Tampa Bay Lightning New Logos

[nash61]

A Picture's worth a thousand words...

[B-Rich]

Re: The Flash comparison, I have to agree with BigEd76 that it is similar. And I'm not alone-- Paul Lukas on Uniwatch led off with "who Knew Barrry Allen was a hockey fan?" and this pic:

My own thoughts? They are colored by my personal history. In February of 1992, my wife and I visited Tampa Bay as a possible site for her medical residency. We liked the area and in a mall I saw the upcoming inaugural season jerseys, which I thought were sweet. Later that year she did a 1 month rotation at Tampa General; I bought a black Lightning jersey, and she gave me (us) tickets to a Lightning game as a 1st anniversary present (that's the paper anniversary). I bought a Lightning Christmas ornament at that game that we still hang on our tree every year. Although she didn't wind up doing her residency in Tampa and we didn't relocate there, the Lightning became my NHL team.

Thus, as you can imagine, I am a fan of the original color scheme and the original logo. Their were some bad moments in uni design for the Lightning-- the weird name and number fonts, the "rainstorm" third-- but in general I think they had a good look up until the change three years ago. The colors of blue, black and silver tied in with their wintertime sports cohorts just up the road (the Orlando Magic) and were very similar to another team that came about during that time period, the Carolina Panthers.

In general, I agree with "what's all been said before"-- this is too reminiscent of the Maple Leafs and Red Wings; it's a newer franchise trying to be something they're not; it's a shame to drop to a basic two color scheme when the exsting color scheme was adequate and unique(for the NHL); and finally, I think it's a slap in the face to the unis that they won the STANLEY CUP in.

Something like Nash61 drew up (but maybe retaining some silver) would be an adequate and perfectly acceptable change.

[IceCap]

Why CANT we have another two color team besides the Wings and Leafs?

Because you flat out stole the a colour scheme the Leafs had only been used by the Leafs for close to a hundred years? You also stole a striping pattern that had been unique to the Wings for close to a hundred years. That's the problem.

Are you fu*king serious?

Yes. I'm not having the same conversation in two different threads. Refer to the other thread for why. And calm the down.

[-kj]

Yes. I'm not having the same conversation in two different threads. Refer to the other thread for why. And calm the down.

Both of you, please do so. Quit beating the dead horses.

[Eye]

Why CANT we have another two color team besides the Wings and Leafs?

Because you flat out stole the a colour scheme the Leafs had only been used by the Leafs for close to a hundred years? You also stole a striping pattern that had been unique to the Wings for close to a hundred years. That's the problem.

Are you fu*king serious?

Yes. I'm not having the same conversation in two different threads. Refer to the other thread for why. And calm the down.

Perhaps I missed something, but do you feel the same way about the Penguins (until 2002) and the Bruins or the Capitals and Canadiens?

[GFB]

This thread has me completely flabbergasted. When was the last time a team unveiled a new brand not to have this place turn into Planet of the Apes?

Tampa Bay Maple Leaf Lightning.

Not only did they deprive of their character with this boring logo for the sake of making it look traditional, they made themselves look like the Maple leafs with a lightning bolt logo. This doesn't look traditional. At least traditional logos have character.

Here's the famous traditional logos

Then here's boringness, bland and unoriginality (for the 3rd logo, they copied the idea of the twins with the "(name of sport) club") for the sake of being traditional!

Sheesh!

I'm sorry, is there an objective meter to define character? Or is character merely a term for "because its been around for ages, all the little inaccuracies and annoyances have now grown on us into awkwardly charming features"? Listen, I don't view myself a modernist or a traditionalist, however, there are aesthetic qualities that transcend eras.

"Character", as you 'define' it, is nothing more than an excuse for older designs to escape scrutiny because that's how they've always been.

Why CANT we have another two color team besides the Wings and Leafs?

Because you flat out stole the a colour scheme the Leafs had only been used by the Leafs for close to a hundred years? You also stole a striping pattern that had been unique to the Wings for close to a hundred years. That's the problem.

Ok, it's time for you to get over it. The Lightning have also used royal blue for 20 years. The Lightning dropping the black and silver will not taint the Leafs legacy. And say 100 years from now, some expansion team also adopts the blue and white look from both the Lightning and Leafs. It's not going to effect either franchise negatively. In a league with 30 teams, there is room for two blue and white teams.

Manchester United, Arsenal, and Liverpool all seem to share red and white just fine. I'm sure you'll manage.

And since when does a single stripe on the sleeve and another one on the hem count as unique? That's like trying to claim that LSU's shoulder stripes are unique. They may be classic and traditional, but they are far from unique.

A Picture's worth a thousand words...

Yeah, it is. The Sharks logo looks like it belongs in the NHL GUARDIANS project, the Blues need to simplify their color scheme, and the Maple Leafs need to ditch that terrible font.

[hockey week]

so, if a newfangled expansion team takes detroit's jersey pattern (one stripe on sleeves and hemline), it's a problem, but if an old expansion team takes the look, we all think it's the best set the team's ever had?

here's looking at you, purple jersey.

yeah, there might be a second color there, but it's the exact same pattern.

Do I think the logo is a tad bit bland and looks similar to any logo of electricity/lightning? yeah.

Do I think the jerseys are a bit plain for this franchise? yep.

Do I wish they used black as an accent color to add just a little more pop? I'd like to see a mockup

Am I freaking out that they "stole" one team's color scheme and another team's jersey? not a bit.

In a league where these three uniforms could exist (especially the jets and rangers), why can't we let the Toronto Blue Wings be?

[hecticbro]

They look a little better on the players than they do on paper, but they are too simple and boring. Also, the "Tampa Bay" above the logo on the white jersey is pretty crappy. I'm pretty sure everyone knows where this team comes from. A bit of black trim would probably help.

[tBBP]

Now that I've had a day to let this process, I think I can give a better critique.

Firstly, I don't think there's a thing wrong with going the one-color-and-white route, especially since it seems TB is using a darker, more muted shade of blue, so in that vein, it's a weelilbit different from the Leafs. All that said...I can see where they were going with the primary crest--the unevenness of the oval outline adds some visual depth to an otherwise flat shape...same with the bolt itself, and the gap meant to evoke a shadow. It probably could have been executed a bit better, but on its own, it's still pretty not bad. That patch is killing me, though. First off, I'm just about certain they were going for a "hockey puck vibe" with that--but still, a circular patch and a ovular crest kinda doesn't match up in my mind. The words "Hockey Club" at the bottom, mixed with the use of plain Helvetica smacks of VFVS (think about it). The whole thing just looks too static to me, especially for a team with such a dynamic name (in context, of course).

Now on to the uiforms...this is where they could have made this simple one-color-and-white look stand out and look much more distinctive. Retaining the bolt on the pants would have gone a long way towards retaining, and even gaining, more of the Lightning's own distinctive character. Also, I really kinda wish they'd have found a more disctinctive number font to go with--maybe not the old Reporter numbers, but something that pops more than plain block (I'm thinking something italicized, but not necessarily stylized)--to keep the "speed thing" going and to add more visual interest. Instead, they opted to basically color the Red Wings' look Tampa Bay Storm blue, graft the new logos onto it, and call it a day.

Is it solid? Sure. Is it safe? Absolutely. Is it disctinctive? Not in the least, when viewed in context. And I think that's the key cause of ire for a couple of us.

[BawlmerOreos]

I could cry.

How on Earth can you not see the new primary is the best they've had? Maybe the uni's fall short in places (not a fan of the road with script, and I also miss the bolt pants) but the logo is spot on. it's iconic...exactly what every team wants.

[Sport]

I could cry.

How on Earth can you not see the new primary is the best they've had? Maybe the uni's fall short in places (not a fan of the road with script, and I also miss the bolt pants) but the logo is spot on. it's iconic...exactly what every team wants.

I agree. It's easily the best logo they've ever had.

I think it's important as a board that we separate the new identity from an aesthetic and execution standpoint and from a "they ripped off the Maple Leafs" standpoint. I like the logos a lot, and I don't dislike the uniforms (though they're dropping my favorite part, the bolt on the pants), but I hate that they're ripping off the Leafs.

[The_Admiral]

In a league where these three uniforms could exist (especially the jets and rangers), why can't we let the Toronto Blue Wings be?

I went over this already: the Jets and Rangers had similar uniforms because John Ferguson kept ordering his ill-advised Rangers sweaters for Winnipeg when he became their general manager. They never had them at the same time.

Also, comparing 1979 branding and marketing to 2011 branding and marketing is categorically idiotic. This stuff matters now like it didn't before, and you know better than to draw such a rickety parallel.

[Sport]

In a league where these three uniforms could exist (especially the jets and rangers), why can't we let the Toronto Blue Wings be?

I went over this already: the Jets and Rangers had similar uniforms because John Ferguson kept ordering his ill-advised Rangers sweaters for Winnipeg when he became their general manager. They never had them at the same time.

Also, comparing 1979 branding and marketing to 2011 branding and marketing is categorically idiotic. This stuff matters now like it didn't before, and you know better than to draw such a rickety parallel.

and just because there's precedent doesn't mean it's right to make the same mistake again. And just because it happened back then doesn't mean it was right in 1979.

[IceCap]

Honest evaluation of the Lightning logo, as if it were in a vacuum?

It's ok. Probably the best they've ever had, but it's still seriously flawed. The oval, even at its thickest is way to thin, and the oval shape itself leads to a lot of negative space between the oval ring and the bolt. It looks sprawled out, not as compact as it could be.

Thicken the oval, make it a circle, make it an equal width all around, connect it to the bolt on both sides, and you'll have something that seems more fitting and in line with the classic marks they were trying to emulate.

[Lee.]

Stupid nature, ripping off the Leafs.

[IceCap]

Clever. Pointless, but clever.

General mod note:

Please drop the team partisanship that's been popping up in this thread. We're here to discuss the logos/jerseys, not your team or how you hate other teams.

[SteveR]

I'm still not impressed, even after 4 pages of mostly honest debate. It's not because it's just two colors or because it's similar in ways to O6 teams like the Leafs and Wings.

It's because it's two colors done poorly. I'd like to see a bit more crispness and definition between the colors. The whole look is a bit too washed-out for my taste. Is that a true white or is it a step or two toward a SF Giants-esque off-white?

[IceCap]

Oh, Lee. Point of clarity. The Leafs wore blue and white before Con Smythe bought the team, when they were known as the Toronto Arenas.

Perhaps I missed something, but do you feel the same way about the Penguins (until 2002) and the Bruins or the Capitals and Canadiens?

Well no. The Penguins changed their colours to reflect the municipal colours of the city of Pittsburgh and, and to mirror the two other Pittsburgh sports teams, the Pirates and Steelers. There was a meaningful reason behind the change.

The Capitals are red, white, and blue, which makes sense for a team based out of the capital of the United States. Furthermore the Capitals' star theme (past) and futuristic jersey template (present) help distinguish them from the Habs.

[Fregus]

My sloppy take:

[nyischremp44]

Very disappointed, it's very amateur looking. Here's my quick idea with no skill and done in MS Paint.

It would be real cool if someone with actual skill on here could fix up this idea and make it look nice. I think it has potential.