Zach Lowe thinks knicks logo is sh*t

SelbyCobra · Post #21 » by **SelbyCobra** » Tue Sep 8, 2015 11:51 pm

louieOrr wrote:Yep our logo is great. This is the logo dude though we should go with...

is this guy serious?

No. It's this logo that was the Empire State Building logo concept that was nixed, according to everything I've read:

kingquan316 · Post #22 » by **kingquan316** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 12:08 am

SelbyCobra wrote:
louieOrr wrote:Yep our logo is great. This is the logo dude though we should go with...

is this guy serious?

No. It's this logo that was the Empire State Building logo concept that was nixed, according to everything I've read:

That NY looks dumb on there. Get rid of that then I guess it would look ok. But then again, I've grown to love the Knicks logo and any change from the triangle won't look right to me.

xNewYorkMadex · Post #23 » by **xNewYorkMadex** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 12:20 am

Our primary logo is type trash.

Whenever I buy a Knicks hat, I never buy it if it has our logo on it. The secondary token logo is great. We should redesign it, its not really iconic at all. It could be so much better.

Post #24 » by **j4remi** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 12:12 pm

Honestly, I've been waiting for the day I could buy a Knicks fitted I'd actually rock. Not a fan of our logo myself.

Post #25 » by **King of Canada** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 12:31 pm

Our logo is one of the absolute best. You want to know why? Because people recognize it. We aren't trying to market trinkets to teenie boppers here. We are talking about brand recognition for one of the most valuable franchises in sports.

Post #26 » by **moocow007** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 12:33 pm

I've been a fan of the Knicks since the early 70's and never liked the logo. Ever. Let's put it this way, if I were picking teams based purely on logo, the Knicks would be at the bottom of the pile. Honestly. It looks like something that a semi disinterested 16 year old put together in art class.

Here's the 2015-2016 official NBA logos for each team (several teams sporting new designs).

Try hard to imagine that you don't know that the Knicks logo is the logo of the team that you love. What order would you put the logos in in (best being 1 and worst being 30)? Please also try to force yourself not to hate on logo's of specific teams that Knick fans just have a problem with and/or dislike (i.e. Raptors, Nets, Heat, etc.). Honestly.

Team logos at the bottom IMO? Heat, Knicks, Lakers, Blazers and (probably) Bulls. The one's that basically haven't been touched or "modernized" in decades.

Post #27 » by **moocow007** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 12:40 pm

King of Canada wrote:Our logo is one of the absolute best. You want to know why? Because people recognize it. We aren't trying to market trinkets to teenie boppers here. We are talking about brand recognition for one of the most valuable franchises in sports.

Hillary Clinton and Oprah Winfrey are two of the most recognized female faces on the planet and I wouldn't say either are raving beauties. Much like Clinton and Winfrey are recognized because they've been around seemingly forever doesn't mean they are necessarily the best classical representations of the female form. Name wise, sure, that's a different story (just like how he had the Knicks name itself high on the list).

Post #28 » by **moocow007** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 12:42 pm

GONYK wrote:

This concept would be interesting to play with. Eagles adorn the façade of the Empire State Building in the same style as the wings in the picture. Maybe make the wings a little smaller, the 'O' a little thinner (or the ball a little bigger)...to make it a less airline-ish and to emphasize the basketball part more...and spell out 'New York' instead of leaving it the 'NY'.

Post #29 » by **moocow007** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 12:58 pm

Honestly, just even looking around the RGM site...they could probably take that Draft Kings "Millionaire Maker" logo (the shield with the football at the bottom) and based on the Knicks logo straight off of that. Make the OKC thunder blue background a darker Knicks blue, make the red more orange, change the semi football into a basketball (make it bigger so the basketball pops out more) and replace "Millionaire" with "New York" and "Maker" with "Knicks". Replace "Fantasy Football" with the NY skyline and the empire state building silouhette in the center. Replace "$10 Million" with something like "Empire State" (on 2 lines) in that now orange ribbon and...voila...a modern logo that kicks.

Post #30 » by **King of Canada** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 12:59 pm

moocow007 wrote:
King of Canada wrote:Our logo is one of the absolute best. You want to know why? Because people recognize it. We aren't trying to market trinkets to teenie boppers here. We are talking about brand recognition for one of the most valuable franchises in sports.

Hillary Clinton and Oprah Winfrey are two of the most recognized female faces on the planet and I wouldn't say either are raving beauties. Much like Clinton and Winfrey are recognized because they've been around seemingly forever doesn't mean they are necessarily the best classical representations of the female form. Name wise, sure, that's a different story (just like how he had the Knicks name itself high on the list).

But what is the point of a logo? Changing the logo to be more "hip" is akin to hiring the Black Eyed Peas to perform at every single NBA event to try to get more tweens to watch the NBA. I like classic logos, and the Knicks logo is very strongly identified. Is it really any different than the Yankees, McDonalds, Coca Cola, Heinz, etc....? Some of the other NBA logos look like they belong to a roller derby team. I'm fine with keeping it as is?

Post #31 » by **moocow007** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 1:02 pm

King of Canada wrote:
moocow007 wrote:
King of Canada wrote:Our logo is one of the absolute best. You want to know why? Because people recognize it. We aren't trying to market trinkets to teenie boppers here. We are talking about brand recognition for one of the most valuable franchises in sports.

Hillary Clinton and Oprah Winfrey are two of the most recognized female faces on the planet and I wouldn't say either are raving beauties. Much like Clinton and Winfrey are recognized because they've been around seemingly forever doesn't mean they are necessarily the best classical representations of the female form. Name wise, sure, that's a different story (just like how he had the Knicks name itself high on the list).

But what is the point of a logo? Changing the logo to be more "hip" is akin to hiring the Black Eyed Peas to perform at every single NBA event to try to get more tweens to watch the NBA. I like classic logos, and the Knicks logo is very strongly identified. Is it really any different than the Yankees, McDonalds, Coca Cola, Heinz, etc....? Some of the other NBA logos look like they belong to a roller derby team. I'm fine with keeping it as is?

I've by far well beyond my tweens years and I think a remake would be a terrific idea. Question...are you driving a 1998 Corolla or wearing clothes from the 90's or listening to music from a Walkman? That's why.

Post #32 » by **King of Canada** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 1:04 pm

Are you guys saying we need Drake to help us design new logos?

Post #33 » by **moocow007** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 1:05 pm

King of Canada wrote:Are you guys saying we need Drake to help us design new logos?

Did he design the Raptors new logo? If so, that logo is pretty nice.

Apples · Post #34 » by **Apples** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 1:33 pm

I'm a traditionalist. Knicks should have kept their Father Knickerbocker logo. Or reintroduced it with the new uniforms. It's somewhat similar to the Celtics, who I think have the best logo.

gavran · Post #35 » by **gavran** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 2:01 pm

moocow007 wrote:
King of Canada wrote:Our logo is one of the absolute best. You want to know why? Because people recognize it. We aren't trying to market trinkets to teenie boppers here. We are talking about brand recognition for one of the most valuable franchises in sports.

Hillary Clinton and Oprah Winfrey are two of the most recognized female faces on the planet and I wouldn't say either are raving beauties. Much like Clinton and Winfrey are recognized because they've been around seemingly forever doesn't mean they are necessarily the best classical representations of the female form. Name wise, sure, that's a different story (just like how he had the Knicks name itself high on the list).

You mean on planet USA.

JohnStarksTheDunk · Post #36 » by **JohnStarksTheDunk** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 4:08 pm

moocow007 wrote:I've been a fan of the Knicks since the early 70's and never liked the logo. Ever. Let's put it this way, if I were picking teams based purely on logo, the Knicks would be at the bottom of the pile. Honestly. It looks like something that a semi disinterested 16 year old put together in art class.

Here's the 2015-2016 official NBA logos for each team (several teams sporting new designs).

[img]http://i61.tinypic.com/2wbynnr.jpg[/img

Try hard to imagine that you don't know that the Knicks logo is the logo of the team that you love. What order would you put the logos in in (best being 1 and worst being 30)? Please also try to force yourself not to hate on logo's of specific teams that Knick fans just have a problem with and/or dislike (i.e. Raptors, Nets, Heat, etc.). Honestly.

Team logos at the bottom IMO? Heat, Knicks, Lakers, Blazers and (probably) Bulls. The one's that basically haven't been touched or "modernized" in decades.

Yup, though I disagree about the Blazers and maybe the Bulls.

Ours is one of the worst on that list. It looks cartoonish, dated, and boring. It's just our name in lame block letters, a triangle, and a ball, and it's not sleek at all. Plus that shade of grey is too light and contrasts too much with the orange and blue.

The token logos, however, are damn near perfect. Both the NYK and the KNICKS one. The latter is a nice update to the 70s ball logo.

I'd be happy with some variation of this:

Post #37 » by **King of Canada** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 4:12 pm

JohnStarksTheDunk wrote:
kfig5 wrote:

I honestly think they should have used the bottom left logo, and added NEW YORK to the top of the wordmark.

Agreed. And it would look good even without the empire state building in it.

I don't mind that, but it's still basically the same logo

CoolKids · Post #38 » by **CoolKids** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 4:13 pm

GONYK wrote:

These are pretty great. 2,3, and 4 would all be better then our current logo.

Sprewell4Three · Post #39 » by **Sprewell4Three** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 4:35 pm

kfig5 wrote:

I honestly think they should have used the bottom left logo, and added NEW YORK to the top of the wordmark.

I like the left bottom one also.

Dirkbaka · Post #40 » by **Dirkbaka** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 5:23 pm

Why does anyone on this board care about some guy ranking logos of all things? Someone give me the tour already ....