4/10/17 announcement

[Gibbsy]

These dip s**t comments on the latest post are a good indicator of why nothing should be left to the supporters. Everyone screaming "it looks too much like Carlton" should be aware that A) it looks nothing like Carlton, three letters can be assembled in completely different ways as seen, and B) we've been using this monogram since at least the 1950s and I'm rapt it's being brought back in a permanent capacity.

 

[Morganashlee]

Oh I love this one too.

 

[wicksy]

These dip s**t comments on the latest post are a good indicator of why nothing should be left to the supporters. Everyone screaming "it looks too much like Carlton" should be aware that A) it looks nothing like Carlton, three letters can be assembled in completely different ways as seen, and B) we've been using this monogram since at least the 1950s and I'm rapt it's being brought back in a permanent capacity.

Yeah, they look nothing alike.

 

[Gibbsy]

Yeah, they look nothing alike.

I honestly don't believe they do, look at the way the above letters integrate (the two C's lapped around each other, F cutting down the middle) versus the Collingwood CFC (wide C, F & C next to each other) but happy to agree to disagree.

 

[Sidebysidey]

If we are doing this to piss off Carlton I fully endorse it.

 

[CarnMags]

The members.
I always thought membership bought certain privileges.
And as such an important piece of our club, mainly the public face of our club, is to be so radically changed, shouldn't one of those privelages be to have input?
As pointed out previously, the membership base is easily contactable in 2017. As posted before, the focus group of a few members overwhelmingly wanted no change
Yet, here we have autocratic change for changes sake.
I'd go all Catalonia if I didn't fear Ed with rubber bullets.

I don't necessarily disagree with you.. but as supporters, surely caring about this is very low on our list of priorities.

To be honest, I don't care less about our logo as long as it represents our heritage (which the new one does).

I just don't think the Club needs a bunch of members acting as Creative Directors.

 

[Stoods]

So what are they planning on doing with this lettering one from the 50s? I don't like it at all, can barely see what it says, its way to crowded and doesnt represent us at all imo, how are we the magpies by looking at that? Im ok with the logo in OP it is actually growing on me a lot, so they better go with that

 

[Black_White]

The logo, the lettering, it's a masterstroke from Ed.
No-one is talking about the shambles of a half decade, on field and off, and the bleak future.
Eds a genius to equal Einstein.

 

[wicksy]

Hope they made that Magpie with no heart just like the club.

PS I know i'm good at Photoshop.

 

[swoop42]

Would have preferred the simple edition of another magpie on an already classy looking emblem.

 

[barrackers]

These dip s**t comments on the latest post are a good indicator of why nothing should be left to the supporters. Everyone screaming "it looks too much like Carlton" should be aware that A) it looks nothing like Carlton, three letters can be assembled in completely different ways as seen, and B) we've been using this monogram since at least the 1950s and I'm rapt it's being brought back in a permanent capacity.

You can bump it back to the 30s

 

[swoop42]

QUOTE="Gibbsy, post: 52807636, member: 93224"]These dip s**t comments on the latest post are a good indicator of why nothing should be left to the supporters. Everyone screaming "it looks too much like Carlton" should be aware that A) it looks nothing like Carlton, three letters can be assembled in completely different ways as seen, and B) we've been using this monogram since at least the 1950s and I'm rapt it's being brought back in a permanent capacity.

[/QUOTE]

Looks God awful and what the hell does the P stand for?

That ain't an F.

 

[Anzacday]

QUOTE="Gibbsy, post: 52807636, member: 93224"]These dip s**t comments on the latest post are a good indicator of why nothing should be left to the supporters. Everyone screaming "it looks too much like Carlton" should be aware that A) it looks nothing like Carlton, three letters can be assembled in completely different ways as seen, and B) we've been using this monogram since at least the 1950s and I'm rapt it's being brought back in a permanent capacity.

Looks God awful and what the hell does the P stand for?

That ain't an F.[/QUOTE]
I wonder when it changed?

 

[nahnah]

well holy s**t that's even worse than the op one, looks like a baseball logo

 

[100volt1]

We're actually not even a f**king Football Club anymore without the "Football Club" text.

Normally what happens when we get PC and think adding a netball team and an AFLW team will bring in more money. Ffs.

 

[Mkcaptain]

Does anyone else think we should have a logo for the "Collingwood brand". Say the one in OP, that encompasses all the teams that fall under the Collingwood umbrella (AFL, AFLW, VFL, SNL).
But then we should have 4 different logos for each of the individual teams that are distinct yet obviously connected to the main logo.
That way we could have branding that applies to Collingwood as a whole, but then individual branding for each team that gives them an individual sense of identity.

But more importantly think of the merchandise opportunities.

 

[100volt1]

Confirmed from the internal review

 

[Matt_352]

Id like to know why the F is a ruddy P

 

[jmac70]

Id like to know why the F is a ruddy P

I think you will find that it is spelt phootball.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Ok, that's a fair point.
If the treatment itself leads to further injury or prolonged problems, this would be a concern

I mean it was a running gag on here wasn't it?

How many players over the years have been 2-3 weeks away for the ENTIRE season? If that isn't the doc/medical staff then who is it?

 

[jmac70]

Yeah, they look nothing alike.

One week ban for posting offensive content.

 

[Scodog10]

These dip s**t comments on the latest post are a good indicator of why nothing should be left to the supporters. Everyone screaming "it looks too much like Carlton" should be aware that A) it looks nothing like Carlton, three letters can be assembled in completely different ways as seen, and B) we've been using this monogram since at least the 1950s and I'm rapt it's being brought back in a permanent capacity.

I like the monogram personally because it speaks of tradition and success, but if they're going to use it on an official basis the F needs to be fixed. It really does look like a P and modernising it slightly will also add the touch of 21st century as well.

 

[wicksy]

One week ban for posting offensive content.

You're right.... I'd ban myself if I could.

 

[Toecrusher]

[/QUOTE]

Looks God awful and what the hell does the P stand for?

That ain't an F.[/QUOTE]

What does the P stand for? Sounds worthy of its own thread.

Based on our last couple of years, it could be "Pathetic".

Ed would tell you it's "potential".

Maybe it should by "Phantasy".

Hopefully it's nothing to do with our gay marriage stance.

 

[Pie fanatic]

Going back with adidas