Jump to content

NYC FC Branding


ksupilot

Recommended Posts

Melbourne City

That club is technically still called Melbourne Heart. (There's also already a sky blue team in the A-League; it'll be interesting to see if MC/Heart decide to go the co-branding route.)
Not only a sky-blue team, but a team that plays in double-blue with a touch of orange.

Sydney-FC-11.jpg

Sydney_FC_logo.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 905
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I'm just stating that I don't believe it to be coincidence that the MCFC owned club in New York is called NYCFC.

Then we are all in agreement - nobody has ever suggested it's 100% coincidence.

I'm only saying that the name might well have still been chosen if some other club, PSG or West Ham, had won the bidding. Or even if a new ownership group, unaffiliated with any other club, had been so lucky. Because it's a perfect name for the club on its own, the reflection of the parent company is a bonus.

Fair enough.

My apologies for the misunderstanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As another outsider here's my take:

1. Yankees ownership for Yankee haters could be a problem. Apples and oranges I know since Seattle doesn't have two teams but if a Seattle soccer team was owned by the 49ers that would be a tough pill to swallow.

2. Man City ownership is a problem since NYCFC could be seen as a second coming of the Chivas USA disaster. Hopefully for them they don't follow that "B" team concept. Helps that Red Bulls don't play in New York unlike Chivas and Galaxy playing in the same stadium.

All in all I guess it would be better for a New Yorker with big pockets and no existing ties to own the team. As it is, I bet the team will have enough support as the NYC team regardless of who owns them.

What about a football team owned by the owner of a one-time basketball rival?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As another outsider here's my take:

1. Yankees ownership for Yankee haters could be a problem. Apples and oranges I know since Seattle doesn't have two teams but if a Seattle soccer team was owned by the 49ers that would be a tough pill to swallow.

2. Man City ownership is a problem since NYCFC could be seen as a second coming of the Chivas USA disaster. Hopefully for them they don't follow that "B" team concept. Helps that Red Bulls don't play in New York unlike Chivas and Galaxy playing in the same stadium.

All in all I guess it would be better for a New Yorker with big pockets and no existing ties to own the team. As it is, I bet the team will have enough support as the NYC team regardless of who owns them.

What about a football team owned by the owner of a one-time basketball rival?

If you're referring to Paul Allen owning the Trailblazers and Seahawks, I think the difference is Paul Allen has always been a Seattlite and was a big supporter of the Supersonics. He wanted to own the Supersonics but the timing was never right and he bought the Blazers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Name the team something. Anything. In this country, teams have nicknames.

An increasingly large number of soccer teams in both Canada and the United States do not have nicknames. I wouldn't be overly fond of the San Diego Chargers becoming San Diego FC or the Toronto Maple Leafs becoming Toronto HC, but it is a naming convention that works for soccer.

Do we have to do everything like Europe does?

Everything? Are MLB teams adopting European naming conventions? NFL teams? NHL teams? NBA teams? No.

Also, the city's name is New York. It's already copying the name of a city in the UK. In some ways a Euro name like NYCFC is appropriate.

2. The logo looks like a subway token.

That's a good thing. The subway's one of the first things I think of when I hear "New York City."

3. Let's hope this team never, ever sees the light of day.

Mmmm...they're going to play. And they'll, in all likelihood, becoming the most well supported pro soccer team in New York City.

The naming convention works for soccer? Really? Maybe for you, not for me and not for the NEW fans you are trying to market to. Do you really think those who are becoming fans will remember the catchy and magnificent name NYC FC? It's just plainly stupid from a marketing point of view. To some of us who watch the sport, play the sport and have been fans of the sport, it is a huge, huge turnoff.

A logo as a subway token. Amusing but um, will it be a seller? Will people stand up and say "wow, what a logo!!"? Even dumber.

Being the most well-supported pro soccer team in NYC doesn't mean squat.

Once again, epic fail. Another soccer team that has not embraced the multi-ethnic culture of NYC. Just plain stupidity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine a European American Football League where the teams had names like London AFC (American Football Club) or AFC Berlin, and if their jerseys had big sponsors instead of numbers on the front of jerseys. I'm sure most in the USA would mock them and say how they didn't "get" real American football. You have to act and look like you know what you're doing. The MLS is simply maturing and growing up as a soccer league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Panthers why do you keep saying the logo is a token, the actual NYCFC logo is a plain roundel. The true token logo was just a concept. Your entire argument is void because everything you have said clearly shows you have NO idea what you are talking about. You were obviously against this team from the start and for every person who is turned off by the Euro naming convention, there is another person who likes it and will take NYCFC more seriously than the New York Lions, Royals, Stars or any other 'murica name. Soccer is a global sport slowly gaining traction in the US and American soccer culture has been laughable and the perception of outsiders is worse.

Trust me I know I'm just getting into soccer, I used to hate it but then I gave it a chance and It really is a beautiful game. I still to this day respect euro soccer more than American soccer, so branding in a euro way is smart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The naming convention works for soccer? Really?

Yes.

Maybe for you...

And most of the world.

not for me and not for the NEW fans you are trying to market to.

MLS' fanbase has increased since they started going with European naming practices. The league was in dire shape when they were trying to Americanize the sport.

Do you really think those who are becoming fans will remember the catchy and magnificent name NYC FC?

Yes.

It's just plainly stupid from a marketing point of view.

All available data says otherwise.

To some of us who watch the sport, play the sport and have been fans of the sport, it is a huge, huge turnoff.

These people you described must be in the minority when it comes to North American soccer fans. I'm sorry that they couldn't recycle an old NASL name for you, but times are'a changin'.

A logo as a subway token. Amusing but um, will it be a seller? Will people stand up and say "wow, what a logo!!"?

Again, all available evidence says yes.

Being the most well-supported pro soccer team in NYC doesn't mean squat.

It means quite a lot actually.

Once again, epic fail. Another soccer team that has not embraced the multi-ethnic culture of NYC.

Ummm...ok? I don't see how it's "failed" in that regard.

You're obviously not a fan Panthers, so instead of telling us the new name/logo is dumb why don't you tell us what kind of name and logo you would have wanted to see? Remember, the Cosmos weren't an option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine a European American Football League where the teams had names like London AFC (American Football Club) or AFC Berlin, and if their jerseys had big sponsors instead of numbers on the front of jerseys. I'm sure most in the USA would mock them and say how they didn't "get" real American football. You have to act and look like you know what you're doing. The MLS is simply maturing and growing up as a soccer league.

That's right. Look at the BBL, the British Basketball League. They have teams such as the Manchester Giants, the London Lions, and the Newcastle Eagles; those are the names that feel right for basketball.

There will always be some "city + nickname" situations in North American soccer. "Seattle Sounders" is a great name; the fans demanded it, and rightfully so. Likewise "Portland Timbers" and "Vancouver Whitecaps". But the fact that MLS now includes FC Dallas, Toronto FC, Sporting Kansas City, and now NYC FC (and the fact that many other teams throughout the American and Canadian soccer pyramids have names like this) shows that these names feel right for soccer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd actually love some "nickname without the city" too. Here you hear Sounders FC alone often. Kind of in the mold of: Inter, AC, Juventus, Arsenal, Benfica, etc.

I've always felt the Revs should go this route. Revolution FC.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To some of us who watch the sport, play the sport and have been fans of the sport, it is a huge, huge turnoff.

These people you described must be in the minority when it comes to North American soccer fans. I'm sorry that they couldn't recycle an old NASL name for you, but times are'a changin'.

How dare you forget about the iconic New York Generals and their long storied tradition. :P

2o4vh2yv1g13zesg3nxhpexfx.gif

(On a unsarcastic note that "G" would look good on baseball caps)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There will always be some "city + nickname" situations in North American soccer. "Seattle Sounders" is a great name; the fans demanded it, and rightfully so. Likewise "Portland Timbers" and "Vancouver Whitecaps". But the fact that MLS now includes FC Dallas, Toronto FC, Sporting Kansas City, and now NYC FC (and the fact that many other teams throughout the American and Canadian soccer pyramids have names like this) shows that these names feel right for soccer.

Great team names like "Seattle Sounders" and "Portland Timbers" just underscore how preposterous "Football Club Dallas" and "Sporting Kansas City" are, not to mention the scarfiest one of all, "Real Salt Lake."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There will always be some "city + nickname" situations in North American soccer. "Seattle Sounders" is a great name; the fans demanded it, and rightfully so. Likewise "Portland Timbers" and "Vancouver Whitecaps". But the fact that MLS now includes FC Dallas, Toronto FC, Sporting Kansas City, and now NYC FC (and the fact that many other teams throughout the American and Canadian soccer pyramids have names like this) shows that these names feel right for soccer.

Great team names like "Seattle Sounders" and "Portland Timbers" just underscore how preposterous "Football Club Dallas" and "Sporting Kansas City" are, not to mention the scarfiest one of all, "Real Salt Lake."
Ya real salt lake is idiotic, there is no royal connection to the club.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd agree with Real Salt Lake being a bad one but FC Dallas is completely fine, and much better than the Dallas Burn. Even Sporting Kansas City (marginal) is light years better than the Kansas City Wizards.

Obviously everyone is entitled to their own opinions but I'd guess that a majority of those who have grown up with and follow world soccer appreciate and welcome the more traditional sounding soccer team names.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it really depends on the situation.

Seattle Sounders sounds a lot better than Seattle FC or Sporting Seattle. However, Sporting Kansas City does sound a lot better than Kansas City Wizards.

Does New York Empire or New York Dukes (two names I saw a lot appear in concepts) sound better than New York City Football Club? I honestly couldn't tell you. I think Empire and Dukes both sound good; But I am not sure it fits with the MLS movement.

It'd be kinda weird to go from the obvious traditional soccer movement then have an Americanized name come out of nowhere. I guess it could go either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's funny is that I was having this debate with non-soccer friends who thought the name was stupid until I told them the nickname/mascot is CITY as in the New York CITY. Complete spur of the moment lie on my part but then they were loving it. Said it was a great name that way. It's how you spin it, just like life in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.