Fan Reaction: The be all to end all?

[Lee Noire]

Over in the sports logos section ASU introduced a new Sparky mascot and artwork to be used for its kids program. It was made very clear the original and some say iconic Sparky logo would remain untouched. Despite the explaination and intent for these changes(or lack thereof) fans instantly wanted it gone and apparently it was scrapped. Its just another example, much like the Islanders fisherman or the 49ers prototype logo, of designs being abandoned due to fan reaction.

I understand teams, pro or otherwise, need fan support but how far does that rabbit hole go? Do these franchises or programs have the right to do what they wish with their property, or make decisions without fearing fan backlash? I can imagine these changes aren't cheap and not to mention the countless hours that went into the creative process, just thrown out because some fans didn't like it?

I'll admit i've found some changes to be down right ugly but I also understand that as times change so must we. For better or worse. Also, very rarely do we get teams like the Celtics that pretty much have looked the same since day 1, but who is to say that is the way to go? Do we as fans have too much power? Are we the "be all to end all?"

I've always believed you can't please everybody and honestly I think some fans think to highly of themselves in regards to what a team "owes" them. I also know that some fans have an emotional attachment to a certain look or logo and change is hard. Figured this would be a nice topic to discuss. What say you?

[drdougfresh]

I think with universities in particular, there's a lot more involvement (and thus, input) from stakeholders (mostly alumnus and boosters) -- who usually have more of a tie to the history of a logo. Keep them happy, keep the money coming in. I'm thinking that's been the case with the new Sparky, and I think it had a lot to do with Michigan State abandoning its new Spartan head logo that Nike proposed in 2010 (http://espn.go.com/b...of-new-brand-id).

At the end of the day, unhappy stakeholders means less money. As non "college athletics" as that may sound to some, it's a sad truth in the current environment of college football.

[Kevin W.]

Fans pay the bills. It's that simple, especially in the case of universities like ASU since most, if not all, big universities have self-funded athletic departments that cannot dip into the university's academic funds. If fan support is gone, their bottom line plummets and athletic departments cannot function without money.

[Lee Noire]

I completely understand that. What I don't get is why some "fans" aren't willing to continue to support a team because of what they wear instead of how they perform. That has always bugged me about some fandoms out there.

[Kevin W.]

Fans are fickle. That's the way it is for every team.

[drdougfresh]

Fans Consumers are fickle.

It's human nature. Sure, the Pontiac Aztec may have been a great vehicle (probably not true, but for argument's sake), and it was ugly as sin -- thus, it never survived.

[Lee Noire]

True. Its an interesting situation. Pretending I were a team owner and I had a vision of what my team should look like/represent. Some fans didn't approve and were unwilling to support the team anymore, I don't know if I'd scrap it to keep fairweather fans. On the other hand, as a business man I'd want to keep every fan fairweather or not. Like CRichardson said, have to pay the bills.