leggman01 Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 story - http://www.averettcougars.com/news/2012/4/17/GEN_0417125725.aspxphoto gallery - http://www.averettcougars.com/photo_gallery.aspx?gallery=88 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conner62 Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Well just like Averett they suckGo SCOTS!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chapeeko Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Leggman you designed it right? If so, that is a pretty nice job you did there. The only thing I don't like is that I think the cougar looks a little bit derpy and there is too many thin lines (especially near the mouth),but maybe that is just me. I really love the font you made. It is a pretty common sports font, but your notches at the bottom really spice it up and make it unique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cshookemHORNS Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Well just like Averett they suckGo SCOTS!!!!Is that necessary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Aware Eagle Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 The cougar immediately reminded me of this, for some reason:But I realize now they're not as similar as I thought. Yes, I root for teams all over the place. And I apparently favor birds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deked73 Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 The lower jaw bugs me, it seems to far forward. It just feels out of proportion to me. It's nice work though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leggman01 Posted April 18, 2012 Author Share Posted April 18, 2012 deked/chapeeko - the lower jaw was certainly an area that was worked on a good bit - there was a fair amount of compromising made there...early versions didn't bring the yellow quite as far forward...but i'm still very happy with the results - if you look at the previous cougar logo (you can see it on the linked story), they seem to prefer a prominent lower jaw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conner62 Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Well just like Averett they suckGo SCOTS!!!!Is that necessary?Probably not and my apologies if I offended anyone. I just noticed the OP had a Methodist logo as his avatar and I figured he would understand it was all in good fun and appreciate a little D3 conference smacktalk. In all reality these are pretty nice. If you look at most of the other logos in the USA South Conference a number of schools have redesigned there logos in the last 6 years or so and it has made the conference as a whole a stronger brand with every school having their own unique, easily recognizable logo. If the OP did design these I am curious if he designed any of the other conference schools logos as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JQK Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 I don't like the lower jaw... it kinda screws up what would otherwise be a solid collegiate logo. Stay Tuned Sports Podcast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elsephen Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 The nose area bugs me. And the eyes. I think if the eyebrow just wasn't there on the insides and the inner eye was cut down that that would help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDixonDesign Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Congrats on the identity. The serifs in the Lettering bugs me, but i'm sure that is the way the university wanted to go...As for the Cougar head, this was the first thing that popped into my mind: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DelayedPenalty Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Like others have mentioned, the lower jaw bothers me. He has a serious underbite going on. He also seems to be lacking a proper nose. Also, he looks a bit...whatever the opposite of cross-eyed is, his eyes are pointing two different directions.That being said, overall it is a well executed logo, and with a few small tweaks could be fantastic. For Division III athletics though, it's well above par. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leggman01 Posted April 18, 2012 Author Share Posted April 18, 2012 Probably not and my apologies if I offended anyone. I just noticed the OP had a Methodist logo as his avatar and I figured he would understand it was all in good fun and appreciate a little D3 conference smacktalk. In all reality these are pretty nice. If you look at most of the other logos in the USA South Conference a number of schools have redesigned there logos in the last 6 years or so and it has made the conference as a whole a stronger brand with every school having their own unique, easily recognizable logo. If the OP did design these I am curious if he designed any of the other conference schools logos as well.conner62 - i took it exactly as you meant it...there aren't many usasac folks on these boards, so when you see one, a little smack-talk is expectedi did not design any of the other usasac identities, although i was very involved with the methodist university identity - that logo was done by skye dillon, who is a member of these boards (i think his username is cward) - i did design another logo that i'm sure you're familiar with, though http://www.greatsouth.org/i agree that the usasac is one of the stronger d3 conferences in terms of athletic aesthetics - i think methodist has the best package (i'm a bit biased there), and maryville has an absolutely beautiful set - the new cnu logos are really nice, as well (their previous package lasted just over a year...they were hideous) - the nc wesleyan set is solid, but a little overly detailed and the primary logo is a bit too horizontal...plus i just don't like nc wesleyan - meredith has a solid new package, with part of it designed by skye dillon (the block M and lettering...someone else added on the angel wing) - averett was the weak link before this redesign, and while i agree that it isn't perfect (i haven't done a single logo that i wouldn't tweak after looking at it for a while), this moves them into the upper tier of the conference (logo wise) and gives them a strong, unified look...i think it will serve them well - now ferrum, greensboro and william peace are the weak links in the conference with regard to branding - both ferrum and greensboro have solid concepts that have been executed poorly (ferrum's logo is a bit too cartoony and elementary while gc's logo is too detailed and derivative of hofstra) - peace's logo has too many flaws to list here...when the conference expands to bring in piedmont, huntingdon and lagrange, it will be adding a joe bosack design (lagrange) and a design by andrew harrington (piedmont) - both are members of these boards - further strengthening the conference aesthetics - while i'm not a huge fan of the huntingdon marks, they do seem to apply them pretty universally/consistently and it is a relatively unique design Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.