Take a look and see what you think of it. The organization didn't make that many changes to it. I'd prefer that they just scrap "Bubbles" all together and just use the throwback uniforms.
OT: New Detroit Lions Logo
"I'd prefer that they just scrap "Bubbles" all together and just use the throwback uniforms."
But this is NOT a uniform-- this is a LOGO. There is a distinct difference, and both play large parts in a sports branding identity.
You're right, it's not a sea change, but rather a 21st century update on an existing brand. I'm more curious about the wordmark at this point. the NFL has a recent habit of using basically the same typography for all their redesigns and just tweaking the serifs in subtle ways-- ever notice how similar the "Cardinals" name is to the "Seahawks," and how both ultimately got their root from the "Falcons" wordmark? So will the Lions get the same treatment, or will the NFL stick with that cowboy font they've used for years (and never totally made sense to me)?
Nice find though-- I hadn't read UniWatch in the last few days, so I didn't know the leak was found.
You're right about the LOGO & uniforms not being the same. I guess I'm assuming that the "Bubbles the Lion" on the side of the helmet will be updated as well. The plain silver helmet that is part of the throwback uniform is the way to go, imho.
Frankly the less change the better - I want to feel like I'm still rooting for the Lions, not like I'm rooting for a new team the way it felt when the Pistons tried that teal disaster. Good concept - actual logo could use a little bit of tweaking, the front foreleg looks a little awkward. But keeping the Honolulu blue is huge.
As for the wordmark, I think you're looking at it on the trailer.
You're right-- guess I was so caught up in the logo I didn't even take a second glance at the "Lions" mark.
Looks good-- unique and feline, in a lion/tiger/panther kinda way. I think I'm more impressed with the name than the logo change, actually.
The front foreleg looks like a limp-wristed paw to me.
And thus its quite apt iconography for the Lions.
I don't understand why people are ok with this. It is an atrocious attempt to hedge future losses from very low forecasted ticket sales with apparel sales. As a fan I beg you not to fall for this. It is a ploy to stay out of the red, which is the only thing that will get WCF the fuck out of ownership. When I hear people say “I think it is a great idea. It is a new beginning.” It makes me want to puke. Get real people!!! Do not fall for this garbage. It is a business and the only way to change things is by demanding better. The only way to do that is by rejecting the product that is given to us currently. A re-brand is not the same as a re-engineer and this product has been in need of a re-engineer since the 50’s.
the logo? Cannot the team need re-engineering as you say (and a new owner obviously) but still make a legitimate attempt to update the logo and uniforms? I'd welcome both changes, but that doesn't mean I endorse the failed management.
If by you buying a new jersey because the old one is "outdated" by design and it helps keep the management in place, then you are endorsing the failed management by default.
They hardly changed the logo. I doubt it's significant enough to motivate huge numbers of people to buy merchandise. Pre-2009 Lion merchandise won't look that obsolete.
I just hope that when it's unveiled that they drop the "Honolulu blue" for the color of the throwbacks. And lose the black. Based on this photo, it doesn't seem as if that will be the case.
When I was a little kid, I always thought that the white spot was supposed to be the eye and the two front legs were some sort of crazy-looking mouth. This is much better.
Oh, wow, I never even saw the old logo that way before. Yeah, the white gap between the legs and head could be its right eye and the mouth could be its left eye, and then the front legs form a giant mouth.
It's like some deformed lion from my nightmares. Maybe that was what they intended in the first place. It would be so much more fitting for that franchise.
Like a lion with a crocodile head. That's hilarious jbaggz.
I thought that too until I was like 9 years old
Holy shit, I thought I was the only one... Thank you JBaggz.
Me three. I used to think "man, that's one fucked up Lion"
Oh my gosh me too. It wasn't until I was like 18 until I was like, Ohhhhhhhhh, that's what it's supposed to be.
It used to piss me off so much because I couldn't tell what it was but now, it is much better.
Makes me want to buy a pair of Zubaz pants.
Great. Now I'm going to have Zubaz nightmares. Thanks a lot.
As it is now, whenever teams see a Lions uniform, they are forced to win by Pavlovian response. The Lions have lost so many games in Honolulu Blue and Silver that it is burned deeply into the psyche of the entire league:
Lions = Losers.
They need to change everything. The colors, the logo, even the name if need be. Most of all, though, they need to change the owner.
I agree that a change can be good, or at least there is some correlation between uni-redesigns and success (Tampa Bay [Bucs and Rays], New England, Arizona, and more). However, none of those teams had the tradition and history that the Lions have. New England was an AFL team, and Tampa Bay was an expansion that was the original 0-fer team. The Lions are one of the original NFL teams, and actually won championships. Radical change would just alienate fans. The logo is a start, but I'm still waiting to see what they do with the uniforms. Hopefully they'll stay traditional, and avoid some of the uglier uniforms in the league (Buffalo, Seattle, Minnesota, Arizona).
I don't really need to add (but I'll do it anyway) that a change in ownership would do far more than uniform tweaks.
"The Lions are one of the original NFL teams, and actually won championships. Radical change would just alienate fans."
The only people who remember this are in their 60's and 70's. Do you really think management would worry about alienating people who they don't get most of their money from?
I'd be alienated. I happen to like the fact that the Lions have some history, unlike a lot of NFL teams. As a Michigan fan, do you take pride in only the history you witnessed, or all of it?
i find sports history very interesting. But I'd be lying to you if I could sit here and tell you that things from 50 years ago sports wise can help me feel overjoyed. Obviously I'm a fan of Bo, the 68 Tigers, ect. However, that stuff is mostly just really interesting to me. Things like the 2004 NBA Title, 1998 Rose Bowl, 2006 World Series, and various Stanley Cups are what really get me worked up.
I think Tater is on to something, look at the Bucs and the Patriots. Two historically awful teams that completely changed the uniforms (logo, color, everything) and it really seemed to change their fortunes. Even if it ends up being an ugly failure, any change at this point can't hurt.
This probably doesn't even need to be stated, but both of those turnarounds were a direct result of ownership changes (Kraft in the case of the Pats, Glazer in the case of the Bucs) that coincided with uniform changes.
I'm guessing the real change will be in the uniforms. No doubt they'll feel the need to put a lot of nutty lines and elements and stuff that weren't there before. Think Cardinals or Vikings.
What about that? it was the Detroit News's contest winner