Tigers6884

Nordiques or Expos?

Recommended Posts

It's even less classic than the ball in glove.

I am no lover of the ball in glove, but at least that logo achieves what it sets out to do.

It's an "m" combined with a "b" in the shape of a baseball glove. The letters are clear and unmistakeable. You can say it's overly cute, you can say it's a relic of its time, but you can't say that it's confusing. It reads precisely as intended. Some people don't see the letters right away in favor of the glove, but once pointed out nobody can help but see them every time.

The Expos logo, on the other hand, is a bloody mess. It's supposed to look like an "M", but doesn't. The muddy silhouette, moreover, is clearly comprised of a distinctive and unmistakeable "e", "l", and "b". Which was not the intended effect.

So no, I don't think the two can really be compared, except in as much as I'm not a fan of either. But one is clear in its design and successful in its execution, and the other one is the Expos logo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but what do you love about it?

I understand sentiment around the logo, but the design itself is so terrible, for the reasons I laid out above, that I'd be happier if it never saw a playing field again.

I like it for it's vibrant colors and it's uniqueness compared to most other MLB logos, which are dull in color.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Expos' logo is great. It's easily identifiable. The last thing it needs to be is "updated". I'm sure it still sells and that's the thing that matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both the Expos' logo and the Brewers' ball-in-glove are incredibly dated, in my opinion.

As far as the Expos go? Their road script would be a good place to start for a new cap logo. A script "M" with a fleur-de-lis worked in? I could dig it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Updated? No. It needs to be scrapped. Start from scratch.

I have to disagree here. I think while it's impossible to for the average (or even an informed) person to clearly tell what the constituent parts mean, the overall completed logo is instantly recognizable as representative of the Expos, without requiring any additional wording. It also passes the "book cover" test. While they failed in their attempt to creatively integrate various letters into a stylized letter form, they succeeded in creating a logo that is truly iconic within the baseball community.

I don't think it's all that dissimilar to the Flyers logo. Hell - I grew up with the team, and never realized it was supposed to be a P with wings. I thought it was just a shape. I'd argue that it is about as iconic as it gets within the hockey world (if not the sports world in general), and I think that the Expos' logo, while not quite in that class, is very close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Updated? No. It needs to be scrapped. Start from scratch.

I have to disagree here. I think while it's impossible to for the average (or even an informed) person to clearly tell what the constituent parts mean, the overall completed logo is instantly recognizable as representative of the Expos, without requiring any additional wording. It also passes the "book cover" test. While they failed in their attempt to creatively integrate various letters into a stylized letter form, they succeeded in creating a logo that is truly iconic within the baseball community.

I don't think it's all that dissimilar to the Flyers logo. Hell - I grew up with the team, and never realized it was supposed to be a P with wings. I thought it was just a shape. I'd argue that it is about as iconic as it gets within the hockey world (if not the sports world in general), and I think that the Expos' logo, while not quite in that class, is very close.

I agree. It may not be a great logo but it is popular and easily identifiable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And everybody recognizes a Big Mac as a hamburger, but that doesn't make it a particularly good one. ;) That's just saturation marketing, same as the Expos.

At least with the Flyers' "P", the P exists, was intended and is there. Even if you didn't personally recognize it at first. But "elb"? It's nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THERE IS NO L

I NEVER SAW AN L

WHY DO PEOPLE INSIST IT'S AN L

IF ANYTHING IT'S A J

it's not a j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And everybody recognizes a Big Mac as a hamburger, but that doesn't make it a particularly good one. ;) That's just saturation marketing, same as the Expos.

At least with the Flyers' "P", the P exists, was intended and is there. Even if you didn't personally recognize it at first. But "elb"? It's nonsense.

Apples and oranges. A Big Mac is recognized as a cheeseburger, but that doesn't make it representative of a brand. The big yellow M does that.

Your comparison would work better if I was trying to claim that a generic logo with a baseball in it was obviously representative of some baseball team, but not one in particular. That's your Big Mac - representative of someone's cheeseburger, but not one specifically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what made the Expos' logo work was how odd it looks. It was somehow emblematic of a team from a foreign country with a foreign language. A block/Tuscan/script M, that could be anywhere in America, but the swirly eMb looks like something from a bilingual culture, like it's meant to communicate something without communicating it in one language or the other. I feel the same way about the Blue Jays to a lesser extent, where the logo and the soccer numbers looked like baseball through a not-necessarily-American prism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You basically said that what makes it work is how bad it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not for our puny anglophone minds to comprehend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was ten years old my little league team was the Expos and none of us knew what the hell the thing on our hats or the name of our team was. Our parents did their best to explain it, but it was before google so figuring out what the logo really was meant you had to look it up in a book.

But we were also the 1994 Expos of that league. We crushed teams that year so the name and goofy logo became our weird rallying cry. Plus early on in the season our coach explained to us that they speak French in Montreal so the whole season you had a bunch of ten year olds screaming in French gibberish and singing "Alouette" instead of your usual little league chants. What a summer.

I'll always have a weird appreciation for the Expos because of that team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was ten years old my little league team was the Expos and none of us knew what the hell the thing on our hats or the name of our team was. Our parents did their best to explain it, but it was before google so figuring out what the logo really was meant you had to look it up in a book.

But we were also the 1994 Expos of that league. We crushed teams that year so the name and goofy logo became our weird rallying cry. Plus early on in the season our coach explained to us that they speak French in Montreal so the whole season you had a bunch of ten year olds screaming in French gibberish and singing "Alouette" instead of your usual little league chants. What a summer.

I'll always have a weird appreciation for the Expos because of that team.

Hahaha, Alouette! That sounds like it was an awesome little league team!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always saw a Jb. Still to this day, I look at it and that's what I see. The M needs to be made a bit more obvious to make it a solid logo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw jb, too. If the Expos ever come back, that will be their logo. It survived the redesign that ended the pinwheel cap and any modification might de-French it, which new owners probably wouldn't risk.

I'd prefer an entirely new monogram, but if the curly W came back, I don't see MLB abandoning the eMb that survived the Expos' entire tenure.

Like someone said above, it says "Expos" ... and not much else.

All that is a big "if"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's inevitable that another pro team comes to Montreal at some point in the future. A high (16th largest metro in US/Canada), growing population. By 2025, the population will be 5 million. A high GDP. Tons of corporate headquarters. All the writing is on the wall for the future.

Personally, I predict basketball before baseball.

The Bell Center is already there, fairly new and well-placed. A team just has to move in, with some minor adjustments I'd imagine.

It's a similar city to Vancouver as far as economics, demographics and rate of growth. I think if the Grizzlies had stuck around, they'd have worked out greatly.

They had great attendance for their first 4 seasons and dipped slightly below 14,000 for the last two. They had absolutely atrocious teams, so getting even 14,000 isn't all that bad. The Sixers and Bucks are both getting those numbers this year. I could understand if they had 4 straight years of 11,000 fans a night.

They weren't well managed from a front office standpoint. But 6 seasons isn't really enough time to give a team. I think had they stayed in BC they'd be doing better than they have been in Memphis, financially.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.