Quad City Mallards Update Identity

[CubsFanBudMan]

That "Mallard green" is light (or shiny) enough to pop off the black. That was the part I was unsure of, but it really looks nice with the orange. And almost like a darker version of the teal they had been using. An alt of that color should be diffeent enough.

[GFB]

That "Mallard green" is light (or shiny) enough to pop off the black. That was the part I was unsure of, but it really looks nice with the orange. And almost like a darker version of the teal they had been using. An alt of that color should be diffeent enough.

Good. I wanted them to go with a slightly different version that used much more green and used orange only as tertiary color... It looked somewhat similar to the old Manitoba Moose jerseys:

[Milo Meningocele]

I know only the colors were changed here, but man...I'm so tired of empty, white pupil-less eyes, and there's way too much "sharp" (for lack of a better word) happening in the wings. As for the colors, I love the darker green, but really want a darker brown.

[GFB]

I know only the colors were changed here, but man...I'm so tired of empty, white pupil-less eyes, and there's way too much "sharp" (for lack of a better word) happening in the wings. As for the colors, I love the darker green, but really want a darker brown.

Sorry man, I don't know what to tell you. I thought the eyes were small enough that a pupil would just muddle the little white that was there. And for the wings, it's hard to walk that fine line between being overly detailed and having way too much "sharp" and not having enough "sharp" and getting the airplane wing effect. The brown intrigues me though... why do you think that would work?

[hockey week]

I know only the colors were changed here, but man...I'm so tired of empty, white pupil-less eyes, and there's way too much "sharp" (for lack of a better word) happening in the wings. As for the colors, I love the darker green, but really want a darker brown.

Sorry man, I don't know what to tell you. I thought the eyes were small enough that a pupil would just muddle the little white that was there. And for the wings, it's hard to walk that fine line between being overly detailed and having way too much "sharp" and not having enough "sharp" and getting the airplane wing effect. The brown intrigues me though... why do you think that would work?

See? now this is the kind of thing that needs to be happening so much more often, around here and elsewhere on the web *cough* icethetics *cough*. Here we have a guy who redesigned a team, like ACTUALLY redesigned a team (not just a concept), and here he is taking constructive criticism on his logos.

I'll be honest, I was not at all sold on their last design. So much brightness...so much brightness... but this? I love it. That caps design was so underrated, especially with how well it handles three colors.

The piping doesn't even bother me, simply because it doesn't stop randomly.

My only thought is that the shoulder patches look upside-down, but I guess it's all a matter of opinion

[GFB]

I know only the colors were changed here, but man...I'm so tired of empty, white pupil-less eyes, and there's way too much "sharp" (for lack of a better word) happening in the wings. As for the colors, I love the darker green, but really want a darker brown.

Sorry man, I don't know what to tell you. I thought the eyes were small enough that a pupil would just muddle the little white that was there. And for the wings, it's hard to walk that fine line between being overly detailed and having way too much "sharp" and not having enough "sharp" and getting the airplane wing effect. The brown intrigues me though... why do you think that would work?

See? now this is the kind of thing that needs to be happening so much more often, around here and elsewhere on the web *cough* icethetics *cough*. Here we have a guy who redesigned a team, like ACTUALLY redesigned a team (not just a concept), and here he is taking constructive criticism on his logos.

I'll be honest, I was not at all sold on their last design. So much brightness...so much brightness... but this? I love it. That caps design was so underrated, especially with how well it handles three colors.

The piping doesn't even bother me, simply because it doesn't stop randomly.

My only thought is that the shoulder patches look upside-down, but I guess it's all a matter of opinion

Actually, the reason it is flipped is so the duck foot loosely forms the shape of an "M"...

I'm glad you enjoy my work, but I have to ask, what "icethetics" issue are you referring to? Also, what "caps design"?

[hockey week]

I know only the colors were changed here, but man...I'm so tired of empty, white pupil-less eyes, and there's way too much "sharp" (for lack of a better word) happening in the wings. As for the colors, I love the darker green, but really want a darker brown.

Sorry man, I don't know what to tell you. I thought the eyes were small enough that a pupil would just muddle the little white that was there. And for the wings, it's hard to walk that fine line between being overly detailed and having way too much "sharp" and not having enough "sharp" and getting the airplane wing effect. The brown intrigues me though... why do you think that would work?

See? now this is the kind of thing that needs to be happening so much more often, around here and elsewhere on the web *cough* icethetics *cough*. Here we have a guy who redesigned a team, like ACTUALLY redesigned a team (not just a concept), and here he is taking constructive criticism on his logos.

I'll be honest, I was not at all sold on their last design. So much brightness...so much brightness... but this? I love it. That caps design was so underrated, especially with how well it handles three colors.

The piping doesn't even bother me, simply because it doesn't stop randomly.

My only thought is that the shoulder patches look upside-down, but I guess it's all a matter of opinion

Actually, the reason it is flipped is so the duck foot loosely forms the shape of an "M"...

I'm glad you enjoy my work, but I have to ask, what "icethetics" issue are you referring to? Also, what "caps design"?

OHHHHHHHH! Now I get it. Ok then, nevermind.

I suppose there IS a slight difference, I thought this:

was based on this:

I stand corrected again.

As for icethetics, there's a lot of hullabaloo going on because of a "premier designer" having a flop, and lots of comments getting censored. Check the NHL 2011-12 possible uniform changes thread. It's just good to have open discussion and constructive criticism going around again

[Milo Meningocele]

I know only the colors were changed here, but man...I'm so tired of empty, white pupil-less eyes, and there's way too much "sharp" (for lack of a better word) happening in the wings. As for the colors, I love the darker green, but really want a darker brown.

Sorry man, I don't know what to tell you. I thought the eyes were small enough that a pupil would just muddle the little white that was there. And for the wings, it's hard to walk that fine line between being overly detailed and having way too much "sharp" and not having enough "sharp" and getting the airplane wing effect. The brown intrigues me though... why do you think that would work?

I guess I'm usually a literalist with logo color schemes, especially with nature-based nicknames--and mallards just naturally have a cool set of colors. The shade used just seems almost white and empty, I could use something even slightly darker. It's too bad that the darker brown chest area isn't shown in the logo view, because that's what I always thought looked really striking, against their white collar and green head. My last issue is that the black outline/shading/whatever it's called, in the head and wing seem much too thick. I find most of the recent logos have too thick outlines for my liking, though. Leaving on a positive, I love the realistic "taking off" depiction.

[Coast2CoastAM2006]

GFB's design is light years ahead of what the QC Mallards had before. I really don't get the infatuation with the previous lime/black/teal color scheme. GFB's looks more professional and the scheme looks pleasing to the eyes. overall HUGE upgrade over what they had. The white jersey alone is a thing of beauty.

[GFB]

I know only the colors were changed here, but man...I'm so tired of empty, white pupil-less eyes, and there's way too much "sharp" (for lack of a better word) happening in the wings. As for the colors, I love the darker green, but really want a darker brown.

Sorry man, I don't know what to tell you. I thought the eyes were small enough that a pupil would just muddle the little white that was there. And for the wings, it's hard to walk that fine line between being overly detailed and having way too much "sharp" and not having enough "sharp" and getting the airplane wing effect. The brown intrigues me though... why do you think that would work?

I guess I'm usually a literalist with logo color schemes, especially with nature-based nicknames--and mallards just naturally have a cool set of colors. The shade used just seems almost white and empty, I could use something even slightly darker. It's too bad that the darker brown chest area isn't shown in the logo view, because that's what I always thought looked really striking, against their white collar and green head. My last issue is that the black outline/shading/whatever it's called, in the head and wing seem much too thick. I find most of the recent logos have too thick outlines for my liking, though. Leaving on a positive, I love the realistic "taking off" depiction.

That's a fair critique.

I would argue that for a minor-league franchise (which tend to fall toward the brighter side of the color saturation scale as it is) the colors match up fairly well. You have:

- Green for the teal head.

- Black is not too far from the brown chest.... (I would say a maroon/burgundy color would also be close enough to work)

- Orange for the yellow beak.

- Cream for the greyish, sheen coat of feathers on the back.

However, all your arguments are extremely valid opinions, so thanks for sharing them!

[Patchey13]

GFB's design is light years ahead of what the QC Mallards had before. I really don't get the infatuation with the previous lime/black/teal color scheme. GFB's looks more professional and the scheme looks pleasing to the eyes. overall HUGE upgrade over what they had. The white jersey alone is a thing of beauty.

Didn't he design the set they had before as well?

[GFB]

GFB's design is light years ahead of what the QC Mallards had before. I really don't get the infatuation with the previous lime/black/teal color scheme. GFB's looks more professional and the scheme looks pleasing to the eyes. overall HUGE upgrade over what they had. The white jersey alone is a thing of beauty.

Didn't he design the set they had before as well?

Yep, but different ownership = different results (Outside of actual better drawings of the logos, which is a result of my own personal improvement as an artist over the last 3 years...)

[GFB]

Alright, here's a glimpse into an alternate universe where I wouldn't have had the opportunity from the new ownership to rebrand this club. Here is what they were planning on going ahead with:

[Sodboy13]

Thank God they went with yours instead.

[Milo Meningocele]

Alright, here's a glimpse into an alternate universe where I wouldn't have had the opportunity from the new ownership to rebrand this club. Here is what they were planning on going ahead with:

No offense, but wordmark notwithstanding, that top one is pretty good. Good colors, the pupiled eye looks good. The head shape works a little better for me, and the neck looks less swan/goose-ish. The green in place of black on the middle one alleviates the critique I had of too thick black outline/shade. I almost never like paw/footprint logos, so I'll withhold judgment on that one.

Having not noticed the new home white jerseys before now though, I do want to revisit my previous comments. The cream used does show up pretty well on those jerseys, I guess a lot more than it did on just the plain logo I saw on my screen.

I don't mean to be a jerk, critiquing one of our own, or saying I like someone else's work better...I'm just trying to review all of this like I would any other logo, made by any artist that was a complete stranger.

[DC in Da House w/o a Doubt]

Ducks don't have blue eyes... and if they do, you sure as hell can't see em. The pupiled eye looks terrible and is completely unnecessary... and it looks like he has a nose ring.

I like GFB's better.

[The_Admiral]

The top logo has the requisite Minor League Whimsy© for a low-level hockey league, but I prefer what they went with instead, which to me almost aspires to be AHL-quality.

Not totally relevant, but why is it "Quad City" and not "Quad Cities"? It's not the city of Quad.

[CubsFanBudMan]

I think it is the same dilemma as "Mallard goalie" vs. "Mallards goalie" vs. "Mallards' goalie," but it's plagued the Quad Cities for years. The Bandits now use the plural, which by at least some measure is "wrong," although I'm not sure what it is. There are plenty of language buffs around here to address it.

As for those concepts, two things: 1) I'm glad they did not go with the angry bird and 2) Milo and I are of different minds completely, on this one at least (which of course is fine).

I'm on record here as saying how much I loved the Mallards' original logo, but I realize now a good chunk of it really is nostalgia. And part of it is that a cartoon baby bird followed and then a fauxback that I can only call the sunset bridge version of the original.

But now I can say that primary is the best they've had. I love it with the circle and I really liked it without on the roads from last year I keep bringing up. I look forward to seeing these roads in person eventually. I'm glad they kept it.