Jump to content

Washington Commanders to debut new NFL identity


DCarp1231

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, DC in Da House w/o a Doubt said:

 

I think you've nailed it.  

 

I can see them trying to somehow tie that in to "fight for Old DC", as well. It'll be hokey as all get-out, but I can completely see it. 

  • Like 3

*Disclaimer: I am not an authoritative expert on stuff...I just do a lot of reading and research and keep in close connect with a bunch of people who are authoritative experts on stuff. 😁

|| dribbble || Behance ||

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this looks like it is going to be terrible and such a let down. The burgundy jersey in the video looks like it would be a nice alternate or color rush to their current look but isn't as good as the current look. The only good news is they might be keeping the Washington Football Team name, but if thats the case they should've just stuck with the current classic uniforms and added the W and some stripes to the helmet 

  • Like 5
SouthParkBaseballOriolespngsmall.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, ManillaToad said:

I thought they couldn't secure the trademark rights to WFT because it was too generic

 

If that's true, then I'd think that would be an even stronger reason for keeping WFT around. If they can't secure trademark rights on those grounds, then nobody else could either, so no threat of legal entanglements. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So first off...everyone trying to get logos out of reflections in windows and helmet cases...y'all need to calm down 😛

 

Secondly...it sucks it won't be Redwolves or Red Wolves. That was my choice, and I even like the concept logo for it everyone seems to be crapping on. 

 

As for what we're seeing uniform wise...they're giving us snippets. I've seen enough "snippet reveals" from teams to know that you can't really extrapolate anything from them. There's some stuff that I think looks good, some stuff I'm unsure about...we just have to wait and see. 

 

I'm not excited about any of the potential names though, or Admirals. 

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Warthogs isn’t a common team name, has a great feel to it, and would open up numerous design possibilities - tusked helmets, off the top of my head. They could even get downhearted every time they farted! (But seriously, Disney can’t own a species; just don’t make the mascot look like Pumbaa and you’re good.)

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

 

If that's true, then I'd think that would be an even stronger reason for keeping WFT around. If they can't secure trademark rights on those grounds, then nobody else could either, so no threat of legal entanglements. 

 

Might want to rethink this one.

 

Teams want trademark rights and want to protect their IP for a reason. 

  • Like 8

Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, ssj_homeslice said:

re: Admirals, i seriously doubt the Team is going to name itself after an extinct NFL Europe franchise

Why not? The Texans, Bengals, Bills and Colts are all named after previous teams before them. The Steelers (then as the Pirates), Washington (then as the Boston Braves), the Cardinals (then as the St Louis Cardinals) and the New York Giants all once operated alongside MLB teams with the same name. I seriously doubt the league and team wouldnt have an issue using the name of a defunct team.

  • Like 5

Signature intentionally left blank

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MCM0313 said:

Warthogs isn’t a common team name, has a great feel to it, and would open up numerous design possibilities - tusked helmets, off the top of my head. They could even get downhearted every time they farted! (But seriously, Disney can’t own a species; just don’t make the mascot look like Pumbaa and you’re good.)

UFL had a Tuskers team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Dilbert said:

Why not? The Texans, Bengals, Bills and Colts are all named after previous teams before them. The Steelers (then as the Pirates), Washington (then as the Boston Braves), the Cardinals (then as the St Louis Cardinals) and the New York Giants all once operated alongside MLB teams with the same name. I seriously doubt the league and team wouldnt have an issue using the name of a defunct team.

Heck, the Cleveland Browns aren’t even the first Browns in pro sports - the American League had a St. Louis Browns 40 years before them, and those Browns were, themselves, named after the St. Louis Brown Stockings from the 1880s (who, themselves, became the Cardinals IIRC). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MCM0313 said:

Warthogs isn’t a common team name, has a great feel to it, and would open up numerous design possibilities - tusked helmets, off the top of my head. They could even get downhearted every time they farted! (But seriously, Disney can’t own a species; just don’t make the mascot look like Pumbaa and you’re good.)

This was a thing

 

Washington Warthogs - Wikipedia

 

Washington Warthogs Nostalgia to Support DC SCORES Custom Ink Fundraising

  • Like 7

Hotter Than July > Thriller

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don’t go reading into those logos in the video. Most of them are fan submitted and I doubt they would use any. The even had been showing some submissions  on their website the last few months. 

Excellent!

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.