TaylorMade

Did the New Jersey Nets tease their Brooklyn logo?

Recommended Posts

This was a huge problem I ran into designing wordmarks. N, E and T are so straight-edged and angular, then you have the curviest and most difficult to draw letter tacked onto the end, in addition to the undesirable negative space on either side of the T. It's a bear of a word, and rarely does it look good. 'Brooklyn' is so much better-looking in every way, and much easier to create good looking wordmarks for, but even it has it's own strange rhythm; the first four letters all have rounded shoulders, B, R, O and O, then the last four letters are all straight and angular, K, L, Y and N.

It was a massive mistake to keep the Nets name for a Brooklyn team. I'm sure there's a proper linguistic term for it, but with Brooklyn ending in an n and Nets beginning with one you either have to take a full beat between the words ("Brooklyn. Nets.") or it sounds like Brooklynettes, which makes them sound like they're Brooklyn's version of the Rockettes. In fact, the -ette suffix refers to a feminine version of something ("bachelorette") or something that is smaller ("kitchenette"). Probably not what you want your big bad NBA team to sound like.

Perhaps I should've taken that naming mistake as a sign that this wasn't going to end well in any way, just like it has.. But best of luck to the Brooklynettes.

Oh, and yes.. Nets is a pain in the ass word. It's very hard to make it look good (especially in caps), and you can't really do much with it visually either as far as a logo goes. They should've ditched it, damn it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll get no argument from me on that. I do give them credit for going b&w though. That takes BALLS. Even the spurs threw in silver.

Well considering the 'fiesta colors' before, just black and white would have been an upgrade:

e04ylwkfdofkr2ctlerjov26s.gif

Better use would be for a Tex Mex restaurant.

Honestly, I kinda miss that.

As do I. I didn't care that the colors weren't on the uniforms - the fact it made for a vibrant, unique logo (and court, for that matter) was enough for me. I loved that about thier identity growing up.

It was a weak logo. It had no real boundaries, was difficult to reproduce by hand, and the wordmark looked completely just slapped on after the fact. I do like the fiesta colors though, but they could really have been used better in the making of the logo.

A was in elementary school too when this was in use. When I saw it, my thought was "That's DEFINATELY a San Antonio team"..... even though they were the ONLY major franchise in that ciy and still is, really.

I miss the 90's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This was a huge problem I ran into designing wordmarks. N, E and T are so straight-edged and angular, then you have the curviest and most difficult to draw letter tacked onto the end, in addition to the undesirable negative space on either side of the T. It's a bear of a word, and rarely does it look good. 'Brooklyn' is so much better-looking in every way, and much easier to create good looking wordmarks for, but even it has it's own strange rhythm; the first four letters all have rounded shoulders, B, R, O and O, then the last four letters are all straight and angular, K, L, Y and N.

It was a massive mistake to keep the Nets name for a Brooklyn team. I'm sure there's a proper linguistic term for it, but with Brooklyn ending in an n and Nets beginning with one you either have to take a full beat between the words ("Brooklyn. Nets.") or it sounds like Brooklynettes, which makes them sound like they're Brooklyn's version of the Rockettes. In fact, the -ette suffix refers to a feminine version of something ("bachelorette") or something that is smaller ("kitchenette"). Probably not what you want your big bad NBA team to sound like.

Perhaps I should've taken that naming mistake as a sign that this wasn't going to end well in any way, just like it has.. But best of luck to the Brooklynettes.

Oh, and yes.. Nets is a pain in the ass word. It's very hard to make it look good (especially in caps), and you can't really do much with it visually either as far as a logo goes. They should've ditched it, damn it.

I don't really agree with the Brooklynettes part. Never have. There's a distinct lingual difference when someone says Brooklyn Nets vs. Brokklynettes. It's subtle, but it's there. That nitpick is a reach for me.

That said, I probably would have changed the name if it were up to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This was a huge problem I ran into designing wordmarks. N, E and T are so straight-edged and angular, then you have the curviest and most difficult to draw letter tacked onto the end, in addition to the undesirable negative space on either side of the T. It's a bear of a word, and rarely does it look good. 'Brooklyn' is so much better-looking in every way, and much easier to create good looking wordmarks for, but even it has it's own strange rhythm; the first four letters all have rounded shoulders, B, R, O and O, then the last four letters are all straight and angular, K, L, Y and N.

It was a massive mistake to keep the Nets name for a Brooklyn team. I'm sure there's a proper linguistic term for it, but with Brooklyn ending in an n and Nets beginning with one you either have to take a full beat between the words ("Brooklyn. Nets.") or it sounds like Brooklynettes, which makes them sound like they're Brooklyn's version of the Rockettes. In fact, the -ette suffix refers to a feminine version of something ("bachelorette") or something that is smaller ("kitchenette"). Probably not what you want your big bad NBA team to sound like.

Perhaps I should've taken that naming mistake as a sign that this wasn't going to end well in any way, just like it has.. But best of luck to the Brooklynettes.

Oh, and yes.. Nets is a pain in the ass word. It's very hard to make it look good (especially in caps), and you can't really do much with it visually either as far as a logo goes. They should've ditched it, damn it.

I don't really agree with the Brooklynettes part. Never have. There's a distinct lingual difference when someone says Brooklyn Nets vs. Brokklynettes. It's subtle, but it's there. That nitpick is a reach for me.

That said, I probably would have changed the name if it were up to me.

Of course it's not the exact same as saying Brooklynettes, but it just doesn't flow right if you ask me. I mean, it's not the end of the world but if you're moving the team and even ditching the team colors, why not ditch that terrible, unexciting name too? They only called themselves the New York Nets to fit in with the Jets and Mets.. There's no point to being the Brooklyn Nets.

Anyway, I was curious.. and maybe you've explained this many times already.. But how did you get involved in this? Do you work for a design/sports company that was involved or what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BrooklynNets.jpg

The logo is really quite nice! It's clean, it's simple and to me it does the job. I just can't wait to see the colored version...oh wait, it's actually black and white? Forget what I just said, this blows!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although the logo does not completely scream "Brooklyn", I like the leaked logo for the Brooklyn Nets mainly for its cleanliness and simplification as opposed to the previous logo incarnations which easily conveyed that the Nets were trying to do too much. Remember, this is the team that brought you these "fine quality" logos:

5992.gif

2hh70mg3h40yl41tzfpn3gha2.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

while googling i found this.

http://www.timothypmorris.com/

lt looks like jayz just picked this dude because he was familiar with him, it is interesting to point out, he mostly deals with brand ID and packaging, and not a lot of sports identity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^yea those weren't exactly masterpieces. The new logo looks like an emblem on some half million dollar luxury car. Classy.

Edit: my post was referring to the old Nets logos...not those concepts. Sorry, i should've quoted it instead. Although i guess my post works for both now that i think about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That guy's work, at least the stuff in his portfolio, is really dull and uninspired. Such as Jay-Z. This explains everything. And the other Nets' stuff on there is even worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the thing that I get from the logo: classy. Its the kind of logo a businessman could show just as much as a sports fan.

But, again, the uniforms make or break it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mindless makes a good point. Their best logo to this point was probably the last one, and people have already pointed out the flaws with that one (although I loved the navy-gray-red color scheme as it was originally used).

I don't see "Brooklynettes" being a problem. First, as someone pointed out above, I doubt many people will slam the words together like that. It might be an awkward pause, but there will be a pause for most people between the two words. Second, how many people use the full name of a franchise that often. They'll be referred to as the "Nets" or "Brooklyn" individually more often than not, especially since they kept the same nickname. People won't need to use Brooklyn with it to know who the Nets are, as they would possibly with a renamed Knights or something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt many people will slam the words together like that. It might be an awkward pause, but there will be a pause for most people between the two words.

As the best case, that's precisely why I think it's a terrible name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and this:

ArgHfuRCEAA3qYL.jpg

That middle t-shirt (which is just fantastic) makes me wish they ditched the "NETS" word mark and just went with a large 'B' and the basketball behind it. Now THAT would have been nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and this:

ArgHfuRCEAA3qYL.jpg

That middle t-shirt (which is just fantastic) makes me wish they ditched the "NETS" word mark and just went with a large 'B' and the basketball behind it. Now THAT would have been nice.

You mean like the cap on the right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right idea, wrong execution. The font blows and that "S" is so painful to look at. The seams on the basketball look weird too. I definitely like the simplistic route, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the logo growing on anyone else? At first like everyone i though it was boring as hell but im kind of liking the simplicity of it. Even the plain B is looking decent to me now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's definitely growing on me. I thought it was a joke at first but I have to be honest, I kind of dig the simplicity of it. I don't know of any team that has tried to do a black/white color scheme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the logo growing on anyone else? At first like everyone i though it was boring as hell but im kind of liking the simplicity of it. Even the plain B is looking decent to me now.

They nailed it with the color scheme but the primary is less than perfect. I think the wordmark is kind of meek, that might be the problem. I really think they executed the basketball/b well though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That middle t-shirt (which is just fantastic) makes me wish they ditched the "NETS" word mark and just went with a large 'B' and the basketball behind it. Now THAT would have been nice.

I wonder if that's even possible for an NBA primary logo. Every single primary logo in the NBA shows the team name and I wonder if that's an NBA rule.

Primaries in the other three major leagues don't necessarily have to show any text whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.