jayhawks logo on helmets

[BIGBAD]

does anyone have any reason why the kansas jayhawks dont put their "bird" logo on their helmets?

that is one of the coolest logo in all of college sports

i see they updated their uniforms this year and still didnt switch

do they think it isnt "tough" enough?

im disappointed they dont add it. better than "KU" on the helmets

any thoughts?

[OnWis97]

does anyone have any reason why the kansas jayhawks dont put their "bird" logo on their helmets?

that is one of the coolest logo in all of college sports

i see they updated their uniforms this year and still didnt switch

do they think it isnt "tough" enough?

im disappointed they dont add it. better than "KU" on the helmets

any thoughts?

I can't speak to why they don't put the Jayhawk on their helmets. I don't think it is a bad logo, but I am glad it's not on the helmet. That's just my personal preference. I don't like logos on helmets, except for silouettes (i.e. Iowa or Texas). I'd prefer to see letters.

Logos on top of wordmarks (i.e. Boise State) are the worst. But again, it's just my opinion.

[powersurge]

I like the 'bird' logo very much actually, but I don't think it works well on the helmet. Just because a logo doesn't work well on a helmet doesn't make it a bad logo, just one that doesn't work on a helmet. I think although I hate the current font they are using, the letters work much better because they are much simpler, easily read, and they seem to 'pop' off of the helmet. .

[Blue Falcon]

Maybe it looks too much like Sonny, the Cocoa Puffs bird, for them to put it on the helmet.

<------

[Gothamite]

I'd tend to agree that even good logos don't belong on the helmets.

I love Bucky Badger, but he doesn't belong on the helmet.

[Me Gusta Guster]

The original reason they changed years ago was because whoever made the decision at the time didn't think the Jayhawk was intimidating enough and too cute...

[leedsunited]

Helmets should have clean, simple logos (i.e. the Texas steer) or letters. Never a main logo, they are usually too busy.

I like the Jayhawk logo myself, but the KU on the helmet rocks.

[Gothamite]

Agreed. Just like baseball caps - they should have clear, simple logos. Not the primaries.

[Mingjai]

As busy as the Jayhawk would look on a helmet, it's not hard to beat the Trajan KU.

The busiest looking college logos that still look good on the helmets are Arizona State, New Mexico, and Akron.

And amen on the logos on top of wordmarks (or vice versa). Boise State, TCU, Oregon State, and San Jose State might want to reconsider their helmets.

[powersurge]

As busy as the Jayhawk would look on a helmet, it's not hard to beat the Trajan KU.

The busiest looking college logos that still look on the helmets are Arizona State, New Mexico, and Akron.

And amen on the logos on top of wordmarks (or vice versa). Boise State, TCU, Oregon State, and San Jose State might want to reconsider their helmets.

I thought that originally about Boise State, but their helmet has grown on me. I think it maybe because it pops a bit nore than some of the others have been mentioned or shown in the thread. I think for a primary logo to work it needs to stand out on a helmet, and in the case of BSU the white wordmark is pretty well visible. It doesn't mean that a simple Bronco head or BSU wordmark wouldn't be better though. Who knows, maybe it could be better, maybe not.

[HeyDingis]

They had the Jayhawk on the helmets in the 80's and they looked OK - not that great. I know the university would never go for it, but I've always been curious to see just the red head of the jayhawk on a blue helmet a la Baltimore Ravens, but with no stripes down the middle of the helmet.

[axl007]

Gale Sayers 1964

[apeman33]

It's my understanding there was a "meaner" Jayhawk developed for the football team sometime in the 90's but nobody liked it. I can't say I know where to find any proof of that, though.

The Jayhawk being taken off because it was too "friendly" is the reason I'd always heard.

I've also seen that Sayers '64 helmet before. I find it interesting that the Jayhawk wasn't mirrored on it and so on the right side of the helmet, he faces the wrong way (almost as much as the fact that this Jayhawk is walking to his left, which is seldom seen.

[Spearhead]

I love Bucky Badger, but he doesn't belong on the helmet.

I like it.

Obviously this is sujective, but I'd like to see the Jayhawk logo on the Kansas helmet. Oddly enough many KU fans don't like "cartoons" cluttering up their headgear.

By the way, the combination of pale blue and the Jay logo as displayed on that KU helmet above was never used. Sayers wore a pale blue helmet with numerals on the side then wore the dark blue shade with the Jay.

[leedsunited]

The only full logo I think that works on a helmet is the ASU Sun Devil, and that's because he's a pretty simple design and completely iconic. The Jayhawk, and Bucky for that matter, are way too detailed for helmet use.

[illwauk]

I think Boise's helmet would be just fine if they didn't have the wordmark. But I agree that most mascot-logos are too busy to use on helmets.

[winghaz]

No, no, no, to a lot of these comments.

Logos, way before letters, belong on football helmets. Letters, unless they historically go with a specific style of the school or pro team (such as the U of Minnesota M, the U of Wisconsin W, the NY of the New York Giants, the wishbone C of the Chicago Bears) are sad substitutes for logos.

And believe me, there is lots of bad lettering out there, such as the KU.

The Kansas Jayhawk is a perfect example of how logos are more superior to non-historic lettering. The Jayhawk logo says much more that this is Kansas than KU letters. People identify with the Jayhawk logo, not the KU.

Imagine, for example, if the San Diego Chargers wore an SD on their helmets instead of the bolts. How lame would that be?

Even more ideal than regular logos are other things that go well on helmets, such as the Vikings horns, the Rams horns and the Eagles wings.

[leedsunited]

No, no, no, to a lot of these comments.

Logos, way before letters, belong on football helmets. Letters, unless they historically go with a specific style of the school or pro team (such as the U of Minnesota M, the U of Wisconsin W, the NY of the New York Giants, the wishbone C of the Chicago Bears) are sad substitutes for logos.

And believe me, there is lots of bad lettering out there, such as the KU.

The Kansas Jayhawk is a perfect example of how logos are more superior to non-historic lettering. The Jayhawk logo says much more that this is Kansas than KU letters. People identify with the Jayhawk logo, not the KU.

Imagine, for example, if the San Diego Chargers wore an SD on their helmets instead of the bolts. How lame would that be?

Even more ideal than regular logos are other things that go well on helmets, such as the Vikings horns, the Rams horns and the Eagles wings.

You kinda missed the whole point here. Simple logos, i.e. the Charger bolt or the Viking horn work well. Those are vastly different than the relatively-detailed Kansas Jayhawk logo.

Don't get me wrong, I love the Jayhawk. I think it's a great logo. But it's waaay too busy for a football helmet. I mean, he's wearin' SHOES for pete's sake!

[powersurge]

No, no, no, to a lot of these comments.

Logos, way before letters, belong on football helmets. Letters, unless they historically go with a specific style of the school or pro team (such as the U of Minnesota M, the U of Wisconsin W, the NY of the New York Giants, the wishbone C of the Chicago Bears) are sad substitutes for logos.

And believe me, there is lots of bad lettering out there, such as the KU.

The Kansas Jayhawk is a perfect example of how logos are more superior to non-historic lettering. The Jayhawk logo says much more that this is Kansas than KU letters. People identify with the Jayhawk logo, not the KU.

Imagine, for example, if the San Diego Chargers wore an SD on their helmets instead of the bolts. How lame would that be?

Even more ideal than regular logos are other things that go well on helmets, such as the Vikings horns, the Rams horns and the Eagles wings.

You kinda missed the whole point here. Simple logos, i.e. the Charger bolt or the Viking horn work well. Those are vastly different than the relatively-detailed Kansas Jayhawk logo.

Don't get me wrong, I love the Jayhawk. I think it's a great logo. But it's waaay too busy for a football helmet. I mean, he's wearin' SHOES for pete's sake!

Atleast he doesn't have teeth and large biceps.

BTW, who's Pete?

[winghaz]

You kinda missed the whole point here. Simple logos, i.e. the Charger bolt or the Viking horn work well. Those are vastly different than the relatively-detailed Kansas Jayhawk logo.

Don't get me wrong, I love the Jayhawk. I think it's a great logo. But it's waaay too busy for a football helmet. I mean, he's wearin' SHOES for pete's sake!

But you're missing my point. You want something on the helmets that make people identify with the team. The Jayhawk, even though it is a bit busy, is the identification mark for the Kansas Jayhawks. The KU isn't anywhere near that.

And the Jayhawk logo is too busy for the helmet, then isn't it too busy, period, to even be a team logo?