UFL Releases Team Logos

[jaha32]

I really like the Tuskers one. I like the T in the those. very clever. I like the Sentinels one too with the skyscraper and the gradients actually make sense on that one. i dont like the gradients on hte redwoods or the colors. the logo itself i like. the R is cool. the Locomotives one is different for sure and maybe it will grow on me. i see what there trying to do with the front grill of the train but its a stretch.

[santoleri3]

I really hope they lose the metallic tinge that appears EVERYWHERE. I have to say though, I kinda like these. Like the green and black for New York, like the Blue for the tuskers (but it needs another color to contrast it), Like the steel gray for the Locos, and I LOVE all the helmet stripes. But the Redwoods "arrowhead"? Wow, is that bad. And it would be SO much better if they offset the green with a rust/brown kind of color.

[Puckguy14]

Santoleri, I'm with you on a dark red, rust color. The arrowhead is weird, I'm guessin it's supposed to be a shield rather than an actual arrowhead. Nonetheless, I like the logo, intrigued by the helmet "stripes" but despise the white helmet. Still waiting for this league to actually do some advertising.

[leopard88]

Using a secondary logo as the stripe is inspired.

Agreed. I especially like the New York skyscraper.

But the Redwoods "arrowhead"? Wow, is that bad. And it would be SO much better if they offset the green with a rust/brown kind of color.

It is supposed to reflect this --

[Bleujayone]

I think it almost goes without saying that the majority of people in here could come up with far better logos, uniforms and nicknames than these without breaking a sweat.

In fact maybe that should be the start of another thread.

Most of them aren't bad at all. The Locos logo needs work, but the Tuskers logo looks great.

That said, a good amount of us could come up with something better. The problem is that a lot of us aren't head of an established graphic design company, which is what companies look for. They don't like to take chances with people who are unproven in their eyes. It sucks, yes, but that is how corporate America operates.

While I'll agree that there are not a lot of us in here who can claim a major commercial account, I would strongly disagree that people in here are unproven, quite the contrary. Some people in here have developed quite the portfolio and reputation. Granted there's a little chance of a major corporation taking the time to look through here for to designers. But if they did I think they'd be surprised at the quality of ideas, discussions, evolution, and overall quality of the final products. It's my opinion that we as a collective have a better reading of the pulse of sports tastes of the United States, Canada and the world thanks largely from our diverse membership.

We've seen the output of "established" graphic companies and I think it's a safe bet that at best they are no better overall than anything we could output in here, and arguably we have had members (usually with community input) create superior product. I believe this is one of those occasions where we can come up with something better.

Part of the reasoning behind that is the UFL originally was only going to have 4 teams with no nicknames, distinct uniform design, or logos. Upon realizing having generic teams with no individual identities might be a bad marketing idea, they put in this "effort" that seems half-hearted and hastily thrown together. Some in here might completely gut what's been done and start from scratch, some would only alter a few things here and there, while maybe others would only tweak something here or there in an attempt to save what was done. We already know nobody is hardly ever taken seriously in here by the professionals- but they should. I just think this is one of those group opportunities where we can again show off our collective minds and talents. People in here have already redesigned entire established leagues in here, and I think it might be fun to see everyone demonstrate how they might have done it differently with these four teams. Are the official designs absolutely horrible? No it's safe to say we've seen worse and there are some positive things in them to be found. But since this was allegedly done by the "professionals" I'd expect far better.

[Mac the Knife]

all of the logos look too "cartoonish." they dont look.....real enough, for lack of a better word .

Yeah, that was my thoughts on it... they could've done a much better job. I now realize my opinion seems to be in the minority here, but IMHO, they suck.

[Hoops McCann]

I like the tusks in the Tuskers helmet, but a flying snout?? That looks a little too weird.

Also, the "Locos" double-meaning (are they trains? or are they just CRAZY????) doesn't sit well with me.

[Brave-Bird 08]

wow, this is going to be an odd looking league for sure.

its like...those ridiculously wild concepts that we praise on here but go...woa, wait, those will never make it onto an actual field.

now, the ufl gives our insane concepts justice

[Cujo]

Also, the "Locos" double-meaning (are they trains? or are they just CRAZY????) doesn't sit well with me.

Verrrry XFL-ish.

And didn't they have a lawsuit thrown at them over the insensitivity of the nickname 'Maniax'?

[logodawg]

They really aren't that bad once you take out that stupid "Metallic Silver" crap the league seems to be in love with.

[powersurge]

The new United Football League today unveiled the logos for their four teams, the New York Sentinels, Florida Tuskers, California Redwoods and Las Vegas Locomotives.

And they all, to varying degrees, suck. Don't have time to post them here but I'm sure someone will, but in the meantime you can check them out at www.ufl-football.com.

First off, thanks for the colorful commentary.

Secondly, I think you are being unneccessarily hard on these designs. I personally think they are quite good given the circumstances. I also think that you have to base some of your expectations around the fact that this league is NOT the NFL, and does not have ties to any sort of history or legacy. Therefore if you were expecting any of these uniforms to rival the Bears, Packers, Giants or Colts then you would certainly be setting yourself up for disappointment. Sometimes its actually nice to see what kind of an identity a designer can create for a brand new football team when there is no prior history or design to build from. No these aren't perfect, but they are a pretty good start. If this league survives past this season and the next maybe we can see some tweaks to these designs that could result in some solid identities.

All in all, If this were a school project, and I were the teacher I'd give them a B- (great effort, great work was put in resulting in some solid results, but there is still room for improvement)

[powersurge]

I think it almost goes without saying that the majority of people in here could come up with far better logos, uniforms and nicknames than these without breaking a sweat.

In fact maybe that should be the start of another thread.

As much as I want to agree with you, it still begs the question: Then if that were the case then why are THEY designing these and not US?

[Brian in Boston]

My take...

The California Redwoods' logo is better suited to adorning an upscale organic supermarket chain, a boutique hotel in the Pacific Northwest, or updated uniforms within the U.S. National Parks Service system. The logo suffers when placed on the team's light-colored helmet, as it doesn't "pop". In fact, said "Premier Season" color schemes really doesn't serve the Redwoods' identity well at all. The less said about the team's hideous helmet-stripe device the better. It looks like a toilet-brush.

The New York Sentinels' logo is even more "corporate" in tone. It looks as if it should be serving as the logo for anti-virus software, rather than as the primary mark for a professional football team. The Sentinels' helmet benefits from being a dark color. The Black causes the Silver, Green and White logo to stand out. That said, the striping pattern tries too hard to tie-in the skyscraper theme, resulting in an overwhelming and clunky design element.

The Las Vegas Locomotives' mark, while certainly suited to serving as part of a pro sports team's logo, is - in fact - only a wordmark. As such, it isn't dynamic enough to stand on its own. I appreciate how it is cleverly rendered in the shape of a locomotive's cattle-guard ("cow-catcher"), but dock it points for the excessive use of gradients. Similarly to California, the Locomotives' logo suffers when placed on a light-colored helmet. The team's striping device also misses the mark. While one can make out certain carry-over elements from the wordmark/logo, it doesn't as effectively communicate the idea of railroads or trains when rendered as a stripe. They'd have been better served by using a railroad-track pattern as a stripe if they wanted to tie-in to the team's overall branding theme.

The Florida Tuskers' logo is perfect for a professional sports team... a minor-pro sports team. It seems a bit too "juvenile" to serve as the primary mark for a major-professional sports franchise. For a major-pro team, I could see this guy cavorting on the sidelines as a kid-friendly mascot and adorning children's souvenir items. The contrast between the Blue helmet and the Silver, Black and White logo serves the Tuskers' helmet well. Further, the inclusion and positioning of the tusk and snout elements on the helmet are clever. In effect, the entire helmet has been rendered as a "Tusker" head. As for the "snout"-stripe, I feel that it is the only one of the four that works. This is because the majority of the stripe is pretty straightforward and simple, with the snout appearing to be a shield containing a "T" for Tuskers. I find it funny that the most juvenile of the logos is served by the best of the overall helmet designs.

[Saintsfan]

I really don't think, given the nature of the UFL, that the logos are all that bad. Its clear the UFL is more concerned with a league wide identity rather than given each team a unique identity, and as such I think they have done a reasonable job.

Though personally I don't really get the point of the UFL. What is it trying to achieve? An NFL minor league kind of thing? All seems strange to me.

[Saturn]

Way too cartoony.

[JQK]

I think the Redwoods is the best of the bunch...

[JQK]

Also, the "Locos" double-meaning (are they trains? or are they just CRAZY????) doesn't sit well with me.

Are you a mentally unbalanced individule?

[themightyspitz]

Also, the "Locos" double-meaning (are they trains? or are they just CRAZY????) doesn't sit well with me.

Are you a mentally unbalanced individule?

The Prince of Darkness would approve of the Locos.

[mania]

Also, the "Locos" double-meaning (are they trains? or are they just CRAZY????) doesn't sit well with me.

Are you a mentally unbalanced individule?

The team's theme song...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MLp7YNTznE

[Jezus_Ghoti]

They aren't great, but I expected them to be so, so much worse. Some of them (or at least elements of them), I actually like a lot.

Also, now that we've seen that this league was willing to spend the time and money at least attempting to make good logos, why on earth did they half-ass it so much when it came to the uniforms and colors?