Importance of Product Branding (Logos, Team Colors)

[Killion]

Kids just skated around with the, Yep we bad, attitude.

Ya, black is culturally a touchy color. It denotes mourning & sadness; evil, blindness, just a whole range of things that no matter how sophisticated as a race we become that color (which technically isnt a color) will always have odious/suspect overtones.

Harold Ballard threw a hissy fit and responded by having the lettering the same colour as the jersey (blue on blue, and white on white) so people would still have to buy programs to know which player was which

Ya, I remember that dealeo' with Ballard. Thanks for the chuckle. Im thinking if the NY Yankees' have a bye' on the naming issues, I dont see why historically significant franchises (including Ottawa albeit with a lapse of about 60yrs) cant do the same.

Vancouver is a good example...

Ya, Vancouver is an excellent example and the very definition of a sartorially challenged outfit with 7 major & several other minor makeovers & tinkerings since 1970, & they still havent got it together.

 

[Mayor Bee]

The Thrashers really screwed up. Instead of going with Georgia colors (Red, Black, and White) or something that was like "New Flames" they came out with these bizarre jerseys with too many colors and patterns. I mean, they were Navy, Light Blue, Maroon(ish), Gold, and White AND copper and orange in the main logo. Absurd.

They couldn't have gone with red/black/white. When the Falcons came into the league and rolled out their uniforms (which featured those colors), the Georgia Tech contingent went nuts because it was UGA's color scheme. To compromise, the helmets remained red with a black logo trimmed in white...and the center striping was gold and white.

One of the challenges that any new team faces is establishing its own identity without either catering to or turning off fans of established teams in the area. I remember there was a significant portion of central Ohio locals that flatly stated that they would not support an NHL team unless their colors were OSU's, and the team name "the Puckeyes". There was legitimate outrage when the name Blue Jackets was chosen because OSU doesn't use blue, but U of Michigan does. And if you notice looking back through the various CBJ logos (alternate and primary), there's always been red and gray/silver, but there's always something between them that acts as a buffer so they don't touch.

 

[Buck Aki Berg]

They couldn't have gone with red/black/white. When the Falcons came into the league and rolled out their uniforms (which featured those colors), the Georgia Tech contingent went nuts because it was UGA's color scheme.

I know college sports is a different beast here in Canada (in that it's less of a beast and more like a puppy pawing at the door and whimpering to be let out to go pee), but any complaints from a university to the effect of "You stole our colour scheme!!1!" should be filed under "I" for "Ignore"

 

[NewClearWinter]

I have a confession to make. Since I grew up in the 90's my second favorite team was the Mighty Ducks SOLEY BECAUSE of their logo and colors. I loved Kariya, Selanne, Giguere, Lupul, etc. But when the switched from jade and eggplant to black orange and brown, I instantly stopped being a fan. The players were mostly the same, but I no longer identified with them anymore. The logo/colors really did mean a lot.

 

[Magnus Fulgur]

They couldn't have gone with red/black/white. When the Falcons came into the league and rolled out their uniforms (which featured those colors), the Georgia Tech contingent went nuts because it was UGA's color scheme. To compromise, the helmets remained red with a black logo trimmed in white...and the center striping was gold and white.

One of the challenges that any new team faces is establishing its own identity without either catering to or turning off fans of established teams in the area. I remember there was a significant portion of central Ohio locals that flatly stated that they would not support an NHL team unless their colors were OSU's, and the team name "the Puckeyes". There was legitimate outrage when the name Blue Jackets was chosen because OSU doesn't use blue, but U of Michigan does. And if you notice looking back through the various CBJ logos (alternate and primary), there's always been red and gray/silver, but there's always something between them that acts as a buffer so they don't touch.

There's one thing with a NFL team mimicking a college team, but if The Thrashers had done the red and black thing nobody would care. Gwinnett Gladiators? Black, Red/Maroon White and a beige-gold. Nobody from Tech has said a thing...What you don't do is trot your guys out looking like Harlequins or North Carolina rejects.

 

[Mayor Bee]

I know college sports is a different beast here in Canada (in that it's less of a beast and more like a puppy pawing at the door and whimpering to be let out to go pee), but any complaints from a university to the effect of "You stole our colour scheme!!1!" should be filed under "I" for "Ignore"

Exactly. The funny thing is that I don't remember any Michigan fans complaining about the Red Wings having one of OSU's primary colors and also having that as part of their name.

As it relates specifically to Atlanta, the first pro sports team in the South was the Atlanta Braves, followed a few months later by the Falcons and Miami Dolphins. College sports is huge in the South because, for a huge chunk of the region's history, college sports was literally all that there was. And since most of those schools were located in smaller cities, it just meant that the bigger cities had larger populations that also followed those teams.

 

[Mayor Bee]

There's one thing with a NFL team mimicking a college team, but if The Thrashers had done the red and black thing nobody would care. Gwinnett Gladiators? Black, Red/Maroon White and a beige-gold. Nobody from Tech has said a thing...What you don't do is trot your guys out looking like Harlequins or North Carolina rejects.

Consider the backlash against Columbus for "stealing" a color scheme and look for their alternates. Consider also that Boston allegedly threatened Pittsburgh in 1967 if they used a black/gold color scheme, and that Chicago threatened the Kansas City Mohawks in 1974 for their logo (KC relenting and becoming the Scouts).

It is imperative for a team to have its own unique image, not just in name but also in logo and color scheme. The idea is to see it from a distance and immediately know what team it is. Atlanta went with an obviously unique name, a unique logo, and a color scheme that wasn't close to what anyone else had. When they went the alternate route, they went with a look that no one else had ever done (the single sleeve striping). Argue if you want over the end result, but it was the right way to have done it.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

Red and black for the Thrashers would have meant the exact colors the Hurricanes, a division rival, use as well. I think you should try to look for some differentiation at least in that regard.

 

[Killion]

One of the challenges that any new team faces is establishing its own identity without either catering to or turning off fans of established teams in the area. I remember there was a significant portion of central Ohio locals that flatly stated that they would not support an NHL team unless their colors were OSU's, and the team name "the Puckeyes". There was legitimate outrage when the name Blue Jackets was chosen because OSU doesn't use blue, but U of Michigan does..

Thats interesting. I was unaware of the controversy over the coloration & naming issues in Ohio. I think of all the "newer" uniforms to come along in the past 20yrs, Columbus's are head & shoulders above the rest. I love the use of the Cannon (in-rink as well) and the whole "Yakee" theme theyve' got going. Really well done.

Red and black for the Thrashers would have meant the exact colors the Hurricanes, a division rival, use as well. I think you should try to look for some differentiation at least in that regard.

Not impressed with the Thrashers uniforms though oddly & Im probably in a minority, I do like their 3rd jersey.

Of the lot, Id like to see changes made to;

Vancouver (revert to the old-school/new-school stick)
Calgary (new name)
Toronto (veined Leaf logo home & away)
Ottawa (retro original jerseys)
Pittsburgh (tweaks to the logo)
Nashville (lose the silver)
Florida (complete makeover)
LA (return to the gold/purple & crown)
Colorado (complete makeover)
Phoenix (complete makeover)

 

[Stephen]

However, the change to red as a primary colour happened pretty much immediately upon the arena being renamed Scotiabank Place, and there's no doubt in my mind that changing to red and aligning with Scotiabank was not a coincidence.

I agree with you that the original logo and colour scheme was better, one of my personal childhood favourites, but I don't think the red had anything to do with the Scotiabank affiliation, since the arena was originally called the "Palladium" and was changed to the "Corel Centre" in 1996-97. The Reds were introduced way before the Scotiabank moniker was added in 2006.

 

[Buck Aki Berg]

I agree with you that the original logo and colour scheme was better, one of my personal childhood favourites, but I don't think the red had anything to do with the Scotiabank affiliation, since the arena was originally called the "Palladium" and was changed to the "Corel Centre" in 1996-97. The Reds were introduced way before the Scotiabank moniker was added in 2006.

You've got me there, the Sens had red as a primary colour in 2003, but iirc (and I probably don't), the jerseys went from "mostly red" to "red" the first full season that Scotiabank had title sponsorship of the barn.

 

[Magnus Fulgur]

Atlanta could have gone Red and Black like Carolina...Rangers and Canadiens have the same colors...Phoenix vs. Detroit is HORRIBLE to watch on TV. Florida's 3rds now look a lot like the old Blueland Atlanta jerseys. TB's 3rds vs. the Leafs will be nasty to watch.

What was wrong with Atlanta was not that they had unique uniforms, but they kept changing it and had kits that were busy and mismatched. If I ask you "What does the Thrashers' kit look like?" You have to write a few paragraphs.

How do you create a sense of fanbase unity when everyone is wearing drastically different jerseys?
1.) A Red jersey with only the wordmark on the front
2.) A Blue jersey with "Atlanta" down one sleeve
3.) A White jersey that is pretty boring
4.) A completely different pre-lockout kit.

All this and constant changes and tweaks for a team that was only around for 12 years. Going to games, the crowd looked more like a rummage sale than fans supporting the same team.

 

[KevFu]

Buffalo's color scheme changed when they moved into HSBC Arena, and were the exact same colors as HSBC's colors. It was unpopular because they obviously catering to a corporate sponsor.

The Houston Astros changed their color scheme when they moved into a new ballpark at an old train yard. Hence the red brick and sandstone scheme, that has nothing to do with the "Astros" motif. The jerseys they were wearing in 1997-98 were awesome. And they just tossed 'em. Tragic.

 

[Butch 19]

And then there were the lessons learned from the Islanders fishsticks debacle.

?? what lessons? The fishstick logo itself wasn't that bad (it was above average imo), it was the wavy accents with new added colors that blew that jersey/logo/number font combo out of the water.

Right now, the fishstick logo is better than the logos for:

1) Minn (waaay too busy)
2) Ott (the 3-d senator has to go! - the profile guy is classic)
3) Dallas (once they get a logo, this can be revisited)
4) Ana (once they get a logo, this can be revisited)
5) Atl (obviously not an issue anymore)
6) Colorado (HM - a puck slides down a mountain? really?)

 

[KevFu]

They couldn't have gone with red/black/white. When the Falcons came into the league and rolled out their uniforms (which featured those colors), the Georgia Tech contingent went nuts because it was UGA's color scheme. To compromise, the helmets remained red with a black logo trimmed in white...and the center striping was gold and white.

One of the challenges that any new team faces is establishing its own identity without either catering to or turning off fans of established teams in the area. I remember there was a significant portion of central Ohio locals that flatly stated that they would not support an NHL team unless their colors were OSU's, and the team name "the Puckeyes". There was legitimate outrage when the name Blue Jackets was chosen because OSU doesn't use blue, but U of Michigan does. And if you notice looking back through the various CBJ logos (alternate and primary), there's always been red and gray/silver, but there's always something between them that acts as a buffer so they don't touch.

I don't get why ATL couldn't have gone with Gold, Red, Black as their color scheme. You could make a pretty sharp looking jersey with that:

I tossed this together in 10 minutes. I think it's better than any look they've had

 

[KevFu]

?? what lessons? The fishstick logo itself wasn't that bad (it was above average imo), it was the wavy accents with new added colors that blew that jersey/logo/number font combo out of the water.

It was the drastic sudden change away from something they'd worn essentially for their entire existence with only slight modifications (stripe size, spacing), collars, etc.


If they had added an aqua stripe, made the stripes wavy, and added the lighthouse logo on the shoulders as a third jersey... people would have been like "wait, what? Oh, okay. I get it. Tying in the coastal theme."

Then they could have changed to the Fishsticks logo/jersey as a third, and the blow back would have been less severe.

But they just ditched their history completely, and with a crappy team, the fans went nuts.

If you're going to toss away 25 years of tradition (including four stanley cups), you better be going from a weak jersey to the most stunning visual display ever.

 

[David_99]

2.) A Blue jersey with "Atlanta" down one sleeve

This one really irked me for some reason. My brain expects symmetry in a hockey jersey. I started to hate the entire franchise just because that jersey existed! Not really, just extremely annoyed.

If they had stayed this season, I half expected them to wear a different colour glove on each hand.

 

[Grudy0]

I remember there was a disagreement in the Australian Football League, which had 12 teams until about 1987. One of those teams, Collingwood Magpies, used black and white as their colors. When the league expanded to an outlying area of Adelaide and awarded the Port Adelaide Magpies of the South Australian League a new team, of course "Magpies" was off the table. But so was the "black and white", and Port Power had to also incorporate another color, in their case, teal.

I'm remembering seeing similar discussions about the Penguins when they decided to ditch their blue in favor of Pittsburgh's black and old gold, upon objection by the Boston Bruins. Remembering this...

The O6:
Detroit - Red
Toronto - White
New York - Blue and Red
Montreal - Red and Blue
Boston - Black and "Yellow"
Chicago - Red and Black

The Next 6:
Pittsburgh - Light Blue and Blue
Oakland - Green and Blue
Philadelphia - Orange and Black
Los Angeles - Royal Blue and Gold
St. Louis - Blue and Yellow
Minnesota - Green and Yellow

Notice the combinations are not really repeating?

1970
Vancouver - Blue and Green
Buffalo - Blue and Yellow

Finally have repetition with St. Louis and Buffalo.

Teams try to have an identity all to their own, yet 29 of 30 teams in the NHL wear some version of blue, red or black as their home jersey now.

It would be interesting to have another color as primary.

 

[Butch 19]

Then they could have changed to the Fishsticks logo/jersey as a third, and the blow back would have been less severe.

But they just ditched their history completely, and with a crappy team, the fans went nuts.

If you're going to toss away 25 years of tradition (including four stanley cups), you better be going from a weak jersey to the most stunning visual display ever.

Good point, but they are just now getting back to their original blue hue. Their ultra dark navy blue color was just terrible - and RBK did them no favors those first fews years after the lockout.

The NYI jersey / logo is one that should have NEVER changed.

 

[Magnus Fulgur]

I don't get why ATL couldn't have gone with Gold, Red, Black as their color scheme. You could make a pretty sharp looking jersey with that:

I tossed this together in 10 minutes. I think it's better than any look they've had

I LOVE THIS!!!

It incorporates the old Flames colors, and NBA The Hawks until recently were Red, Black, and Gold. It makes too much sense! Oh well...

 

[Butch 19]

I LOVE THIS!!!

It incorporates the old Flames colors, and NBA The Hawks until recently were Red, Black, and Gold. It makes too much sense! Oh well...

I would like to have seen their plan B & C logos... (or more)

I just could never buy into the primary logo they picked.

 

[KevFu]

Good point, but they are just now getting back to their original blue hue. Their ultra dark navy blue color was just terrible - and RBK did them no favors those first fews years after the lockout.

The NYI jersey / logo is one that should have NEVER changed.

I really don't have a problem with them tweaking the blue and the orange to make the more rich colors. Back in the day, the colors available were stock colors. Even if you look at a Nike catalog, they have a "box of crayons" as color options. Like 16 tops. Well, now they can get jerseys made in custom PMS colors. So going to something besides the stock colors is fine by me. Make it sharp, make it pop.

But yes, the RBK 07-08 iteration of the jersey was abysmal looking.

What's funny is that fans want the "traditional jersey we wore during the Dynasty Era" but the Islanders actually different jerseys EACH YEAR in the dynasty era, changing the width/order of the stripes.

In hindsight, the Fisherman uniforms actually don't seem THAT out of place with their brand/image/look overall from the front. The biggest problem with them in my opinion was the shoulder designs. If they didn't have the wavy blue panel, but a solid color with the shoulder patch, it would have been much more acceptable.

The issues most people face with making a good looking uniform isn't the colors or logos, it's the little things. The panels, piping, stripes, etc. The best jerseys are the simple clean ones. The ones that look ugly have the visible panels and piping.

For example, St. Louis could have gorgeous unis. Isn't less piping and panels better?

 

[DeathToAllButMetal]

I don't get why ATL couldn't have gone with Gold, Red, Black as their color scheme. You could make a pretty sharp looking jersey with that:

I tossed this together in 10 minutes. I think it's better than any look they've had

It sure is. That looks fantastic.

I could never understand the Atlanta color schemes. I couldn't tell you right now what the primary colors were on the sweaters, aside from saying they had some powder blue and some maroon. Worst sweaters in the league since Vancouver's "Morning After Halloween Candy Puke" days.

 

[DeathToAllButMetal]

I really don't have a problem with them tweaking the blue and the orange to make the more rich colors. Back in the day, the colors available were stock colors. Even if you look at a Nike catalog, they have a "box of crayons" as color options. Like 16 tops. Well, now they can get jerseys made in custom PMS colors. So going to something besides the stock colors is fine by me. Make it sharp, make it pop.

But yes, the RBK 07-08 iteration of the jersey was abysmal looking.

What's funny is that fans want the "traditional jersey we wore during the Dynasty Era" but the Islanders actually different jerseys EACH YEAR in the dynasty era, changing the width/order of the stripes.

In hindsight, the Fisherman uniforms actually don't seem THAT out of place with their brand/image/look overall from the front. The biggest problem with them in my opinion was the shoulder designs. If they didn't have the wavy blue panel, but a solid color with the shoulder patch, it would have been much more acceptable.

The issues most people face with making a good looking uniform isn't the colors or logos, it's the little things. The panels, piping, stripes, etc. The best jerseys are the simple clean ones. The ones that look ugly have the visible panels and piping.

For example, St. Louis could have gorgeous unis. Isn't less piping and panels better?

I have zero affinity for the St. Louis Blues. Team means nothing to me, aside from some minor lingering thoughts of the old rivalry with the Leafs from the 80s and 90s in the Norris.

But I've always loved the sweaters and have always been glad the team is in the league. Logo, name, colors -- it's just a great look. For that reason alone, I hope the Blues never move. Power of the logo there for me, big time.

 

[Brazz]

I

I'm remembering seeing similar discussions about the Penguins when they decided to ditch their blue in favor of Pittsburgh's black and old gold, upon objection by the Boston Bruins. Remembering

Teams try to have an identity all to their own, yet 29 of 30 teams in the NHL wear some version of blue, red or black as their home jersey now.

It would be interesting to have another color as primary.

here's what should happen to mix up
Minnesota green
Dallas green
LA purple
Nashville yellow

At least that is a little more varity plus there are other colors then black for s third jersey