Remove this Banner Ad

New logo

Do you like the proposed new RFC logo?

  • YES

    Votes: 1 100.0%

  • NO

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    1

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Not a massive fan of the new one. The main problems are with the shield. It unbalances the composition, and is really pretty poorly executed.

I'm not sure about the level of detail, either. It's too complex to look good sized right down, but not complex enough to really wow you at a large size. It sits in an uncomfortable middle ground.
 
Ambivalent towards it. Would've preferred the more grunge look we've gone over the last year (rips, growling shadows) as this is a little too close to paddlepop but it's alright. Can imagine it's aimed at being modern and accessible for the youngsters (catch the new wave).
 
The comments I think about moving on from the 'failure era' logo are pretty spot on.

I love the old logo, but this one is pretty great too. Simplistic yet fierce, modern. peterbuch74's edit with the club name is exceptional :thumbsu:. Bring it on!!
 
popcap said:
Sh@t. I just wrote a huge response to this thread that didn't post. It had sales figures for guernseys and internal dialogue from other clubs and everything. *sigh*

In short -

Switches to new logos and strips in the AFL have been universally deemed as failures, both from a financial and a marketing perspective. WCE, Fremantle, Adelaide, and more recently North, Brisbane and Melbourne have all suffered from this.

Switches to a more traditional, heritage strip and logo on the other hand has resulted in enormous benefits for those clubs willing to go in that direction. Here, I would point to the decision of a number of clubs who went the modern direction (WCE, Freo, Adelaide, Port) and subsequently decided to switch back as evidence of this, although I had much more concrete data in my first post which I can't be bothered rehashing.

It's also worth noting that 'heritage' guernseys are consistently the most popular selling items in the AFL, and often have significant resale value (particularly when signed).

Going backwards in terms of design is easily the more financially prudent and easy-to-market option. The trend towards a more modern logo and strip is an unfortunate byproduct of the powers-that-be's obessesion with the Americanisation of our game, despite the fact that any sports marketer worth their salt is fully aware that they've even abandoned this trend over there (see Golden State, Cleveland, the Twins, Tampa Bay Rays, etc. etc.).
Click to expand...

Depends how you approach it. Not sure freos new image could be seen as a failure. Hawthorns has worked well and new Orleans and Orlando in the Nba have gone with new logo and jersey designs to huge success. It all depends how its approached.
People are always going to resist change so the initial reaction of people is not surprising at all and not reflective of the end result in terms of support once people have seen it a few more times.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Reiwoldt_Groupie said:
Its too feminine. Its got no balls:thumbsdown:

They could have done a way better job.
Click to expand...

Feminine is exactly the word I was going to use to describe it
Needs to be tougher

I would have liked if they adapted pictures like this into a logo
5505944.jpg
5505936.jpg
 
Don't like the shield. Makes it look like a Soccer teams logo.

The Tiger needs to be looking right at you, with a meaner glint in its eye. Not gazing off into the distance pondering such thoughts as "mm those gazelles are too far away, screw it, time for a nap".

Even a bloodied Collingwood jumper hanging out of its mouth wouldn't hurt. ;-)
 
Oh damn. You're right, that's a plagiarism case just waiting to happen right there. There's definitely enough similarities to warrant interest from IP lawyers.

But still, it's a Tiger.. There's probably only SO many ways you can draw the damned things :p
 
Spagman said:
Oh damn. You're right, that's a plagiarism case just waiting to happen right there. There's definitely enough similarities to warrant interest from IP lawyers.
Click to expand...

Better to check it out now than invest heavily in marketing, merch etc. only then to have the pants sued off the club.

I hope someone is paying attention.
 
HARKER said:
It wouldn't work as well with two solid colours.
The relief is good.

You've got yourselves a good logo in times where we're all trying to be avant-garde, without vindication for wanting to be so.

You'll all grow to love this one. It's quite powerful.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree, I was pretty meh when I first, but now when I have a look at it I really like it, the white is good as well for your reason stated, plus Tigers do have white fur.
Wouldn't be upset if they were to change it
 

Remove this Banner Ad

It could be worse........You could have our current piece of rubbish they try and call a logo.


The added bonus is your club wont try and put it oversized on your jumper and take up most of the front with it.
 
If it is a new RFC logo I could just live with it.

But why are the eyes brown?
Tigers have YELLOW EYES (remember yellow? one of our club colours?).

It should also be staring into your soul. Not looking at clouds.

And a yellow sash could easily have been worked into the design.
 
Mowse said:
If it is a new RFC logo I could just live with it.

But why are the eyes brown?
Tigers have YELLOW EYES (remember yellow? one of our club colours?).

It should also be staring into your soul. Not looking at clouds.

And a yellow sash could easily have been worked into the design.
Click to expand...

Because if the eyes were the same colour as other parts of the design they wouldn't stand out.
 
Tigerdrive said:
Richmond-logo-1977.gif


Courtesy of footyjumpers.com (Y)
Click to expand...

Cheers mate, I've got a bit of a soft spot for this one myself. It's got that eat em alive look about it. Lets face it you see this and ya wanna run the other way, it's primal.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Remove this Banner Ad

New logo

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top