BigSack Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 after many months of secrecy the new NBA D- League team now has a name and a logo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zachary15 Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Eh...it's okay. Definitely sounds D-League/WNBA. Not a fan of the colors. I know they are Cavs colors but meh. Definitely will hit up a few games since I'm only an hour away. CHIEFS - BLUE JACKETS - CARDINALS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Eh...it's okay. Definitely sounds D-League/WNBA. Not a fan of the colors. I know they are Cavs colors but meh. Definitely will hit up a few games since I'm only an hour away.Their sword is bigger than Cleveland's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
north dakota Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 I think it is a good logo for a Cavs minor league team. But I thought D-League teams had more than one affiliate. Woah! You think I'm Cody? My name is Carl Scott Simone and we just happen to share a birthday. BIG DEAL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walkerws Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 From Wikipedia:Ownership models vary across the NBA D-League. Independent owners control most of the league?s teams, but growing willingness among NBA organizations to invest in the D-League has led to two other models: direct ownership of D-League teams by parent NBA clubs and single-affiliate partnerships in which the D-League team remains independently owned while the parent club runs and finances basketball operations.The Houston Rockets and Rio Grande Valley Vipers pioneered the single-affiliate partnership, also known as the hybrid model, in 2009?10. In November 2010, the New Jersey Nets and Springfield Armor announced they will enter into a single-affiliate partnership beginning in 2011?12. In June 2011, the New York Knicks and Erie BayHawks announced they will be single-affiliated.Independent ownership: Bakersfield Jam, Fort Wayne Mad Ants, Idaho Stampede, Iowa Energy, Maine Red Claws, Reno Bighorns, Sioux Falls Skyforce, Texas LegendsParent club ownership: Austin Toros (by the San Antonio Spurs), Canton Charge (by the Cleveland Cavaliers), Dakota Wizards (by the Golden State Warriors), Los Angeles D-Fenders (by the Los Angeles Lakers), Tulsa 66ers (by the Oklahoma City Thunder)Hybrid affiliation: Erie Bayhawks (by the New York Knicks), Rio Grande Valley Vipers (with the Houston Rockets), Springfield Armor (with the New Jersey Nets) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterling84 Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 I accept that team names have gotten more abstract over the years; oftentimes using verbs or phenomena as nickname inspiration. But I still question the wisdom of picking a term that is also an illegal act/personal foul within the very sport you play. Toledo Travel? Odgensville Over-The-Backs? Glendale Goaltenders? The Official Cheese-Filled Snack of NASCAR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walkerws Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 People are 'charged' with duties but I agree. It's a better than meh name, but not. Confused? It's unique but not so unique that anyone would be pleasantly surprised by it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest23 Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 I think it is a good logo for a Cavs minor league team. But I thought D-League teams had more than one affiliate.I thought the cavs already were a d-league team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee. Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Although I am struggling to not make the "D-league existing" joke, why in the blue hell don't the TImberwolves have a stake in Dakota? It's only like, right there. Welcome to DrunjFlix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Although I am struggling to not make the "D-league existing" joke, why in the blue hell don't the TImberwolves have a stake in Dakota? It's only like, right there.Because the Warriors bought Dakota last year and are moving them to San Jose for the 2012-13 season. This is their final year up there in Dakota. Speaking of the D-League, are they still playing this year lockout or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DelayedPenalty Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Los Angeles D-Fenders?I'm okay with the name Charge, even though it is one of those intangible team names. Colors look good, but the logo could have used some navy to break up all the maroon and yellow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lights Out Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 The linework is way too thin in the logo... it looks more like an illustration than a sports logo. POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSox44 Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 The name and logo don't really related with one another. I understand they're the Cavaliers affiliate, but shouldn't their logo actually exude some sort of charge-ness? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee. Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Although I am struggling to not make the "D-league existing" joke, why in the blue hell don't the TImberwolves have a stake in Dakota? It's only like, right there.Because the Warriors bought Dakota last year and are moving them to San Jose for the 2012-13 season. This is their final year up there in Dakota. Well, that's a damn shame. The last of the IBL teams, too. Welcome to DrunjFlix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 The name and logo don't really related with one another. I understand they're the Cavaliers affiliate, but shouldn't their logo actually exude some sort of charge-ness?The "cavalier" is pointing his sword in the "Charge!" of battle, so-to-speak. Â Â https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frylock Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 The first this I thought of when I saw the new Charge logo was the old New Jersey/Cleveland Gladiators from the AFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eriqjaffe Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 "Powered by the Cleveland Cavaliers" just cracks me up. Is that some sort of D-League-wide thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaha32 Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 It's not bad, but if they would thicken the lines, it'd be sooooo much better. And I agree with those that say a team named after a foul just doesnt make sense. Im ok with singular nicknames, but Chargers would be better IMO. DesignsByHahn.com Behance Dribbble Instragram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Although I am struggling to not make the "D-league existing" joke, why in the blue hell don't the TImberwolves have a stake in Dakota? It's only like, right there.Because the Warriors bought Dakota last year and are moving them to San Jose for the 2012-13 season. This is their final year up there in Dakota. Well, that's a damn shame. The last of the IBL teams, too.Yeah, and the worst part is the whole reason they did it isn't because they wanted to own a D-League team or develop their own talent. No they're doing it as a block to ensure that the Hornets or Kings don't end up playing at the HP Pavilion in San Jose. The development aspect is just icing on the cake for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eRay Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Although I am struggling to not make the "D-league existing" joke, why in the blue hell don't the TImberwolves have a stake in Dakota? It's only like, right there.Because the Warriors bought Dakota last year and are moving them to San Jose for the 2012-13 season. This is their final year up there in Dakota. Speaking of the D-League, are they still playing this year lockout or not?Still playing, lockout or not. They have a separate CBA, which confuses me since players move between the organizations.Anyway, this is a perfect identity for a Cavs minor league affiliate. The logo isn't better than that of the parent club, but it isn't terrible. As you smart people have said, thicken up the lines and make it feel more like a logo than a pencil drawing and we can have a more serious discussion about it. I also don't like how the sword takes up most of the space. A sword can be shown but it definitely shouldn't take up 80% of the 'logo' area. Despite all that, I like this look and think it uses the colors very well and works without having to add Black or Gray or anything outside the Cavs identity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.