Jump to content

Logo Downgrades


Brave-Bird 08

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

fge4lf9ridpgum631fb0gg9tt.gif>qlpk0etqwelv8artgc7tvqefu.gif

That is as best logo upgrade that has happened in the NBA in recent history.

I disagree. You could make an argument that it is better for nostalgic value, but I think their previous logo is superior. The only thing that needed to change was the garish color scheme. Swap those colors to match the "retro" logo, and I think it is perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

fge4lf9ridpgum631fb0gg9tt.gif>qlpk0etqwelv8artgc7tvqefu.gif

That is as best logo upgrade that has happened in the NBA in recent history.

I disagree. You could make an argument that it is better for nostalgic value, but I think their previous logo is superior. The only thing that needed to change was the garish color scheme. Swap those colors to match the "retro" logo, and I think it is perfect.

But the nostalgic logo is just better...cleaner, simpler, fewer lines, fewer colors. I wouldn't say that logos are "downgraded" so much as they are simplified because logos in the 90s got OUT OF HAND in terms of garishness, busyness, and muddled with two many elements. The classic teams have timeless logos that are simple and work well, and newer teams are probably moving towards developing that simplicity in their logos.

Is it any wonder why the logos that stand the test of time are usually just lettermarks? Look at NY Yankees, Green Bay Packers, Chicago Bears, Boston Red Sox, Chicago Cubs, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

fge4lf9ridpgum631fb0gg9tt.gif>qlpk0etqwelv8artgc7tvqefu.gif

That is as best logo upgrade that has happened in the NBA in recent history.

I disagree. You could make an argument that it is better for nostalgic value, but I think their previous logo is superior. The only thing that needed to change was the garish color scheme. Swap those colors to match the "retro" logo, and I think it is perfect.

But the nostalgic logo is just better...cleaner, simpler, fewer lines, fewer colors. I wouldn't say that logos are "downgraded" so much as they are simplified because logos in the 90s got OUT OF HAND in terms of garishness, busyness, and muddled with two many elements. The classic teams have timeless logos that are simple and work well, and newer teams are probably moving towards developing that simplicity in their logos.

Is it any wonder why the logos that stand the test of time are usually just lettermarks? Look at NY Yankees, Green Bay Packers, Chicago Bears, Boston Red Sox, Chicago Cubs, etc.

Exactly the way I see it. The nostalgic logo is aesthetically pleasing, less busy, and less 90s (I hate most 90s logos).

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually like the logo change for the Dodgers. It's similar to the NFL logo change, but even more subtle. Cleans it up just enough.

On September 20, 2012 at 0:50 AM, 'CS85 said:

It's like watching the hellish undead creakily shuffling their way out of the flames of a liposuction clinic dumpster fire.

On February 19, 2012 at 9:30 AM, 'pianoknight said:

Story B: Red Wings go undefeated and score 100 goals in every game. They also beat a team comprised of Godzilla, the ghost of Abraham Lincoln, 2 Power Rangers and Betty White. Oh, and they played in the middle of Iraq on a military base. In the sand. With no ice. Santa gave them special sand-skates that allowed them to play in shorts and t-shirts in 115 degree weather. Jesus, Zeus and Buddha watched from the sidelines and ate cotton candy.

POTD 5/24/12, POTD 2/26/17

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can anyone think the Lightning logo is an upgrade?

The logo looks like a clip art piece of :censored:. There is no depth, and it's a failed attempt and making the team be classic all of the sudden.

It looks like a high school logo. They did a terrible job, as did the Devil Rays.

Both downgrades were just ugly. The Devil Rays downgrade is my worst of all time, but the Lightning upgrade is pathetic.

How $1 million and some "experts" came up with that is still beyond me. It's a disgrace to professional sports logos.

2ly2w09.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can anyone think the Lightning logo is an upgrade?

The logo looks like a clip art piece of :censored:. There is no depth, and it's a failed attempt and making the team be classic all of the sudden.

It looks like a high school logo. They did a terrible job, as did the Devil Rays.

Both downgrades were just ugly. The Devil Rays downgrade is my worst of all time, but the Lightning upgrade is pathetic.

How $1 million and some "experts" came up with that is still beyond me. It's a disgrace to professional sports logos.

The previous Lightning logo is an awful lightning bolt--it looks fat.

Lightning bolts--to me anyway, should look sleek.

I know it's supposed to show depth, but they failed at that.

And having Tampa Bay written across the top takes away from the look.

With the new one the bolt is sleek, there's no obnxious wordmark across the top, and the circle around it is better as well.

It no longer looks clumsy, it looks sleek. (They still need to dump the Tampa Bay off their road jerseys though.)

But as Lee posted and I quoted-

This just in: things people like are subjective.

So you're free to like the older logo better, and I'm free to prefer the newer one.

Now could the new one use some work?

I think so--it's not perfect, but it is a step in the right direction.

Comic Sans walks into a bar, and the bartender says, "Sorry, we don't serve your type here."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still angry the Bengals don't use the tiger head more. It's probably my favorite logo in sports.

I like it and the flying tiger, but what has always bugged me about them both is that the tiger is looking and leaping backwards. It should flow from left to right. I've always wondered who made that decision, and why.

As for downgrades, here are my choices, and the first two probably won't be popular.

This change in 2000:

nafrv1dliq98g46e9ksl.gif919.gif

This change in 1998:

5gtfjeljv9kf52bdv9otg3fhf.gifv7tehkwthrwefgounvi7znf5k.gif

This change in 1993:

706.gif715.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.