Overdone logo crutch

[nash61]

I agree that the buck looks decapitated. This one is much better

Ugh. I hate that logo. I look at it and see one thing:

Don't think that's the association the team was really shooting for.

I don't know if that was intentional, but that was good.

I thought the same thing, that's why I left it with the original.

[BlazerBlaze]

How about this one for the Hawks. It would take out one of the basketballs and would be the logo that the majority of the actual ATL fans like unlike the primary.

[YessSir32]

Thanks for taking the trouble to update the picture. I think, it looks great now.

I would only have one last suggestion. I agree with you that the "P" doesn't stand so well for the Pistons. I would keep the primary logo as you did for the Clippers and Nets.

But it's just a wordmark over a basketball. It's so BORING! Would the Horse be better, or would it be too similar to the Mavs?

As a Pistons fan, I would shoot for the 2nd and 4th one, I really wish that they kept those....

[DC in Da House w/o a Doubt]

This one still has a basketball, but I like this logo better than that flying ball on fire one Nash put in for the new set of logos.

[YessSir32]

This one still has a basketball, but I like this logo better than that flying ball on fire one Nash put in for the new set of logos.

Definitely, way better

[jrh31584]

I don't have a problem with having a basketball in the logo. What I don't like is having the logo be nothing more than a wordmark and a basketball.

[Blue Falcon]

My only stipulation would be that the team with the basketball in its logo should be forced to play its home games with a basketball of that color. Who wouldn't want to see:

The Hawks and Nets play with a silver ball?

The Cavaliers play with a maroon ball?

The Mavericks play with a blue ball...with a horse's head attached to it?

The Pistons play with a red ball?

The Pacers play with a yellow ball with a severed hand attached to it?

The Clippers play with a white ball with red stripes?

The Lakers and Hornets play with a yellow ball?

The Heat play with a dark red ball with flames coming off of it? (You'd see a REALLY fast break then...)

Or the Suns playing with a sun-hot orange ball?

The Kings/Royals with a purple ball?

The Jazz with a green ball...with a mountain attached to it?

[epper]

My only stipulation would be that the team with the basketball in its logo should be forced to play its home games with a basketball of that color. Who wouldn't want to see:

The Hawks and Nets play with a silver ball?

The Cavaliers play with a maroon ball?

The Mavericks play with a blue ball...with a horse's head attached to it?

The Pistons play with a red ball?

The Pacers play with a yellow ball with a severed hand attached to it?

The Clippers play with a white ball with red stripes?

The Lakers and Hornets play with a yellow ball?

The Heat play with a dark red ball with flames coming off of it? (You'd see a REALLY fast break then...)

Or the Suns playing with a sun-hot orange ball?

The Kings/Royals with a purple ball?

The Jazz with a green ball...with a mountain attached to it?

That idea is so crazy that I like it. (Minus the severed hands/mountains et al.)

[YessSir32]

My only stipulation would be that the team with the basketball in its logo should be forced to play its home games with a basketball of that color. Who wouldn't want to see:

The Hawks and Nets play with a silver ball?

The Cavaliers play with a maroon ball?

The Mavericks play with a blue ball...with a horse's head attached to it?

The Pistons play with a red ball?

The Pacers play with a yellow ball with a severed hand attached to it?

The Clippers play with a white ball with red stripes?

The Lakers and Hornets play with a yellow ball?

The Heat play with a dark red ball with flames coming off of it? (You'd see a REALLY fast break then...)

Or the Suns playing with a sun-hot orange ball?

The Kings/Royals with a purple ball?

The Jazz with a green ball...with a mountain attached to it?

That idea is so crazy that I like it. (Minus the severed hands/mountains et al.)

Believe it or not, I like it except the hands/mountains haha

[uniguy22]

I still don't get the uproar about the teams with basketballs in the logos. The league wants to promote the idea of its brand as basketball. Basketballs are great graphic elements with their round shapes and curved lines.

Almost all MLB teams have a baseball in their logos. I don't hear the complaints there, why is it for basketball?

Because basketball uniforms are so minimal compared to other sports', you need a basketball in the primary logo to enhance the brand. The only place you'll find the primary logo is usually as a patch on the shorts. The jerseys contain a different script, and maybe a secondary or tertiary logo on the back. You need the ball in the logo to provide context because it's hardly every shown on the uniform itself, which is where the association would be provided.

Look at other sports...in hockey, the primary is almost always the crest on the jersey, so it's instantly associated as a hockey logo. In football, the primary logo is usually the helmet logo, and its almost always shown on a helmet graphic, reinforcing the fact it's a football team.

Not all baseball teams display the primary logo on the uniforms, and in just about every case, it's a small patch on the sleeve. So when the logo is shown stand-alone, it contains a baseball. Same idea with basketball.

It's all about branding and context.

Well said and I completely agree.

[altosax29b]

My only stipulation would be that the team with the basketball in its logo should be forced to play its home games with a basketball of that color. Who wouldn't want to see:

The Hawks and Nets play with a silver ball?

The Cavaliers play with a maroon ball?

The Mavericks play with a blue ball...with a horse's head attached to it?

The Pistons play with a red ball?

The Pacers play with a yellow ball with a severed hand attached to it?

The Clippers play with a white ball with red stripes?

The Lakers and Hornets play with a yellow ball?

The Heat play with a dark red ball with flames coming off of it? (You'd see a REALLY fast break then...)

Or the Suns playing with a sun-hot orange ball?

The Kings/Royals with a purple ball?

The Jazz with a green ball...with a mountain attached to it?

That idea is so crazy that I like it. (Minus the severed hands/mountains et al.)

Believe it or not, I like it except the hands/mountains haha

I like this idea, but traditionalists will write it off as too gimicky, like colored football fields and picture-courts a la Oregon.

[LetsGoOakland9]

Looking at the main site, here's the breakdown for primary logos featuring equipment of the sport (balls, helmets, bats, diamonds etc.)

NFL- 5

MLB- 15

NBA- 20

[chakfu]

My pet peeve isn't so much the ball in nearly every logo, it's the wordmark.

EVERY logo has some form of a wordmark.

That's because the NBA wants that

Which completely kills any potential for a good primary logo. Almost every one of these teams has an alternate logo that would do a far better job of symbolizing them.

A few Examples are the New Orleans "Fleur De Bee," The Mavericks logo with just the horse and basketball, The Nugget's Crossed Pickaxes, The Cavaliers Sword and Flag, the Timberwolves Howling Wolf, etc etc.

This aspect of NBA logos annoys me even more than using the basketball motif as a crutch.

I disagree with all those examples. I like the fact that all NBA teams include their nickname in their primary logo. It looks nice and consistent when you look at them as a whole, as opposed to a hodgepodge of logos that look like they are in different stages of completion.

Sounds like you would enjoy NFL primary logos... so deal with the NBA logos being the way they are and go admire the NFL primary logos.

The problem with the NFL is they barely have primary logos - for years teams have predominantly just used the helmets or the logo from them. Going by the site, only the Vikings and Rams have a legit independent primary logo.

To me the idea of disliking wordmarks is conflating the ideas of a primary logo and a cap/helmet logo. A cap/helmet logo can be identifiable and heavily used...but it's not necessarily a good primary logo. In baseball we've seen the Tigers, Red Sox, and Angels go from decent primary logos to slapping a secondary mark or cap logo on a blank background and calling it a day. All because they think the Yankee's secondary/cap logo is such a great primary.

[nash61]

My pet peeve isn't so much the ball in nearly every logo, it's the wordmark.

EVERY logo has some form of a wordmark.

That's because the NBA wants that

Which completely kills any potential for a good primary logo. Almost every one of these teams has an alternate logo that would do a far better job of symbolizing them.

A few Examples are the New Orleans "Fleur De Bee," The Mavericks logo with just the horse and basketball, The Nugget's Crossed Pickaxes, The Cavaliers Sword and Flag, the Timberwolves Howling Wolf, etc etc.

This aspect of NBA logos annoys me even more than using the basketball motif as a crutch.

I disagree with all those examples. I like the fact that all NBA teams include their nickname in their primary logo. It looks nice and consistent when you look at them as a whole, as opposed to a hodgepodge of logos that look like they are in different stages of completion.

Sounds like you would enjoy NFL primary logos... so deal with the NBA logos being the way they are and go admire the NFL primary logos.

The problem with the NFL is they barely have primary logos - for years teams have predominantly just used the helmets or the logo from them. Going by the site, only the Vikings and Rams have a legit independent primary logo.

To me the idea of disliking wordmarks is conflating the ideas of a primary logo and a cap/helmet logo. A cap/helmet logo can be identifiable and heavily used...but it's not necessarily a good primary logo. In baseball we've seen the Tigers, Red Sox, and Angels go from decent primary logos to slapping a secondary mark or cap logo on a blank background and calling it a day. All because they think the Yankee's secondary/cap logo is such a great primary.

You forgot the Eagles and Bengals.

But if sports is all about branding, then shouldn't your primary logo be the one that you use the most (i.e. on helmets)?

[Gothamite]

But if sports is all about branding, then shouldn't your primary logo be the one that you use the most (i.e. on helmets)?

Which might be why we haven't seen a team adopt a helmet logo other than their primary in thirty years (and the previous one was twenty years before that).

[chakfu]

You forgot the Eagles and Bengals.

But if sports is all about branding, then shouldn't your primary logo be the one that you use the most (i.e. on helmets)?

No idea how I overlooked those two; maybe I can claim camouflage for the Bengals.

Anyway, the problem with that idea that it assumes that what is good for a primary logo is good for a helmet logo. The most glaring case where that isn't the case happen to be the ones that do have independent primaries, as a single Viking horn, Eagle wing, Ram horn, or Bengal stripe would be really awful.

But I guess it's all a matter of taste - something in me just says a primary logo should have a wordmark as well as some additional artwork. But something with both of those elements is generally too busy for a small helmet or baseball cap. Some of the worst logos in my memory are the ones that lacked one element or another - like when the Padres had nothing but a wordmark. At the same time, I always liked the more complicated secondary NFL logos you'd come across - like the flying elvis draped over a Patriots wordmark.

The lack of nice primaries and overreliance on helmet logos always bugged me in the NFL when compared to other leagues. Look at the Browns - they barely use their secondary logos at all, and their "primary" is just the helmet. That tells me that the NFL doesn't really use primary logos at all - they mostly just use the helmets and whatever happens to be on it.

Everyone loves the Yankee's NY and loves to cite it as a great and iconic logo; but it's not much of a primary logo to me if the Knicks can recolor it and slap it on their shorts. It's a great and iconic secondary mark/cap logo but still doesn't work as a primary IMO

[Gothamite]

Everyone loves the Yankee's NY and loves to cite it as a great and iconic logo; but it's not much of a primary logo to me if the Knicks can recolor it and slap it on their shorts.

I don't know, I think that only reinforces its iconic status, since at the time we all said "Why do the Knicks have the Yankee logo on their shorts?"

Personally, I favor simple designs over messy and cluttered ones. Which, unfortunately, describes most of the NBA teams under the "city+nickname" rule.