My fix idea: Make the top yellow part resemble the hancock tower with a little bit more detailing. Make the bottom kinda wavy so it looks more like flames. Do a cool animation (ecuador-like) on the re-re-brand launch that shows the fire reflecting off the lake and the skyline rising up in it's place. Have Kevin Coval come back and say something about "the city that rose up from the flames" or something like that...he's the professional poet, not me.
It matters because we’re trying to get more fans who aren’t fans already. In case you forgot nobody showed up to our first playoff appearance in years against the Red Bulls with World Cup Winner Schweinsteiger on the team. You can say it was a cold midweek day, but if this team had any weight in the city people would have showed up / cared. For every Fire fan who likes the team’s identity I’m sure there are far more Chicago-based soccer fans who don’t follow the Fire who thought the logo and identity were amateurish, childish, goofy, lame, etc. You can say you don’t care about attracting those people to Soldier Field but Mansueto & co. certainly do to get a return on their investment.
This is utter horse shit. The team has been successful with the old logo/branding so blaming the old logo for our fall from grace is terribly stupid logic. Something else changed that caused the dramatic fall off. It’s a really stupid argument. Remember, the old logo was in use when we had more people at our first home game ever than Seattle had at their first home MLS game. We used the old logo when we sold out Toyota Park ten years ago. I think you’re just projecting your disdain for the old logo and look. As for the confusion, does anyone confuse the Blackhawks logo with some Native American charity organization or something? Do they see the head and think “Is that an ad for a Western movie?” No. It’s borderline narcissistic to claim “other” people aren’t smart enough to be able to discern the differences oneself can.
I’m not claiming other people aren’t smart enough to discern the differences I can, I’m saying I’ve had actual conversations with people that couldn’t understand why a soccer team would name itself after a natural disaster. I’ve had conversations with people who have told me about their son whose also a fireman because I was wearing the team hat. I’ve had people legit ask me, since they know I’m a soccer fan, why they built a soccer dome for the fire department by Lane Tech. I am not making any assumptions about these people’s intelligence, these are just a few examples of brand confusion caused by the name.
By "see during a fire" do you mean to imply the DUMPSTER FIRE that has been the Chicago Fire for the past several years?
They're already putting the new logo in the background to avoid backlash. The announcement of Beric on the official page is devoid of the new logo.
People aren't going to support a team or not because of a logo. Well actually, apparently some won't over here anymore if they don't like it, but this is a unique crowd... Anyways, normally you cheer for your hometown team or you bandwagon another club because they're good or you like a player on the team. Someone isn't going to suddenly say, "Hey this new Fire logo is sick! I'm going to go cheer them on now and go to games!" With that said, it is a fact that the old logo caused confusion amongst people who didn't follow the team. People have numerously come up to me to ask if I'm a firefighter when wearing Fire gear. As much as I love the old crest, I can understand them wanting to go with a new logo that possibly creates less confusion. However, a bunch of fan made options are infinitely better than what they gave us. Some examples:
You’re misunderstanding me; I’m not saying the logo is the cause for the fall from grace. I’m saying it may put off people who are already soccer fans from caring about the team. Yes, and that was a long time ago. A different time when people were just happy to have access to soccer. Like it or not most teenage or twenty-odd year old soccer fans today in Chicago would probably prefer some generic name than “the Fire.” That’s certainly the case in Atlanta and Los Angeles. I want this team to be cared about; that’s all. This Blackhawk argument is a red herring. Aside from a military helicopter and a nearly extinguished native population that name is attached to nothing in the current collective consciousness of Chicago. If I ask someone on the street in Chicago to tell me what the Chicago Fire is there are three things ahead of the soccer team people will say: the disaster in the 1800s, the NBC soap opera, and the Chicago Fire Department. I have no disdain for the brand. I just don’t see it ever getting traction.
I really like that design that s8c was selling on shirts, but I think we all known damn well you'd see "Nelson desecrated our crest!!!1" posts if they actually revealed it as the rebrand. /and a blue six pointed star is too much like the gangster disciples. More evidence that Nelson is trying to get Chicago's children killed. /s
Kind of like putting the Burn's flame on the bull's head during the FC Dallas rebrand. I still don't care for their generic names, but FCD and SKC are great examples of successful full rebrands. Red Bull NY too, but it's kind of a different deal. LA Galaxy and Colorado are examples of successfully rebranding the logo and color scheme that we could have learned from. A much better idea would have been to follow the great examples set by Columbus and DC United; modernizing their logos marked a new chapter without disregarding history or greatly alienating fans. In all six cases (seven, if you count RBNY), the clubs have great logos and color schemes. I don't love the Red Bull branding, but the logo is much cleaner and more professional looking than the old Metrostars logos.
And not calling it “Futbol Club” may put off people who are already fans of the sport but are not white Northsiders so we don’t give a ********.
That’s where the money is I’m afraid. Management is trying to attract these people. That’s why they moved back to the city and did this half-*ssed rebrand. In any case, there’s no need to get upset. For the time being the team will continue to be known as “the Fire” for better or for worse.
What a reductionist and (I’d hope purposefully) obtuse take. Nobody’s saying that people are going to actively like or dislike the team based on the name en masse, but individuals absolutely do make those decisions on a personal level- the point is establishing a brand identity that resonates and stands out in the marketplace, and over more than 20 years, through good teams and bad, “Fire” has failed to do that. For many reasons, obviously, but sharing a name with other entities that are more strongly associated with the city is definitely one of them. Sidebar, Jesus if I have to see one more crappy fan concept for a logo that employs the flag and the name “Fire”. Ugh... If the name has to say, the old logo was about as get as it gets, unfortunately.