New Times article insulting

[touborg]

I'm sorry, but if anyone thinks an NFL logo can be "scary" or "intimidating", they have are probably a bit too easy to scare. The logo is the teams symbol and nothing else. Ours has remained almost the same for 40 years and it's a part of our identity.

On a sidenote, all the people wanting to make it scarier, you do know our name is the dolphins right? It's pretty damn hard to make that scary. Maybe if we turn it into a zombie dolphin that shoots lazers and eats children, but otherwise any attempt will probably horribly fail.

 

[RWhitney014]

You guys who are bashing this are no fun...no one really wants to change the logo dramatically, we're just having some fun with it.

Already on this site, the Miami New Times has gotten more attention than ever before with this, and keep in mind that it's a contest.

BTW, a fleur de lys (New Orleans) doesn't scare me.

 

[DrAstroZoom]

Right along with the dopes from this site getting a stiffie at the idea of submitting a new logo. :yell:

That's really harsh, Agua. The folks working on the alternate logos took this as an opportunity to play around and experiment with their talent. That doesn't mean they're all for overhauling the logo and it CERTAINLY doesn't mean their dopes.

I think this post was uncalled for.

 

[Fin D]

Its obvious you dont know much about marketing..

Its no coincidence that the dominant colors in most NFL franchises are red and blue.. And darker shades may I add..

Things such as colors, use of space in uniform design, stripes, logos, etc. DO have a slight psychological effect on the players and fans alike.. I actually think the uniform design of the Dolphins is top notch.. The use of stripes is well done.. But the logo, especially the new version, just does not fit in with the venue..

Drop the helmet and the logo would be 30x better imo.

Skape, don't bother with them. You clearly are a designer as am I. Our opinion means nothing to these people. They are scared of change and heII bent on defending it with the "tradition" arguement. Its happened many times throughout history, from circumnavigating the globe to slavery to Iraq.

What's really funny is how they say the article is attacking the team and its history, when all they're saying is the logo is silly looking in this day and age. Is changing the logo really akin to erasing our storied tradition and history? Or is it just bringing our beloved franchise into the current times.

Seriously people, we can update the logo AND carry on tradition. They are not mutually exclusive.

 

[SkapePhin]

You want to talk cartoonish looking, look at the Titan's logo.

The Titans should use their Alt.. The Sword Logo.. Their real one sucks.

 

[DrAstroZoom]

you guys are idiots.

who cares about the logo on the helmet?

having a different logo WILL NOT HELP US WIN GAMES or WILL NOT STRIKE FEAR INTO OUR OPPONENTS.

Ditto this post. Take a sedative.

 

[inFINSible]

Skape, don't bother with them. You clearly are a designer as am I. Our opinion means nothing to these people. They are scared of change and heII bent on defending it with the "tradition" arguement. Its happened many times throughout history, from circumnavigating the globe to slavery to Iraq.

What's really funny is how they say the article is attacking the team and its history, when all they're saying is the logo is silly looking in this day and age. Is changing the logo really akin to erasing our storied tradition and history? Or is it just bringing our beloved franchise into the current times.

Seriously people, we can update the logo AND carry on tradition. They are not mutually exclusive.

F that.....like i said, change the logo and i'll never buy anything again....I'm dead serious.

 

[DrAstroZoom]

That said, the guys at the New Times are numbnuts.

 

[Kucha]

So how the heck can anyone make a Dolphin look mean or intimidating? Now THAT would be a joke. If they put big growly teeth on a Dolphin then they just made a Shark. We're not sharks. We're Dolphins. Dolphins are smart while sharks have no brain. Brains have made this a successful franchise for almost 40 years. So :goof: to you New Times. hehe.

 

[KB21]

This is the New York Times. I find the existance of this rag and every other liberal rag to be insulting. I wouldn't wipe my *** with the New York Times, or the LA Times for that matter.

 

[Fin D]

F that.....like i said, change the logo and i'll never buy anything again....I'm dead serious.

Wow.

You really so against change. I've read a lot of your posts, and you always seemed so anti-reactionary. Guess I was wrong, about you.

 

[SkapePhin]

I'm sorry, but if anyone thinks an NFL logo can be "scary" or "intimidating", they have are probably a bit too easy to scare. The logo is the teams symbol and nothing else. Ours has remained almost the same for 40 years and it's a part of our identity.

On a sidenote, all the people wanting to make it scarier, you do know our name is the dolphins right? It's pretty damn hard to make that scary. Maybe if we turn it into a zombie dolphin that shoots lazers and eats children, but otherwise any attempt will probably horribly fail.

Noone said anything about "scary".. I think it needs more "strength".. It needs to look less "silly".. Right now, the Dolphins logo is the ONLY logo in the NFL that looks like it could be a cartoon character.. Does that seem right? The Broncos logo used to look like a cartoon character, now it doesnt..

I dunno, I think there should be some homogeneity of design in the NFL.. Some of the classic logos such as GB, Dallas, SF are timeless because they are so simple and just contain letters of a generic symbol like a star... A representation of an animal is a bit different..

Just for perspective.. Picture putting a helmet on the Cardinals logo, or the Broncos logo, or the Falcons logo.. Dont you think it would look a little silly?

 

[SkapePhin]

This is the New York Times. I find the existance of this rag and every other liberal rag to be insulting. I wouldn't wipe my *** with the New York Times, or the LA Times for that matter.

:rofl3:

I think you might want to re-read the link.. this is the NEW TIMES... There is no "York" in between the two words..

 

[RWhitney014]

This is the New York Times. I find the existance of this rag and every other liberal rag to be insulting. I wouldn't wipe my *** with the New York Times, or the LA Times for that matter.

Of course it's the liberals' faults!

:shakeno: :goof:

 

[touborg]

Noone said anything about "scary".. I think it needs more "strength".. It needs to look less "silly".. Right now, the Dolphins logo is the ONLY logo in the NFL that looks like it could be a cartoon character.. Does that seem right? The Broncos logo used to look like a cartoon character, now it doesnt..

I dunno, I think there should be some homogeneity of design in the NFL.. Some of the classic logos such as GB, Dallas, SF are timeless because they are so simple and just contain letters of a generic symbol like a star... A representation of an animal is a bit different..

Just for perspective.. Picture putting a helmet on the Cardinals logo, or the Broncos logo, or the Falcons logo.. Dont you think it would look a little silly?

I don't agree that it's a problem that our logo looks a bit cartoonish. I actually think it's a lot better than if we'd try and make it more "life like". Like I said, I like the log.

I will agree that the GB, Dallas and SF logos are timeless, but they are also timelss because they will never be changed. They are classic franchises that won't ever change their logo because tradition comes before the newest marketing ploy when it comes to design. I'd like to maintain that here aswell, and thus I'd like very little change to the logo.