Portland Timbers to have a new logo for MLS Debut

[The_Admiral]

Short enough response for you?

Class

Trash

This doesn't really help the stereotype about North American soccer fans.

[Jezus_Ghoti]

The logo is not even that bad! It's not like they unveiled the Buffaslug or something.

[andrewharrington]

I don't think the video was in favor of one group of logos or the other, at least not literally. It comes across more a question of, 'Do you want it to look like a global soccer brand, or a North American action sport brand?'

The new logo by itself is okay. It's not great and it doesn't totally blow, but I think we can all agree there are clunky parts of it and questionable decisions that seemed to have been made just to get it to 'work' within the confines of the original logo. It's pretty clear they wanted to break the box on this, but couldn't and thus had to force a lot of incompatible design language into a package the size and shape of the old logo.

In and of itself, it's solid. It's a B- logo that could be a B/B+ logo without totally scrapping what's there already and tinkering with a few things. It's over-designed and it's trendy, but what isn't in sports these days? (The Whitecaps logo, for one) The axe is proportionally out of whack, looking much like a toy, and the triangle/chevron/banner is losing the tree imagery a little. The update posted in the thread is a nice compromise.

The problem is that this logo is going up against a logo that was so good compositionally and had a great hierarchy of elements. It was doomed to fail from the get go. Say what you will about the dated lettering and the 1970s wood paneling-esque diagonal tree lines, the old logo had 'it.' It had a good Northwest aesthetic and more importantly, it looked like a soccer crest. The problem is (to the ownership), it looked like an international soccer crest, not an MLS soccer crest, but I think Portland is more like an international soccer city than an MLS city and that's why the old crest worked so much better. I think the entire brand was forced into an area with which the fans weren't comfortable. One of the first things you see in the logo is the PORTLAND text, but new identity doesn't seem to fit Portland well at all. It's too slick for Portland, in my opinion.

[Krona]

I feel sick from that.

Oh, I am talking about how the fans presented themselves. Totally classless. You will lose a lot of respect that way.

Well, to be fair, let's also not forget the team's owner completely lost his cool, and had to be restrained from his own team's fans while yelling at those fans, "you can shove your old minor league logo up your @ss!" No joke. Most fans think the current logo is classic and classy, so the minor league jab coupled with the extreme self-assurance on the new logo design have many fans wondering if he even "gets it" when it comes to football club culture.

Not a very classy display from either side yesterday, I'm afraid.

Wow. I've never felt better about the Sounders' ownership group.

I was right there when that image was taken. The supporters were all butt hurt and going on and on while Paulson was doing an interview. When finished, he immediately hustled over to these guys and simply said "Give it time guys". If he told them to shove it up there ass, it wasnt here. If anything he was very classy at that moment and without apologies, went over and talked to supporters. He didnt slink back and run away from the criticism. The guys put a lot of money down to give Portland an MLS team. He's putting a lot of money on the line for a stadium that he'll never own. Im happy with our ownership. So, feel good about your Sounders ownership, but remember that its the host of the "Price Is Right" and you have a marching band. Burn.

[murtaugh]

Reposting a comment I made elsewhere:

The old one certainly needed to be updated, to be assigned unified colors, improve the type choices, and clean some of the mistakes/misalignment still apparent in even the most recent update of a few years ago. It’s not ready-out-of-the-box by any means.

But the new one goes too far. What’s more, there is plenty of sloppiness and misalignment, even in the new badge.

This version is better, but there’s still the matter of the mistakes and silly line weight inconsistencies.

http://www.portlandmls2011.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/AxeSociety_siteimage.jpg

[Brian in Boston]

When finished, he immediately hustled over to these guys and simply said "Give it time guys."

Based upon the expression on his face, the tension evident in the tendons of his neck, and the pressure with which the Timbers' front-office type is grasping Merritt's arm in order to lead him away, Paulson must have been SCREAMING, "Give it time guys," at the top of his lungs. That is not a photo of a gentlemen "simply saying" anything. He's clearly agitated and he's shouting something.

The guys put a lot of money down to give Portland an MLS team.

Which secures him an ownership stake in Major League Soccer and its ancillary businesses, most imortantly Soccer United Marketing. Is said stake going to see Paulson realize a profit immediately? No. That said, Merritt Paulson's decision to bring a Major League Soccer team to Portland was hardly a charitable action on his part. It is an investment, plain and simple. Rest assured, Paulson is anticipating garnering a significant return on that investment at some point in the future. If he weren't, he wouldn't have secured the operating rights for an MLS franchise.

He's putting a lot of money on the line for a stadium that he'll never own.

The City of Portland is borrowing $11.2-million of the $31-million price-tag for Phase ONE of the project (who knows how many more phases Paulson will demand once his soccer team is the primary tenant in the facility). It will take the city more than 25 years to pay-off the debt service. Paulson and his father are fronting the rest, albeit with a catch: $11.1-million of their contribution is so-called "pre-paid rent" that will allow them to use PGE Park rent-free from 2017 to 2033. In other words, this "pre-paid rent" is a de facto construction loan that will allow the Paulsons to avoid rent and ticket-tax payments totaling at least $38.4-million. It gets better for the Paulsons. While it has never been specifically revealed, it is believed that the Paulsons also hold the right to sell their "pre-paid rent" rights to other tenants. As such, they have a vehicle for recouping the $11.1-million in "pre-paid rent" costs they incur under their financing deal with Portland, but the city will effectively go 16 years without collecting rent from anyone the Paulsons sell-off portions of their "pre-paid rent" rights to. That potentially includes the likes of Portland State's football program and the Oregon School Activities Association's soccer and football championships. The majority of the City of Portland's $11.2-million payment will be financed by ticket taxes and parking fees at the Rose Garden Arena. In other words, the Paulsons have entered into a deal where they've ultimately got patrons of Paul Allen's TrailBlazers paying the Timbers' freight. If the aforementioned ticket taxes and parking fees at the Rose Garden Arena prove insufficient to meet the debt service on the City of Portland's $11.2-million contribution, city property taxes will be dipped into. Yep... the taxpayers will be on the hook, regardless of whether they're interested in the Timbers or ever take-in an event at PGE Park. The debt on the $11.2-miilion is estimated to be in the neighborhood of 9%, though it could end-up being much higher. The bonds backing it are "no interest, no payment" for nine years. Which sounds good until you realize that if you borrow $11.2-million at 9% interest and make no payments for eight years, by the time you start paying at the end of the ninth year, you owe somewhere in the neighborhood of $22.3-million. Oh, and the City of Portland is on the hook for subsidizing the wages of stadium employees.

Yeah... Poor little Merritt sure is getting hosed on this stadium deal.

[murtaugh]

This version is better, but there’s still the matter of the mistakes and silly line weight inconsistencies.

http://www.portlandmls2011.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/AxeSociety_siteimage.jpg

A better look. The "secondary" mark is much better, but still lacks something.

The chevron inconsistencies are glaring. And there is some truly poor rendering at close inspection.

[IceCap]

I don't think the video was in favor of one group of logos or the other, at least not literally. It comes across more a question of, 'Do you want it to look like a global soccer brand, or a North American action sport brand?'

The new logo by itself is okay. It's not great and it doesn't totally blow, but I think we can all agree there are clunky parts of it and questionable decisions that seemed to have been made just to get it to 'work' within the confines of the original logo. It's pretty clear they wanted to break the box on this, but couldn't and thus had to force a lot of incompatible design language into a package the size and shape of the old logo.

In and of itself, it's solid. It's a B- logo that could be a B/B+ logo without totally scrapping what's there already and tinkering with a few things. It's over-designed and it's trendy, but what isn't in sports these days? (The Whitecaps logo, for one) The axe is proportionally out of whack, looking much like a toy, and the triangle/chevron/banner is losing the tree imagery a little. The uodate posted in the thread is a nice compromise.

The problem is that this logo is going up against a logo that was so good compositionally and had a great hierarchy of elements. It was doomed to fail from the get go. Say what you will about the dated lettering and the 1970s wood paneling-esque diagonal tree lines, the old logo had 'it.' It had a good Northwest aesthetic and more importantly, it looked like a soccer crest. The problem is (to the ownership), it looked like an international soccer crest, not an MLS soccer crest, but I think POrtland is more like an international soccer city than an MLS city and that's why the old crest worked so much better. I think the entire brand was forced into an area with which the fans weren't comfortable. One of the first things you see in the logo is the PORTLAND text, but new identity doesn't seem to fit Portland well at all. It's too slick for Portland, in my opinion.

Well said Andrew. The new logo isn't terrible, it's just a downgrade compared to what they had before.

And I'm also going to have to agree with BiB here. Merritt Paulson ended up looking like a complete tool.

[Krona]

I guess you were there. all i'll say is i saw the back and forth. Yeah, the guy may have been a bit pissed, but it wasnt nearly as bad as whats being reported(by blogs, not the news agencies that were standing two feet away). Not to mention, look at those guys. C'mon. That girl totally has the "my boyfriend is such a d-bag" face...

[IceCap]

I guess you were there. all i'll say is i saw the back and forth. Yeah, the guy may have been a bit pissed, but it wasnt nearly as bad as whats being reported(by blogs, not the news agencies that were standing two feet away). Not to mention, look at those guys. C'mon. That girl totally has the "my boyfriend is such a d-bag" face...

Your logic is air-tight sir.

Look, Mr. Paulson is clearly agitated about something. So I'm inclined to believe that the story that he yelled "You can shove your minor league logo up your a$$" rather then calmly saying "give it time guys." Frankly the former is also more likely when you consider the scenario. Him losing his cool is understandable when you consider he payed for a new logo to be designed and put this whole grand unveiling together. And the fans hated it. It's not unreasonable to suspect he lost his cool. Still, he blew up at his team's own fans. That's not a good sign. His comment, to me, suggests that he has no real understanding of the traditions of the Portland Timbers club.

Now lets talk about the logo. If the Portland Timbers were an expansion team with no prior history this logo would work. It still wouldn't be great, but it would be a solid enough mark. The problem is that the Timbers do have a history. The old logo wasn't some antiquated design from the 70s. It was simple, iconic, and it conveyed its imagery very well. It didn't need a face lift or an update. It could have worked as the crest of the MLS version of the team, and it would have been one of the better logos in the league.

That's why I dislike the new logo, and it's why I suspect so many dislike it. Not only is it an unnecessary change, but it's simply an inferior mark. It doesn't convey the imagery as well as the old one, and it's certainly not as iconic as the old one.

In a vacuum it's an alright logo, but as the Timbers' new crest it's a downgrade all around.

[murtaugh]

A one-color version, editing some of the minor errors (but leaving the lineweight changes)

[Sport Billy]

It's also important to remember that those fans are the only reason Portland has an MLS team.

Do you actually believe this?

The ONLY reason Portland is in MLS is because Paulson has a :censored:load of cash.

The fact that MLS went to Salt Lake City or remain in New England, Dallas, San Jose and KC demonstrate that fans don't mean crap.

MLS cares about money and nothing else.

They will go to any city with a Metro population of 1.5m+ and a superrich owner.

But I agree that the new Portland crest is poor.

[knnhrvy16]

It's also important to remember that those fans are the only reason Portland has an MLS team.

Do you actually believe this?

The ONLY reason Portland is in MLS is because Paulson has a :censored:load of cash.

The fact that MLS went to Salt Lake City or remain in New England, Dallas, San Jose and KC demonstrate that fans don't mean crap.

MLS cares about money and nothing else.

They will go to any city with a Metro population of 1.5m+ and a superrich owner.

But I agree that the new Portland crest is poor.

IDK if Salt Lake City is very valid in this argument. I could be misunderstanding you, but SLC is great for soccer and has many fans, I being one of them. We also have a large Hispanic community (of which I'm also a part of) which adds to the hype for soccer here. So say what you want about unloading cash, but there is great love for soccer here that goes beyond simply money.

Anyways, about the crest - I really don't think it's that bad. Infact it's pretty solid. However, this isn't just another expansion team. Because of the history of the Timbers, that overrides it completely. Though I think the new crest is pretty good, the old one is even better. And not just for history's sake, either. It's clean, it gets the point across, the fans love it, and it fits the criteria for what a soccer crest should be. That is why the old one should have come back.

[DelayedPenalty]

I guess I fall into the minority on this one. I like it.

[patsox]

the new logo isn't that bad, but the old logo does have tradition behind it and it would have been plenty suitable with some tweaks (i.e. font and something to fill up the space between the words portland and timbers).

[Titanole]

If the Portland Timbers were an expansion team with no prior history this logo would work. It still wouldn't be great, but it would be a solid enough mark. The problem is that the Timbers do have a history. The old logo wasn't some antiquated design from the 70s. It was simple, iconic, and it conveyed its imagery very well. It didn't need a face lift or an update. It could have worked as the crest of the MLS version of the team, and it would have been one of the better logos in the league.

That's why I dislike the new logo, and it's why I suspect so many dislike it. Not only is it an unnecessary change, but it's simply an inferior mark. It doesn't convey the imagery as well as the old one, and it's certainly not as iconic as the old one.

In a vacuum it's an alright logo, but as the Timbers' new crest it's a downgrade all around.

Well put.

[ClutchIsEverything]

I know little of the situation. So just looking at the two logos, I like the new one better.

For all the anger over it, its not like they radically changed the colors, or got rid of the axe. It's still there. It is the same concept, just touched up a bit. If you like the old logo, that's fine, but it seems like a silly thing to get in a huff over when it is so close to the old logo. Its not like the Sonics adding red, the Bucks going to purple or the Rockets having a big spaceship on their court where you have a huge separation from the past.

[CubsFanBudMan]

I know little of the situation. So just looking at the two logos, I like the new one better.

For all the anger over it, its not like they radically changed the colors, or got rid of the axe. It's still there. It is the same concept, just touched up a bit. If you like the old logo, that's fine, but it seems like a silly thing to get in a huff over when it is so close to the old logo. Its not like the Sonics adding red, the Bucks going to purple or the Rockets having a big spaceship on their court where you have a huge separation from the past.

This is where I'm at. It's a modernization using the same colors. I'd feel lucky it wasn't more radical and if I was a fan and didn't like the new one... I'd wear the old one.

(The only thing I can compare it to personally since I have some fairly stable teams is the NFL Equipment patch. I swore I'd never buy another jersey until it was gone and have stuck to it. Well, that and any Florida Panthers alt that isn't red.)

[Titanole]

I liken this to the change of the Miami Dolphins logo a while back to the current cartoony version or the change of the wings on the Philadelphia Eagles helmets. Neither were radical alterations, but were they really necessary or just change for change's sake? IMO, neither were an improvement but at least they weren't ridiculous changes. It's the same with the Timbers. It was just enough of a change to annoy some people.

[Krona]

I guess you were there. all i'll say is i saw the back and forth. Yeah, the guy may have been a bit pissed, but it wasnt nearly as bad as whats being reported(by blogs, not the news agencies that were standing two feet away). Not to mention, look at those guys. C'mon. That girl totally has the "my boyfriend is such a d-bag" face...

Your logic is air-tight sir.

I'm not trying to win a legal case. Im joking around. Something that is getting lost here. Some folks are treating this like their kid was snatched out of their arms.

Look, Mr. Paulson is clearly agitated about something. So I'm inclined to believe that the story that he yelled "You can shove your minor league logo up your a$$" rather then calmly saying "give it time guys." Frankly the former is also more likely when you consider the scenario.

I have no stake in defending the guy. I think his choice of logos and designers are less than stellar. I'm just telling you what i saw and heard. The last thing i want to do is defend a trust fund kid, but i don't see what he did wrong. He promised the Army that there would be changes, but the elements of the crest would be brought along. His only mistake was to say "trust me. i wont screw this up", to which the answer is a matter of opinion. He didnt hit it out of the park, but he didnt screw it up either.

Him losing his cool is understandable when you consider he payed for a new logo to be designed and put this whole grand unveiling together. And the fans hated it. It's not unreasonable to suspect he lost his cool. Still, he blew up at his team's own fans. That's not a good sign. His comment, to me, suggests that he has no real understanding of the traditions of the Portland Timbers club.

Now lets talk about the logo. If the Portland Timbers were an expansion team with no prior history this logo would work. It still wouldn't be great, but it would be a solid enough mark. The problem is that the Timbers do have a history. The old logo wasn't some antiquated design from the 70s. It was simple, iconic, and it conveyed its imagery very well. It didn't need a face lift or an update. It could have worked as the crest of the MLS version of the team, and it would have been one of the better logos in the league.

That's why I dislike the new logo, and it's why I suspect so many dislike it. Not only is it an unnecessary change, but it's simply an inferior mark. It doesn't convey the imagery as well as the old one, and it's certainly not as iconic as the old one.

In a vacuum it's an alright logo, but as the Timbers' new crest it's a downgrade all around.

The feeling I get from this is that the group of supporters so agitated with this would rather keep their badge and stay in the USL rather than move up with a new logo. Handling this in a more formal, tasteful way might get some small changes that really make this badge a win/win(see above). That wont happen when you hold your breath and stamp your feet. We'll be waiting to pick up your season tickets.