Breaking Down The Pac-12 Championship Game Logo Contenders
Ever seen a great idea and a horrible one all rolled up into one? If not, you're about to.
The Pac-10 has decided to put the process of selecting the Pac-12 Championship Game logo to a popular vote, and I gotta be honest -- all four logos are pretty attractive. Great idea, right?
Well, here's the terrible part: The voting opened today and closes on Monday -- also known as Memorial Day.
I imagine you probably see the issue with that, but in case you don't: Just how many people does the conference think are going to be on their computers in the next three days, given that, A) Internet traffic goes way down on the weekends because people are at home and not screwing off at work (trust me, I have the data to support this), and B) It's a HOLIDAY WEEKEND and many people who might otherwise be on their computers, even on the weekend, will be out of town?
Swing and a miss, Pac-10.
It's not like organizations don't whiff; it's just that the Pac-10 has done so many things right that when it makes a pretty bad error, it sticks out. (Sort of like this.)
At any rate, if you're reading this, it means you're at your computer this weekend, which means you might be so inclined to vote. You know how Grady is a geek for uniforms? I'm a geek for graphic design, since I've done some graphic design work in the past, and it was sort of my job to teach graphic design when part of my duties involved advising high school publications. Given that, I figured I could throw the four logos your way with my quick thoughts on each one.
First, a working assumption: This logo -- like any other piece of branding for the conference -- should scream Pac-12, whether through the use of the conference shield, the overall shape of the logo, or something. It should be clearly identifiable as Pac-12 . The very best option should be one that can ONLY be used by the Pac-12 and not generic enough to be used by any conference.
LOGO 1

Likes: Has a strong feel to it with the squared edges. Almost has a football-like shape, despite the squared edges.
Dislikes: Many. The centerpiece of any logo of the conference should be the conference shield. The biggest part of the logo is the word "FOOTBALL." Well, duh -- we know it's football. Unnecessary. Also not a fan of the word "championship" swooshing like that. And last -- why couldn't the kerning (the space between the numbers) on the year have been consistent, since you're not using a fixed-width font? Annoying as crap.
LOGO 2

Likes: Many! Now we're getting somewhere. The overall shape of the logo mirrors the shape of the conference shield, as does the color scheme -- gradients and all. Laces at the bottom of the logo are a nice touch. Sleek design overall that screams Pac-12. Love it.
Dislikes: I really would have liked the Pac-12 logo to be a little bit bigger -- perhaps moving the year to below the word "championship" would clear enough pace to increase the size of it by 5 percent or so. I think that would do the trick. Additionally, too many font families -- I count 4. That's about two too many. Icky, but an easy fix that doesn't destroy the overall concept.
LOGO 3

Likes: The gradient sunbeams/spikes/whatever that come out of the logo do a great job accentuating the shield. "Football" is big enough to let people clearly know what sport we're talking about, but not so big that it dominates the logo. Incorporation of the color scheme good here, too. The inverted "championship" and "2011" fit in nicely.
Dislikes: Again, doesn't pass my "only the Pac-12 could use this logo" test. Change the shield to another conference logo and change the color scheme and anyone else could use it. Also not a big fan of the embossed look on "football." Additionally, too many logos use the spikes -- like this and this and this.
LOGO 4
Likes: The shield is front and center. Everything plays off of it, and I like the overall football shape of the logo. It's sleek, progressive and unique.
Dislikes: The roman numeral year underneath is horrendous. WAY too big -- like so big it competes with the actual logo. Awful. This also suffers from the font family issue -- why the different fonts for "football" and "championship"? One sans-serif and the other serif? The same effect could have been accomplished by just using a thicker version of the sans-serif font. Silly.
OVERALL
My first choice would clearly be Logo 2, for all the reasons stated above. It screams Pac-12. As for the others? Logo 1 is awful. Logo 3 is fine, but like I mentioned above, is just a little too generic for my tastes. Logo 4 is intriguing, and could be very nice with just a few changes, but I'd be disappointed if it won and was used as-is.
How about you? Which one do you like? (Oh, and you can go vote here.)
21 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I liked 2 on first glance, now I kind of like 3
Those spikes could be a subtle nod to the old Pac-10 logo.
What I don’t like about 3? The gradients. They got a little too excited there. #1 looks like something Fox would want us to choose, and #4 has some weird off-centeredness going on.
I would be happy with 2, but there’s too much wasted space… so 3 gets my vote.
Writer: CougCenter Twitterer: @GradyClapp
AThe crowd agrees with you over at the site
As for number 2, that’s sort of what I was talking about. I think making the shield a bit bigger takes care of most of that.
by Jeff Nusser on May 27, 2011 7:32 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I agree, I voted 3.
Yes, the spikes are definately a nod to the old logo. The old logo had 10 spikes (I think they’re sunbeams actually) to represent the 10 schools. This new logo has 12 spikes to represent 12 schools.
by Mind of no mind on May 30, 2011 7:59 PM PDT up reply actions
#1 SCREAMS FOX super intense NFL Sunday
Don’t like it at all.
I would love number 2 if not for the fonts. Great concept, poor execution.
4 just flat out sucks.
I voted for 3 because overall it appealed to me the most, but I definitely agree with the “insert logo here” opinion, though you could really say that about most of them.
by B-Lot tailgater on May 27, 2011 7:17 PM PDT reply actions
#2 is a winner in my book
Number 1 looks the most polished, but it seems kind of stagnant or boring. Though the logo should be bigger on #2, #4 they tried to hard to be different, but it failed. The Roman numerals are WAY too big! I’m really becoming a fan of the Pac-12 shield, I didn’t really care for it when it first was introduced.
"If anyone epitomized Cougar grit and courage, Jason Gesser did that." - Bob Robertson
I feel the same about the conference logo
Was unimpressed at first, but I love it now
by B-Lot tailgater on May 27, 2011 9:18 PM PDT up reply actions
So much badness with Number 4
Using roman numerals for the year both looks like a rip off of the super bowl logos and a way to create a fake sense of history for the game. No reason to say football as the fact that you are watching the game will give that away. And the shadow/stand the football is sitting on just make it look like a bad trophy. Not a fan.
But number 2 and 3 are both solid, number 2 gets my vote.
They are all pretty bad.
1. Looks like something Fox NFL would do and Jeff is right they did a really bad job with the lettering. The way they did Championship looks awkward. They could have done something better like making the Pac12 logo large then make football championship smaller and put it in the middle.
2. This may be the best of the worst. The 2011 looks real bad. What is with the green color, spacing and font? Is this arena league or something? The blue shield is a bit big. There is do much open space.
3. Looks like something for a bowl game in the early 90’s or 80’s.
4. I don’t even know where to start, just really bad. That graphic design is bush league.
I hope they come up with some more logos or tweak some of these. I hope they change them each year.
"Borrow money from a pessimist - they don't expect it back"
Sorry, it is done in paint
but just wanted to get the idea across. Maybe keep it simple like this. You could make football championship straight instead of slanted. And make the it a little transparent so you can still see a little of the Pac12 logo mountain through it. I am sure Larry Scott didn’t want any of the logo blocked. This could definitely be cleaned up and spaced better and color etc., but you definitely know this is the Pac12.
Or just put
2011
Football
Championship
right above the logo and keep it simple. That way the Logo still dominates and it the most visible.

"Borrow money from a pessimist - they don't expect it back"
by SoCalCoug on May 27, 2011 11:20 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
This is a much better concept.
I voted for #4 because it at least had a football in it for a football specific event. Which makes saying “FOOTBALL” unnecessary.
(But then how far have we sunk to be breaking down designs for a one off logo???)
Andy Wooldridge, andy_wooldridge@yahoo.com
BuildingTheDam.Com
Go Beavs!
I agree. Don't ruin the shield logo with something over the top.
The symmetry is fine, but the PAC 12 logo is the central theme of any logo and should not be damaged.
"From the end spring new beginnings." - Pliny the Elder
I agree and I understand what you are saying
but our logo has such a unique shape it is hard to design around it without it looking like an arena league or something just stupid. I don’t think you have to worry about going over the top because the shield (symmetry) of our logo is like no other in college. It is already really identifiable. So that in itself already stands out as unique. That is why I also suggesting to make it a little transparent so you can still see a silhouette of the mountain behind whatever goes over it.
"Borrow money from a pessimist - they don't expect it back"
I agree with you on many counts Nuss,
I hate the first one, and honestly the 3rd ones not far ahead. They look like the kind of thing you would expect from an intern at Fox who was told to make a quick logo for the Pac-12 championship game the next day. My favorite is actually the 4th… minus the roman numerals. The shield in the football is a good idea, just get rid of the unsightly numerals
Now there is no question this is a unique logo for the pac12. And its probably redundant to use the word football, allowing for better placement of “Championship” and the year, but you get the idea. Unfortunately judging by the voting so far, I’m going to have to vote for number 2 just to keep that eye sore number 3 from being put on national television (just an opinion of course)… Seriously though I wouldn’t be surprised if people on the east coast start wondering why Oregon and USC are playing in Florida…

by Bleezz on May 28, 2011 3:04 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
That is the logo it reminded me of,
I just couldn’t place what bowl game it was.
"Borrow money from a pessimist - they don't expect it back"
This is exactly what I was thinking.
Love the football, hate the Roman numerals.
by Kyle Rancourt on May 29, 2011 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions
agreed #4 without the Roman numerals.
I like the version by Bleezz. How do we do a write in vote?!
"I used to play sports. Then I realized you can buy trophies. Now I'm good at everything." - Demetri Martin.
by LeaveItToWeaver on May 29, 2011 7:05 PM PDT up reply actions
#4 is my favorite.
Until those damn Roman numerals. I like it a lot more in Bleez’s cropped version above.
CougCenter In Reid We Trust, Twitter!
they are all missing one thing
Dancing Whales…..
as long as the Pac 12 logo is prominent, I’m good with anything.
Is there an SEC championship game? Or a DR pepper game? Maybe the players can start chanting Dr Pepper when an SEC team wins a bowl game.
Don't worry.
Just give Larry Scott some time. I am sure that will probably happen. I wonder when the Cougs will be playing in Red Lion Inn Stadium? RLI Stadium.
"Borrow money from a pessimist - they don't expect it back"

by 

















