Jump to content

Cleveland Indians become the Cleveland Guardians


Bill0813

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Titanium Eagle said:

Don't hate the name after I took the 14 seconds to Google the local context...but THAT is all they came up with for something as visually interesting as these?!

 

spacer.png


The goal was to ease fans into it by keeping the visual identity roughly the same as it has been for the past decade and for the ‘40s-‘50s glory days. They were scared of pissing off too many fans with the new name that they couched it as much in the old identity as possible. Remember, they’ve been using the “Indians” script since 1994. That’s a long time for something to last before it’s gone. This is why they played it safe.

 

Give them a few years and they can be more daring.  A logo that resembles the face of a guardian statue, working the pattern into a roundel, etc. That’s all possible.

 

I’m just glad the issue is over. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, bbush24 said:

The logos feel...rushed

spacer.png

 

 

The Guardians was the best name choice... but these logos are a disaster.

 

They should have maintained the Block C, since it was the ORIGINAL Cleveland Baseball Team logo/monogram.  The font is terrible.  It looks like a special edition Single A wordmark.

 

The biggest issue is the colors... they really needed to change the colors.  Great, we're still just 1 of 984375298435 teams with R/W/B color pallet.  They have green seats, great walls, etc.  They could have come up with a somewhat unique color scheme, at least unique to MLB.  But no.

 

The G-Ball logo looks like something straight out of Major League, circa 1989.  The block wordmark seems very WMMS ROCK AND ROLL BABY... which is... nauseating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from the G-Ball logo, I actually really like these a lot. The script is fantastic, and the C and Cleveland wordmarks are very simple but unique enough to be an upgrade of their current stuff.  

 

I'm just hoping for a return of red pants 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CLEstones said:

They should have maintained the Block C, since it was the ORIGINAL Cleveland Baseball Team logo/monogram.  The font is terrible.  It looks like a special edition Single A wordmark.


The “boring Block C with no outline” was a constant criticism from my research. It wasn’t nearly as loved, even for its historical significance. Tweaking it would’ve been cool, but replacing it with the new font was probably the best choice. I rather like the new font and how it blends the deco stylings of the statues with a block font. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me this seems like a major cop out, and if I was a fan of the team I'd be bummed. They clearly wanted to keep the three-syllable, ending in "ians" just to make things easy. The font is still reminiscent to the one they currently have, which is part of the problem in the first place.

Maybe I'm being cynical but this seems very half-a**ed to me. The fans deserve a full rebrand. This is a team that should've changed their identity at least a half century ago

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:


The goal was to ease fans into it by keeping the visual identity roughly the same as it has been for the past decade and for the ‘40s-‘50s glory days. They were scared of pissing off too many fans with the new name that they couched it as much in the old identity as possible. Remember, they’ve been using the “Indians” script since 1994. That’s a long time for something to last before it’s gone. This is why they played it safe.

 

Give them a few years and they can be more daring.  A logo that resembles the face of a guardian statue, working the pattern into a roundel, etc. That’s all possible.

 

I’m just glad the issue is over. 

It's the whole, "you want to be the coach who follows the guy who follows Coach K" type thing, right? For a club that's been masquerading with a single-color block letter (that doesn't even include its primary color!) as a primary logo for several years now, this set is non-generic in the way that it's, well, generic. It's good for what it's trying to (and probably needs to) be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a huge disappointment. "Spiders" was right there and everybody would have loved it!

 

I do think the new script and font are okay, but the G-ball logo is terrible. They also blew their opportunity to adopt a more unique color scheme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“Spiders” had a lot of negative stuff towards it. What better way to piss off fans than by changing your name to the historically worst team ever? Especially only a season after you traded your franchise’s biggest star since Grady Sizemore or even Albert Belle? Bad optics.

 

I’d prefer Spiders, but the name has some bad optics for a team in a bad position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the name is great but the logos/word marks fall flat for me. There’s so much great imagery in the Guardians statues and this is all they came up with? I’ll echo the sentiments that it feels rushed.
They kinda scratched the surface with the winged G. I really like the vintage vibe there, but I don’t really get Art Deco  from the wordmarks. The statues have lots of straight lines and rounded corners and there’s none of that in the script logos. Long story short: name’s good, logos are a miss, for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm stunned that they didn't go with Spiders.

 

The name isn't bad, but the G-Wing-Ball logo is terrible.  Cartoonish, doesn't capture the deco look that I presume was intended and the perspective bothers me.

 

Also, the jagged cursive(ish) wordmark reminds me very much of this . . . 

 

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guardians was my preferred name and I'm happy that's what they selected. Not surprised at all, actually.

 

Could there have a been a better choice? Absolutely, but not among those floating around over the past year. I still don't understand why Spiders had so many advocates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:


The “boring Block C with no outline” was a constant criticism from my research. It wasn’t nearly as loved, even for its historical significance. Tweaking it would’ve been cool, but replacing it with the new font was probably the best choice. I rather like the new font and how it blends the deco stylings of the statues with a block font. 


That’s an interesting data point. 
 

I thought the plain red on blue was something fairy unique but it just goes to show that your own preferences don’t necessarily line up with the fan base. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the "ians" ending and keeping the colors was trying to keep some continuity, but this just feels insanely forced. I don't like it at all. Everyone that is hammering Washington for taking so long might want to rethink that now. It might have been better for Cleveland to think it through a bit more. Honestly, I think a complete rebrand would have been much better that this. This feels like a video game that didn't have naming rights, so the made the Cleveland Guardians in the same colors. Awful

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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