Sign in to follow this  
gosioux76

MLS Expansion Club St Louis City SC Unveils Name and Logo

Recommended Posts

What is MPLS City Futures?

 

The colors part is pretty bad. But otherwise this is what happens when everyone decides that only three possible soccer team names are acceptable, plus just going for the safe uber-hip type treatment that's everywhere right now.

Share this post


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

What is MPLS City Futures?

 

The colors part is pretty bad. But otherwise this is what happens when everyone decides that only three possible soccer team names are acceptable, plus just going for the safe uber-hip type treatment that's everywhere right now.

Minneapolis City's youth team. I think it's more than just the colors, it's the font and style that combine to make this more than a coincidence for me. Yeah the filled/outline text thing is popular, but has any other team recently used it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, QCS said:

Minneapolis City's youth team. I think it's more than just the colors, it's the font and style that combine to make this more than a coincidence for me. Yeah the filled/outline text thing is popular, but has any other team recently used it? 

 

I've been seeing that style left and right in social graphics. It's still bad, but we're not exactly pulling from the well of originality here.

 

Also this is their home kit? Seriously? 

 

homejersey2020.jpg?fit=600,600&ssl=1 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Digby said:

 

I've been seeing that style left and right in social graphics. It's still bad, but we're not exactly pulling from the well of originality here.

 

Also this is their home kit? Seriously? 

 

homejersey2020.jpg?fit=600,600&ssl=1 

Minneapolis City's home kit, yes, but the team using the colors is Minneapolis City Futures, their youth team. I think the main things that connect the two are the colors which are nearly identical, which isn't uncommon, but it's the use of the exact same font as well that pushes it over. 

Share this post


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

Minneapolis City's home kit, yes, but the team using the colors is Minneapolis City Futures, their youth team.

 

EastBank_600x600.jpg?fit=600,600&ssl=1

 

I wish I could get over my eyeroll reaction every time I think of Mpls City, since I know so many people who love them, but their attitude just rubs me the wrong way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Updated. 

 

Just guessing on the Charlotte and St Louis shirt colors, and I'm not willing to guess on the STL MLS badge colors, so that one stays gray for now.

 

EfWkxH4XYAEcP_6?format=jpg&name=4096x409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suddenly find myself wondering how Charlotte's blue compares to the Wizards' blue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, -kj said:

 

EastBank_600x600.jpg?fit=600,600&ssl=1

 

I wish I could get over my eyeroll reaction every time I think of Mpls City, since I know so many people who love them, but their attitude just rubs me the wrong way.

 

That's a much sharper kit than that cut-rate Minnesota United kit I posted earlier. That said, these guys have their regular brand, that fauxback brand (which was nice!), and now this hyper-modern youth team brand. That cheapens the cries of "we're getting ripped off" to me. Still not great on STL's part, you'd think they would have checked on these things, but in fairness they've been telegraphing interest in a pinkish red for quite a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Digby said:

 

That's a much sharper kit than that cut-rate Minnesota United kit I posted earlier. That said, these guys have their regular brand, that fauxback brand (which was nice!), and now this hyper-modern youth team brand. That cheapens the cries of "we're getting ripped off" to me. Still not great on STL's part, you'd think they would have checked on these things, but in fairness they've been telegraphing interest in a pinkish red for quite a while.

 

Or they saw these things and liked them so much they decided to just rip them off and hope nobody noticed. 

 

UPDATE

Alternate theory: this is an expert troll job by Minneapolis City. 

 

Based on their Twitter feed, this Futures team branding -- which includes four separate teams with four separate color palettes -- was released in mid-July, at almost the exact same time St. Louis City SC had initially planned their brand launch. (The original event announcement was for July 15, based upon a mobile-site page that has since been updated.)

 

The ownership group in St. Louis have said this brand has been ready to go for months. If that's true, who's to say Minneapolis City isn't a client of one of the 20 designers used by St. Louis, received a glimpse of the St. Louis branding, and thought, "that looks pretty nice for one of our youth sides." 

 

Not sure I even believe that scenario. Just pointing out that the timelines here would make it seem more complicated than it otherwise appears to be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Gothamite, if the backdrops of those squares are based on shirt color, Chicago ought to be changed, yes? (This is a correction that brings me no joy, maybe hold off til next year in the hopes that they sweep that whole thing under the lost-2020 rug.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

 

Not sure I even believe that scenario. Just pointing out that the timelines here would make it seem more complicated than it otherwise appears to be. 

 

Yeah, I mean, a regular cliche of this board is that new brands take a long time. Seems unlikely that the decisions at the level of colors and fonts were still being picked less than a month ago for a new MLS team. And, again -- neither team is pulling from a well of originality on this one.

 

(incidentally I'm digging into this MPLS City stuff and it's actually cool! 7-a-side youth leagues in a community-run club, different brands for different pieces of the city, it's like a concepts thread come to life.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Digby said:

 

Yeah, I mean, a regular cliche of this board is that new brands take a long time. Seems unlikely that the decisions at the level of colors and fonts were still being picked less than a month ago for a new MLS team. And, again -- neither team is pulling from a well of originality on this one.

 

(incidentally I'm digging into this MPLS City stuff and it's actually cool! 7-a-side youth leagues in a community-run club, different brands for different pieces of the city, it's like a concepts thread come to life.)

Absolutely. I can't imagine MLS4TheLou putting the brakes on their unveiling in mid-July because they just saw the branding for a Minneapolis youth club and decide to start over. 

 

And you're right on MPLC City -- it's a really interesting organization. Reminds me a lot of nearby neighbor St. Paul Saints and the success they've had in building up an independent brand. 

Share this post


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

Updated. 

 

Just guessing on the Charlotte and St Louis shirt colors, and I'm not willing to guess on the STL MLS badge colors, so that one stays gray for now.

[snip]

I'm almost certain their MLS badge colors will be red/pink/whatever on the top, blue on the bottom, with yellow in between. Basically the reverse of RSL's.

Share this post


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

I'm almost certain their MLS badge colors will be red/pink/whatever on the top, blue on the bottom, with yellow in between. Basically the reverse of RSL's.

 

Possibly, maybe even probably.  But I'm holding off until I see something from the club.

 

It's strange, because that usually gets released at the same time as the main badge.  Charlotte put it in the reveal video, oftentimes it's a website graphic or appears on a piece of merchandise.  But none the St Louis merch released so far has any MLS anything on it.  No word, no logo, nothing.

Share this post


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

@Gothamite, if the backdrops of those squares are based on shirt color, Chicago ought to be changed, yes? (This is a correction that brings me no joy, maybe hold off til next year in the hopes that they sweep that whole thing under the lost-2020 rug.)

 

You are right, and I will correct that.   That was a guess-slash-wishful thinking on my part, and I guessed wrong.

 

Thanks.  I think.  :lol:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this link certainly provided something I hadn't seen yet: https://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/new_name_and_logo_for_st_louis_city_sc.php

 

st_louis_city_sc_family.png

 

Hadn't seen that secondary crest before. Also, if you click on the link, it's mentioned that the "SC" isn't just "Soccer Club" it's also supposed to stand for "Soccer Capital" considering the city's history.

 

Also, for the record, this is their take on the logo:

 

Quote

The name is kind of interesting in that, eventually, I assume, the team will simply be known as “City”, as in “Hey, did you watch last night’s City game?” or “I’m going to a City game” and that is a pretty powerful statement. I’m also intrigued that they went with “SC” for Soccer Club instead of the usual “FC” for Football Club as I know it’s a thing where football fans get upset when it’s called soccer. For a United States-based team I think this makes much more sense. The new logo, at a glance, looks good but there is definitely a sense that “a diverse group of over 20 local designers”, as the press release states, had a hand in this and interestingly not one of them could explain what the angled lines under the Arch represent. Lite sarcasm aside, the logo does have the right elements in it, I mean, how could you NOT include the Gateway Arch? I’m not sure the execution of it is quite right… it loses heft at the top but not enough to look as if it was done on purpose and the river lines are just slightly thinner but not thinner enough to look much different. The abrupt cut in the crest to fit the name vertically is, well, abrupt. I mean, it’s not bad, and as I mentioned, it looks good at a glance but there are some questionable decisions here and there. The secondary mark that shows the full arch is interesting but, again, there is something not right about the minimalist interpretation of the arch — like the curvature and depth is off. The wordmark is nice and chunky. Things get a little trendy with the stroked-type approach but no doubt looks exciting when animated. Overall, I would say this is pretty good and it’s a very convincing look — just a little off on some aspects that most fans won’t be bothered by at all.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Maroon said:

it's mentioned that the "SC" isn't just "Soccer Club" it's also supposed to stand for "Soccer Capital"

 

EDyeZI9WwAIBuYQ.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

 

Color that secondary mark and slap it on the jersey. 

Ya, to be honest it's the better logo. It avoids the wordmark being a part of the crest (the biggest mistake they made in this whole thing, imo) and looks more complete without the arch and river being cut off. And if you want the full identity package just center it over the Wordmark and DONE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Maroon said:

Ya, to be honest it's the better logo. It avoids the wordmark being a part of the crest (the biggest mistake they made in this whole thing, imo) and looks more complete without the arch and river being cut off. And if you want the full identity package just center it over the Wordmark and DONE.

Better yet, replace the SC with STL or the entire acronym, STLCSC. That may be a bit clunky, but I don't know that it would look much different than if they were Roman numerals denoting a year. 

 

Maybe that's another option: Don't put letters in that space, but the year established: 2023. 

 

Or leave it blank. Anything besides the lonely "SC."

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.

Sign in to follow this