The Cornucopia of Possible NBA Logo Changes

[Old School Fool]

So the primary logo is inverted colors now. Looks like they threw us off after that leak.

[The_Admiral]

All total speculation, it all started with one of the prospective buyers saying he wanted to move them to sf. Then the giants themselves talked about joining a bid and moving them. Supposedly Larry Ellison has had talks with the Giants about the land and asking them to wait before they decide to sell it or make something on it. In case he does get the team and wants to move them there.

That's why this alt SF logo is from left field and makes no sense. I guess the new logo design was all kept in house.

Yeah, I was working off the Ellison speculation. I'd like to see them back in San Francisco. Honestly, I can't see this team sticking around that old Oakland arena much longer, lease or no lease.

[LocalVulture]

The Warriors would be worth more if they played in San Francisco as well. Especially in a new barn.

[dfwabel]

They'll be in or moving to San Francisco in the next five years.

......................................

Where, back to the Cow Palace?

There is talk about building am arena next to at&t park. But it would probably be over 5 years. Since you still have to wait for new owner, build a arena and wait out the Oakland lease.

So it's really speculation at this point....

All total speculation, it all started with one of the prospective buyers saying he wanted to move them to sf. Then the giants themselves talked about joining a bid and moving them. Supposedly Larry Ellison has had talks with the Giants about the land and asking them to wait before they decide to sell it or make something on it. In case he does get the team and wants to move them there.

That's why this alt SF logo is from left field and makes no sense. I guess the new logo design was all kept in house.

All total speculation, it all started with one of the prospective buyers saying he wanted to move them to sf. Then the giants themselves talked about joining a bid and moving them. Supposedly Larry Ellison has had talks with the Giants about the land and asking them to wait before they decide to sell it or make something on it. In case he does get the team and wants to move them there.

That's why this alt SF logo is from left field and makes no sense. I guess the new logo design was all kept in house.

Yeah, I was working off the Ellison speculation. I'd like to see them back in San Francisco. Honestly, I can't see this team sticking around that old Oakland arena much longer, lease or no lease.

There is the thought that Ellison and/or Mark Mastrov (24Hr. Fitness founder) are the leading candidates in getting the team in terms of money which public knows about. Ellison easily has the money and Mastrov is worth $2B. Cohan wants over $400M for the team, but even Forbes listed their value at $315M after their last playoff year.

Mastrov wants to keep the team in Oakland while the team has a lease with Oracle Arena until 2017. If the Warriors left Oakland before then, they'd have to pay off more than $100 million in debt service to city and Alameda County. If the team leaves Oakland after 2017, it will still have to make up the difference between the arena's costs and revenues until 2027.

[LocalVulture]

It would be sweet to have a new building right across McCovey cove there in San Francisco.

[dfwabel]

It would be sweet to have a new building right across McCovey cove there in San Francisco.

All of this should not be a part of the "logo change" thread, but to let those not in the Bay Area more knowledgeable of this if they choose to read.

1-As many as eight parties are interested in the Warriors, but Oracle's Larry Ellison seems to have aligned himself with the minority owners.

2-The SF Giants parking lot in question is Seawall Lot 337. All movement is basted on it. The San Francisco Giants joined with a group of companies to form a development team, which has been in ongoing negotiations with the Port of SF for nearly a year, according to Renee Martin, the port?s media and public relations manager. The Giants plan includes a music venue but no arena. However, that proposal could get changed. Anything being built on this land will undergo substantial review from a smattering of government agencies, including the Mayor?s Office.

WMS (Wilson/Meany/Sullivan) are the project architect of choice due to the land issue.

[Puckguy14]

With the Warriors, and in regards to a new arena. Back in 1990, San Francisco failed a measure to build an arena where AT&T Park now stands. It was to be an arena that the Warriors and Sharks were to call home. When that failed, the Sharks went to Oakland to ask to call the then Colsieum Arena home. The Colsieum officials and the city of Oakland were trying to get the Raiders back after a 1989 preseason game that they didn't pay attention to the idea. When the Sharks decided to call San Jose home, it left the Warriors going solo on an arena plan of their own. I seriously doubt the team would leave for San Francisco. The city doesn't have money to make improvements to Candlestick Park, let alone, build a new arena.

As for land availability around AT&T Park is very limited now. Once just the lone standing figure in China Basin, now has businesses and ritzy lofts. There is no room unless they eliminate any parking they have available. It would have to go to where Candlestick is once the 49ers leave for Santa Clara.

[dfwabel]

With the Warriors, and in regards to a new arena. Back in 1990, San Francisco failed a measure to build an arena where AT&T Park now stands. It was to be an arena that the Warriors and Sharks were to call home. When that failed, the Sharks went to Oakland to ask to call the then Colsieum Arena home. The Colsieum officials and the city of Oakland were trying to get the Raiders back after a 1989 preseason game that they didn't pay attention to the idea. When the Sharks decided to call San Jose home, it left the Warriors going solo on an arena plan of their own. I seriously doubt the team would leave for San Francisco. The city doesn't have money to make improvements to Candlestick Park, let alone, build a new arena.

As for land availability around AT&T Park is very limited now. Once just the lone standing figure in China Basin, now has businesses and ritzy lofts. There is no room unless they eliminate any parking they have available. It would have to go to where Candlestick is once the 49ers leave for Santa Clara.

Plus as for public money, Proportions D and F were passed in the late 90's for the 49ers, but no stadium project has been made. Even with the Santa Clara voter approval, the 49ers may not be able to secure the private financing to build their stadium since the NFL is tapped out on their "G3 Loan" program funds.

[FiddySicks]

With the Warriors, and in regards to a new arena. Back in 1990, San Francisco failed a measure to build an arena where AT&T Park now stands. It was to be an arena that the Warriors and Sharks were to call home. When that failed, the Sharks went to Oakland to ask to call the then Colsieum Arena home. The Colsieum officials and the city of Oakland were trying to get the Raiders back after a 1989 preseason game that they didn't pay attention to the idea. When the Sharks decided to call San Jose home, it left the Warriors going solo on an arena plan of their own. I seriously doubt the team would leave for San Francisco. The city doesn't have money to make improvements to Candlestick Park, let alone, build a new arena.

As for land availability around AT&T Park is very limited now. Once just the lone standing figure in China Basin, now has businesses and ritzy lofts. There is no room unless they eliminate any parking they have available. It would have to go to where Candlestick is once the 49ers leave for Santa Clara.

Thank you Puckguy, I figured it'd be you who brought all of this back down to earth a bit. There is absolutely no way in hell the Warriors get an arena built anywhere in the city, let alone in the China Basin. In order to build an arena that meets the standards of today's pro teams you need things like money, land, and city approval (well, mostly). San Francisco has NONE of this. The city is in hundreds of millions of dollars of debt in a state that's billions of dollars in debt. The 49ers have been trying for years to get a new park built, and the city has laughed in their face every time they've put out a plan that includes public funding. The only reason the Giants aren't either still stuck in Candlestick or in another city entirely is because AT&T Park was the first privately funded ballpark since the 1960s, and the city STILL fought that. Unlike 10 to 15 years ago, private investors and banks that can loan hundreds of millions of dollars to build these buildings just don't exist anymore. The Niners are seriously contemplating a move to Los Angeles it's so bad (And why it'll be easier to find private investors in LA, I'm not quite sure). And like you said, there is no land you can really build on left in the China Basin, and no great spots anywhere in the city when you look at feasibility. And finally, the city is notorious for fighting stadium/arena proposals to the death. The 49ers have a whole graveyard of them from nearly 20 years ago till now. These proposals and ideas for a new arena in the China Basin are pipe dreams.

[dfwabel]

With the Warriors, and in regards to a new arena. Back in 1990, San Francisco failed a measure to build an arena where AT&T Park now stands. It was to be an arena that the Warriors and Sharks were to call home. When that failed, the Sharks went to Oakland to ask to call the then Coliseum Arena home. The Coliseum officials and the city of Oakland were trying to get the Raiders back after a 1989 preseason game that they didn't pay attention to the idea. When the Sharks decided to call San Jose home, it left the Warriors going solo on an arena plan of their own. I seriously doubt the team would leave for San Francisco. The city doesn't have money to make improvements to Candlestick Park, let alone, build a new arena.

As for land availability around AT&T Park is very limited now. Once just the lone standing figure in China Basin, now has businesses and ritzy lofts. There is no room unless they eliminate any parking they have available. It would have to go to where Candlestick is once the 49ers leave for Santa Clara.

Thank you Puckguy, I figured it'd be you who brought all of this back down to earth a bit. There is absolutely no way in hell the Warriors get an arena built anywhere in the city, let alone in the China Basin. In order to build an arena that meets the standards of today's pro teams you need things like money, land, and city approval (well, mostly). San Francisco has NONE of this. The city is in hundreds of millions of dollars of debt in a state that's billions of dollars in debt. The 49ers have been trying for years to get a new park built, and the city has laughed in their face every time they've put out a plan that includes public funding. The only reason the Giants aren't either still stuck in Candlestick or in another city entirely is because AT&T Park was the first privately funded ballpark since the 1960s, and the city STILL fought that. Unlike 10 to 15 years ago, private investors and banks that can loan hundreds of millions of dollars to build these buildings just don't exist anymore. The Niners are seriously contemplating a move to Los Angeles it's so bad (And why it'll be easier to find private investors in LA, I'm not quite sure). And like you said, there is no land you can really build on left in the China Basin, and no great spots anywhere in the city when you look at feasibility. And finally, the city is notorious for fighting stadium/arena proposals to the death. The 49ers have a whole graveyard of them from nearly 20 years ago till now. These proposals and ideas for a new arena in the China Basin are pipe dreams.

Lot 337 is what is in question if Ellison or others buys the team. The City of San Francisco has less to do with that plot of land as the Port of San Francisco does. The Port Commission is responsible for the seven and one-half miles of San Francisco Waterfront adjacent to San Francisco Bay, which the Port develops, markets, leases, administers, manages, and maintains. Its jurisdiction stretches along the waterfront from Hyde Street Pier on the north to India Basin on the south.

[Old School Fool]

With all do respect, can we get back to the logo talk? I'm interested in speculation and seeing peoples opinions on the new logos and uniforms.

[Discogod]

I really hope that new uni depicted on the logosheet is just a mock-up or something. I like the new logo package, but that jersey's just nasty.

[Gothamite]

And here it is for the main site...

The mountain logo that the Jazz tweeted is not the real one with the new font for "Utah", but the note logo here is exact.

Thanks!

While you're at it, any chance you have a larger version of that Lakers' awesome giraffe logo for the site?

[TruColor]

I really hope that new uni depicted on the logosheet is just a mock-up or something. I like the new logo package, but that jersey's just nasty.

I'll be mourning the loss of "Golden Gate Orange"...I thought that was rather inspired...

[Old School Fool]

And here it is for the main site...

*Frakkin huge logo*

The mountain logo that the Jazz tweeted is not the real one with the new font for "Utah", but the note logo here is exact.

Thanks!

While you're at it, any chance you have a larger version of that Lakers' awesome giraffe logo for the site?

This is as large as it gets...

This isn't the exact logo, it's a mockup made by our very own forum member Hoopskid. It's a rather good mockup though, and I'd love to see it on the site.

[Hoopskid]

A little larger version, it's not very good IMO, I'm sure there's better designer on here that could create an exact replica.

[TheOldRoman]

So the primary logo is inverted colors now. Looks like they threw us off after that leak.

Yeah, and it was really dumb. The logo is supposed to mimic the sun, especially with the ill-concieved off-center outer outline. The logo should be yellow unless its on a yellow background.

Oh, and the jerseys are :censored:ing attrocious. Part of the reason I loved the most recent Cavaliers' jerseys is because they were a traditional basketball template. They had elastic striping going around the neck and arms, not piping, not a pointless inverted thing at the bottom of the collar, not a thick stripe on the back of the neck pointlessly, no long material on the shoulders making it look like a sleeveless t-shirt. I wish the Warriors would have went with a more traditional template instead of the garbage Nike template teams are still using.

[Milo Meningocele]

With all do respect, can we get back to the logo talk?

With all due respect.

I'll be mourning the loss of "Golden Gate Orange"...I thought that was rather inspired...

Not me. I only liked it after I learned the meaning of it. But it's pretty much red, and ridding the league of even a little more red is a good thing.

[TruColor]

Not me. I only liked it after I learned the meaning of it. But it's pretty much red, and ridding the league of even a little more red is a good thing.

I get where you're coming from, but it was a truly unique color in sports. The only other franchise I have record of using it was the first iteration of the Bakersfield Blitz of af2 (whose colors mirrored the Warriors anyway). The Pioneer League also uses it in their logo, but that's it. Oh well.

[TruColor]

...oh, and I plan to present all of these new graphics doing my RGB-optimization-thing as soon as I get the new files. Whenever that happens.

(I feel like everyone already has these things except for me...)