wonderbread Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 Nba has to take back all merchandise, promotions, etc that has the previous logos on them and other semantic bullsh##..But then the NBA will sell merchandise with the old logo as part of their hardwood classic apparel so i dont see the loss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadojoker Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Yea exactly^^^ but its the same as when someone wants to change their number or like Chad OccoCinco case..someone changes their name Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilt Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Except that Chad can do whatever he wants with his private money while a franchise needs solid business reasons for spending any money (unless your owner is a Russian with bottomless pocket).Anybody knows how long this fee exists? The Pistons tried recolouring in 2001 before completely ditching the horse logo. And does it apply to relocation/name changing (e.g. Brooklyn, Hornets swap) as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goforbroke Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Except that Chad can do whatever he wants with his private money while a franchise needs solid business reasons for spending any money (unless your owner is a Russian with bottomless pocket).Anybody knows how long this fee exists? The Pistons tried recolouring in 2001 before completely ditching the horse logo. And does it apply to relocation/name changing (e.g. Brooklyn, Hornets swap) as well?I was confused about the Nets logo for a while, to me the new primary seems to be a redesigned version of the old shield. Simple and cleaner but obviously inspired. It's hard to tell if it's close enough to qualify as a re color. I basically assumed they made that to satisfy the league and plan to use the circle-B logo "primarily" so it really doesn't matter. That's also why they slapped the word Brooklyn under it so it had the city name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEANS Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 man DC sports teams all have some pretty poor primary logos https://www.andrewsterlachini.com/ or http://dribbble.com/MEANS1974 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRicSlick Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 man DC sports teams all have some pretty poor primary logosThe 'skins logo isn't bad, it's just "racist". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderbread Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 man DC sports teams all have some pretty poor primary logosThe 'skins logo isn't bad, it's just "racist".The logo isnt racist the name is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSU151 Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Except that Chad can do whatever he wants with his private money while a franchise needs solid business reasons for spending any money (unless your owner is a Russian with bottomless pocket).Anybody knows how long this fee exists? The Pistons tried recolouring in 2001 before completely ditching the horse logo. And does it apply to relocation/name changing (e.g. Brooklyn, Hornets swap) as well?I was confused about the Nets logo for a while, to me the new primary seems to be a redesigned version of the old shield. Simple and cleaner but obviously inspired. It's hard to tell if it's close enough to qualify as a re color. I basically assumed they made that to satisfy the league and plan to use the circle-B logo "primarily" so it really doesn't matter. That's also why they slapped the word Brooklyn under it so it had the city name.The Brooklyn logo is not a recolor. It's similar, but a totally different logo.Recolors are like what the Nuggets, Jazz, and Raptors did, and to a certain extent, the Hawks, Bucks, Wizards, and Suns. Logo is the exact same, but maybe a different font. Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEANS Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 man DC sports teams all have some pretty poor primary logosThe 'skins logo isn't bad, it's just "racist".stop kidding yourself, it's a bad logo https://www.andrewsterlachini.com/ or http://dribbble.com/MEANS1974 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderbread Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 man DC sports teams all have some pretty poor primary logosThe 'skins logo isn't bad, it's just "racist".stop kidding yourself, it's a bad logowhat are you talking about? its not bad, its not racist, only the name is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goforbroke Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Except that Chad can do whatever he wants with his private money while a franchise needs solid business reasons for spending any money (unless your owner is a Russian with bottomless pocket).Anybody knows how long this fee exists? The Pistons tried recolouring in 2001 before completely ditching the horse logo. And does it apply to relocation/name changing (e.g. Brooklyn, Hornets swap) as well?I was confused about the Nets logo for a while, to me the new primary seems to be a redesigned version of the old shield. Simple and cleaner but obviously inspired. It's hard to tell if it's close enough to qualify as a re color. I basically assumed they made that to satisfy the league and plan to use the circle-B logo "primarily" so it really doesn't matter. That's also why they slapped the word Brooklyn under it so it had the city name.The Brooklyn logo is not a recolor. It's similar, but a totally different logo.Recolors are like what the Nuggets, Jazz, and Raptors did, and to a certain extent, the Hawks, Bucks, Wizards, and Suns. Logo is the exact same, but maybe a different font. The thing about Brooklyn is that, to me, the very existence of the shield logo seems to indicate its to get around some NBA rule. Its pretty clear that's the case with the shield logo that has Brooklyn slapped under it. But even the shield itself - I know its different, but its - idk how to say it - unnecessarily inspired. Like-- why is it what it is. They really didn't need or give any indication that they were trying to connect the Brooklyn Nets with any NJ Nets history, or that they even cared if any fans followed them across Staten Island. They launched the team as a brand new team in Brooklyn, and to me the only reason they kept the nickname Nets was because it was their main priority to promote Brooklyn, rather than promote a new nickname. So again who cares what the nickname is .. its a Brooklyn Basketball Team. No need to throw another promotional obstacle in a new nickname.SOOO with all of that in mind, in a way I feel like they threw together the "Primary" not really caring what it looked like because they didn't intend to use it that often. Granted, they do use it a little more than I thought they would, but still the B-circle logo is what is primarily used. And that's why I'm wondering if the shield is in that supposed 50% range where - according to NBA guidelines - its close enough to count as a recolor - because to me it seems like something the Nets would want to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJKiddsHead Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 I know here in Brooklyn, you'll see the shield on the back of the occasional varsity jacket or New Era hat, but the roundel is everywhere. Hats, shirts, jackets, hoodies, sweapants, tracksuits, baby bottles, yarmulkes, flags, THE ACTUAL BROOKLYN NETS CENTER COURT, etc. Point: the real "primary" logo is whatever the team uses the most, not what some release sheet says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEANS Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 man DC sports teams all have some pretty poor primary logosThe 'skins logo isn't bad, it's just "racist".stop kidding yourself, it's a bad logowhat are you talking about? its not bad, its not racist, only the name is.I never said anything about race, I just think it's a poor logo. https://www.andrewsterlachini.com/ or http://dribbble.com/MEANS1974 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC in Da House w/o a Doubt Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Every New Era Wizards hat I've seen features the wizard logo. Occasionally you'll see the dc-hands logo on Adidas hats. But it seems like majority of Wizards hats in general still have the Papa Smurf wizard logo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.