Zach Lowe thinks knicks logo is sh*t

Post #41 » by **King of Canada** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 5:32 pm

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

It's the internet! It's only here for two things, and the other one is arguing about stuff.

Post #42 » by **Thorn** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 6:53 pm

kfig5 wrote:

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

Agree 100%

don't panac · Post #43 » by **don't panac** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 7:35 pm

bottom left logo is FAR superior to the current one

i fully agree our current one is just meh, and definitively ih the bottom third, but at least it is not the total disaster that the clippers put out (or the thunder's, which is almost as bad)

kingquan316 · Post #44 » by **kingquan316** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 7:38 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).

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.

I honestly don't think the Knicks logo is bad. When I see that picture, I see many teams using a round logo nowadays. It's kinda boring to me. The Knicks at least is kinda unique in it's own way, with the only team having a 3d like wording for the name. The best logos to me taking out nostalgia and bias for teams are the Hornets, Pelicans, Mavs, and Suns. Worst logos are the Raptors, Pistons, Celtics, Pacers, and Clippers. Knicks are in the middle of the pack, but would consider them in the upper half of the best.

X-Man Cometh · Post #45 » by **X-Man Cometh** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 7:42 pm

I think the biggest problem with our logo is the lack of a defined shape.

Maybe a lack of harmony between the triangle in the back and the shape o the letters.

I'd personally like a circular logo, like the Hawks or 76ers, using the Empire State theme.

Enviado do meu iPhone usando o RealGM Forums

Post #46 » by **moocow007** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 9:31 pm

X-Man Cometh wrote:I think the biggest problem with our logo is the lack of a defined shape.

Maybe a lack of harmony between the triangle in the back and the shape o the letters.

I'd personally like a circular logo, like the Hawks or 76ers, using the Empire State theme.

Enviado do meu iPhone usando o RealGM Forums

Agreed.

Post #47 » by **mrpoetryNmotion** » Wed Sep 9, 2015 9:36 pm

El Poochio wrote:I didnt read that shİt but I think our name, colours, and our logo have been the best part of our team for some time now

You know, I hate our logo, but I agree with this statement.

I mean, bottom left...'the logo your logo could like' right there...

Post #48 » by **Thorn** » Thu Sep 10, 2015 1:25 pm

I think all of these have potential...

As well as the bottom left version in this 4 blocker.

bklynstoops · Post #49 » by **bklynstoops** » Thu Sep 10, 2015 3:12 pm

never liked the 80s lookin triangle, but I'm glad we don't have the Empire State Building in the logo. You don't need that kind of facile, touristy association for NYC.

rajajackal · Post #50 » by **rajajackal** » Thu Sep 10, 2015 3:34 pm

i like this one

nice and simple

JohnStarksTheDunk · Post #51 » by **JohnStarksTheDunk** » Thu Sep 10, 2015 3:39 pm

Not sure if anyone has seen this fan-designed concept:

The bottom of the building looks weird, but lining up the letter "i" with Central Park is pretty clever. However, it's probably not a good idea to use the shape of Manhattan in a logo, after the Nets kept trying to represent us only as the Manhattan Knicks.

Entire branding/concept here, with more pics:
https://www.behance.net/gallery/21976791/New-York-Knicks-identity-concept

Post #52 » by **moocow007** » Thu Sep 10, 2015 6:38 pm

JohnStarksTheDunk wrote:Not sure if anyone has seen this fan-designed concept:

The bottom of the building looks weird, but lining up the letter "i" with Central Park is pretty clever. However, it's probably not a good idea to use the shape of Manhattan in a logo, after the Nets kept trying to represent us only as the Manhattan Knicks.

Entire branding/concept here, with more pics:
https://www.behance.net/gallery/21976791/New-York-Knicks-identity-concept

Not a fan of the idea of combining the silhouettes of the empire state building and the island of Manhattan. Makes it looks like some weird combination of a syringe and an erect penis. The Knicks are supposed to represent NYC, not just Manhattan so having that shape there is limiting. It almost would be better to just keep everything else and drop the building/island "thing". The design has the looks of a minimalistic approach...so might as well go full minimal and just have the basketball and the words New York Knicks. Or at the very least get rid of the, for lack of words, "ball sac" on the bottom (i.e. the lower part of Manhattan) and just have the base of the empire state building flow right into the bottom part of the basketball.

Post #53 » by **GONYK** » Thu Sep 10, 2015 6:40 pm

moocow007 wrote:
JohnStarksTheDunk wrote:Not sure if anyone has seen this fan-designed concept:

The bottom of the building looks weird, but lining up the letter "i" with Central Park is pretty clever. However, it's probably not a good idea to use the shape of Manhattan in a logo, after the Nets kept trying to represent us only as the Manhattan Knicks.

Entire branding/concept here, with more pics:
https://www.behance.net/gallery/21976791/New-York-Knicks-identity-concept

Not a fan of the idea of combining the silhouettes of the empire state building and the island of Manhattan. Makes it looks like some weird combination of a syringe and an erect penis. The Knicks are supposed to represent NYC, not just Manhattan so having that shape there is limiting. It almost would be better to just keep everything else and drop the building/island "thing". The design has the looks of a minimalistic approach...so might as well go full minimal and just have the basketball and the words New York Knicks.

That is EXACTLY what I thought :lol:

Post #54 » by **moocow007** » Thu Sep 10, 2015 6:43 pm

GONYK wrote:
moocow007 wrote:
JohnStarksTheDunk wrote:Not sure if anyone has seen this fan-designed concept:

The bottom of the building looks weird, but lining up the letter "i" with Central Park is pretty clever. However, it's probably not a good idea to use the shape of Manhattan in a logo, after the Nets kept trying to represent us only as the Manhattan Knicks.

Entire branding/concept here, with more pics:
https://www.behance.net/gallery/21976791/New-York-Knicks-identity-concept

Not a fan of the idea of combining the silhouettes of the empire state building and the island of Manhattan. Makes it looks like some weird combination of a syringe and an erect penis. The Knicks are supposed to represent NYC, not just Manhattan so having that shape there is limiting. It almost would be better to just keep everything else and drop the building/island "thing". The design has the looks of a minimalistic approach...so might as well go full minimal and just have the basketball and the words New York Knicks.

That is EXACTLY what I thought

And100 · Post #55 » by **And100** » Thu Sep 10, 2015 6:43 pm

If the KNicks play in the 'World's Most Famous Arena', wouldn't some iconography of MSG be appropriate for the Knicks logo?

Yep. Maybe incorporate the Empire State Building with Madison Square Garden in the previous picture (in place of the lower half of Manhattan Island) would work better.

Post #56 » by **moocow007** » Thu Sep 10, 2015 6:51 pm

What makes any logo concept difficult to do is that the word "Knicks" is a shortened version of the word "Knickerbockers" (which is what the team was called originally). A "Knickerbocker" is basically a style of pants worn by (mostly) Dutch settlers which ends right below the knees. Similar styles of a "knickerbocker" was popular in the 1920's, especially in golf (and that some baseball players nowadays sport).

So a logo based on a pair of pants would be very difficult. Even if someone can come up with a visually pleasing design, the notion of a team logo based on a pair of pants probably won't go off well in terms of marketing to the usual age range that feeds the merchandising beast.

NOTE: Even though the Knicks weren't named after a style of pants (I believe they were named after a rather famous baseball team in NY from the 1850's who themselves were named after the engine company that one of the founders of the team respected) it's just not a easy thing to base a logo off of.

Post #57 » by **Thorn** » Thu Sep 10, 2015 7:58 pm

moocow007 wrote:What makes any logo concept difficult to do is that the word "Knicks" is a shortened version of the word "Knickerbockers" (which is what the team was called originally). A "Knickerbocker" is basically a style of pants worn by (mostly) Dutch settlers which ends right below the knees. Similar styles of a "knickerbocker" was popular in the 1920's, especially in golf (and that some baseball players nowadays sport).

So a logo based on a pair of pants would be very difficult. Even if someone can come up with a visually pleasing design, the notion of a team logo based on a pair of pants probably won't go off well in terms of marketing to the usual age range that feeds the merchandising beast.

NOTE: Even though the Knicks weren't named after a style of pants (I believe they were named after a rather famous baseball team in NY from the 1850's who themselves were named after the engine company that one of the founders of the team respected) it's just not a easy thing to base a logo off of.

egelband · Post #58 » by **egelband** » Thu Sep 10, 2015 11:54 pm

Unless Zach Lowe is related to Nick Lowe, I dont care what he thinks.

Marty McFly · Post #59 » by **Marty McFly** » Thu Sep 10, 2015 11:54 pm

i mean, it is kinda lame. i always liked the father knickbocker logo though.

Bill Pidto · Post #60 » by **Bill Pidto** » Fri Sep 11, 2015 2:38 am

What a bunch of BS. Knicks logo is classic. It screams "New York" without having to incorporate the predictable city skyline. The hell does Zach Lowe know about branding?

Knicks don't need a mascot or a special symbol. The name "KNICKS" is unique and recognizable in itself. The big block letters, the blue and orange colors, and the incorporation of the basketball is perfect to me. I think I read not long ago that even the triangle has a meaning. Something representing New York in some way. Funny coincidence that the triangle is such a theme here now with Phil in office.

Anyway.. I don't mind change.. but not when it comes to this kinda thing. I love the classic look in sports, especially for my NY teams. I hate the way NBA jerseys have changed over time. I hate the orange unis for the Knicks, and would hate it if they changed their regular unis too drastically. The same way I would hate for the Yankees to stop wearing pinstripes, or if they started calling Yankee Stadium "Google Stadium", or the Garden, "Chase Garden". Keep the Knicks logo the way it is.