Yeah, pretty much that. SKC is the rebrand model that I feel like we could’ve best replicated, with their move to the new building and (iirc) new ownership, new name and kits all happening at around the same time and a successful team accompanying it all. Hopefully we can at least do the successful team part right and hope for the best from there.
Sure it’s not true. That’s why so many people in the city know that the words Chicago Fire are associated with a soccer team above all else... That’s why soccer is the first thing that comes to people’s mind when they hear those two words together. Yep, that brand resonates and stands out in the marketplace, yes it does...
All of my friends now what I mean when I say Chicago Fire. My Fire jersey has been recognized anywhere I have worn it. Can't say I have ever watched the TV show, nor do I plan to do so.
Your sample there is incredibly biased. And plenty more people have watched and give a shit about the TV show, both locally and (obviously) nationally, than have watched, give a shit about, or associate the words Chicago Fire to the soccer team.
Hey, someone understands hyperbole. But also, when the rhetoric is toned down to an objective statement, the brand doesn’t resonate or stand out locally. Well, it didn’t at least- we’ll see if side********ing the logo and keeping the confusing name helps with that, but uh, I have my doubts...
I’m not saying either of us is or isn’t biased, I’m saying that the sample your using of friends of yours is biased because of course your friends will know who the club is- mine all do because their dopey friend likes the team. And I generally wear my gear in places it’ll get recognized and in those places it does. It does outside of those places as well, but there are times it gets confused for something else, even if people think it’s cool. Anecdotally, that never happened with, for instance, a Chicago Wolves jersey, and they’re just a minor league hockey team. I doubted it too, but the ratings and the fact that it’s been on the air for damn 8 years or so and has spawned half a billion spinoffs seem to indicate that, yes, many people do actually give a shit about the show. It will probably be a long time, with syndication and streaming deals, if ever, before people don’t give a shit about the show, and even in a universe where they do stop giving a shit in large numbers, there’s still other things that add to the brand confusion.
The bolded part is absolutely not an objective statement like you claim it to be. It’s an opinion not backed up by facts.
Also, regarding the person I saw wearing the hat and scarf with the new logo yesterday, apparently the Fire headquarters moved downtown, and I heard it moved to the same location as CPS headquarters, which shares a building (but not the address somehow) with my work. Heard that the team is also offering or planning to offer huge ticket discounts to parents, students, and CPS staff for the opener, although that might be a bit off topic. Not sure if that info is new or not, but it might explain why someone was randomly in the lobby of the building I work at with the gear on, but also it might not ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The team is not the primary entity associated with the words that represent it in their primary marketplace. If you think a fan of the team since it’s inception would come to that conclusion subjectively i don’t know what to tell you. I can point to a simple search engine search results page to help convey how irrelevant the team is compared to the other entities it is often confused for, but I already know that people will bend over backwards to pretend that means nothing so ...
It’s anecdotal but not subjective, and it’s not just myself that has mentioned or witness the phenomenon of people confusing the branding with other entities. When you observe something first hand, it’s not subjective.
Correct, anecdotal. Whenever someone has said “I’m going to a Fire game”, exactly zero people have ever thought that meant the person was going home to watch TV or to a barn to attempt to burn the city down.
It could be fixed with money is an opinion, that has no basis in fact. It's possible money could 'fix' that one particular issue with the branding, but the fact that it requires money to fix says quite a bit! It's also possible that money can't fix it, or that money can only make it slightly less confusing, or that money won't do a damn thing- it's certain that we can't really know what 'money' (or how much money and what the ROI on that money would be) can really do to that one part of it or the larger issue of brand confusion, but at least we're on the same page in acknowledging that it's something that requires a 'fix'. lol, yeah, I mean, duh. I can't think of one person I would say that to organically that wouldn't already know what I'm talking about, but if I walked up to stranger and worded it 'hey, I'm going to see the Fire, wanna come with', I'd love to see how frequently they had a clue what I was talking about, especially if I was wearing a hat with the old logo. And it probably bears repeating that my main gripe isn't that we kept the name, it's that we kept it, changed the most straightforward part (we were a soccer club - nobody can really argue or be confused by that), and made this monstrosity representative of the name. To me (totally subjective here, obvs) a change like this, coupled with new ownership and a move back to the city- just show some real guts change it all and see what happens, or just add a secondary logo or something and keep the name. Either way, just feels like Mansueto missed a golden opportunity to bring the "Fire" that we all remember back to the city or announce a big fundamental change to that status quo by trying to do both.
Yeah the new logo screams in your face "we had to redesign this in order to make even more money" and so they threw as many colors and brand marketing knowledge at it that it has become completely interchangeable. The parts of the existing brand they took are not recognizable e.g. the crown/fire and the used colors. Other aspects were changed without need, e.g. from soccer to football. Look at all the crests of old European clubs and you will find half of them are straight ugly. Seriously, has anyone ever said the crest of Real Madrid was beautiful? All the clubs in Italy have calcio in their name cause thats their name of for the game. But they are at least unique and are based in their history and thats their selling point. It provides them with a meaning as a standalone product with standalone identity. Instead, by trying to appeal to(and attract) as many people as possible they managed to appeal to no one. That is also the reason why their plan of getting people used to it over time will not work as this approach would only work with minor, cosmetic changes.
Because NBC spent money to associate their show with the term "Chicago Fire" and not the soccer team or the CFD. Mansueto can spend money to do the same thing. One might argue that it's not a fight worth spending money to overcome, but Dick Wolfe thought it was worth doing instead of just naming his show something else. Yes, in the same way NBC fixed this problem with money. I agree. Recall this article from the Tribune in 2012. https://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-chicago-fire-soccer-tv-show-20121008-column.html "If you (say) 'We're working on "Chicago Fire,"' they ask you if you're a soccer player," said Kinney There was a time when our name meant soccer in Chicago, I don't accept the argument that the branding failed. It's not a challenge that can't be overcome. NBC clearly succeeded with the name and so can Mansueto.
NBC advertises all of its primetime shows, I don't see anywhere in that article where they're spending additional money to eliminate any confusion with the club. Why would they? The article itself talks about how the Fire had a winning team the season before but were still, in their 15th year, struggling for relevance. The brand was already confusing for a lot of people before the show (there were questions about whether or not it was and why they would be named after a disaster that destroyed the city before 2012), and the show added to that confusion "I think (it's confusing)," Rolfe said. "But I think it's a good thing for the organization. If people are confused, at least it means they're talking about the Fire." At least it means they're talking about the Fire - doesn't sound to me like the brand meant soccer in the city at that time, even with a good team. But hey, if the team spends the equivalent to NBC's advertising budget for a primetime TV show, maybe more people will associate soccer with the name instead of the disaster/recovery, fire department, and/or show. Maybe they still won't! You can't possibly know, and the fact that the team would have to consider that kind of outreach just to try to 'fix' the branding really screams that it just might be broken.
Mr. Harrylee773, what you've just said...is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point, in your rambling, incoherent response, were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
I think (it's confusing), but I think it's a good thing for me. If people are confused, at least it means they're talking about Harrylee773.
Somehow, I don't think there is that much demand, just some BS to make the user feel like there is demand...
Gives you an idea of how much STs they sold. (Minus all the freebie tix for opener of course) Lower level midfield sections on both sides look disappointing. 2nd level west side looks ok Bottom half of club seats on 2nd level of east side looks good, upper half not so good.