If the New England Revolution were to rename/change logo, what will it be?

But there's a tournament happening right now and we're not in it. Burns and Kraft are running a second rate organization.

 

If you are talking about the Disney one, you know it overlaps with the one the Revs are doing right

 

I think someones sarcasm detector is broken.

 

Maybe, but this is the Revs board and most of the crap you see here is not sarcasm. And the way people feel about this team and ownership. I actually think people think you should do both tournaments.

 

That was in fact sarcasm, though I could see with some of the commentary on this board where it would be missed.

 

The general public? Not even close. The vast majority of them aren't even aware that the franchise has reached the level of "clown car failure". Most simply dismiss the team as playing "soccah... that faw-rin kick-ball game".

Again, when it comes to the vast majority of the general public, their thinking "this team is a joke" has absolutely nothing to do with the Krafts' indifferent stewardship of the franchise and/or on-field fortunes.

Amongst the general "public"? No, actually, it isn't.

While I'll grant you that some soccer die-hards are dismissive of the Revolution, that "snark snicker and immediate dismissal" is - on the part of most people in New England - being delivered at the sport of soccer as a whole, not the Revolution.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

No major-pro sports brand in New England was more "damaged"... further "beyond repair"... considered a "joke" and "clown car failure" by a larger percentage of the New England population - die-hards and casual fans alike - than the New England Patriots. Hell, the "Patsies" were a laughing-stock throughout all of pro sports fandom. The franchise was the proverbial "fifty pounds of sh*t in a five-pound bag" for the vast majority of its existence. That's part of the reason New England is still home to a significant pocket of New York Giants fans - because the Patriots took so damned long to achieve anything approaching legitimate traction amongst the region's population. Then, James Busch Orthwein bought the franchise, hired big-name coach Bill Parcells, drafted top-prospect quarterback Drew Bledsoe, and introduced a sleek new logo and uniforms. Suddenly, the team had an aura of respectability around it. Hell, the hiring of Parcells alone spurred season-ticket sales to unheard of heights. Now, in the wake of local boy Bob Kraft stepping-up (oh, the irony) and keeping Orthwein from relocating the team to St. Louis, plus the winning of three Super Bowl chmapionships, the former "Patsies" are one of the crown-jewel franchises in all of pro sports.

Bottom line? No pro sports "brand is damaged beyond repair". If a major-pro sports owner puts a competitive team on the field, markets said team properly, and treats the product as if it is a priority to him, the audience - both die-hard and casual - will flock to it. If the pathetic-beyond-belief New England Patriots didn't have to become the New England Blitz/Sentinels/Steamrollers in order to resurrect their fortunes, the New England Revolution doesn't have to recreate itself as FC Sporting Boston & New England Wanderers in order to become relevant.

And I'd go so far as to say that if the way the franchise actually does business is changed, a cosmetic change would be unnecessary. Hire experienced soccer professionals to run the club both on and off the pitch... commit time, effort, and money into marketing the product properly... actually deliver on the promise of a soccer-specific stadium... and put a competitive side on the pitch... do all of that, and a cosmetic change would be superfluous.

 

When Gillette Stadium is in ashes, then you have my permission to rebrand

 

Yawn, learn to read, bro. I never said the anonymity of the brand in the general public, nor its hated of soccer, was entirely Kraft's fault. Thanks for the nonsensical rant that had nothing to do with what I was talking about.

 

Seriously... "Yawn"? "Bro"? What are you, a high school sophomore? Oh, right... you're the community's resident self-appointed Snarkmaster General.

Neither did I. While I mentioned "the Krafts' indifferent stewardship of the" Revolution in passing, that was in no way, shape, or form the crux of my post.

What I took issue with was your contention that "the Revs brand is damaged beyond repair". Sorry, but "anonymity of the brand in the general public" doesn't equate to "damaged beyond repair". In fact, the argument can be made that if the Revolution brand suffers from significant "anonymity... in the general public", it doesn't even register amongst enough consumers - actual, or potential - to be "damaged beyond repair".

Further, if there's one thing that professional sports has proven time and time again, it is that fan-bases that are quick to embrace dismissiveness when a team is mired in failure, are just as likely to jump on the band-wagon when a franchise turns the corner and experiences success.

Thanks for the snarky posturing that had nothing to do with mine. Do yourself a favor: dial down the attitude by about a third and replace it with a few additional cogent arguments in each of your posts. Then we can engage in a meaningful exchange of ideas and opinions.

There's clearly someone with at least half a brain operating behind the "Kraft Out" persona, it's a shame he's so caught-up in having to prove himself the BigSoccer New England Revolution forum personification of Williamsburg, Brooklyn circa 2003.

 

It's only been 18 seasons. What's the rush?

On the bright side, number 4 did make a brief appearance about six years ago.

 

hahahahahahahaha u mad

 

I agree. All that other stuff is lame lol

 

Too bad there isn't a catch-all phrase that would summarize all them places, the same way the "Inland Empire" does for that wasteland in Southern California way east of El-Lay and north of San Diego, too far away to be part of either city's metro area, but nothing more than suburban tract housing and a basin of smog...

Anyway, changing the name, colors, logo or anything else is totally pointless unless there is a fundamental change in how the team operates. If there is a change there, then who cares about cosmetic stuff? The Red Sox were pretty sad-sack in the late '40s, refusing to sign black players becuase of their owner's racist, backwards attitude. (They could have signed Jackie Robinson and Willie Mays.) By the early 50s, the Dodgers had 4-5 black stars, and every other team had at least a couple of black players, but not the Sox. What if the Sox changed their name to the Boston Atomics and started wearing crazy colored unifiorms. Would that have made any difference? No, it was not until they changed their approach, invested in the farm system and started winning did they become an "institutuion." And other than a few red hat years in the '70s they are wearing the same uniform since the 1930s.

 

Ya, too bad we don't use a term like "New England" to describe those places.

 

I'm flattered!
ps I wasn't being ironic... I was being acknowledging

 

I can match you anecdote for anecdote. No one in my office follows the Revs except me; some of them didn't even know we had a local pro soccer team; "Revs? What's that?" is a comment I have gotten on more than one occasion when I have mentioned the Revs, and this is from people who do follow the local pro sports teams in New England/Boston. Even those who knew who the Revs were before I mentioned them, knew nothing about when or where they played or anything at all about the team except for a vague memory that they existed and played somewhere in the greater Boston area (ie about the same level of awareness they probably have that we have, somewhere in the Boston area, a pro lacrosse team). I'm talking averages here, not your personal experience. On average the Revs are almost invisible to your average sports fan who isn't going out of his way to find and support his local pro soccer club.

It's great that your coworkers talk to you about the Revs; but that has not been my experience at all. All I can get from people I know who know that I follow the Revs are vague suggestions from people that maybe they'll take their kids to a Revs home game one of these days, but they never do. The soccer fans I do know follow European soccer; they don't follow the Revs (I don't hang out with Rev fans in real life, so I'm not able to immerse myself in Revs fandom except online). I never see Revs gear on sale anywhere. I never see Revs gear worn anywhere, never see Revs bump stickers, and almost never see or hear anything about the Revs on local sports media (coverage of European soccer has actually gotten better now, but the Revs are still mostly missing from local sports media). We Revs fans are living in a bubble; your co-wokers may humor you in your favorite topic of conversation, but in my experience sports fans in this market don't follow the Revs and don't care and wouldn't notice if the Revs disappeared entirely (except for asking years later, "didn't we used to have a soccer team?") so the Revs are effectively invisible - not to you and people who know you, perhaps, but to the greater public they are simply not sufficiently visible to count for much.

We're comparing anecdotes, of course, but in my experience people don't talk about the Revs if they don't know I support the Revs, and they don't mention the Revs to me except out of polite interest, ie, trying to think up topics of conversation with subjects they know I'm interested in. And its quite obvious to me when they do mention the Revs that they don't know anything about them at all except for things I happen to tell them about. Sure they tell me about Revs news if they happen to see it on the news. If they didn't know me and know I supported the Revs, they wouldn't have paid that bit of Revs news any mind and it would have gone in one ear and out the other (you notice things that you are aware of; like if you think about VW bugs all of a sudden you see them everywhere, but if you don't think about them you could pass dozens on the street and not be aware of them). The Revs are like that: if you aren't for some reason aware of them, you don't notice anything Revs related. If you are a Revs supporter you of course are very aware of the Revs, and people who know you are aware of the Revs because they know you support them, but that level of awareness rapidly diminishes as you move beyond the circles of Revs supporters and their friends/co-workers/etc. That's what I mean by the Revs being effectively invisible in this market.

It isn't because local sports fans hate soccer, either. The "soccer is gay and un-American" crowd exist everywhere, including in the Pacific Northwest. But in successful MLS markets like in the PNW, the soccer-haters don't matter because the local MLS teams are obviously popular and successful. That's not true in New England which is why the soccer haters sound more persuasive because there is no local successful MLS team to contradict their assertion that "Americans don't like soccer". The reality is that this is a huge soccer market; it's just that most soccer fans aren't following the Revs. They are following elite European or other teams outside the USA, or their local clubs, school teams, youth teams, etc. When they sell out Fenway for instance to watch visiting European soccer teams, that gets the attention of local sports fans who don't follow soccer. The Revs don't. New England should be a successful pro soccer market but KSG has to do more than just show up every spring with a weak MLS 1.0 soccer mom-oriented half-@ssed afterthought of a pro soccer organization.

Now I'm ranting, sorry.

Makes no sense to me either. My point is that if they are pretty invisible to all but the hardcore fans, why disrespect those who have remained loyal to the brand by changing the brand, as in any case the newcomers really aren't going to care about the name change. They'll come if the team is successful and well marketed and if there is a positive game day experience (obviously more likely to be positive in an urban SSS than in Foxboro, but the Foxboro experience could still be improved since it is obvious an urban SSS is not happening any time soon). Rebranding is overhyped. It didn't help Dallas and conversely KC could have succeeded quite well without rebranding assuming they made all the other changes that they made. In sum I don't care for rebranding: KSG needs to do the basic work needed to be successful in MLS 2.0. Rebranding is a red herring, a distraction and not really relevant to what's wrong with the Revs. Really it's an excuse for people who like to make up new names, photoshop new logos and uniforms, etc. I suppose it's a harmless pastime but I don't see the point really. YMMV of course.

 

Obviously you weren't being ironic. That is saved for those who are the "New England Revolution forum personification of Williamsburg, Brooklyn circa 2003."

 

I enjoyed your post, and found it pretty accurate - except for, in my opinion, this last part. Rebranding is not overhyped, but it does need to be done intelligently.

Have you heard the expression, "dress for the job you want to have"? The Revs need to brand for the role they want to have in the Boston community, not for the one they do currently. What their brand says about their core identity - to the public, and honestly, to their own players and administrators - has a real affect on future outcomes for the team.

There's absolutely no excuse not to start doing things better today. Waiting for a stadium is foolish - at best that's several years away, at worst, a decade or more. Changing perception takes time - and in fact, if the Revs were to take some rebranding steps now, they would reduce the "stunt" factor that comes with rebranding while moving into a stadium all at once. (This is the one aspect of the KC change that kind of bothered me - it leaves a slightly artificial taste in my opinion.)

Just because dislike your middle management job in a Foxboro office park and drive a '96 Camry doesn't mean you can't clean up, dress well, act friendly and cleverly and impress people with who you are. Doing so will have a much greater affect on what your next job is, and whether it's a step up. The Revs are stuck in a "This job sucks. Why should I try harder?" mindset. What they need is the "I'm going to surprise some people with how hard I work and how well I present myself - and make them wonder what I'm still doing out here" mindset. Good things will follow. A smart rebrand would be like putting on a tie and ironing their shirt.

 

I feel it's the behind the scenes things which make the Revs shabby. As for their uniforms and logos, I have absolutely no problem with them and I'm usually sensitive to appearance. We actually have really cool kits. (True that I hated the silver patriots shoulder pads of 2 years ago.)

Has the state of the F.O. blinded people into thinking we don't look cool on the field? I say it again, there is nothing wrong with the colors or kit!

 

I agree with this part. The problem is that this ownership has no ambition whatsoever to change that mindset. They are perfectly content being the Pittsburgh Pirates of MLS.

As long as they continue to:
- Avoid speaking of the Revs in public
- Hire under-qualified front office/coaching staff
- Have the lowest payroll in the league

they will continue to be what they are, no matter what you call them or dress them up as.

They need to change the way they run the team to make a rebrand work, and that will never happen unless the ownership has a serious change of heart.

 

Branding is more than just the uniforms and colors. It's the attitude and approach.

• I won't argue about any behind-the-scenes stuff as I have no idea how the business is actually run from the inside.

• I concur that the kit is good and has gotten better. The template has improved and the league-wide typeface change alone really affects the look for the better.

• The club's colors are good, but not especially memorable; I wouldn't change them but I'd consider how to spice things up / differentiate the brand a bit.

• The name has equity and some like it more than others. I'd err on the conservative side and keep 'Revolution' around, but why couldn't it be the official on-field nickname for a club called, say, New England FC? Best of both worlds.

• The club's crest has got to change. It makes the whole operation look bad.

• The current attitude, visually is here:



This isn't acceptable in 2013. Besides the crest, you have kind of a Mad Max metallic honeycomb thing that the team has been recycling for years ("Soccer is the future and totally rad!"), and a typeface that looks like it should be printed on crates of tile at Grossman's Bargain Outlet ("See? We're hardcore and a little rough around the edges. Aww yeah!"). I can almost hear the Van Halen guitar riffs in the background. The whole thing is several steps behind what passes for savvy, creative branding to an increasingly soccer-versed public. Beyond old and stale, it reeks of "we don't really know what to do!" and that's what bothers me.

But yeah, the kit is pretty good.

 

It goes even beyond the stupid idea of what those images are supposed to represent. Modern web and graphic design moved away from this nonsense years ago. The only people who still do it are design hacks.