Jump to content

NFL's New Postseason Logos


HowBoutThemFins

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

To me the previous trophies have 100X more character and 100X more history, as do the logos and therefore are 100X more 'meaningful'. If I was an NFL player, playing for something my predecessors played for is much more 'meaningful' than something Tiffany's designed in 2010. This is pure speculation but I'd be willing to bet that Landor charged the NFL upwards of $100k for this rebrand (maybe more). I'm sure they they probably had a bunch of 'focus groups' come in and they told the NFL that they needed to go in this direction and that this would be more 'meaningful'. While I don't know what the number was, I'd be a little disappointed if I shelled out a bunch of dough for those so-called 'logos'. This is a classic case of over thinking a brand and trying to fix something that wasn't broken to begin with. These new logos and trophies, while sleek and modern looking, lack any sort character whatsoever. I would love to know how much they paid them to design a football silhouette with a hole in it. And how that captures the intensity of the post season I just don't know. I think that might take me 10 seconds to come up with. That's what you get when you hire an ad agency to do sports work. Good job NFL. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me the previous trophies have 100X more character and 100X more history, as do the logos and therefore are 100X more 'meaningful'. If I was an NFL player, playing for something my predecessors played for is much more 'meaningful' than something Tiffany's designed in 2010. This is pure speculation but I'd be willing to bet that Landor charged the NFL upwards of $100k for this rebrand (maybe more). I'm sure they they probably had a bunch of 'focus groups' come in and they told the NFL that they needed to go in this direction and that this would be more 'meaningful'. While I don't know what the number was, I'd be a little disappointed if I shelled out a bunch of dough for those so-called 'logos'. This is a classic case of over thinking a brand and trying to fix something that wasn't broken to begin with. These new logos and trophies, while sleek and modern looking, lack any sort character whatsoever. I would love to know how much they paid them to design a football silhouette with a hole in it. And how that captures the intensity of the post season I just don't know. I think that might take me 10 seconds to come up with. That's what you get when you hire an ad agency to do sports work. Good job NFL. :rolleyes:

Hate to break it to you, but you've got it backward. The NFL is not the victim here; they are the bully. The designer (even Landor) rarely, almost never, is in a position to tell the client, "This is the direction we're heading, and this is how it's going to be." Especially if the client is paying that much. In fact, a lot of this work was taken out of the hands of Landor and done by the NFL's in-house designers, which I'm assuming is why the Playoff logos look like Roger Goodell's secretary did them in Microsoft Word.

I would love to know how much they paid them to design a football silhouette with a hole in it.

You've got to understand something if you're going to be like every other uneducated critic out there: Designers and design firms don't get paid to design. They get paid to cut through the Jungle of bull :censored: and manage the egos of the client and their focus groups; to deliver the best possible solution that is acceptable to all parties involved in the decision-making process. Clearly those people suck at making decisions, and their in-house designers suck even worse at implementing a brand strategy.

I think that might take me 10 seconds to come up with.

Besides being the worst, most cliché comment the world has seen in the past 60 years, that's an insult to the design process. I know a lot of this stuff sucks, but there's no place for that comment. Ever. What I can't figure out is why the playoff logos were even changed. I think the old ones coordinate quite well with the new combine, minicamp and draft logos. The shield was a nice little element to base the brand on, if you ask me.

I sure as hell won't miss those ugly Hunt and Halas trophies, though. I need to see the new ones up close before I pass judgment, but I think they could have been better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These have grown on me and I like them. There. I said it.

I also don't find things evil just because they're new. Sometimes it's okay to break away from established tradition to start a new one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hate to break it to you, but you've got it backward. The NFL is not the victim here; they are the bully. The designer (even Landor) rarely, almost never, is in a position to tell the client, "This is the direction we're heading, and this is how it's going to be." Especially if the client is paying that much. In fact, a lot of this work was taken out of the hands of Landor and done by the NFL's in-house designers, which I'm assuming is why the Playoff logos look like Roger Goodell's secretary did them in Microsoft Word.

You've got to understand something if you're going to be like every other uneducated critic out there: Designers and design firms don't get paid to design. They get paid to cut through the Jungle of bull :censored: and manage the egos of the client and their focus groups; to deliver the best possible solution that is acceptable to all parties involved in the decision-making process. Clearly those people suck at making decisions, and their in-house designers suck even worse at implementing a brand strategy.

Besides being the worst, most cliché comment the world has seen in the past 60 years, that's an insult to the design process. I know a lot of this stuff sucks, but there's no place for that comment. Ever. What I can't figure out is why the playoff logos were even changed. I think the old ones coordinate quite well with the new combine, minicamp and draft logos. The shield was a nice little element to base the brand on, if you ask me.

I sure as hell won't miss those ugly Hunt and Halas trophies, though. I need to see the new ones up close before I pass judgment, but I think they could have been better.

First of all, you have no idea what my 'education' or 'experience' in the design business is. Whether you like it or not, I am entitled to an opinion. If you don't like it, too bad. And quite frankly, what difference does it make whether I am an award winning designer or someone who can't even color in between the lines? 99.9% of the people who are going to have an opinion on the new logos (i.e., football fans) aren't designers. I guess that means they can't have an opinion either.

You obviously didn't understand the point I was trying to make. Whether it was Landor who did a bulk of the work or the NFL in-house team, somebody probably got paid a lot of money to come up with this new brand that, in my opinion falls short. I know what design firms get paid to do and ultimately it is to come up with a visual solution that communicates a message that the NFL is trying to get across. In my opinion, whether Landor actually did the designing or was just hired in a consulting role, they did a bad job. It looks like they spent '10 seconds' thinking about that message and implementing that message. That's the conclusion I came to when I first saw this. Sorry if that offends you but it's true. You basically said just as much with your comments, sorry if I didn't phrase mine to your liking. I didn't realize the comment police were out today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the point is that they didn't do a bad job if they did what the NFL wanted them to do. The NFL might have had a bad vision, or a bad idea, but the designers are just the ones who execute that vision. Even if the designers were hired to come up with the whole campaign, chances are they came up with several ideas, and the NFL narrowed it down and then ordered tweaks or redesigns until they came up with this.

AH might come off as arrogant and condescending sometimes :P but that post was spot on. Unless you know exactly how the process unfolded, it's really difficult to blame the designer for poor team / league identities and graphics packages. It's cool to get on them for actual design related things (like incorrect shadowing, poor rendering, etc.), but not necessarily the concept.

Look at the clink room blog - they showed the whole Cincinnati Reds project, which was them coming up with a ton of concepts, showing them to the team, who then rejected most and suggested changes to the others until they came up with something acceptable. Plan B probably has as much ability to influence and "sell" teams on a direction as anyone, and still they're ultimately working at the whim of the club. I don't know who did this work for the NFL, but highly doubtful they went with a group like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Conference Championship logos made me instantly think "archery", not football.

It looks like an arm and a pulled-back bow. I would expect better from the NFL than this.

As for the other playoff logos, the old ones (which I didn't really care for) look vastly more "official" than the NFL shield inside an abstract football.

I am at a loss for words. The NFL is usually elite when it comes to market designs, but this stuff is vastly inferior to the current/old designs.

Major Fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the point is that they didn't do a bad job if they did what the NFL wanted them to do. The NFL might have had a bad vision, or a bad idea, but the designers are just the ones who execute that vision. Even if the designers were hired to come up with the whole campaign, chances are they came up with several ideas, and the NFL narrowed it down and then ordered tweaks or redesigns until they came up with this.

Believe it or not I know that the way it works is that firms submit ideas and the team goes back to them with revisions. Thanks for explaining it to me though. ;)

I also realize that I do not know exactly how everything went down, which is why I prefaced my comments by saying it was 'pure speculation'. Whoever was responsible in the end, be it Landor or the NFL, I think it lacks creativity and misses the target of what they were trying to communicate. If you disagree, you're entitled to your opinion.

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.