Big Ten to unveil new logo today at 12pm EST

[BrandMooreArt]

after having some time to really look this over and see it in application mock ups, im liking the logo even more.

the "B1G" version is my favorite and definitely works the best. then theres the stacked logo which reads something like "Big 10 TEN". i think they should have replaced TEN with Conference to solve that. still, its a clever logo and very well executed.

i dont mind cyan and black, but does that really represent the midwest?

the division names are awful. id be surprised to learn if Pentagram had any involvment in that. surely the big guys in the Big10 scribbled it on a napkin and loved it.

[STL FANATIC]

I actually think he's right.

Every designer I've heard from that doesn't frequent this board likes the logo. I'm one of them who loves it.

It seems as if it has missed the mark with sports fans for some reason, though. And maybe the designers on here who don't like it are identifying more as a sports fan when judging it. I dunno, just thinking.

I can say that I like it tremendously from both sides of the equation.

Then let it share the blue ribbon for design excellence with the new Gap logo and design something that isn't Avant-Garde Web 2.0 bullhooey that actually appeals to your target audience rather than your peers.

But the Gap logo was renounced by everyone, including the design community.

The Big Ten logo is far, far from Avant-Garde or Web 2.0. You don't like it that's fine, but it's not some design that's just over everyone's head. It just for some reason isn't connecting with sports fans and is with designers. I can't really put my finger on why.

[STL FANATIC]

Just so people know, it was Pentagram (http://pentagram.com/en/) who designed the logo. I see what they're trying to do, it's a nice visual play, with the Big also reading as a B-10 and all the variations that go along with it. The type is well done, it's Vitesse from Hoefler & Frere-Jones (www.typography.com) but it's wayyy too corporate and plain. This would be good for a company but not for a major athletic conference.

I really just started checking this out today, and my first thought was that there should be a "B10" variation of the logo. I never even noticed what you pointed out. Now that I see it, I really think it's a bad idea, because it can't stand on it's own because of the G. All it does is make you wonder why there's a 1 in B1G.

I'd argue that it can and will stand on it's own. Armin Vit nailed it when he said that in the context of college athletics (despite the existence of the Big 12 and some others), the word Big instantly makes one think Ten. The B1G logo captures that and allows it say Big Ten by really only saying Big.

[CS85]

I've been trying to figure out what was bothering me about the logo, it felt somewhat familiar. Then I turned on the TV.

I know the differences are vast and numerous, but I can't help but see it.

[The_Admiral]

That's just plain old wide heavy Eurostile. The Big Ten typeface isn't as traditional.

I know I don't like cyan and black, but I don't think it's for not "representing the midwest." Which colors do? Red for barns, yellow for corn, green for prairies, blue for lakes, grey for big cities, orange for undergrad co-eds? Now you've got a whole rainbow going, aaaaaaaaand there's no purple in there for Northwestern AND THEY ARE MUCH TOO IMPORTANT TO THIS CONFERENCE AND TO AMERICA TO BE LEFT OUT LIKE THIS

[rams80]

I actually think he's right.

Every designer I've heard from that doesn't frequent this board likes the logo. I'm one of them who loves it.

It seems as if it has missed the mark with sports fans for some reason, though. And maybe the designers on here who don't like it are identifying more as a sports fan when judging it. I dunno, just thinking.

I can say that I like it tremendously from both sides of the equation.

Then let it share the blue ribbon for design excellence with the new Gap logo and design something that isn't Avant-Garde Web 2.0 bullhooey that actually appeals to your target audience rather than your peers.

But the Gap logo was renounced by everyone, including the design community.

The Big Ten logo is far, far from Avant-Garde or Web 2.0. You don't like it that's fine, but it's not some design that's just over everyone's head. It just for some reason isn't connecting with sports fans and is with designers. I can't really put my finger on why.

You're talking about a demographic that watches 18-22 year olds beat their brains in for sport and amusement. It's pretty easy to get "too cute" for that group.

[illwauk]

Here's the tweaks I would make:

Still far from ideal, but as long as they insist on cramming a number in there, this is probably the route to go.

[Cujo]

Another thing I really dislike about the new B16TEN logo -- THE FONT.

I dunno what the font is called, or if it's just something they made up themselves. Comic Sans looks better than this crap!

[BBTV]

Just so people know, it was Pentagram (http://pentagram.com/en/) who designed the logo. I see what they're trying to do, it's a nice visual play, with the Big also reading as a B-10 and all the variations that go along with it. The type is well done, it's Vitesse from Hoefler & Frere-Jones (www.typography.com) but it's wayyy too corporate and plain. This would be good for a company but not for a major athletic conference.

I really just started checking this out today, and my first thought was that there should be a "B10" variation of the logo. I never even noticed what you pointed out. Now that I see it, I really think it's a bad idea, because it can't stand on it's own because of the G. All it does is make you wonder why there's a 1 in B1G.

I'd argue that it can and will stand on it's own. Armin Vit nailed it when he said that in the context of college athletics (despite the existence of the Big 12 and some others), the word Big instantly makes one think Ten. The B1G logo captures that and allows it say Big Ten by really only saying Big.

The "G" just doesn't work as a "0".

Maybe if they made it an actual 0 with the G carved out of the space in the midle. It'd look a little odd to have BI in large font and G in smaller font inside of a 0, but I think it'd work. It would certainly make the "B1G" logo work better.

[ESTONES6]

The '10' is just such a stretch... it's beyond a stretch. I dunno. Like people have said, it would have been better if they just avoided putting the '10' in there all together. It would have made everything cleaner.

[STL FANATIC]

Another thing I really dislike about the new B16TEN logo -- THE FONT.

I dunno what the font is called, or if it's just something they made up themselves. Comic Sans looks better than this crap!

It's Vitesse by Hoefler & Freer-Jones and is, in my opinion, one of the better modern athletic fonts out there. I've got a fund going to buy it.

http://www.typography.com/fonts/font_styles.php?productLineID=100036

[The_Admiral]

It's not a bad font. I guess that sort of modern slab-serif is in lately. Lubalin Graph is my favorite slab-serif, if I had to choose one.

[pianoknight]

I guess I have some questions:

Is the sixth-place team in that division still a "Leader?" Can you be the last Leader? The worst Leader? The bottom Leader? Hey, that's a pun!

Or you can be Indiana and be legendary for not leading anything.

I don't understand why people are so ape sh^t about the idea of Ohio State and Michigan rematching in a conference championship game. That's been happening with Nebraska-Oklahoma or Nebraska-Texas for years. Same for Alabama-Florida, etc. for the SEC teams.

I guess in a perfect world, I'd rather play a "new" team than a rematch, but it definitely adds to the rivalry of the whole thing. You can put away a patsy opponent only to have them come back and beat you for the conference title later on. It forces you to bring your "A" game EVERY week, and if you're seriously in the National Title hunt that year, you should expect some tough challenges.

[The_Admiral]

Best Big Ten logo. Just squeeze Nebraska in there (though they have the same colors as Wisconsin, don't they) and you've got something.

[KJTALBOT]

The Big Ten's biggest mistake was making the new logo unveiling a big event. All they did was hold themselves up as a target for people to attack. When any new logo gets released, this board will always have people who immediately post FAIL. HUGE Fail. etc. The logo is fine. Does anyone remember any other conference having a logo unveiling. They just change it. Look at the other conference logos. They are just three or four letters. No big deal. People need to chill.

[STL FANATIC]

Sorry to bump this month-old thread, but I've got an update.

It seems that the new Big Ten identity has already moved in the direction I thought it would.

In the Big Ten identity manual, the B1G logo is listed as the primary logo. The football field and basketball court mockups now show the B1G logo instead of the stacked type, and there is in fact NO MENTION of the stacked type logo or the horizontally spelled out logo at all. I do not know whether this means those logos have gone by the wayside or not, but the stacked type logo is clearly not the primary as they said when it was first unveiled.

Additionally for everyone who was freaking out about the color scheme... first off, the B1G logo uses black which makes the blue look much more appealing (IMO). Secondly, There is an alternate version of that logo in which the B becomes white with a colored stroke and the 1G is solid with that same color. Schools are free to apply their school colors to the logo. They are NOT allowed to use multiple school colors however, so for Michigan for instance, it's either maize or it's blue. The B can't be one and the one 1G the other. Still, I think this is a good development, and one I expected.

Lastly, while the original unveiling showed the logos with a tagline saying EST. 1896 in the same font as the logo (Vitesse) the tagline now says either BIG TEN (in black weight) SINCE 1896 or just SINCE 1896 in the typeface Benton Sans.

With these changes/modifications/updated plans, the new identity goes from pretty good with a lot of potential to realizing it's potential and becoming great.

[rams80]

Sorry to bump this month-old thread, but I've got an update.

It seems that the new Big Ten identity has already moved in the direction I thought it would.

In the Big Ten identity manual, the B1G logo is listed as the primary logo. The football field and basketball court mockups now show the B1G logo instead of the stacked type, and there is in fact NO MENTION of the stacked type logo or the horizontally spelled out logo at all. I do not know whether this means those logos have gone by the wayside or not, but the stacked type logo is clearly not the primary as they said when it was first unveiled.

Additionally for everyone who was freaking out about the color scheme... first off, the B1G logo uses black which makes the blue look much more appealing (IMO). Secondly, There is an alternate version of that logo in which the B becomes white with a colored stroke and the 1G is solid with that same color. Schools are free to apply their school colors to the logo. They are NOT allowed to use multiple school colors however, so for Michigan for instance, it's either maize or it's blue. The B can't be one and the one 1G the other. Still, I think this is a good development, and one I expected.

Lastly, while the original unveiling showed the logos with a tagline saying EST. 1896 in the same font as the logo (Vitesse) the tagline now says either BIG TEN (in black weight) SINCE 1896 or just SINCE 1896 in the typeface Benton Sans.

With these changes/modifications/updated plans, the new identity goes from pretty good with a lot of potential to realizing it's potential and becoming great.

So they can tweek the logo but God forbid they change the division names. If they want feedback on those, all red-blooded Big Ten fans should give it to them. And tell them the names suck repeatedly and often.

[TxRangersFan]

So instead of this being the primary logo...

This will be the primary logo...

Works for me.

[CubsFanBudMan]

I wouldn't say the changes make it "great." Doesn't solve the problem of the "I" really only being a 1, and calling the G a "0" is a stretch at best.

The commercials I've seen lately only are using that version, too. They are still using the division names -- Delaney is still in denial about their acceptance. Before he said they needed some time to "breathe" and soak in. Last week he used the "breathe" term again while announcing they'd try them for 2011 and the reevaluate. Sure they will. They're terrible no matter how long he waits, and he refuses to admit it.

[STL FANATIC]

I don't know how you could see the B1G logo and not instantaneously read the word BIG, and at that point have your mind easily finish the G as a zero by thinking 10. I mean, obviously we'll all see things differently, but it seems so automatic to me.

I was always high on the package, so to me this modification just makes it brilliant. But I know many don't share my feelings.