Jump to content

Oakland Athletics rebrand


Turkleton

Recommended Posts

Following on from my 1st rebrand attempt (the controversial Cardinals one!), my 2nd go is the Oakland Athletics

I tried to take on board everything said to me about the Cards concept, and hope ive improved here. I wanted to give them a 'proper' logo of sorts. Im not a fan of logos which consist of just the teams name and the initial. So I tried to think of something 'athletic'. Hence, a flying foot :D

The elephant is a redesign of the current elephant alt logo they have. I dont pretend to know alot about baseball teams history but from what I found out, its the Oakland mascot, Stomper. Could be wrong....

C&C is appreciated again, helped me alot last time.

Cheers!

athleticsjq3.png

athletics2iq5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Turk--can I call you "Turk"--I think you have a very unique style, and you take chances which really is the best way to tackle things, but I just don't think this is working that well together. It's a little too "futuristic" for my liking. The elephant head is cool looking, but it needs some work still. And the flying foot logo, well that's very similar an old White Sox logo, even though it is well rendered. Keep taking the risks, but stay true to the brand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Likes:

+ I like the direction.

+ That Elephant is... laughing? Actually, it reminds me of the old Braves logo of the laughing Indian. Remember that?

+ The winged foot logo. It's different, and different is good.

Dislikes:

- The font. Who are the R's?

- The wordmark is too small on the front. I realize that you're dealing with a font that is more wide than anything, but it needs to cover a little more area in the chestal region.

- Drop the logo from one of the sleeves, it only needs to be on one.

Definately an improvement over your Cardinals rebrand. Like that one, I wouldn't mind seeing this on a minor league strip, but this is half decent. Good job, Turkleface.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Turkelton, once again I'm getting a "minor league vibe" from this concept. Don't take that as a knock because minor league vibes are fun which your concepts definitely are. Anyway, on to the critique.

The font is is too futuristic. It says nothing about Oakland or Athletics. It's just "cool looking" which doesn't look cool in this set. Also two-toned wordmarks are tough to pull off. Especially when one of them is yellow on a white background. An outline may be in order, but the font should be changed. Keep readability in focus.

The front number/font is too small and the back number is too big. Strike a balance between them. Attention to minor details like that can damage or enhance a concept.

The winged foot logo is a neat idea. It could work with an Athletics concept. The elephant is a new direction as well. See if you could add the gold as an accent color. Tread lightly and don't over do it with the gold.

Overall I think this is an improvement over your Cardinals concept. El Duderino hit it on the head when he said you have your own style. Because of that I think that these "rebrands" aren't going to be your best work. Your takes are probably too drastic from teams' current look and their history. When you redesign an existing team a nod to their history is usually in order.

That said, I think your work would be more appreciated if you put out some completely original concepts. Don't "rebrand" existing teams. Create fictional teams (for fantasy sports or whatever) and go wild. I think your style is more toward the edgy side of the design spectrum and is would be better served with completely original works.

Keep at it and good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol, yes, Turk is fine! As is Turkleface, apparently..... :D

BigBrain, your right, that does look like an R! I didnt think of it till u pointed it out!

Allow me to explain myself on the dislikes....

The font was supposed to convey speed, to fit in the the Athletic theme. The flying foot was one of two designs, the other being a flying pair of trainers. The flying trainers however, looked crap. The wordmark on the front fit better like that, but one thing I was never sure on was that if u were looking at it from 20 feet away u probably wouldnt be able to read it... :lol:

The elephant is laughing, yes. He's laughing his damn ass off because the first one I did was a big, full body angry elephant and that just didnt seem to fit!

Ok...a question. Should I take all this C&C, go away, re-do the design and post it again?

OR

Take whats been said and keep trying new concepts, different teams, and just gather all the advise until one day, about 25 yrs from now everyone says "HOLD, THE, PHONE. THATS a good concept" !!!???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With some tweaks, that primary would be a great primary for the White Sox. It would return them to their Flying Sock days of old, lower some of the redundancy of the Old English monogram, and improve upon the current diamond-sock logo that just looks like an L-shaped blob on a diamond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The front script needs more vertical length. It would never show on braodcast that thin. Pack some meat on those.

Consider customizing the A. It does look like an R. PLay around with the design to come up with something maybe larger than the rest of the wordmark, make it stand out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With some tweaks, that primary would be a great primary for the White Sox. It would return them to their Flying Sock days of old, lower some of the redundancy of the Old English monogram, and improve upon the current diamond-sock logo that just looks like an L-shaped blob on a diamond.

No way, dude. The SOX logo is awesome, still very fresh what, 17 years later? And the diamond sock logo is a great secondary logo. They may suck ass this year, but they have one of the top five uniform/logo sets in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: The White Elephant, from www.thebaseballpage.com:

History of the "White Elephant"

In 1901, Connie Mack and his Philadelphia Athletics helped form the American League. The following year, New York Giants Manager John McGraw dismissed the A's with contempt, calling them "The White Elephants." In response, Mack defiantly adopted the White Elephant as the team insignia, and it has been part of the franchise's heritage ever since. Its first appearance was on team sweaters. In about 1918, the Elephant finally saw game action when Mack had the pachyderm symbol (in blue with a white "A" inside) placed on the left sleeve of every player.

By 1920, Mack had fully adopted the A's Elephant as the team's symbol. Gone was the traditional A" on the front of the jersey. In its' place was a blue elephant logo. But after a few poor seasons, Mack decided a change was in order. So, in 1924, the blue elephant was replaced by the white elephant on the team's jersey. The new-look pachyderm seemed to do the trick, as the A's played better ball for the next few years.

In 1928, Mack decided the elephant had worn out its brief welcome on the A's jersey fronts. He replaced it with the familiar "A" on the uniforms, and the A's went on to win two World Championships and an AL crown in the next three years. This resurgence was probably due more to the additions of Jimmie Foxx, Al Simmons, Lefty Grove, Mickey Cochrane, et al., than to the elephant's absence.

That was the last year for the elephant on the A's uniform until 1955, when the A's, now in Kansas City, added an elephant patch to their left sleeves. But when Charlie Finley purchased the team in the early sixties, the elephant mascot was once again sent packing, replaced by, of all animals, a mule. This was the last we saw of this loveable A's mascot until 1988, when the elephant proved to be a "good luck" charm for the A's, as the team, now in Oakland, won three straight American League pennants and one world championship.

Although really, Connie Mack is also known as wearing a suit as a manager instead of the team's uniform. Maybe that would make a fun Athletics' alternate? Also, your wordmarks come off to me as very "Blade Runner."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you please explain the winged foot logo & what it represents? Thanks.

It originated as a symbol of Mercury, the messenger of the gods. It has since come to represent speed (see the logos of Goodyear and FTD -- below) and has often been used to represent track-and-field athletes (though that use has become more rare in recent years). I assume that is the "athletic" connection he is looking for.

logo_gy.giflogo_ftd.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i really like the wordmark, it is definetly an update, though for the A's i dont think it would work. dont get me wrong i think it is great, just not for the A's. I also think the foot logo has potential, make all the black lines transparent and add a thin outline and it would be great

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I ask if the foot and elephant are clip art? I think I've seen something just like these before, but I can't find it. Same with the Cardinals muscle logo you did. Can't recall the website that has great art in that style. If you use clip art and claim it as such, people will be cool about that. If you drew them, very good job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It originated as a symbol of Mercury, the messenger of the gods. It has since come to represent speed (see the logos of Goodyear and FTD -- below) and has often been used to represent track-and-field athletes (though that use has become more rare in recent years). I assume that is the "athletic" connection he is looking for.

Good explanation, but that begs the question: why would you use a symbol of speed for a team that couldn't steal a base from an abandoned diamond?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.