gueman Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 As for the logos and ripoffs alleged--that's crap.What they have in common is they are profiles of a horse head--that's it.The eyes, nostrils, mouths, manes, and necks are all different.Thy're not ripoffs of the others... WRONG! I have an intimate knowledge of that era in the NFL through a family member who was working for a the league at the time. Those logos are an evolution of the initial St. Louis Stallions look. Just like many designs here designs go through modifications. I'm sorry you can't see that the root of the Broncos look was the St. Louis Stallions, and the Baltimore CFL Colts/Stallions. The NFL gave some ground on the logo because it wasn't 100% sure that the Broncos were going to go through with the change, and if there was a negative reaction to the Baltimore logo they could have gone in another direction. Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. P. J. O'Rourke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stampman Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 Well the problem here is incomplete info was given--the three by themselves don't show that the 3 by themselves are different--as I pointed out--different eyes, mouths, manes, nostrils, necks, etc.If there were intermediate states between them--such as an early version of the Baltimore logo that looked more like the St Louis logo or early versions of the Broncos logo that looked like either.So if you merely post the the St Louis "prototype" logo and then the other 2 as used you can't expect us to go--"oooh, they're the same!"There have been logo comparisons made before where the logos were much closer and the consensus of the board is that any similarities were co-incidental.If you could have posted anything in betwwen steps 1 & 2 or 2 & 3 to back this up I wouldn't have mentioned it--but as for the logos that we the general public saw the only similarty really is that it is the profile of a horse head.If you went into court with only that evidence they would laugh at you.If you had other evidence you would get a hearing--we did not see anything else to back up your claim.I am not saying that it's a false claim--merely we were given incomplete information as proof.So watch how you call someone out. Comic Sans walks into a bar, and the bartender says, "Sorry, we don't serve your type here." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gueman Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 Well the problem here is incomplete info was given--the three by themselves don't show that the 3 by themselves are different--as I pointed out--different eyes, mouths, manes, nostrils, necks, etc.If there were intermediate states between them--such as an early version of the Baltimore logo that looked more like the St Louis logo or early versions of the Broncos logo that looked like either.So if you merely post the the St Louis "prototype" logo and then the other 2 as used you can't expect us to go--"oooh, they're the same!"There have been logo comparisons made before where the logos were much closer and the consensus of the board is that any similarities were co-incidental.If you could have posted anything in betwwen steps 1 & 2 or 2 & 3 to back this up I wouldn't have mentioned it--but as for the logos that we the general public saw the only similarty really is that it is the profile of a horse head.If you went into court with only that evidence they would laugh at you.If you had other evidence you would get a hearing--we did not see anything else to back up your claim.I am not saying that it's a false claim--merely we were given incomplete information as proof.So watch how you call someone out. Well unlike some here I WILL NOT betray others trust by posting things that are not released to the general public. This is not a court of law but a board for sports logos aficionados. Sorry you can't see the link, and I will not share the accompanying developmental artwork that would fill in the gaps. Perhaps you need to be more trusting. I fail to see why some one would lie about something this trivial. Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. P. J. O'Rourke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean69 Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 Then why didn't anyone stop the Broncos then? Or your family friend, why didn't they stop the Broncos? Well cause frankly the logos are different. If you want to start playing they look similar rule, then I guess every logo ever made is a rip-off of something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slickster Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 The Las Vegas Outlaws logo was changed because it made a six-pointed star, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceCap Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 Why did the American teams fold again? I forget. If I recall teh US teams were pretty good, Balto won the cup one year.. Because Baltimore was the only team that was any good/was able to draw fans. With the exception of the Stallions, the American experament flopped. PotD 26/2/12 1/7/15 2020 BASS Spin the Wheel, Make the Deal Regular Season Champion 2021 BASS NFL Pick'em Regular Season Champion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appleclock Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 I think it was interesting how Memphis and Birmingham put their logos right on the front of the jerseys, like this is hockey or something... the Argonauts did that too for a year I think. I'm glad that trend didn't last. What were they thinking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winghaz Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 The Baltimore Stallions had a lot of things going right, including that logo. It's a classic, although I thought the stripes should have been red and white. Still, it did the job and still looks good.The other logos ... blech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gueman Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Then why didn't anyone stop the Broncos then? Or your family friend, why didn't they stop the Broncos? Well cause frankly the logos are different. If you want to start playing they look similar rule, then I guess every logo ever made is a rip-off of something else. It was the NFL who had the issue with the logo and the name not the Broncos. When St Louis was shelved it was the league who liked the idea of the logo package presented. When the CFL Colts thing came about the league through the CFL Colts logo into the suit too because it had something similar in the works for one of its teams. I believe at the time they were pressuring the NFL Colts in to making a change. But that I don't know 100%. I do know that the league at any one time has a "few ideas" floating around. When a team wants to make a change they present there concepts and the NFL shows them what they have and they work together. At least that is the way it was back in the late 80's to mid 90's. I don't know if it is still that way though. Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. P. J. O'Rourke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stampman Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Well unlike some here I WILL NOT betray others trust by posting things that are not released to the general public. This is not a court of law but a board for sports logos aficionados. Sorry you can't see the link, and I will not share the accompanying developmental artwork that would fill in the gaps. Perhaps you need to be more trusting. I fail to see why some one would lie about something this trivial. Hey I understand if there's a reason you can't divulge info.But without revealing that how can you call out others?With the 3 logos side by side the only similarity is horse head profile--that's it--the other elements are different.Without the intermediate states you have no case--so even if you're convinced you can share the info--but stop the attitude when people disagree.Leave it at that. Comic Sans walks into a bar, and the bartender says, "Sorry, we don't serve your type here." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sodboy13 Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 The Las Vegas Outlaws logo was changed because it made a six-pointed star, right? I don't claim to have any insider knowledge on this one. In fact, I don't. But I remember the initial unveiling of the XFL team names and logos. Upon seeing the Outlaws' logo, I couldn't help but notice that the intersecting L and V did, in fact, form a broken Star of David. Outside of references in Judaica, the Star of David is a very popular gang symbol around here. And I'm guessing that showing a break in that star is akin to disrespecting the gamg it represents. (I remember when the Astros first sported the "broken star" look, word got around my school very quickly that it was a gang symbol.) So, yeah, when I first saw the Outlaws logo, I thought "Wow, that'll sell well for all the wrong reasons." And shortly thereafter, it was revised. Take what you will from that.XFL side note: Birmingham's original color scheme was a bright royal blue, highlighter yellow, and silver. I would have liked to see that, rather than the purple, silver, and toned-down yellow they took the field in. On 1/25/2013 at 1:53 PM, 'Atom said: For all the bird de lis haters I think the bird de lis isnt supposed to be a pelican and a fleur de lis I think its just a fleur de lis with a pelicans head. Thats what it looks like to me. Also the flair around the tip of the beak is just flair that fleur de lis have sometimes source I am from NOLA. PotD: 10/19/07, 08/25/08, 07/22/10, 08/13/10, 04/15/11, 05/19/11, 01/02/12, and 01/05/12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 The Las Vegas Outlaws logo was changed because it made a six-pointed star, right? I don't claim to have any insider knowledge on this one. In fact, I don't. But I remember the initial unveiling of the XFL team names and logos. Upon seeing the Outlaws' logo, I couldn't help but notice that the intersecting L and V did, in fact, form a broken Star of David. Outside of references in Judaica, the Star of David is a very popular gang symbol around here. And I'm guessing that showing a break in that star is akin to disrespecting the gamg it represents. (I remember when the Astros first sported the "broken star" look, word got around my school very quickly that it was a gang symbol.) So, yeah, when I first saw the Outlaws logo, I thought "Wow, that'll sell well for all the wrong reasons." And shortly thereafter, it was revised. Take what you will from that.XFL side note: Birmingham's original color scheme was a bright royal blue, highlighter yellow, and silver. I would have liked to see that, rather than the purple, silver, and toned-down yellow they took the field in.They changed the logo because Louis Vuitton threatened to sue.The LV logo for the designer is similar to the Outlaws first logo.Vuitton:Vegas: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fonz Posted September 12, 2006 Author Share Posted September 12, 2006 The Las Vegas Outlaws logo was changed because it made a six-pointed star, right? I don't claim to have any insider knowledge on this one. In fact, I don't. But I remember the initial unveiling of the XFL team names and logos. Upon seeing the Outlaws' logo, I couldn't help but notice that the intersecting L and V did, in fact, form a broken Star of David. Outside of references in Judaica, the Star of David is a very popular gang symbol around here. And I'm guessing that showing a break in that star is akin to disrespecting the gamg it represents. (I remember when the Astros first sported the "broken star" look, word got around my school very quickly that it was a gang symbol.) So, yeah, when I first saw the Outlaws logo, I thought "Wow, that'll sell well for all the wrong reasons." And shortly thereafter, it was revised. Take what you will from that.XFL side note: Birmingham's original color scheme was a bright royal blue, highlighter yellow, and silver. I would have liked to see that, rather than the purple, silver, and toned-down yellow they took the field in.They changed the logo because Louis Vuitton threatened to sue.The LV logo for the designer is similar to the Outlaws first logo.Vuitton:Vegas: Hmm, I never realized it but they do look similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferdinand Cesarano Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 me: Even the XFL's Las Vegas Outlaws had a good one in the one they intended to use, but which they had to change for reasons so stupid I don't even want to mention.Slickster: The Las Vegas Outlaws logo was changed because it made a six-pointed star, right?Sodboy13:Upon seeing the Outlaws' logo, I couldn't help but notice that the intersecting L and V did, in fact, form a broken Star of David. Outside of references in Judaica, the Star of David is a very popular gang symbol around here.rjrrzube:They changed the logo because Louis Vuitton threatened to sue.Wow, very interesting about the Louis Vuitton thing. I hadn't heard about that. (And I also had no idea of the gang references.) The "stupid" reason I had in mind was the supposed resemblece to the Star of David. I understood at the time that the team changed the logo because Jewish groups complained.On the assumption that the change was because of the Star of David thing, I said that it was stupid because the six-pointed star logo was actually intended to mimic the typical shape for a sherriff's badge: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leedsunited Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Anyone else see a ribbon-tasseled severed head when seeing the Stallions' logo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
random_ax Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 Guess I'm in the minority but I thought the Birminghma Barracudas was a great logo and on the same level as the Colts/Mustangs logo in the CFL. As for Barracudas in Birmingham...besides flwoing nicely...where are there Bears in Chicago, Lions in Detroit, Bengal Tigers in Cincinatti, Penguins or Pirates in Pittsburg, Jaguars in Jacksonville or Jazz in Utah????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolphins1972 Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 I remember hearing how the long range plan was for the CFL to change it's name to the Continental Football League if the "American Experiment" has worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean69 Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 woulda, coulda, shoulda, I'm glad it didn't work. Here's hope it will never happen again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stampman Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 or Jazz in Utah????? Jazz in Utah Comic Sans walks into a bar, and the bartender says, "Sorry, we don't serve your type here." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
totc Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 I always like the Stallions -- hated the Barracuda jerseys. The Cudas are not just bad, they are 1960 Denver Broncos bad. They are 1976 Chicago White Sox Bermuda Shorts bad. They are 1997 Australia women's lacrosse team bad. They are just flat out 1980 Vancouver Canucks bad. I'd even say they are 1978 Colorado Caribous bad. Or at least 1995 NFL Europe bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.