I don't like "Hoops" because it's based on the uniform (note: I didn't call it a "kit") - I like it because it sounds cool. "Toros" doesn't sound cool to me. I like the single-syllable nick.
I read your post just fine. No way the hoops go away even in five years, probably not ten. Again, barring the sale of the team (again, not something that is even vaguely on the horizon at this point), the look is going to stay the same. Sure, the size of the hoops might change, but I think you'll see the same thing from Dallas that you've seen from Celtic for most of their hoops existance.
Steve Davis weighs in... http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon...ts/sdavis/stories/090606daviscol.33d8ba8.html
And I still think the rebranding was a mistake. Clearly it has not accomplished a damn thing in regards to attendance or community recognition, as I predicted. It has, however, created confusion to some extent.....I'm still asked by soccer neophytes "what happened to the Burn". Furthermore, it destroyed 10 years worth of impressions made upon the community that did, to some measure, recognize the Burn and that it was the local outdoor soccer team. Trading those impressions (good or bad) for what appears to have been little to no gain was what worried me from the outset. 2.5 years into this and its clear my fears were well-founded.
I'd like to congratulate Rocket for providing the local soccer beat writers with one article each this season when they clearly had nothing else to write about. You are obviously a friend to the unimaginative journalist. Bravo.
I'm going to go back to calling you vw. I also believe your rebranding was a mistake. You clearly are more representative of a small foreign car than a large space missile.
Yes, it did have potential, but it would have had to been one hell of a rebranding for me not to have the fears that I did. Bottom line, it is DAMN hard to market MLS soccer. Unless you are paying for ad space, no one is interested in your press releases. No media are clamoring to reprint your information. There is no urgency in getting out your message. Knowing this, it was always going to be hard to have an effective rebranding campaign. Just another one of Greg Elliot's mistakes, if you ask me.
Possibly, but I'm not sure there's any amount of marketing short of handing out pamphlets to every citizen of the DFW metroplex that makes up for the inherent problems with "FC" that Texgator's talking about.
Even if they had gone with a better "brand" than FC it still would have been an uphill struggle to get the word out, to get the recognition. But, it's obvious to me that the unimaginative choice of FC Dallas created some problems. I remember sitting in the banquet room at the Westin Stonebriar in Frisco looking at the new shield and Dustin comes up and says, "For all the money they put into this thing, you think they could have at least come up with something better than this". Exactly my feelings. Basically all they accomplished was getting rid of a bad first choice, but they failed to replace it with something that would truly make a difference.
That is because that something from a brand perspective does not exist. The lone exception in this market being: The Dallas Cowboys SC. Embrace everything Cowboys. The Silver and Blue. The cheerleaders. The Lone Star logo. Poor Uncle Lamar's head would have exploded, but that brand had a chance.
Might have had a chance. What's the Spanish word for a cowboy? Ranchero? Dallas Rancheros SC? Silver and Blue kits. Big Star on the crest. Beats the hell out of FCD.
haha and our away kits can be white with the Red Stripe sash like the bottle and River Plate delicious and refreshing
Tsk-tsk! A rap on yar knuckles for sleeping through Texas History class in Jr. High. "Vaqueros"=Cowboys.