Jump to content

Cleveland Indians become the Cleveland Guardians


Bill0813

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Quillz said:

I forgot that the Spiders were a NL team. I wonder if that's one of the reasons they didn't revive it. It's like how the Nationals didn't bring back the Senators name yet again, as that was an AL team. (Well, I'd assume that was one of the reasons).

 

The mayor of DC made a stink about how DC doesn't have statehood and thus has no actual Senators of its own, and also Selig said he liked Nationals better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, the admiral said:

 

The mayor of DC made a stink about how DC doesn't have statehood and thus has no actual Senators of its own, and also Selig said he liked Nationals better.


Grays was still the best choice. “bUt PiTTsBuGh!!!” - they have the Crawfords.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/28/2020 at 10:35 AM, MJWalker45 said:

For some reason i bought that movie. Bakula and Ted McGinley are really the only good parts of that movie. Everyone else is a cliche. Pops (old guy that's trying to hold on to his youth), Downtown (big bat, little brain), a ballerina that plays outfield (No, really), a guy whose pitches are so slow the radar gun can't even pick them up. And the major league players at the end of their careers that randomly appear on the roster (Tanaka, Cerrano and Rube). 

Eh, Downtown was more of the hot prospect with a big ego...Hog Ellis was more of a "little brain" guy, just with a rocket arm rather than a big bat.

Yes, I've watched Major League III more than once.  I liked it.  And now I want you to go Downtown 😛

 

On topic, I like the new C, if only because it has more character than the block C.  I figure as much continuity as they could maintain was a good call, considering that changing the colors runs the risk of alienating most of the fanbase.

Considering the short timeframe, the Guardians did an okay job here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Marlins93 said:

I still feel like Guardians was the best name among those mentioned as possibilities or proposed by fans. A better name is out there somewhere but hasn't been mentioned yet.

 

According to one article I read, the status of existing trademarks seems to have been a major factor. Guardians had few roadblocks in that regard.

 

Spiders was discussed but they seemed dissuaded by the "worst team in history" legacy and the trademark status for the name held by the University of Richmond.

 

They didn't hold a fan vote because they feared that the fans would select something with too many trademark issues. Evidently they did have some agreement with Marvel about the Guardians name.

 

The branding would look better with a different color scheme but I understand why they wanted some aesthetic continuity in terms of colors and wordmark.

 

My sharpest criticism is directed towards the ball logo, which is frankly rather terrible. It looks a bit rushed, as some have pointed out. It's important to remember that they decided all of this in about a year.

 

Yeah, the legal stuff we often don't take into consideration, so you do have a point on that.

 

I don't think Marvel really owns the word guardian, because I think DC probably used that for a couple of their titles too. I don't remember Marvel batting an eye when Casey Wasserman named his Arena Football team the Avengers.

 

It seems like the Spider name didn't really check the boxes for what the club thought would really represent Cleveland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to the Twitter video, I found some numbers beyond "216"

 

vlcsnap-2021-07-23-19h31m14s881.pngvlcsnap-2021-07-23-19h31m19s680.pngvlcsnap-2021-07-23-19h31m22s890.pngvlcsnap-2021-07-23-19h31m09s025.png

 

...which has given me an idea about the number font (I totally support the idea of a custom number font as differentiation):

 

CLE-Guardians-Numbers-Guess.png

 

It's not exact and I'll know more once more images/fonts come out. Similarly, I've also fixed the "C" to look more like the wordmark version.

 

CLE-Guardians-Fixed-C.png

 

I like it a bit more.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think my favorite part of the rebrand is the number font, which looks classic while also being unique and fitting the guardian shape everything else has been taking. The Guardians script is really good as well, that's gonna look great on a jersey. I know the fastball G isn't everyone's favorite here, but it has an old-school charm that keeps me from hating it. I prefer it to the plain "C", that's for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Quillz said:

I forgot that the Spiders were a NL team. I wonder if that's one of the reasons they didn't revive it. It's like how the Nationals didn't bring back the Senators name yet again, as that was an AL team. (Well, I'd assume that was one of the reasons).

My uncle has a Harmon Killebrew card from before the Twins moved and it says Nationals on it. The original DC AL team flip flopped names, and then the second one solidified senators. So the Nats name is a sort of revival

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, JustForFun said:

 

I grew up in Dayton and aside from concerts, my friends and I all tried to avoid going to Cincy if we could. It was a racist and archconservative place, belonging more to Kentucky than Ohio (this was before Ohio politically turned into Alabama). They built a highway named after Reagan while he was still alive. If we had to go to the "big city" we went to Columbus, which is bland and generic but not as nakedly right-wing.

 

Interesting political dichotomy between the NE and SE.   Cleveland is more industrial/midnorth/eastern compared to the midwestern/nearly southern Cincy.   My background kind of illustrates that with parents/ancestors with distant and recent roots further east before moving to Cleveland. And with subsequent culture shock moving deeper into the midwest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, QCS said:

I think my favorite part of the rebrand is the number font, which looks classic while also being unique and fitting the guardian shape everything else has been taking. The Guardians script is really good as well, that's gonna look great on a jersey. I know the fastball G isn't everyone's favorite here, but it has an old-school charm that keeps me from hating it. I prefer it to the plain "C", that's for sure.

 

Exactly. Distinct enough to fit the brand. But simple enough that it doesn't look forced and cheesy. Looks like normal numbers but still matches the wordmarks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Marlins93 said:

 

According to one article I read, the status of existing trademarks seems to have been a major factor. Guardians had few roadblocks in that regard.

 

Spiders was discussed but they seemed dissuaded by the "worst team in history" legacy and the trademark status for the name held by the University of Richmond.

 

They didn't hold a fan vote because they feared that the fans would select something with too many trademark issues. Evidently they did have some agreement with Marvel about the Guardians name.

 

It always surprises me that trademarks should be a problem for huge entities like major league sports franchises.   Similar to the claim that templated uniforms/warm-ups reduce costs for onfield wear and custom designs aren't feasible. Seems like a drop in the bucket compared to player salaries and overall budget.

 

Maybe if Disney or something wanted to play ball, but surely they could come to an agreement with University of Richmond.   I'm also surprised MLB didn't have rights to Cleveland Spiders already.  Didn't the AL franchise acquire the "assets" of the Spiders at the time of establishment/folding?  I only learned of that continuity recently and think the franchises should be considered connected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, chakfu said:

 

It always surprises me that trademarks should be a problem for huge entities like major league sports franchises.   Similar to the claim that templated uniforms/warm-ups reduce costs for onfield wear and custom designs aren't feasible. Seems like a drop in the bucket compared to player salaries and overall budget.

 

Maybe if Disney or something wanted to play ball, but surely they could come to an agreement with University of Richmond.   I'm also surprised MLB didn't have rights to Cleveland Spiders already.  Didn't the AL franchise acquire the "assets" of the Spiders at the time of establishment/folding?  I only learned of that continuity recently and think the franchises should be considered connected.

 

Trademarks are a big issue because of several factors:
 

1. Merchandise. A team doesn't manufacture all their own product, it gets licensed out to suppliers especially but not limited to Nike. So those licensing deals have to have the appropriate paperwork.

 

2. Counterfeiting. Fakes are a MASSIVE problem and shutting down counterfeiters necessitates valid registrations that empower courts to issue injunctive relief.

 

3. Intellectual property is transferable but like any asset, its best if there's clear chain of custody with few disputes. Problems can and are worked out between parties but that can mean compensation changing hands and at a minimum legal fees for negotiating and drafting an agreement. It makes the process a lot smoother, less messy, and less expensive if there aren't any risks of an opposition being filed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Discrim said:

 

On topic, I like the new C, if only because it has more character than the block C.  I figure as much continuity as they could maintain was a good call, considering that changing the colors runs the risk of alienating most of the fanbase.

Considering the short timeframe, the Guardians did an okay job here.

 

Alienating seems a bit strong; personally I've been alienated by 30 years of heartbreak and unwillingness to spend to get over the hump when championships are in reach, far more than I could be alienated by a rebrand.

 

But gradual is a nice way to transition. WFT is doing that ok too IMO. Especially since their change was more contentious.

 

Guardians is continuing to grow on me.  Oddly when the Forest City brand was mentioned, I realized Guardians gives me a similar vibe for some reason.   I do wonder if forest green or gold could be worked into the identity somehow.  That sort of thing could be considered after this initial transitional set.  Might clash too much, but navy is neutral enough that I think a touch of forest green might be an interesting addition. Calm navy/forest sort of fits eternal Guardians in my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The flying G is growing on me even though I hate nickname monograms. It’s the custom block that’s the problem. The cap logo and wordmark don’t match but they’re both bad. Some of the numbers look okay if they look like an athletic block-ized DIN, but others look like the worst kind of tryhard customized fussy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spiders isn't that great a name, but it's insane that the reason the Indians didn't use it is because they didn't want to deal with Disney. That company needs to be broken up into a million pieces if they have the legal muscle to preclude a sports team named after a large group of animals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, the admiral said:

Spiders isn't that great a name, but it's insane that the reason the Indians didn't use it is because they didn't want to deal with Disney. That company needs to be broken up into a million pieces if they have the legal muscle to preclude a sports team named after a large group of animals.


University of Richmond was the bigger threat. Disney posed more of a threat with Guardians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, the admiral said:

Spiders isn't that great a name, but it's insane that the reason the Indians didn't use it is because they didn't want to deal with Disney. That company needs to be broken up into a million pieces if they have the legal muscle to preclude a sports team named after a large group of animals.


I haven’t found anything about any lawsuits with Disney, but I read an article stating that around 1992 that Cleveland considered renaming themselves the Spiders back then. The article does mention that there would be some connection to Marvel/Disney given that some Spider-Man movies were filmed in the area, but  little (if anything) else.

 

Still, it wouldn’t surprise me if The Mouse held some kind of legal threat over Cleveland’s baseball team.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, the admiral said:

Guardians of the Galaxy, which is Marvel, which is Disney. That's just as ridiculous as them using Spider-Man to get in the way of Spiders. Loathsome company.

I admittedly haven't  looked for it, but is there a source for this rumor?

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.