn't even have a mouth at all. Outside of basic things, they're not really all that similar. If it's a nod, it's a loose one at best outside of the yellow horns and both logos being rams.

 

The St. Louis logo is closer to that logo then the new one is. Honestly, something akin to this in the updated blue would've been pretty nice, even without a mouth;

spacer.png

It cleans out the STL-era logo, but keeps the more sports-like feel that logo had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Ridleylash said:

 

spacer.png

It cleans out the STL-era logo, but keeps the more sports-like feel that logo had.



Thai Woman Accidentally Caught Peeping Tom On Video Crouching ...

Stay Tuned Sports Podcast
sB9ijEj.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ridleylash said:

If "clearly" is "the same general idea", sure. Both are ram heads in a charging position. Except one's at a 3/4th angle and one's in profile, one has black lines and the other does not and one has an open mouth with teeth and a tongue, while the other doesn't even have a mouth at all. Outside of basic things, they're not really all that similar. If it's a nod, it's a loose one at best outside of the yellow horns and both logos being rams.

 

The St. Louis logo is closer to that logo then the new one is. Honestly, something akin to this in the updated blue would've been pretty nice, even without a mouth;

spacer.png

It cleans out the STL-era logo, but keeps the more sports-like feel that logo had.

 

I think this one got it's nose cut off or smooshed. It's like a rabbit and a ram had a baby. Jackrammit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the best way to describe the new ram head is "Good, but incomplete". I know the horns are the focus, but they really spent no time at all on the face. It's like they just blocked it out to show how the head shape would look with the horns, and the rams signed off on the draft.

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ridleylash said:

If "clearly" is "the same general idea", sure. Both are ram heads in a charging position. Except one's at a 3/4th angle and one's in profile, one has black lines and the other does not and one has an open mouth with teeth and a tongue, while the other doesn't even have a mouth at all. Outside of basic things, they're not really all that similar. If it's a nod, it's a loose one at best outside of the yellow horns and both logos being rams.

 

The St. Louis logo is closer to that logo then the new one is. Honestly, something akin to this in the updated blue would've been pretty nice, even without a mouth;

spacer.png

It cleans out the STL-era logo, but keeps the more sports-like feel that logo had.

 

That's one cute logo

fiowXOD.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JQK said:

Historical context. Clean. Better than the branding it is replacing...

I don't see the "bad" here... but i mean.... if that's your opinion, cool...

 

I does look a lot better embroidered. Makes me want to see it as a jersey patch. 

 

I'm all for the ram head. It's not perfect, but it's far better than the LA. The more pressure the fanbase applies the more the team will likely lean into the ram head. The team even walked back the "LA is the primary logo" bit twenty-four hours after the unveiling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, oldschoolvikings said:

Whatever else you can say about the logo, that shade of blue is f'n perfect.

The “sol” shade of yellow is wonderful too. They knocked their primary colors out of the park. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ridleylash said:

If "clearly" is "the same general idea", sure. Both are ram heads in a charging position. Except one's at a 3/4th angle and one's in profile, one has black lines and the other does not and one has an open mouth with teeth and a tongue, while the other doesn't even have a mouth at all. Outside of basic things, they're not really all that similar. If it's a nod, it's a loose one at best outside of the yellow horns and both logos being rams.

 

The St. Louis logo is closer to that logo then the new one is. Honestly, something akin to this in the updated blue would've been pretty nice, even without a mouth;

spacer.png

It cleans out the STL-era logo, but keeps the more sports-like feel that logo had.

 

This was actually my logo design. This design took me three years to do. I had a hard time deciding between the head looking left or right, but i'm happy with how it looks.

If you want to read more about it, here you go:   dribbble.com/mattharveysc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.