Please help get rid of the Sabres new logo!

[Coast2CoastAM2006]

Man, I liked Sabres fans more when they were crying about Brett Hull's skate.

fixed that for ya.

as for the slug, if the are going to look like , they might as well play like .

[Coast2CoastAM2006]

This is and will always be the slug in its purest form.

now lets move on to more pressing issues like why Dick can't get in to the Pink Taco after hours.

[BB61]

Man, I liked Sabres fans more when they were crying about Brett Hull's skate.

fixed that for ya.

as for the slug, if the are going to look like , they might as well play like .

In my defense, I hadn't had coffee yet.

[daschuck77]

Because we're tired of listening to you (in general, not personally) whining about a stupid logo. Yes, I realize it's a logo board, and we're here to discuss logos, but here it is a year after the fact, and we're still on the logo.

The team has more important things to worry about. Like, y'know, not bombing out in the playoffs every year (like the Flyers do, I know, but this isn't a "ditch the P-wing" thread).

It's old hat, it's old news, and honestly, once the fervor of something like this dies down, the attention should turn to how they're playing, not what they're wearing.

Man, I liked Sabres fans more when they were crying about Bobby Hull's skate.

The P-wing is cool though...No matter how bad you guys play, you still have always looked good. Even in that 9-1 drubbing awhile back.

My flaw is that I do not hate the logo enough to pray for the Sabre to suck so it will change faster. I'll never do that. I will also never purchase any merchandise either as long as the slug is painted on HSBC ice.

And with Brett Hull, granted an edge of his skate was in the crease and technically it was against the rules but I got over rather quickly...Hasek was helplessly on his belly flailing on the ice...the skate (or Chinaman) was not the issue. Hasek was terribly out of position and allowed the goal.

Buffalo needs to catch a break...and bad.

And Scott Norwood...well he sells insurance down here in VA. Good for him.

But what was more funny was how physics experts, almost like analyzing the JFK assasination tried to disprove the Music city miracle...That went way too far and embarassed Buffalo more than helped it.

It's not whining, it is the emphasis of a presentation of an alternative logo and letting fans know something better was available to the organization and was rejected for no explained reason. It is trying to explain to the Sabres front office and fans who are dissatisfied with the logo that there are those alternatives and it takes a little bit of effort on their part but a statement can be made to demand a change.

[olivier in france]

Because we're tired of listening to you (in general, not personally) whining about a stupid logo. Yes, I realize it's a logo board, and we're here to discuss logos, but here it is a year after the fact, and we're still on the logo.

The team has more important things to worry about. Like, y'know, not bombing out in the playoffs every year (like the Flyers do, I know, but this isn't a "ditch the P-wing" thread).

It's old hat, it's old news, and honestly, once the fervor of something like this dies down, the attention should turn to how they're playing, not what they're wearing.

Man, I liked Sabres fans more when they were crying about Bobby Hull's skate.

The P-wing is cool though...No matter how bad you guys play, you still have always looked good. Even in that 9-1 drubbing awhile back.

My flaw is that I do not hate the logo enough to pray for the Sabre to suck so it will change faster. I'll never do that. I will also never purchase any merchandise either as long as the slug is painted on HSBC ice.

And with Brett Hull, granted an edge of his skate was in the crease and technically it was against the rules but I got over rather quickly...Hasek was helplessly on his belly flailing on the ice...the skate (or Chinaman) was not the issue. Hasek was terribly out of position and allowed the goal.

Buffalo needs to catch a break...and bad.

And Scott Norwood...well he sells insurance down here in VA. Good for him.

But what was more funny was how physics experts, almost like analyzing the JFK assasination tried to disprove the Music city miracle...That went way too far and embarassed Buffalo more than helped it.

It's not whining, it is the emphasis of a presentation of an alternative logo and letting fans know something better was available to the organization and was rejected for no explained reason. It is trying to explain to the Sabres front office and fans who are dissatisfied with the logo that there are those alternatives and it takes a little bit of effort on their part but a statement can be made to demand a change.

what made me very angry is that with Buffaloes and Sabres its so easy to make a great logo. Well i can understand the Ducks logo suck... it's not really easy to make a duck look cool, but come on bisons and swords are a perfect start to make a great logo!! and they ended up with that slug thing... incredible...

[SabreGuy]

incredible...

That really is all there is to say about it. Incredible. Just makes me shake my head and sigh.

Oh well... a great opportunity missed in a big way. I suppose we'll all see each other in 10 years when they take another stab at this.

[daschuck77]

incredible...

That really is all there is to say about it. Incredible. Just makes me shake my head and sigh.

Oh well... a great opportunity missed in a big way. I suppose we'll all see each other in 10 years when they take another stab at this.

Maybe 2-3...but not 10. If you personally can't stand it either then let them know! Don't sit around and wait 10 years.

[eSabre]

And as customers eSabre, people should be furious that most Christmas orders were not fufilled on time and that people out there are still waiting on backorder for their stuff. It's bushleague.

Obviously you don't work in production. There's not much you can do when demand is greater than production capabilities.

That goes from Reebok not being able to make enough jerseys, to whoever letters them. Jerseys take a long time to produce.

Go ahead, be upset about it then. Not much that'll help.

[js °]

And you're wrong eSabre, when you claimed that this team is "a private firm, and the logo change was internal process." The business of sports is much closer to a fraternal organization than a private firm. Members pay their dues to participate in the rituals and ultimately form a bond with other members of this group. The management are merely the organizers, and should be held accountable by the whole membership (players & fans) for their decisions.

Following a line of thought of this as a 'private firm', only takes you to a place where there are no consequences for the decisions made by the organizers, because they are refusing to acknowledge the legitimacy of their members.

And at the end we all hold hands, right? You're not speaking from fact, you are speaking of fantasy.

It'd be nice if pro sports was like that, and as much as I wish you were right, you're not. Fans aren't members, they are customers. Simple as that. Unless it's the Green Bay Packers.

If it wasn't an internal process, then they would've had voting, and would've taken fan input. They didn't.

Well its exactly that kind of thinking that allows for situations like this. Thinking that "oh I'm just a customer", I have no say in whats sold to me. I mean come on. Look at the trends in successful business models lately. Compare Apple to Microsoft (one feeding into its 'community' aspect, the other stifling it) ... JetBlue vs Every Other Major Airline ... VW, Threadless, YouTube, MySpace, etc. There has always been an understanding that when the largest component of your business (the customers) want something, you give it to them ... and just recently we are seeing a revolution in the way in which companies are able to directly communicate in a more efficient way with their customers (thank you, internet). Thus allowing for a more effective result, and successful business.

To go back to the 'fraternity' analogy again .. it would be ridiculous, naive and foolish to think that the organizers aren't aware that the will of their members truly dictate their successes and failures. This leaves for two options ... make it truly democratic and try to always please the people ... or dictate policy yourself and suppress criticism. The latter is alot easier to accomplish when you are in an environment where your membership already has been conditioned into feeling powerless and lethargic towards their organizations. If you're thinking is ... "I'm just a customer, I'm not a part of this machine" ... let me assure you, you most certainly ARE a part of it. You are actually the biggest and most powerful part of it. Without you, it would not and could not exist.

I mean seriously ... sports are all about passion, you see more rabid revolting towards sports organizations than any other business really. Look at what happened with the Detroit Lions a few years back ... you don't really see over 18,000 people dressing up in orange and chanting slogans in unison to change the management's mind over at AT&T. And if you did, I guarantee you it wouldn't actually produce a result. In sports, more than any other business, the management listens to its customers (or organizers to its members ... use whatever label you like), mostly because with no real NEED for sports, its much easier for fans to just stop going to games (withhold their dues). So thats the last resort of communication for the members to the organizers, and sometimes the only one that works. But clearly companies that listen before that point have proven more successful.

[SabreGuy]

Maybe 2-3...but not 10. If you personally can't stand it either then let them know! Don't sit around and wait 10 years.

Been there. Done that. Got the t-shirt. (well, not the t-shirt, but I just got a nice classic logo hat the other day)

If the response had been bad right off the bat, I might be more encouraged... but a year has gone by now, and there's no mutiny, and there's no signs that one will be successful. Honestly, best case scenario IMO is to wait for 3rd jerseys to come back, and then perhaps the Sabres will pull the ol' Atlanta/Minnesota Switcheroo... and move the 3rd's to become the regular home jerseys. But that would be your 3 year plan, I think.

[daschuck77]

Maybe 2-3...but not 10. If you personally can't stand it either then let them know! Don't sit around and wait 10 years.

Been there. Done that. Got the t-shirt. (well, not the t-shirt, but I just got a nice classic logo hat the other day)

If the response had been bad right off the bat, I might be more encouraged... but a year has gone by now, and there's no mutiny, and there's no signs that one will be successful. Honestly, best case scenario IMO is to wait for 3rd jerseys to come back, and then perhaps the Sabres will pull the ol' Atlanta/Minnesota Switcheroo... and move the 3rd's to become the regular home jerseys. But that would be your 3 year plan, I think.

3 years is still better than 10 and I am aware of the time it takes to rebrand. A change overnight literally would mean 2 years of development on the idea, maybe less in an optimistic stretch since John's is somewhat far along in its own developement.

Well Drew Celestino with www.FixTheLogo.com tried something right off the bat but somehow lost his footing. He never really offered a specific way to "Fix the logo" in a practical sense for the organization either. He had captured an audience but let it slip away and really didn't emphasize John's designs as a readily available solution. And then the great success of the team was the easiest way for criticism to be supressed then Larry proclaimed in all pompousity how all the fans came around to loving the logo. Drew's site is even down now...He's still alive and well and can tracked down via the miracle of myspace.

I don't want people to forget how hard he worked too.

[pcgd]

It's not whining, it is the emphasis of a presentation of an alternative logo and letting fans know something better was available to the organization and was rejected for no explained reason.

The explaination is...they liked the Current logo better than anything else they saw.

[daschuck77]

It's not whining, it is the emphasis of a presentation of an alternative logo and letting fans know something better was available to the organization and was rejected for no explained reason.

The explaination is...they liked the Current logo better than anything else they saw.

Why? I've been writing letters all year asking them.

If that is true then hardly have they followed good practice in logo developement...

They Sabres' logo really screwed up with unwanted associations...

Appraising your logo concepts...

Is it practical?

Can it be printed on scalable sizes with out being fuzzy? Will it work in black and white format as well as in color? Some logos designs become incomprehensible when

reproduced in newspaper ads or when sent through a fax machine. Try blowing it up and reducing the logo to determine its readability at different sizes. Keep in mind too that something like 10 million American men and a few women are at least partially color blind. Keeping in mind that color does make a difference. (View our psychology of color)

Is it distinctive?

A logo design needs to be unique and effective, simplicity is key. A design idea doesn't

need to be unique to the world, just distinctive enough so you can market your target audience.

Is it graphic?

You shouldn't have to explain to people what message you are portraying in your logo design. A effective logo design will communicate purely in graphic terms to the right brain hemisphere, and doesn't depend on verbal intellectual interpretation. This is equally true for all logo designs, whether an iconic logotype, a wordmark or even a simple lettermark. The choice of fonts, shape and color should effectively communicate the essence of the company.

Is it appropriate?

Is the design relevant to your business? Is it consistent with the personality and tone you wish to convey about your business? The content has to be right! An otherwise great logo

will fail if the message expressed is at odds with management intentions.

Is it simple?

Simplicity of design makes a logo easier for customers to remember and recognize. A

great logo will contain only one graphic idea, one gimmick, one dingbat. Thus if there's a symbol, the accompanying name should be plain and unadorned. If it is a wordmark, one idea or device should make it special- like the stripes in IBM. The more unique the name,

the simpler the graphics can be. Think clear contrast and simple shapes, with limited

colors and tones.

Does it convey ONE message?

Great designs try to express no more than one attribute and support a single aspect of positioning.

Get opinions from colleagues and from people in your target market instead of merely relying on your own intuition and taste. Also, use this checklist to avoid common problems with logos:

Is it too trendy?

Think of the future and avoid being too trendy. A good logo will last your company 15 years and give your customers a chance to burn the image of your logo into their brains.

If the logo uses words or letters, are they recognizable?

You shouldn't have to explain or decipher the logo for people.

Does it arouse any unwanted associations?

What you intended as stepping stones might come across to others as looking like animal droppings. If you get this kind of honest feedback, pay attention.

Are the colors appropriate?

Colors are powerful. Different colors have different associates and can have predictable effects on your audience. Understanding color associations is imperative!

Do you and others in your company like the logo enough to use it enthusiastically? If not, return to the drawing board.

[spyboy1]

i'm actually convinced you can design a jersey with dog on it and dress it on a winning team that it will be tops in sales and be used for 10 years. if that slug logo came out with the sabres in the basement, then the slug would be gone by now.

I couldn't agree more. Take away Briere and Drury and you just might find that next year Sluggo isn't in the top half of sales.

[eSabre]

And you're wrong eSabre, when you claimed that this team is "a private firm, and the logo change was internal process." The business of sports is much closer to a fraternal organization than a private firm. Members pay their dues to participate in the rituals and ultimately form a bond with other members of this group. The management are merely the organizers, and should be held accountable by the whole membership (players & fans) for their decisions.

Following a line of thought of this as a 'private firm', only takes you to a place where there are no consequences for the decisions made by the organizers, because they are refusing to acknowledge the legitimacy of their members.

And at the end we all hold hands, right? You're not speaking from fact, you are speaking of fantasy.

It'd be nice if pro sports was like that, and as much as I wish you were right, you're not. Fans aren't members, they are customers. Simple as that. Unless it's the Green Bay Packers.

If it wasn't an internal process, then they would've had voting, and would've taken fan input. They didn't.

Well its exactly that kind of thinking that allows for situations like this. Thinking that "oh I'm just a customer", I have no say in whats sold to me. I mean come on. Look at the trends in successful business models lately. Compare Apple to Microsoft (one feeding into its 'community' aspect, the other stifling it) ... JetBlue vs Every Other Major Airline ... VW, Threadless, YouTube, MySpace, etc. There has always been an understanding that when the largest component of your business (the customers) want something, you give it to them ... and just recently we are seeing a revolution in the way in which companies are able to directly communicate in a more efficient way with their customers (thank you, internet). Thus allowing for a more effective result, and successful business.

To go back to the 'fraternity' analogy again .. it would be ridiculous, naive and foolish to think that the organizers aren't aware that the will of their members truly dictate their successes and failures. This leaves for two options ... make it truly democratic and try to always please the people ... or dictate policy yourself and suppress criticism. The latter is alot easier to accomplish when you are in an environment where your membership already has been conditioned into feeling powerless and lethargic towards their organizations. If you're thinking is ... "I'm just a customer, I'm not a part of this machine" ... let me assure you, you most certainly ARE a part of it. You are actually the biggest and most powerful part of it. Without you, it would not and could not exist.

I mean seriously ... sports are all about passion, you see more rabid revolting towards sports organizations than any other business really. Look at what happened with the Detroit Lions a few years back ... you don't really see over 18,000 people dressing up in orange and chanting slogans in unison to change the management's mind over at AT&T. And if you did, I guarantee you it wouldn't actually produce a result. In sports, more than any other business, the management listens to its customers (or organizers to its members ... use whatever label you like), mostly because with no real NEED for sports, its much easier for fans to just stop going to games (withhold their dues). So thats the last resort of communication for the members to the organizers, and sometimes the only one that works. But clearly companies that listen before that point have proven more successful.

Your lovey-dovey utopia isn't the real world.

I am a customer. I can choose not to give them any of my money. Just like the people who don't like the logo choose not to buy anything new.

Like any business, to be successful, you need to provide goods/services that the customer is going to want. When things aren't working, you adjust to the market. The whole point is they have absolutely no reason to change something that is wildly successful just because some people don't like it. There's no guarantee that if they abandoned their look now that the next would be more popular. You don't know that, it's a risk. For an organization that isn't completely stable financially, it's not smart. You go with what works.

So do as much complaining as you want, it won't have near the effect that putting your wallet away will.

[daschuck77]

And you're wrong eSabre, when you claimed that this team is "a private firm, and the logo change was internal process." The business of sports is much closer to a fraternal organization than a private firm. Members pay their dues to participate in the rituals and ultimately form a bond with other members of this group. The management are merely the organizers, and should be held accountable by the whole membership (players & fans) for their decisions.

Following a line of thought of this as a 'private firm', only takes you to a place where there are no consequences for the decisions made by the organizers, because they are refusing to acknowledge the legitimacy of their members.

And at the end we all hold hands, right? You're not speaking from fact, you are speaking of fantasy.

It'd be nice if pro sports was like that, and as much as I wish you were right, you're not. Fans aren't members, they are customers. Simple as that. Unless it's the Green Bay Packers.

If it wasn't an internal process, then they would've had voting, and would've taken fan input. They didn't.

Well its exactly that kind of thinking that allows for situations like this. Thinking that "oh I'm just a customer", I have no say in whats sold to me. I mean come on. Look at the trends in successful business models lately. Compare Apple to Microsoft (one feeding into its 'community' aspect, the other stifling it) ... JetBlue vs Every Other Major Airline ... VW, Threadless, YouTube, MySpace, etc. There has always been an understanding that when the largest component of your business (the customers) want something, you give it to them ... and just recently we are seeing a revolution in the way in which companies are able to directly communicate in a more efficient way with their customers (thank you, internet). Thus allowing for a more effective result, and successful business.

To go back to the 'fraternity' analogy again .. it would be ridiculous, naive and foolish to think that the organizers aren't aware that the will of their members truly dictate their successes and failures. This leaves for two options ... make it truly democratic and try to always please the people ... or dictate policy yourself and suppress criticism. The latter is alot easier to accomplish when you are in an environment where your membership already has been conditioned into feeling powerless and lethargic towards their organizations. If you're thinking is ... "I'm just a customer, I'm not a part of this machine" ... let me assure you, you most certainly ARE a part of it. You are actually the biggest and most powerful part of it. Without you, it would not and could not exist.

I mean seriously ... sports are all about passion, you see more rabid revolting towards sports organizations than any other business really. Look at what happened with the Detroit Lions a few years back ... you don't really see over 18,000 people dressing up in orange and chanting slogans in unison to change the management's mind over at AT&T. And if you did, I guarantee you it wouldn't actually produce a result. In sports, more than any other business, the management listens to its customers (or organizers to its members ... use whatever label you like), mostly because with no real NEED for sports, its much easier for fans to just stop going to games (withhold their dues). So thats the last resort of communication for the members to the organizers, and sometimes the only one that works. But clearly companies that listen before that point have proven more successful.

Your lovey-dovey utopia isn't the real world.

I am a customer. I can choose not to give them any of my money. Just like the people who don't like the logo choose not to buy anything new.

Like any business, to be successful, you need to provide goods/services that the customer is going to want. When things aren't working, you adjust to the market. The whole point is they have absolutely no reason to change something that is wildly successful just because some people don't like it. There's no guarantee that if they abandoned their look now that the next would be more popular. You don't know that, it's a risk. For an organization that isn't completely stable financially, it's not smart. You go with what works.

So do as much complaining as you want, it won't have near the effect that putting your wallet away will.

Please read what I will aniticpate will happen over the course of next seaon...again...carefully...and objectively. I believe you should soon enough see when things will no longer work...

"The #1 Selling NHL Jersey of 2006.

Please dismiss all of the hype-laden, brooding comments from Gary Bettman regarding the Sabres' number-one selling jersey in the NHL. This will wear off very quickly, considering that more NHL teams are adjusting their looks for the upcoming season to coincide with the launch of the RBK Edge Uniform System. There will be more "new-look" uniforms looking to capture the market, thus decreasing the Sabres' share; this season, it won't just be the Sabres and Ducks offering a new uniform package to the public. The whole buzz had generated huge amounts of impulsive sales, due to the team's terrific play this season, and now that they have fallen short of their goal, fair-weather fans may have fallen off as well. In fact, we don't think even another 10-0 start and president's trophy would sustain merchandise sales this time."

900% percent sales over the handfull of black and red jerseys of a 10 year old design isn't that spectacular...and again THERE IS NO DISTINCTION WITH VINTAGE LOGO SALES. How clever too, all of a sudden 3 years after the suprise throwback jersey game they finally get the message that fans wanted blue and gold...well I bet my left testicle that they wanted the vintage logo to come back with it too in some form or another. Those details were left out and was all social marketing and timing. I'm trying to make fans more aware of that. And people who agree, I am encouraging them to not purchase ANY current form of Sabre merchandise. If they don't agree, then they indeed are satisfied "customers" happy with their experience as a Sabres fan. Mission accomplished Larry Quinn.

But I've personally heard more of "I hate the slug", than "I hug the slug" to even suggest people are satisfied with the logo.

All the Sabres are doing last season is what is called skimming...enjoying the RBK high price points on a new and long awaited look which I don't see too many people around saying that design wise, they really knocked it out of the park.

[ebod39]

Who was a fan of Zorro by the looks of the slashing on the poor bison...The poor thing looks molested.

I'll admit that the slug looks marginally better than this wounded vintage wannabe. Some of them are quite similar to some of Slabyks concepts as well...

But look below...In my opinion, it is still a far cry from where Slabyk had it right all along.

I think Slabyk may have come cheaper than 200k too...

you mean the charging cotton ball? sorry, but I think Slabyk's are weak. I've never seen the allure of what

makes people like them so much. They're too busy with multiple outlines, unneccesary shading and the bison are not rendered very well. Too stubby and puffy. At least the ones shown are thought out and when you actually look at the charging bisons the lines flow back and the angles and curves have purpose. It's actually designed and not just drawn. The zorro slash you refer to indicates the distinction between the mane and the body, I don't get why it's wounded? The first one looks like a very slight update to the original crest, which is what alot of people first cried for when the Slug was leaked.

Wow, well thats my cue to chime in. I will gladly accept any criticism of my work, as I have done all along the way, and its only improved the results at every turn. But this "charging cotton ball" comment, just doesn't really make any sense to me. Lets go to the board ...

This is an American Bison ... aka Buffalo.

This is an illustration of a Native American spirit which manifested itself in the form of a white buffalo / woman to usher in a great era of propserity and change. White buffaloes are a rare phenomenon that still exists, as they are not albino, but just born with white fur. Great symbolism, great historical and modern references important to WNY ...

Now lets look at a few different representations of these guys ...

Aaaaaaand which one looks like a "charging cotton ball" to you ebod ? I have always been the first to put a large disclaimer on the front of my work noting that they are unfinished concepts done in my own time, and if given the proper attention, a lot of kinks would be ironed out in the process. Charlie is always backing me up on that too (thanks man).

And which of these look like "the bison is not rendered very well. Too stubby and puffy." I'm sorry, maybe you are just seeing something I'm not here ebod, but I don't see a very well rendered bison in these concepts.

I see a top heavy beast with odd, awkward legs that never seem natural. I also see a rather odd man / beast character here rather than a bison ..

I don't know where these beautiful locks of hair flowing in the wind come from, but certainly not a buffalo.

And the sabres themselves in this concept series, seem rather cartoony and "Alladin-esque". The sabres are the essence of the logo and deserve to appear swift and strong, not bubbly and over-stylized.

The imbalance in the negative space in these concepts are rather obvious as well. The original Sabres logo was stylized the way it was because rendering a buffalo or any animal for that matter in a defined space requires a delicate attention to the negative space around it. A defined balance needs to be met to allow for the mark as a whole to appear strong, and not just elements of it to appear as desired. These concepts fail that test in my eyes.

So, ebod, please explain to me how these were "designed and not just drawn", implying that my concepts were the other side of that coin.

Yours is the cotton ball, didn't you get the memo. I think it's too puffy and stubby, that's my opinion. As you have yours about my renderings. I know I'm the only person to ever have a negative reaction to your concepts on any board I've ever seen but step back and forget that everyone always blows sunshine up your a$$ about these concepts and take some criticism. Mine were designed trying to keep the propotions of the original mark in mind. The lines on the underside flow back from the chin to the hind legs, the lines have purpose and meaning, that's designing. I don't see that when I look at your bison rendering, I see a clunky, stout, jagged animal, not the sleek yet powerful charge of a bison. Are mine finished? heck no. I never said they were, they're concepts and would need plenty of revisions. The flowing mane is artisitic license, it's called designing a logo. Does a Bison's mane flow naturally like that, of course not but when designing a logo who said everything needs to be literal. If that were the case then slap the dictionary illustration on the front of a jersey and call it a day. Example: the Patriots logo, does a colonial hat flow back and look like a flag? No but it sure makes a nice design element and visual statement. That's what designing a logo is all about. I agree the face has never looked like a bison to me either and I intend on fixing this concept one day. Your stuff is drawn well, it's professional but I personally don't see purpose or or how one line or angle relates to the other. It''s just a buffalo, two sabres on a circle, and the elements look to me to be of two different drawing styles. Desgining is when there is purpose and meaning to everything involved. Drawing is, well just a nice drawing and none of the elements relate.

I'm not trying to get into a pissing contest, I've seen your work on your webiste and it's great. I actually think it's better than the blue and gold project and would love to see what would happen if you applied that same sensebility to your Sabres concept.

[js °]

Yours is the cotton ball, didn't you get the memo. I think it's too puffy and stubby, that's my opinion. As you have yours about my renderings. I know I'm the only person to ever have a negative reaction to your concepts on any board I've ever seen but step back and forget that everyone always blows sunshine up your a$$ about these concepts and take some criticism. Mine were designed trying to keep the propotions of the original mark in mind. The lines on the underside flow back from the chin to the hind legs, the lines have purpose and meaning, that's designing. I don't see that when I look at your bison rendering, I see a clunky, stout, jagged animal, not the sleek yet powerful charge of a bison. Are mine finished? heck no. I never said they were, they're concepts and would need plenty of revisions. The flowing mane is artisitic license, it's called designing a logo. Does a Bison's mane flow naturally like that, of course not but when designing a logo who said everything needs to be literal. If that were the case then slap the dictionary illustration on the front of a jersey and call it a day. Example: the Patriots logo, does a colonial hat flow back and look like a flag? No but it sure makes a nice design element and visual statement. That's what designing a logo is all about. I agree the face has never looked like a bison to me either and I intend on fixing this concept one day. Your stuff is drawn well, it's professional but I personally don't see purpose or or how one line or angle relates to the other. It''s just a buffalo, two sabres on a circle, and the elements look to me to be of two different drawing styles. Desgining is when there is purpose and meaning to everything involved. Drawing is, well just a nice drawing and none of the elements relate.

I'm not trying to get into a pissing contest, I've seen your work on your webiste and it's great. I actually think it's better than the blue and gold project and would love to see what would happen if you applied that same sensebility to your Sabres concept.

Ok well, I think I've finally gotten to the bottom of where our views on art and design differ. You see a completely lack of design manifesting itself in symbolism and purpose, and instead believe that style and artistry should display the 'design' aspect in and of itself, all the while allowing 'artistic license' allowing you to put any purpose you wish behind any one of your elements (See Figure A. Flowing Locks of a Buffalo Mystically Transforming into Symbols with Purpose known only to the Illustrator).

You sight the Patriots logo as an example, but in that instance the transformation has symbolism and purpose, and same as the Texans star eye. In this case I see no purpose .. no design behind it.

And please, seriously explain to me how somebody with an artistic eye can look at you're rendering of a buffalo with its complete lack of distinction between its hump and head, making it appear to have a cotton mane, and tell me its not what it looks like ?

Your lovey-dovey utopia isn't the real world.

I am a customer. I can choose not to give them any of my money. Just like the people who don't like the logo choose not to buy anything new.

Like any business, to be successful, you need to provide goods/services that the customer is going to want. When things aren't working, you adjust to the market. The whole point is they have absolutely no reason to change something that is wildly successful just because some people don't like it. There's no guarantee that if they abandoned their look now that the next would be more popular. You don't know that, it's a risk. For an organization that isn't completely stable financially, it's not smart. You go with what works.

So do as much complaining as you want, it won't have near the effect that putting your wallet away will.

Theres nothing lovey-dovey or utopian about it, its a description of business as seen by those who are successful in it. Nothing more, nothing less ... this is not to say there are bad decisions and unfairness and obvious negative aspects within this thinking ... but its about a general success, and separating that from immediate and short success.

[IceCap]

js, I for one love your Sabres logo. Honestly, its the perfect update of the classic mark.

ebod39, you're entitled to your opinion, but face the fact that you seem to be the only one who doesn't like js' update of the Sabres' classic logo. That's fine, you're free to like and dislike whatever you want, but why should js even contemplate tweaking his logo to your suggestions when the general consensus is that it's perfect as is? Why should he tamper with a design everyone seems to like to appease the one guy who doesn't like it?

Also, one has to wonder how much your posts are fuelled by jealousy. Now before you start ripping me to shreds, just take a breath. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but from your last post I assume that you designed at least some of those leaked Sabres logos. These logos have received lukewarm feedback at best, while js' mark has been almost unanimously praised. Given that you seem to be the only one to attack js' work, I have to wonder if jealousy isn't playing a role.

[ebod39]

I'm not asking him to change anything based on my comments nor should he if he feels it's perfect how it is. I stated that the work on his website shows what I think to be a better sensibilility and aesthetic that I would love to see applied to his blue and gold work. It's a compliment, I think they're good but could be great. While everyone else feels they're "perfect as is", I don't. I am stating my opinion, no matter how much I am in the minority.

Yes I do prefer symbolism and meaning in my work. I also don't feel that it always needs to be so apparent to the viewer as the Texans star eye. I don't subscribe to the notion that if it needs to be explained then it's not good design. I believe somethings should be left to discovered, even explained so that they can take on new appreciation by the viewer.

Jealousy? please, don't make me laugh. I've done plenty that's gotten more than just praise over the internet. I'm more dumbfounded than anything, I just don't get the allure and how so many people can think they're the allmighty answer. I think they're good, the execution is great but they're not all that.