jefrsn Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 I found a link to this page today on sports illustrated.10 worst logos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cola Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 and i agree with them all except for the Islanders logo. while i am certainly no fan of hockey, i have always liked that logo and the color scheme with it. don't know why it was hated so much. dern hockey fans.also, i thought possibly that brownie didn't deserve to be on this list but after some though...yes, yes he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Island_Style Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 To me, over simple = lack of imagination which = crappy design. No reason for the Clippers or it's more successful and just a tad bit better looking twin the Lakers. not to be on that list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwinsTerritory Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 I agree Cola, the Islanders one can't be one of the ten worst. Twins-Territory.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joely Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 the blazers logo is fantastic - not only does it have the 5 on 5 element, it creates a 't' and a 'b' (or a t and a p depending on who you're talking to)...I like it, its graphically original. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtthasportfreak Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 I have to back-up my Blazers on this one. The logo has stood the test of time because it was modernized at the right time, though the grey is unnecessary. Thankfully they never used a hokey covered wagon w\Lewis & Clark as the mascots. The pinwheel is about basketball, what the team should be focused on. It is the most unique logo in sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
officeglenn Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 I don't think it's fair to include the 1916 Cubs or that ?20s Tigers logo among the worst. Sure, they don't look so hot, but that's by today's standards. Designers at that time didn't have nearly the tools that designers have today. Really, pieces like this should only take logos from a specific era and compare them to one another. Otherwise, it's like comparing apples and ... well, not oranges ... maybe just really old apples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC97 Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Nice of them to use logos from my site (even ones that I drew myself... you can tell which ones those are ) and not include a link to the site anywhere on there... --- Chris Creamer Founder/Editor, SportsLogos.Net "The Mothership" • News • Facebook • X/Twitter • Instagram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brass Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Nice of them to use logos from my site (even ones that I drew myself... you can tell which ones those are ) and not include a link to the site anywhere on there...Contact them. That's the only way you can make something out of this. On 4/10/2017 at 3:05 PM, Rollins Man said: what the hell is ccslc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC97 Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Nice of them to use logos from my site (even ones that I drew myself... you can tell which ones those are ) and not include a link to the site anywhere on there...Contact them. That's the only way you can make something out of this.I fired off an email just asking for a link or something -- we'll see. --- Chris Creamer Founder/Editor, SportsLogos.Net "The Mothership" • News • Facebook • X/Twitter • Instagram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferrousoxide66 Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Um, the author's clearly an idiot. Bucco Bruce AND the Portland Trailblazer spoke? On a worst-logo list? Get the hook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferrousoxide66 Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Nice of them to use logos from my site (even ones that I drew myself... you can tell which ones those are ) and not include a link to the site anywhere on there...Hammer those bandwidth bandits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quantum Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 I don't think it's fair to include the 1916 Cubs or that ?20s Tigers logo among the worst. Sure, they don't look so hot, but that's by today's standards. Designers at that time didn't have nearly the tools that designers have today. Really, pieces like this should only take logos from a specific era and compare them to one another. Otherwise, it's like comparing apples and ... well, not oranges ... maybe just really old apples.I completely disagree with this. Talent is talent and tools are tools. If billboards and post cards from the era can have great artwork, so can the teams. It's true that branding was an afterthought, but it doesn't change the fact that these teams accepted terrible artwork. "One of my concerns is shysters show up and take advantage of people's good will and generosity". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC97 Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Nice of them to use logos from my site (even ones that I drew myself... you can tell which ones those are ) and not include a link to the site anywhere on there...Hammer those bandwidth bandits.To be fair to them, they are not stealing bandwidth... they're just using the images. --- Chris Creamer Founder/Editor, SportsLogos.Net "The Mothership" • News • Facebook • X/Twitter • Instagram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 I don't think it's fair to include the 1916 Cubs or that ?20s Tigers logo among the worst. Sure, they don't look so hot, but that's by today's standards. Designers at that time didn't have nearly the tools that designers have today. Really, pieces like this should only take logos from a specific era and compare them to one another. Otherwise, it's like comparing apples and ... well, not oranges ... maybe just really old apples.I completely disagree with this. Talent is talent and tools are tools. If billboards and post cards from the era can have great artwork, so can the teams. It's true that branding was an afterthought, but it doesn't change the fact that these teams accepted terrible artwork.True, but the logos shown aren't necessarily the actual logos used by the team.For example, the 1908 Red Sox didn't use this logo:They used this one:The second is the actual logo as it appeared on the jerseys. The first is a rough representation of that logo, commonly identified as the logo itself (including, unfortunately, this site).If all you have in front of you is the rough version, you'd think that the artist had never actually used a pencil before (you might also wonder how they stiched all those squiggly lines on the front of the jersey).I suspect that might be the case with some of the logos that he ridicules for being rough. I'm not willing to call out that Cubs or Tigers logo until we know for a fact that they are the actual logos. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC97 Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 The first is a rough representation of that logo, commonly identified as the logo itself (including, unfortunately, this site).You're not another user who sits on the accurate logos and then doesn't understand why I don't have them are you? I put up what I can get. --- Chris Creamer Founder/Editor, SportsLogos.Net "The Mothership" • News • Facebook • X/Twitter • Instagram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 No, not at all. I thought for sure that I sent you the vector of that other Sox logo. I'll send you the AI file again, if you like.I understand that you're busy, and that you have a limited amount of time. I didn't mean that as a criticism of you. It's just that your placeholder graphics have a way of getting out there and staying.Heck, the Brewers somehow found the old Beer Barrel Man graphics I created for an old website and are using it, much to my chagrin - I have him wearing his stirrups backwards. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arts11 Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 the blazers logo is fantastic - not only does it have the 5 on 5 element, it creates a 't' and a 'b' (or a t and a p depending on who you're talking to)...I like it, its graphically original.i can see a "b/p" but where is the "t" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mania Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 That's the best logo the Islanders have ever had. It might not be much, but it sure as hell beats the clip-art they used before and after. Off The Top Rope: A Pro Wrestling Podcast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC97 Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 No, not at all. I thought for sure that I sent you the vector of that other Sox logo. I'll send you the AI file again, if you like.I understand that you're busy, and that you have a limited amount of time. I didn't mean that as a criticism of you. It's just that your placeholder graphics have a way of getting out there and staying.Heck, the Brewers somehow found the old Beer Barrel Man graphics I created for an old website and are using it, much to my chagrin - I have him wearing his stirrups backwards. If you sent it previously then my apologies If you don't mind just fire me an email with the logo so I can get 'er up there; if you don't know my address send a PM and I'll send it to you. --- Chris Creamer Founder/Editor, SportsLogos.Net "The Mothership" • News • Facebook • X/Twitter • Instagram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.