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

Ummm...2002 - 2007 Won Hunt National Cup 2007 & SuperLiga 2008 We were 2nd best for a cup 4 times...And Runners-Up for Champions of MLS Season 2005..!
Pretty decent credentials but we seemed to lose fans in droves..
Had game changing coach and some of the best players EVER to play in MLS...Best pure American Striker since who knows! Best crosser of the ball ever...etc..etc

The only constant in all those years was the MORON in charge in the penthouse office..!

 

[quote=" They just don't want to make the investment and do it.[/quote]

Stands to reason when the Pat's are everything to them and the Rev's are a mere investment. All that matters with the Krafts and their Rev property is that the equity and value of it keeps growing.

 

Personally, I think KC got much more bang from the new owners and new stadium than they did the name change. But I agree with you that if you are going to rebrand, SKC did it the right way.

 

Demba friggin Ba and Bob Bradley couldn't save this franchise in any universe. To suggest that it is winning and a couple key signings that could be a panacea for this franchise, is about as offbase are you could possibly get.

 

A rebranding is far from just changing colors and logos. It's a refreshment of the image of the business entirely, and how it is shown and perceived by the public. Ownership/Management changes, and new stadiums are all a part of any rebranding.

 

Agreed. Anything short of Mourinho and CR7 won't change that status quo in Foxborough.

 

They needed a name change -I feel- because the Wizards was so lame and cliche as to be embarrassing. The name Revolution, however is very cool and I do not want it changed. I would also venture to say I've spent more money and shed more tears on this team than a lot of people who post on here and glibly say they want a re-brand. If this is in fact true, then I feel I have a right to say the name I invested in is partially mine, and I feel a sense of equity in this name and I know for sure that I do not want it messed with.

 

I'd venture to say you haven't.

 

I once had that same feeling...and now I have a feeling of betrayal. Unfortunately for you, there are far more people like me (ok, not like me completely, but you get the point ), than there are like you. Which, is evidenced by their putrid support and near anonymous market presence.

 

Ha ha yes, I hear you, but that's only true for the inner circle and the inner outer circle or the outer inner circle.... for the outer outer circle, they still want Revs!

 

And to think how many people, me included, laughed at the "Sporting" name change!!
I haven't heard Benfica Kansas in a while! LOL

 

Ha, I meant the way they did it, not the name they picked! Still not crazy about the new name (and it's Benfica Topeka, I believe).

 

I'd venture to say you're crooked.

 

all 10 of them

 

I think people are missing the entire point of the SKC rebrand...

As a quick aside, rebranding doesn't always necessarily mean changing a logo. Often times companies can change their product line and rebrand. Look at McDonalds. Other than adding the term "Cafe" to some of their locations, the logo is the same it has been for most of our lifetimes, same as the name. Now they dealing with dietary changes, cultural changes, political changes etc...They adapted, changed the product they sell, and are doing better than they were before. There are endless numbers other companies that have done the same throughout the years.

The difference in sport is that you can't really change the product. You can try to change the quality of product, but that is essentially the goal (at least ideally) for any sports organization. Winning is ultimately the end goal, no matter the brand, so attempting to change brand identification that way will only work if there is a prebuilt market. Everyone understands that sport is meant to win. People who chose not to consume the Revs, or the Wizards, didn't do it because the teams didn't win, they didn't consume it because the brand was hokey, damaged or anonymous...or a combination of the three.

The SKC rebrand was a perfect storm. New ownership, management, players, stadium...and logo. It all worked because it was all a complete re-imagining of professional soccer in Kansas City. Few people, other than diehards, probably even associate the old team with the new. And that is the point of a rebranding. It's not to change a silly logo, or fire a coach, or slap "Cafe" on the sign. It is to completely re-invent how or what you do. In the case of sport that almost always means changing the logo, because you cannot change the actual product that you sell.

 

Revs doing ANY type of rebrand will be meaningless to me.

Any ReBranding, especially by this club, better come with a healthy dose of complete philosophical change! Cuz, if all we do, is go full bore on switching to the Revere Silversmiths, new shiny uniforms and brand spanking new high school stadium with Burns, Summers and Krafty still in charge..be ready for stingy to get downright 1930's post depression! Cuz, without the fall back on Gillette and pats related resources that the Revs use...we are going to seem worse than a 4th division team in Canada!
What division do we seem to be in now?

 

But I think you have to take rebranding in its fullest context to understand it's importance. There are certain rebrands which are just changing the facade. Then there are situations like SKC, and the Revs, where the entire identity of the club needs to change, on the field and off, in the front office and in the locker room, at the stadium and in the region, etc...

Kraft will always be here, but they can certainly change everything else. Will they? No, because they are never leaving Foxboro.

 

We're saying the same thing, no?

Kraft never leaving
Revs rebrand
Kraft never leaving
Revs the same tired, neglected team (only full of lipstick)

 

So, you're saying we need a sex scandal?? Hmm...

 

Dude the Revolution is an awesome name, no need to change it.

Let it be known that I actually do like the Revs logo. I never really have a hard on for straight aping Euro style heraldry JUST to do it. It's fine as a logo on it's own. The only problem is now compared to others it feels out of place. Not to mention it's not as strong when seen on the uniform. Considering the colonial brand of the team and history of the area, a more "traditional" type logo would actually work very well. You could keep the graffiti logo as a secondary thing to put on flags.

But I also agree that you guys have bigger fish to fry, namely an apathetic front office.

 

I really like the Revolution name, but it could be tweaked and Boston should be included. My suggestion is Boston Revolution 96. The year thing is the only "Euro" naming convention MLS hasn't stolen yet, and it emphasizes the Revs as a signature/original MLS franchise. I still maintain despite the gains made by the Cascadia/Canadian teams, the Revs are one of the teams casual fans immediately think of when they hear MLS (the Galaxy and DC United being the other two).

I agree the logo should go by the wayside, as it's too '90s and "loose" and it doesn't look like a soccer crest, and that aesthetic is what MLS is targeting. I'm really surprised they've held onto it this long as usually teams love to update logos for merchandising purposes. The Revs definitely got a sales bump when they got the UHC sponsorship and had this year's kit change - a logo update would do the same thing.

 

But it's cheaper if you don't have to pay a graphic designer to do a redesign.

The real problem I have is the current flag logo only can work on a white background. You might have noticed that we also wear blue jerseys, and then the logo doesn't work. The US flad does not have red and blue stripes, y'know.

All the other teams have some sort of standalone shape that can go on any color background.

 

They sometimes take the flag logo and stick it in a circle which, I think, has faint soccer ball lines in the background and is circumscribed by a thick band enclosing the words "New England Revolution Est. 1996". I've seen it in print on STH documents, etc..., but I don't think I've seen it online. I think that might make a better badge while keeping the known flag element.

 

Because -and I'll say it again... a revolution is not neat. It's not tidy, it's not structured, planned nor stuffy. It's loose, spontaneous, chaotic and unpredictable. There is nothing wrong with it! They captured that spirit way back when.