Jump to content

Cleveland Indians become the Cleveland Guardians


Bill0813

Recommended Posts

I can't believe how much more quickly this all happened in comparison to the Football Team.

 

All things considered, I think it's OK. There was literally nothing they could do that wasn't going to be jarring to most fans. When I think about my teams, a name change would be jarring to me (even if it was the Wild).  No matter how good the name and identity, calling the Twins anything else would take some serious getting used to. Therefore, I think it makes sense that:

  • The colors and general identity are reminiscent of the current team. That continuity is important.
  • Guardians has a similar cadence to the old name.

As for Spiders, I know a lot of us, myself included, would have liked it. But the general fan base? I legitimately don't know. Remember, at any given time, 80% of the fans there probably haven't heard of Len Barker and half probably haven't heard of Bob Feller (this is not a shot at Clevelanders but an observation about the the lack of attachment to history for the casual fan everywhere). They likely don't know the Spiders (on the other hand, they don't know the Spiders were historically bad). My two cents:

  • Name: OK. Like I said, the cadence works (and someone point out the "ians"). Someone else pointed out that it's a bit "too local" but hey, it gives the rest of us a chance to learn something about Cleveland.
  • Colors: They had no choice, in my opinion. It's not their problem that so many teams have similar colors. They needed to keep the continuity. And it looks fine. Don't worry about it; I'm sure they'll be wearing a "city" jersey 50 times a year (maybe inspired by the Cuyahoga River fire).
  • Wordmarks: OK. I actually think they should have gone for more continuity with a smoother wordmark, particularly the "Guardians" one. But it makes the "Cleveland" mark less boring, I suppose.
  • Cap: Nice.  While I'm sometimes a fan of seeing no white, the "C" hat has been begging for white from day 1. The contrast on their hats messed with my eyes.
  • "G" Logo: The only truly awful part of this. Edit: I just realized that the 3D aspect of the logo implies that on the other side, there's a backwards-facing G. It's worse than I initially thought.

Overall, I give them a B+ and I'm more grateful that they sidestepped potential "expansionesque" landmines than I am disappointed about any missed opportunities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole indentity screams "fine" to me. The name is fine. The new cap is fine (I like it much more than the current Block C personally). The wordmarks are fine. The G-Baseball logo is the worst aspect of this, but given that you had a name that would've led you in more creative directions & could've been a merch goldmine.... for this... it's kinda lame. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

A couple interesting tweets on two levels here — I know there was a guy a few months ago trying to squat on the "Cleveland Spiders" trademark, but the stories all talked about him running into issues with the University of Richmond — I wonder if the baseball club ran into the same concerns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will take a while for me to appreciate the flying 'G'. I am not sold on the script "Guardians", I would have with the block font they used for "Cleveland". I happen to like the name, though I was hoping they would take the "Gladiators" name and reuse the arena league logo 😄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overall I like this and think it’s the best we could’ve hoped for. The new fonts are nice, unique, if not a bit contrived.

 

The baseball in the flying G is embarrassingly bad, and the perspective is weird. It really looks like clip art or something designed for a coming of age film about a high school baseball player. With that said, their branding speak about the split finger grip of the G really sold me on the concept so I think it should be reworked in the future.

 

Idk enough about graphic design to express this effectively but the marks all look like something I designed in illustrator as an amateur. There is a flatness there that I don’t typically see from professionals. Do any of our designers have insight into that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

with the full caveat that i don't really have an emotional attachment to the old identity, i think the the name and the wordmarks are fine. as everyone else has said, the 'G' logo is an abomination. i wouldn't be surprised in the least if that changes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, insert name said:

The Wing G logo looks like the Disney era Angels logo. 

My thoughts exactly. Cleveland Guardians of Akron, anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

 

Tom Hanks is a longtime Indians fan and he has some connections to Cleveland. I guess he used to act in Cleveland before he was famous.

 

He has a deep connection to Cleveland baseball.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The winged baseball logo looks like they were trying for Back to the Future for me. I’m glad they kept the colors. I’m certainly glad they stayed away from the Spiders. Guardians sounds like a name to be proud of. Hopefully in a few years they can move on from the winged logo and actually phase into something an actual guardian statue. 
 

I love the script, word mark, but everyone else has said. That baseball logo is horrible. I think it could’ve been a rushed job. But I just don’t see Guardians. I see alternate logo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, spartacat_12 said:

 

Except you're not a fan, so I don't know how you can speak to what they wanted or deserved. The goal here was clearly to create as smooth a transition to the new brand as possible, not to blow up 100+ years of brand equity and start from scratch.

No, I'm not. But from a purely outside perspective, the Cleveland Indians brand was tied for the stupidest name in all of professional American sports. It was racist, embarrassing, and based on a complete misappropriation and misunderstanding of the original inhabitants of this land.

So no, I can't speak from a fan's perspective, but I think the goal should be to completely disassociate from anything resembling what they once were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bbush24 said:

The logos feel...rushed

spacer.png

 


One other criticism that I overlooked in my earlier post . . .

 

I get the attempt to maintain a connection to the existing block C.  However, if they were trying to mimic the shape of the bridge pillars, I believe it would have worked better to eliminate the serif on the top right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gary said:

The winged baseball logo looks like they were trying for Back to the Future for me.

Adventures in Babysitting (1987) - IMDb

Or they're fans on Elizabeth Shue?  Hahahahaha!!! I understand they were mimicking the helmet of one of the Guardians, but a 2D look would have been better.

AGPix: :: View Large Preview & Download Comp Images

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That G logo is horrid, but the name is cool by me. 

 

I wish they could have done a logo similar to a local Cleveland brewery. 

 

HOP SALES — Barn Talk HopsMarket Garden Brewery's Progress Pilsner clone - Brew Your Own

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.