Portland Timbers to have a new logo for MLS Debut

[crashcarson15]

Wow. That totally ruins the redesign for me.

[CreamSoda]

redesign of redesign is a huge downgrade....

Should have stuck with the original redesign

[Fjm]

How about a compromise?

I realize it's a rough mock-up.

[Gothamite]

A quick before and after...

Wow - looking at the version without the wordmark, I just realized that the new crest doesn't have three chevrons representing the three leagues to which the Timbers have belonged - it only has two.

Two green chevrons bordered in gold, thicker where the two borders meet. Oops.

[eRay]

Looks like some design group/agency/collective won't be getting MLS work for a while.

[-kj]

Wow - looking at the version without the wordmark, I just realized that the new crest doesn't have three chevrons representing the three leagues to which the Timbers have belonged - it only has two.

Two green chevrons bordered in gold, thicker where the two borders meet. Oops.

I've presumed the lines to be the "chevrons", not the space between.

[gosioux76]

Totally agree.

Enough with the midget axe already. Incorporate a big boy axe or leave it out altogether. The ligature seems more like a big ":censored: Y*u!" to all of the guys that were booing and chanting at the unveiling. Are they really serious?

Part of me really wants to see the other logos that didn't make the cut, but its starting to seem like the other ones probably all looked just like the one they unveiled. I wonder if the designer even tried explore other options what so ever. He probably just made a hundred comps revolving around an axe with a circle and maybe one or two comps with a tree or a logger or something just to appease everyone. Not good.

First of all, the ligature not only wasn't a "big `:censored: Y*u!" to the logo's critics -- it was DESIGNED BY THEM. Crappy or not, it was included in the list of team marks because it was conceived and designed by members of the Timbers Army.

Second, I can almost guarantee that the designer didn't "explore other options," at least not so far as to stray from ax-and-circle logo. No loggers, no stand-alone trees, etc. The front office from the outset made it clear that this would be an update of the team's historic crest that they wear today. The argument here and among fans is whether the team strayed too far from that mission.

how

Third, what is with all this moaning about this "midget axe"? It's not as if the axe in the team's original logo was some giant, Paul Bunyanesqe axe, yet nobody complained about that.

As for the chevrons, I'm with Mockba: I think the three lines are the chevrons, not the space in between. But the case can be made that it would look better if they just added another line so the wider spaces could be seen as chevrons. Then it would be more apparent.

[Gothamite]

Were that the case, why is one twice as thick as the others? Not a good design.

While thin lines with great space between them could fit the dictionary definition of chevron, that wouldn't be the way chevrons are usually expressed.

Heck, green chevrons with gold outlines would be a nice Timbers Army tie-in (although the colors are reversed from that other Army):

[Gothamite]

Third, what is with all this moaning about this "midget axe"? It's not as if the axe in the team's original logo was some giant, Paul Bunyanesqe axe, yet nobody complained about that.

They're not talking about the size of the axe but its dimensions. The axe in the original Timbers crest, since it was cut off at the bottom, gave the impression of being the top half of a felling axe:

By defining the entire axe, they have given it more the appearance of a short hatchet.

Can't say as I agree wholeheartedly, but I understand where they're coming from.

[tBBP]

All the Army pictures floating around on the interwebs, and you go and find Elvis...lol

[Cujo]

It looks like a hatchet in front of a pitched tent. I suppose it'd make an okay boy scout patch, but not as a prosessional team's logo.

[gosioux76]

Third, what is with all this moaning about this "midget axe"? It's not as if the axe in the team's original logo was some giant, Paul Bunyanesqe axe, yet nobody complained about that.

They're not talking about the size of the axe but its dimensions. The axe in the original Timbers crest, since it was cut off at the bottom, gave the impression of being the top half of a felling axe:

By defining the entire axe, they have given it more the appearance of a short hatchet.

Can't say as I agree wholeheartedly, but I understand where they're coming from.

OK, I can see that argument. I wonder if it would help to tuck the handle of the axe inside the circle. Would that create the same illusion?

[BeerMe]

First of all, the ligature not only wasn't a "big `:censored: Y*u!" to the logo's critics -- it was DESIGNED BY THEM. Crappy or not, it was included in the list of team marks because it was conceived and designed by members of the Timbers Army.

No it was not. It was designed by ONE member of the Timbers Army.

[Krona]

First of all, the ligature not only wasn't a "big `:censored: Y*u!" to the logo's critics -- it was DESIGNED BY THEM. Crappy or not, it was included in the list of team marks because it was conceived and designed by members of the Timbers Army.

No it was not. It was designed by ONE member of the Timbers Army.

Thats my biggest rub against the TA and their reaction to the new badge. That logo is so bad, and some of the TA gear has awful marks, yet it is worn proudly. The new set of marks didnt even get a chance, and the updates have a hurried, compromised look. Had the reception only been lukewarm, damage control wouldn't have left us with an inferior product.

[jfurdell]

I'm still trying to figure out what the hell happened here.

Somebody earlier in this thread suggested that this is a backlash against American logo design principles versus those of the old European soccer clubs, and I think that's on the mark. I'm in Seattle and I love the Sounders; I've had a great time attending some of their games and I love that so many people here are really into it. Having said that... one thing I've noticed about soccer fans here is that they tend to idolize the way they do things in Europe. These fervent "European soccer nerds," for lack of a less-insulting phrase, tend to be protective of the game, and very defensive when they encounter people who otherwise like "American" sports but can't stand soccer (for the record, I love 'em all). They tend to have an air of superiority and feel they are fans of the "world's game". They form supporter's groups, stand and chant and wave flags the whole game, use the games as an excuse to drink lots of beer (this part I approve of), and in extreme cases get into brawls with other fan groups, mostly because that's how they do it abroad. They wish MLS would do some kind of promotion-relegation system and remove the playoffs, even though it would make no financial sense here. MLS has seemingly caught on that this should be their target demographic, which is probably why we've seen a rise in more European-y team nicknames (e.g. putting "FC" on the end of everything even though we don't call it football; also, Real Salt Lake? WTF?), as well as expansion teams in cities that have a more European-centric culture: Seattle, Vancouver, Portland, Toronto. Putting a team in Montreal is a master stroke.

I generally have a problem with none of this and have been guilty of it myself at times. I do have an issue with it when it crosses the line into seeming anti-American sentiment, which I think is what we're seeing here. The resdesigned Timbers logo is quintessentially American. It's got beveling! It's got modernized fonts! It's got more than one color! In general, it does look like something that a design firm in Mississippi (note: so very NOT a European-centric culture) would create for an American sports franchise. It's a fine update. There was nothing seriously wrong with the updated logo, at least nothing justifying so much rage. They appeared to do a good job emphasizing the iconic elements of the old one (the axe and the chevrons). Everything in the new logo would be easier to render on fabric and more recognizable from a distance, which are things you should want in your team's logo, especially in a sport where the logo takes a back seat to advertising on the uniform. The whole package is just so downright American.

With the supporters group getting so up in arms about this, to me they're essentially saying, "We want so very desperately to be European." But we're not European! We're American, dammit! We should be taking our love for the game and making it our own, which is what they do all over the rest of the non-European world. We should not be conforming to everything that Europe does just for the sake of admiration, which looks to me what's happening here.

[Brian in Boston]

Somebody earlier in this thread suggested that this is a backlash against American logo design principles versus those of the old European soccer clubs, and I think that's on the mark... one thing I've noticed about soccer fans here is that they tend to idolize the way they do things in Europe... I generally have a problem with none of this and have been guilty of it myself at times. I do have an issue with it when it crosses the line into seeming anti-American sentiment, which I think is what we're seeing here.

With the supporters group getting so up in arms about this, to me they're essentially saying, "We want so very desperately to be European." But we're not European! We're American, dammit! We should be taking our love for the game and making it our own, which is what they do all over the rest of the non-European world. We should not be conforming to everything that Europe does just for the sake of admiration, which looks to me what's happening here.

I couldn't agree with your assessment of this situation any less.

It strikes me that supporters in Portland who don't like the new logo aren't looking to "idolize the way they do things in Europe" while simultaneously engaging in "anti-American sentiment". Rather, they're simply of a mind that it is best for soccer clubs - and, by extension, their supporters - to embrace established, authentic tradition whenever and wherever it exists. That's especially true here in the United States, a country that is all-too-often derided on the international soccer scene as having no true traditional feeling for the sport.

In Portland, committing to the supposed international/European commitment to embracing club soccer tradition meant maintaining a very American-style pro sports team name - Portland Timbers. Why? Because in spite of the placename/nickname combination flying in the face of the majority of international/European club names, said format does represent the authentic tradition of several pro soccer incarnations in Portland.

Likewise, there are many soccer supporters in Greater Portland who obviously feel that the iconic logo that their pro side currently sports in Division 2 play - itself a tweak of a logo that dates back to the NASL incarnation of the Timbers - is more than capable of making the transition to Major League Soccer. In fact, they feel it should make the transition to MLS, despite the fact that it is an example of 1970s American sports logo design. In point of fact, such supporters are embracing "American logo design principles", rather than eschewing them in exchange for a logo based on that of "old European soccer clubs"... or, new American pro sports franchises.

The supporters of the existing, iconic Portland Timbers logo that dates back to the days of the NASL are, in fact, saying, "We're American, dammit!" They're taking their love for the game as it has historically existed in Portland and telling Merritt Paulson and the artists at RARE Design that they'd rather not "conform to everything that" newer pro sports franchises have done - including MLS teams - with regard to branding "just for the sake of" allowing Mr. Paulson to indelibly stamp the team as his, or to allow the aforementioned artist to flex their 21st-century design muscles.

As for the new Portland Timbers logo being "a fine update", we'll have to agree to disagree. Rather than doing "a good job emphasizing the iconic elements of the old one (the axe and the chevrons)", the new logo transformed a simply-rendered silhouette of a long-handled double-bladed felling axe into a short, stumpy, cartoonishly-rendered hatchet, while simultaneously transforming minimalistically-rendered tributes to Mt. Hood and fir trees into an all-but-completely obscured delta-wing device. For "a good job" of updating the Timbers' old logo, check-out grubstreet's work:

THIS would have been "a fine update". It is vastly superior to what RARE Design churned-out.

[powersurge]

Totally agree.

Enough with the midget axe already. Incorporate a big boy axe or leave it out altogether. The ligature seems more like a big ":censored: Y*u!" to all of the guys that were booing and chanting at the unveiling. Are they really serious?

Part of me really wants to see the other logos that didn't make the cut, but its starting to seem like the other ones probably all looked just like the one they unveiled. I wonder if the designer even tried explore other options what so ever. He probably just made a hundred comps revolving around an axe with a circle and maybe one or two comps with a tree or a logger or something just to appease everyone. Not good.

First of all, the ligature not only wasn't a "big `:censored: Y*u!" to the logo's critics -- it was DESIGNED BY THEM. Crappy or not, it was included in the list of team marks because it was conceived and designed by members of the Timbers Army.

Second, I can almost guarantee that the designer didn't "explore other options," at least not so far as to stray from ax-and-circle logo. No loggers, no stand-alone trees, etc. The front office from the outset made it clear that this would be an update of the team's historic crest that they wear today. The argument here and among fans is whether the team strayed too far from that mission.

how

Third, what is with all this moaning about this "midget axe"? It's not as if the axe in the team's original logo was some giant, Paul Bunyanesqe axe, yet nobody complained about that.

As for the chevrons, I'm with Mockba: I think the three lines are the chevrons, not the space in between. But the case can be made that it would look better if they just added another line so the wider spaces could be seen as chevrons. Then it would be more apparent.

I think most of my response has already been documented in the subsequent posts. I guess my biggest problem with this logo is that they decided to base it off of a classic logo that really needed no update. It was fine as it was. The fact that they didn't even explore any other options was a waste IMO. Why hire a design crew and not have at least some other ideas or concepts? At least get a fresh new look at an identity, right? As a result they tried to tinker with a classic and they came up with crap.

[IceCap]

They modernized a classic logo and got flake for it. True, it's a terrible "update," but it does retain the key elements of the team's historical identity. How much flake do you think they would have gotten had they completely thrown the classic identity out for something completely separate from the traditions of the Portland Timbers team?

[Droost]

The problem with Portland fans being upset stems not only from the Americanization of their crest, but also the fact that they were privy to a well crafted marketing campaign ("you can't fake this") along with the owner repeatedly stating that "they won't mess this up". The logo infringes on both of those statements being that the updated/new logo stands for everything that is fake about the sport and throws tradition out the window.

I am still waiting for the creator of the logo to hopefully post on this thread, and I am curious about how much of the logo was his input along with Rare's or did the owner give specific guidelines for the creation of this boy-scout badge of a monstrosity. .........

Looking at the majority of logos that Rare has turned out it appears that they love the cartoony look. Maybe the problem was ignoring the portland design firms that have a wide array of looks and instead reaching out to Mississippi that appears to be a one trick pony when it comes to sports logos...........In this case it appears Merrit simply got what he paid for.......

[Jer15]

The problem with Portland fans being upset stems not only from the Americanization of their crest, but also the fact that they were privy to a well crafted marketing campaign ("you can't fake this") along with the owner repeatedly stating that "they won't mess this up". The logo infringes on both of those statements being that the updated/new logo stands for everything that is fake about the sport and throws tradition out the window.

Nailed it.

This, in my opinion, is EXACTLY why people are so upset. I personally don't feel strong about the logo either way. At least the included the ax (or hatchet in this case) and the chevrons.