StillS Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 btw what happened to league policy that new primary logos must have city names in them? Maybe the leaked logo is actually an alternate logo.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old School Fool Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 If it ends up being anything like the Thunder's logo with text on top of the shield, I'm going to want to punch someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abluecarrot Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 btw what happened to league policy that new primary logos must have city names in them? Maybe the leaked logo is actually an alternate logo.. Hence the B. Like OKC on the Thunder."Hey guys, we need to put the city name on this thing. Sheit, put a B on there somewhere!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epiphanic Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I do not think "Brooklyn" when I look at the B. I just think "basketball". The logo just says "Nets Basketball." If this is the real thing, it's horrible. And dare I say it, worse than OKC's logo. Just bleh. "In the arena of logic, I fight unarmed."I tweet & tumble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyrocol Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Any net would be preferable, really. Is it so much to ask for the Nets to finally use a net?Why do people want to see a net so much? Because really, New York teams and graphical representation of nicknames just don't mix. Case examples... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goforbroke Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Any net would be preferable, really. Is it so much to ask for the Nets to finally use a net?Why do people want to see a net so much? Because really, New York teams and graphical representation of nicknames just don't mix. Case examples...That's a great point, although the examples you posted are really not good ones. Most NY logos are bassicly word marks in a geometric shape : Rangers Knicks Yankees jets islanders Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTank Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Any net would be preferable, really. Is it so much to ask for the Nets to finally use a net?Why do people want to see a net so much? Because really, New York teams and graphical representation of nicknames just don't mix. Case examples...Father Knickerbocker was a classic early NBA logo. It would not work today, but it was good for the 1950's. www.sportsecyclopedia.com For the best in sports history go to the Sports E-Cyclopedia at http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 The New York brand is too strong to have to rely on childish depictions of mascots for logos. I've always felt that major markets don't really need gimmicks to base their brand on. Minor league and smaller markets? Sure. Very few people outside of the market are going to buy Memphis Grizzlies gear unless 1) for some odd reason they happen to be a fan, 2) their kids really like the bear logo. The major market cities just don't need that, IMO. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old School Fool Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 The New York brand is too strong to have to rely on childish depictions of mascots for logos.Mr. Met is badass, though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 As a 4th or 5th logo - something that's really just there for the kids or for fun. Not as a primary or even secondary.I'm not saying they shouldn't have mascots - just that they shouldn't be marketed around their mascot / nickname. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bravo96 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I actually like the thing... Click the Banner - Join the Movement! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 The New York brand is too strong to have to rely on childish depictions of mascots for logos. I've always felt that major markets don't really need gimmicks to base their brand on. Minor league and smaller markets? Sure. Very few people outside of the market are going to buy Memphis Grizzlies gear unless 1) for some odd reason they happen to be a fan, 2) their kids really like the bear logo. The major market cities just don't need that, IMO.I mostly disagree. Baseball is different because letters work best on caps and each team should have a strong initialed logo for cap use. Cap logos can sometimes serve as de facto primary marks, so the Orioles' new smiling bird is more important than the official primary; the Yankees' NY is more important than the stars and stripes logo. However, in other sports, logos are more important as identifiers. Logos for other sports should be more than just monograms/initials. I would say the Chicago Bulls have one of the most iconic logos in sports, far more iconic than any "C" could be, including the Bears' wishbone logo. The Blachawks' Indian head, the Celtics' leprechaun, the Patriots' Flying Elvis (though I personally think it sucks) are all iconic logos from huge markets. I think initials work better for two-word cities. Interlocking letters are easier to make iconic. I'm sure the Patriots could potetntially come up with some inspired "NE" logo, but it would look really forced if the Blackhawks just used a "C" or the Bulls just used a wordmark over a basketball. And that is a big problem too - most of the NBA logos blow. I mean, when two of the marquis franchises - the Knicks and Lakers, have names of such obscure or indistinct natures, you end up with a wordmark in front of a basketball. They don't not have mascot logos because they are above it, they don't have them because the names don't lend to them. A laker isn't really a thing and 99% of the population has no idea what a knickerbocker is, so representation of one doesn't help as an identifier.Most of the iconic monogram/initials logos are grandfathered in and would be done differently today. If someone was starting a new team called the New York Tigers, what logo would they go with - a stylized NY logo, to compete with established NY logos from the Yankees, Mets, Giants, and even the Jets' NY oval logo that everyone loves? No, they would probably use some kind of visual representation of the team name rather than just relying on people to eventually make the connection "this version of NY means the Tigers". The Jets went back to an old logo, but if they were to be redesigned today, there would be a jet in the package. Giants is of an indistinct nature too. It's hard to visually represent a giant unless you draw one towering over something... like a stadium. Stick with the initials in that case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyrocol Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Most of the iconic monogram/initials logos are grandfathered in and would be done differently today. If someone was starting a new team called the New York Tigers, what logo would they go with - a stylized NY logo, to compete with established NY logos from the Yankees, Mets, Giants, and even the Jets' NY oval logo that everyone loves? No, they would probably use some kind of visual representation of the team name rather than just relying on people to eventually make the connection "this version of NY means the Tigers". The Jets went back to an old logo, but if they were to be redesigned today, there would be a jet in the package. Giants is of an indistinct nature too. It's hard to visually represent a giant unless you draw one towering over something... like a stadium. Stick with the initials in that case.The Jets went with this "NY" secondary logo using the font from their old logo back in 2003.Its obviously not a classic logo, nor does it invoke any form of imagery, yet people still recognize that logo as the Jets'. No need for airplanes or jet engines as long as it is coherent with the brand identity. The brand is what's important here, not the logo. (and the Jets' branding was developed in the early 2000's and only loosely based on the old oval logo)And I think that's the key point you're missing here. A logo is only a representation of a brand. As long as a brand itself is presented well, then you don't need a mascot for people to visualize what the brand is about. With "New York" or "Brooklyn" there's already a strong foundation for a brand to develop around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrad. Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 My $0.02 on a fix to the logo (plus a partial logo). Seems like some consensus among people is that the "B" needs to be memorable, a 3rd color needs to be added, and the city name needs to be present. I also added a slight nod to the crenelation of the Bridge. Red Goat Creations :: Graphic Design Solutions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowld Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSU151 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Those shirts and logos are just so generic. If that's the look they're going for, then kiosks in malls and shopping centers that sell generic/fake hats are going to have a field day. Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
29texan Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Ah crap, it IS real..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
epper Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I'm going to withhold full judgement until I see the entire package unveiled, but so far I really like it. Gives me a real Raiders vibe and there's no doubt this stuff will sell like hotcakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StillS Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 My $0.02 on a fix to the logo (plus a partial logo). Seems like some consensus among people is that the "B" needs to be memorable, a 3rd color needs to be added, and the city name needs to be present. I also added a slight nod to the crenelation of the Bridge.Now that's what i call a logo. Primary is 10x better than the original, borough name is there, has some iconic element of Brooklyn in it and "B" has the potential to become a classic over time. For the partial logo though i'll say just go with just letters BK or BKLYN in a shield, don't really need a basketball there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowld Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 To me those shirts look like something you would buy at Old Navy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.