hawk36 Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 The big difference between the Bears and most of the other teams is that the "C" is a simple letter "designed" by Papa Bear Halas and not a simple drawing of a bear. Are you sure about that? I understood that the C was originally used by the Univ. of Chicago and Papa Halas "borrowed" it from them. Design Hovie Studios Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBGKon Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 It wouldn't work well anyway, because the bear logo is looking straight at you. For it to be a suitable helmet logo, it would have to be in profile. " It wouldn't work well anyway, because the bear logo is looking straight at you. For it to be a suitable helmet logo, it would have to be in profile."That is ridiculous and wrong.Let's see.... the following helmets are not in profile and work very well...JAGUARSPANTHERSRAIDERSBUCS Both the Jags and Panthers would be considered in profile. The Jags, yes.....the Panthers are a hybrid in my opinion, you see the whole face, yet the body looks like it is profiled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powersurge Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 Wow, this thread title isn't misleading at all... I'm actually a little annoyed with this thread because of how ridiculously misleading it is. I'm a huge Bears fan and held my breath when I opened this thread. Thanks for nearly ruining my day guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneRaizer Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 Of all the major pro leagues, the NFL is the most steeped in tradition and full of legendary, classic uniforms...- LA/Oakland Raiders- LA/St. Louis Rams- NY Jets- Dallas Cowboys- Washington Redskins- Pittsburgh Steelers- Chicago/St. Louis/Phoenix/Arizona Cardinals- Green Bay Packers- Chicago Bears- Cleveland Browns- Baltimore/Indianapolis Colts- Miami Dolphins- Dallas Texans/Kansas City ChiefsAll of those teams have been around forever and have done little over the years to change their look. Why? Because they're fine just the way they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nwtrailtrekker Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 im a modernist, but even I would have a problem with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattMilone Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 By the way, here is a link to a hi-res version of the Seahawks alternate logo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
random_ax Posted August 9, 2006 Author Share Posted August 9, 2006 Actually, when I asked people around Chicago where I live, 60% or so said they would favor the change to the suggested "growling bear" logo so I'm surprised that so many here oppose it. I am going to immediately cast your poll into serious question. 60% of whom? Chicagoans, randomly sampled? Football fans? Bears fans? Graphic designers? Heck, 60% could be you and 4 of your friends - 2 of whom like the "C", 2 of whom don't. I don't see you walking up and down Michigan Avenue or State Street soliciting strangers for this poll, just call it a hunch.That said, I'll reiterate my original point: logos aren't just about whether any individual finds them XXX-TREEEEEEEEME, aggressive, hip or awesomely rad. Logos are at the core of a team's identity. The wishbone "C" has been an icon of the Bears for over half a century. It was worn by every legend who's worn the orang and navy, a practical Who's Who of pro football. It was in "Brian's Song". It was worn on SNL by "Da Superfans". That orange "C" on a navy background is recognized around the world - people instantly think, "Chicago Bears". Why on Earth would any rational person trade all that instant brand recognition, the ties with historical success, whatever grandeur is associated with the team and the logo, for something "that the kids'll think is way kewl and wear when they're shreddin' on their snowboardzz". An effective logo doesn't have to be effective. The "C" is effective and timeless. Get used to it, because it's not coming off the helmets for a long time - it'd be like getting rid of their distinctive number font, the "GSH" and the colors, for drop shadows and teal.The Bear is just like the Browns 'Dawg. It would probably make a great sleeve logo or hockey crest, but both teams have stripes, and neither play hockey, and there would be a furor if either logo were slapped on the helmet.No it's not. The bear head has been a symbol of the team for quite some time, and makes an excellent representation when the helmet imagery and logo isn't used. The Browns' Dawg is a piece of concocted to pay tribute to a subsection of the fans that root for a team with no helmet logo (but not a logo for the team itself) and placate people who can't stand the fact that a team can have an iconic look without a logo to put on every piece of merchandise. To answer your question, about 60 people I asked over the alst 10 years ...60% have said they either like the idea of changing it to the traditional growling bear logo I suggested or would have no objection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
random_ax Posted August 9, 2006 Author Share Posted August 9, 2006 It wouldn't work well anyway, because the bear logo is looking straight at you. For it to be a suitable helmet logo, it would have to be in profile. Did you know that actual, real , genuine Vikings...never wore horns on their helmets???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 What does that have to do with anything I said, though? ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.