Jump to content

2012-13 NBA Logo & Uniform changes


Conrad.

Recommended Posts

BAMNqk6CMAAHZ_p.png

YES. Keep the name of the historic franchise. I know they were the Royals, but the names have a "theme"...plus adding the name of a new franchise creates confusion (at the risk of rehashing an old argument). Then use the Sonics colors. I think it keeps the history intact and provides some link to Seattle's NBA past.

I believe that it says in the lease for the new arena that any NBA team playing in the arena MUST use the Supersonics nickname. I can't find a supporting article, but I'm sure I read it around the time the arena was approved.

Which is a shame, because I actually do like the Kings nickname. I hope a future team picks it up. Kansas City perhaps?

Kings are gonna use the Supersonics name, and probably their last logo

I could see them adopt the old identity for the next two years and then go for a redesign once they move into the new arena.

...And it totally fits what with Seattle being in King county and all!!!

My vote would be to retain the Kings name and recolour it to pay homage to the Sonics franchise...

canada.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Im not really influenced or educated on who does or doesn't have claims to the aformentioned history so i'll just say this: I really hope this time they actually reference the supersonic jets they were named after in the new primary logo. The only logo to actually do it was their 1st then it just got random with each change. The last logo they had could've been for anybody and that bugs me as they have such a great source to pull from with their name. I also hated how it was "sonics" instead "supersonics." I get that maybe it saves space on the uni (i.e. Blazers and Wolves) but not on the primary logo. Personally I loved the skyline logo. I say modernize it with a jet in it somewhere and a new, less boring font. That would be nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Kings move to Seattle and become the Super Sonics, I guess one good thing is that there will only be one black, silver, and (now minimal) purple team called the Kings in California/major league sports (not that I personally have a problem with the way things are now).

17013982017.gifu2jelkdnhfxbda2vmnsggv6hf.gif444.gifyo3wysbjtagzmwj37tb11u0fh.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Werent the Warriors going to go with some shirt looking like jersey this year? I could've sworn I seen that here.

The leaked photo photo from a photo shoot was a t shirt. But it didn't match the shorts (pinstripes on shorts, not shirt also non matching yellows). It was most likely just the warm up shirt. They were not going with a t shirt as a jersey. But the latest files out there as nothing for the warriors now. So it appears any new jersey was scrapped for this season.

5994736127_c919880617.jpg


20899768053_5ff571c8fc.jpg21520909095_58cb3890d9.jpg


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seattle keeps all Supersonics history. It was part of the settlement when the team moved to OKC. They retained the rights to logo/colors and history.

Not sure what that means for the Kings.

Is this really true? I thought they only got the name/logos and not the history.

I am one of those rare "Browns Deal" haters. However, this is even worse. It could have worked as well as the Browns had Seattle been given an expansion team. But since they are taking an established team, then the franchise from Rochester, Cincy, KC, and Sacramento will probably now have to be considered defunct.

Yeah the Browns deal wouldn't have worked well at all if a team had moved in. The other difference is that the Sonics history is "shared", I'm pretty sure. Which is fair enough. Old Sonics championship banners and retired numbers warrant keeping in Seattle, I'd say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Rochester/Cincinnati/Kansas City/Sacremento Royals/Kings pre-date the NBA.

They should keep the Kings name. It would be a shame to see that lineage just disappear just so the team can pretend to be the Super Sonics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Rochester/Cincinnati/Kansas City/Sacremento Royals/Kings pre-date the NBA.

They should keep the Kings name. It would be a shame to see that lineage just disappear just so the team can pretend to be the Super Sonics.

So if it is a variation of the Browns Deal, then one would assume that the Royals/Kings are "contracted". We have:

  • Seattle Supersonics: 1967-2008, time off, and 2013-
  • OKC Thunder: Expansion, 2008
  • Royals/Kings: NBA Day 1, then contracted after 2013 season. Or I suppose they are "in purgatory" just in case Sacramento (or KC for that matter) ever gets another team. Oh boy, would I hope for an expansion team rather than playing the intellectual dishonesty game with more history.

Good timing, though on the Kings being contracted and the Sonics starting up. All the kings players can just go play for the old Sonics, who apparently had to take time off because all the old Sonics thought it would be cool to start an expansion team in OKC.

Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse."

 

BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD

POTD (Shared)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Rochester/Cincinnati/Kansas City/Sacremento Royals/Kings pre-date the NBA.

They should keep the Kings name. It would be a shame to see that lineage just disappear just so the team can pretend to be the Super Sonics.

So if it is a variation of the Browns Deal, then one would assume that the Royals/Kings are "contracted". We have:

  • Seattle Supersonics: 1967-2008, time off, and 2013-
  • OKC Thunder: Expansion, 2008
  • Royals/Kings: NBA Day 1, then contracted after 2013 season. Or I suppose they are "in purgatory" just in case Sacramento (or KC for that matter) ever gets another team. Oh boy, would I hope for an expansion team rather than playing the intellectual dishonesty game with more history.

Good timing, though on the Kings being contracted and the Sonics starting up. All the kings players can just go play for the old Sonics, who apparently had to take time off because all the old Sonics thought it would be cool to start an expansion team in OKC.

This is why the Cleveland Deal, and all of its variations, is a terrible idea. It used to be that if you moved, you took your identity with you. Maybe you didn't keep it in the new location, but it was still recognized as part of your lineage.

This? This is just a mess. A mess brought on by people who want to play make-believe. Sure the Sonics left town in a s***y way, and that sucks, but calling the Kings the Sonics, dressing them as the Sonics, and pretending the team never moved in the first place won't change the fact that 1) Durant and Co. still play in Oklahoma City and 2) that you're just rooting for the G-ddamn Sacramento Kings. Just listen to DG, noted Sonics fan, lament the fact that the promising young Sonics teams from a few years ago are now coming into their own in Oklahoma City to see that, to anyone actually paying attention, the true Sonics are in Oklahoma City.

It's all doubly annoying when you consider that all of this will lead to the termination of one of the most enduring team legacies in the NBA. It pre-dates the NBA even. And it's not even like keeping the Kings name in Seattle would be trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. Seattle's in King County and a planned pre-Seahawks NFL expansion team in Seattle would have used the Kings name. So the identity, which has exited in various forms since before the NBA, would work wonderfully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Rochester/Cincinnati/Kansas City/Sacremento Royals/Kings pre-date the NBA.

They should keep the Kings name. It would be a shame to see that lineage just disappear just so the team can pretend to be the Super Sonics.

The team is more the city's than the owner's regardless of what a piece of paper says. Owners come and go while the fans remain for year after year. It's ludicrous to think that OKC has anything to do with 40 years of history in Seattle, really insane. If fact it's beyond me why it's even being argued. The Seattle SuperSonics are Seattle's team. The Kings are Sacramento's. It's really not that difficult people.

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.