nuordr Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 I like the new Panthers logo more than the old, too. Not that the new doesn't have flaws, but the old was just too chunky to me.Here is my personal opinion, upgrade vs downgrade of the NFL logo changes for the last ten years or so (unless I'm forgetting someone)...Upgrades: Arizona - Meaner and sleeker Atlanta - Drastic upgrade Carolina - Loved the removal of the white outline. Cincinnati - Striped "B" logo is perfect for the Bengals Detroit - Nice simple update Minnesota - Nice subtle changesDowngrades:Buccaneers - This looks to "new" to be a pirate flag and the terminator head needs to go. Dolphins - Prefer the old logo compared to a cruise ship logo. Jaguars - This looks to cartoon-ish for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sportstar1212 Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 I like the new Panthers logo more than the old, too. Not that the new doesn't have flaws, but the old was just too chunky to me.Here is my personal opinion, upgrade vs downgrade of the NFL logo changes for the last ten years or so (unless I'm forgetting someone)...I would put the Falcons in the upgrade category, but other than that, it's spot on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 I'm with you all the way. Good list.Three outlines? The old Panthers logo needs three outlines? Awful. Exactly...A blue outline. then a black outline, then a white outline? WTH? Maybe they didn't use a keyline on the current logo because they'd used them all up here.That white keyline is completely pointless against a silver background. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnWis97 Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 I like the new Panthers logo more than the old, too. Not that the new doesn't have flaws, but the old was just too chunky to me.Here is my personal opinion, upgrade vs downgrade of the NFL logo changes for the last ten years or so (unless I'm forgetting someone)...Agree on all the upgrades (since the Lions already had black on their previous version). Honestly, though, if I was not on these boards, I doubt I'd have noticed the Vikes change. But as minor as it is, it's an upgrade.Regarding the downgrades:Bengals: Obviously.Bucs: I am back and forth but tend to agree. Of course it's small potatoes relative to everything else they did to poop on their look.Dolphins: Along with the Bengals, this one's more than a tweak and probably for some of us comes down to philosophies. Mine is that I love the not-too-detailed, almost silhouette look and I find a dolphin wearing a helmet to be minor league. But then again, I am about the only one on here that does not love the "bucking colt with the elastic strap holding the helmet three feet off of his head" logo. Falcons: I tend to agree, but understand why some think it's better. While I have gotten used to it, I don't think it corrected the biggest problem with the old logo. The biggest problem with the old logo was that the one wing does not clearly indicate flying motion. I thought it was an abstract rendering of a bird for years. I don't think this clarifies that at all. I wish they'd have gone to something like the below high-school logo.That is essentially what the original (and now the robo) Falcons logo has always represented...it's just way better-conveyed here. 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 More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 When I see that helmet above, it gives me the idea to tilt the bird so it's more head-on, and also slightly more upright. Then, have a space between the wings, with the legs crossing them and forming an A shape. Boom.I've hated the Falcons' new logo since it debuted. They took something old and kitschy which was flawed itself, struck with the same premise, but removed the aspects that gave it any charm. If they were going to do that, that should have just started from scratch. The current logo looks less like an F than the previous one, which didn't look like one itself. The new logo is forced and just an awful mess. It occurred to me now that the Falcons' new logo is very much like the Seahawks'. Both teams messed with a somewhat dated but charming design, tried to update it and make it "fierce," and in the process took away its effectiveness. The Seahawks' logo is just a fierce, XX-treme bird now, and doesn't have the same impact it had when it was symbolic of Native American art. Even being dated, the old logo was far better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnWis97 Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 If I'd never been on the boards, I'd have had no idea that either Falcon logo formed an "F". I doubt a lot of people notice it, so the value is minimal.And by the way, I think it is incredibly stupid to have the Falcon form an "F". "Falcons" is represented by a drawing, it does not need to be "double-represented" by an "F". If the bird design could work in an "A" that would be different (or if the Falcons played in a city that started with "F", I suppose). So I really hope that keeping a "hidden F" was not the driving force behind the update...if so, they potentially sacrificed the potential to do better just to maintain something fairly subtle and very stupid. And I otherwise echo TheOldRoman's post in terms of what they did to the bird. (though I don't think the Seattle change was nearly as detrimental as Atlanta's) 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 More sharing options...
Buster Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 I saw the F more on the old logo, which I preferred.It was more obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschoolvikings Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 They messed with a somewhat dated but charming design, tried to update it and make it "fierce," and in the process took away its effectiveness. The Falcons' current logo is just a fierce, XX-treme bird now, and doesn't have the same impact it had. Even being dated, the old logo was far better.I came on to defend my preference for the old Falcon Logo over the new, and saw the Roman (with a bit of minor editing) had pretty much summed it up. http://dstewartpaint.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 If I'd never been on the boards, I'd have had no idea that either Falcon logo formed an "F". I doubt a lot of people notice it, so the value is minimal.And by the way, I think it is incredibly stupid to have the Falcon form an "F". "Falcons" is represented by a drawing, it does not need to be "double-represented" by an "F". If the bird design could work in an "A" that would be different (or if the Falcons played in a city that started with "F", I suppose). So I really hope that keeping a "hidden F" was not the driving force behind the update...if so, they potentially sacrificed the potential to do better just to maintain something fairly subtle and very stupid. And I otherwise echo TheOldRoman's post in terms of what they did to the bird. (though I don't think the Seattle change was nearly as detrimental as Atlanta's)THANK YOU about the F being unnecessary. Just like the awful striped B for the Bengals. The stripes demonstrate perfectly well that they're the Bengals. The letter should represent the city.As for the Seahawks, their new logo isn't that bad, and it far better than the Falcons'. I didn't appreciate the old logo that much until recently. I traveled to Alaska last summer, and a big portion of the Inuit population was Seahawks fans specifically because of the logo (Seattle is the closest team to them, but nowhere near being in their TV region). As we saw totems and Native art, it became crystal clear how much the old logo was influenced by it, and that charm is missing from the current logo. I mean, they don't have to pay homage to Inuit people with their logo, but it was cool that they did. The new one is just another logo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Also, the leg on the old Falcons' logo was awkward as hell and far too long, but the leg on the new logo looks like a freaking bear's leg. That thing is gigantic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 I don't know how anyone can prefer the new Jags logo to the old one. That current logo they use is just downright hideous. On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailGoldPants Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 I don't know how anyone can prefer the new Jags logo to the old one. That current logo they use is just downright hideous.It seems to me that most prefer the update, but I think it looks more cartoony than the previous Jags logo. Check out my site at stevebcreations.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBGKon Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 I don't know how anyone can prefer the new Jags logo to the old one. That current logo they use is just downright hideous.It seems to me that most prefer the update, but I think it looks more cartoony than the previous Jags logo.The previous Jags logo was money, especially on that black-teal blended helmet. Even on a matte black helmet it would be perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk36 Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 I think both the new Jags and the new Panthers suffer from being more realistic, and less stylized, and thus take on a cartoonish feel. I feel for a logo it's better to be less literal. Below are a few examples I think are successful due to not being overly realistic and literal. Design Hovie Studios Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 The old Falcons logo is one of the few that I feel qualifies as iconic. The new one is just an overaggresified bastardization of it. It works ok with their current uniforms, but the old one would have too. The problem with it is it is one of the most pirated logos out there at a high school level (or at least was back in my day) so maybe they wanted to start over with something that they could (try to) protect from day one. I don't kbow. If they wanted to modernize it, I'd suggest a Cardinals approach. Maybe cut down on the lines in the wing and make the lines a little bolder. That's about it. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk36 Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 I think that's a great suggestion (updating the Falcons like the Cardinals did with their logo). Even simply reducing the claw and stop trying to force it into an "F" shape would improve its look greatly. Design Hovie Studios Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschoolvikings Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 What's the point of that gray keyline? Why not just use the white to separate it from the background color? http://dstewartpaint.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GFB Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 The Falcons logo is greatly improved by removing the red streaks inside the logo and making the eye red. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 What's the point of that gray keyline? Why not just use the white to separate it from the background color?It's strange considering they don't use silver anywhere else in the identity. They probably ran with silver as a nod to all those years wearing silver pants. I think they probably did that to make the logo more visible against the black helmet background. Also, I think it would need some kind of keyline on a white background. Looking at that image without the silver, it changes the overall shape of the logo, and it's not an improvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jungle Jim Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 EDIT: Forgot about Cincy's B logo. Great as an alternate, not so much though as a primary. The Bengal head is perfectExcept it and the leaping tiger logo were both headed the wrong direction. That has always thrown me off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.