Kings Have a new Logo

VF21

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#61
#61
I think the retro logo is crap. I thought it was crap before, I thought it was crap in 2011 when it showed up on the interweb and I think it's crap now. There's no character, nothing unique, nothing that shows tradition.

But you know what? I also don't care what the logo is. I care about building a REAL team with a REAL coach and winning some more freaking games. They can use a purple stylized version of the McDonald's arches for all I care as long as they pay as much attention to fixing the team as they have rebranding their product. (Oh wait...I actually hope they pay MORE attention to fixing the team then they apparently spent on the "new" logo.)

If I want to buy Kings merchandise and it has the crap logo on it (my judgment), then I just won't buy it.
 
Blastoff

Blastoff

G-League
#62
#62
Padrino said:
agreed entirely. and i kinda wish that lion head secondary logo was the main logo, to be honest. simple, clean, elegant, and ferocious all at once...
Click to expand...
Who knows, the secondary looks like it has had so much thought put into it -- it may eventually become the primary mark. The re-designed traditional logo may be a safe play to help along this big branding change in the short term.
 
VF21

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#64
#64
nebs said:
lol You realize the seats are going to be black/dark grey?
Click to expand...
Who effing cares what color the freaking seats are? When the arena is full, nobody will see them and when there's nobody there... well, nobody will be looking at the empty arena anyway right?

I want comfortable seats with decent cup holders. They can be covered in zebra print or florescent striping and it won't make any difference at all.

What are we going to argue about next? What color uniforms/shirts the ticket takers will be wearing?

/end rant
 
funkykingston

funkykingston

Super Moderator
Staff member
#67
#67
VF21 said:
I think the retro logo is crap. I thought it was crap before, I thought it was crap in 2011 when it showed up on the interweb and I think it's crap now. There's no character, nothing unique, nothing that shows tradition.

But you know what? I also don't care what the logo is. I care about building a REAL team with a REAL coach and winning some more freaking games. They can use a purple stylized version of the McDonald's arches for all I care as long as they pay as much attention to fixing the team as they have rebranding their product. (Oh wait...I actually hope they pay MORE attention to fixing the team then they apparently spent on the "new" logo.)

If I want to buy Kings merchandise and it has the crap logo on it (my judgment), then I just won't buy it.
Click to expand...
Hmm, I've always liked the old logo minus the color scheme. And I thought the cartoon tikki lounge looking thing (which also had no character, tradition or connection to Sacramento or California) was far, far worse. But to each their own.

But while I can understand not liking the logo, I don't quite understand the notion that none of it matters because the team is bad. It's not like Vlade and Mike Bratz were doodling new logos or picking out the color for the arena seats instead of watching film of prospects or getting in touch with prospective coaches.

The arena looks great, the new logos (IMO) look great and I'm guessing the new uniforms will look great. Nice to see the business/marketing side has their act together even if the front office hasn't fixed the on court product. Reading articles from around the web the response to the new logos has been overwhelmingly positive. I of course want the team to be better and I'm cautiously optimistic that Vlade will help deliver that but I'm happy to at least have some positive momentum with a world class arena opening and solid acclaim for the new logos. Because the alternative would have been a Clippers-like rebrand where people think the logo & uniforms are poorly done and it just furthers the national perception that the Kings are a joke of a franchise. Every little bit will help in starting to change that perception but obviously having a stable, winning franchise will be the only way it really changes.

VF21 said:
Who effing cares what color the freaking seats are? When the arena is full, nobody will see them and when there's nobody there... well, nobody will be looking at the empty arena anyway right?

I want comfortable seats with decent cup holders. They can be covered in zebra print or florescent striping and it won't make any difference at all.

What are we going to argue about next? What color uniforms/shirts the ticket takers will be wearing?

/end rant
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is arguing. And I'd say new logos and uniforms are a relatively important thing for a sports team. Just seems overly negative to jump into a thread about the Kings new logos just to say that you hate them and imply that nobody cares and it's not worth discussing.
 
Last edited:
funkykingston

funkykingston

Super Moderator
Staff member
#68
#68
Padrino said:
agreed entirely. and i kinda wish that lion head secondary logo was the main logo, to be honest. simple, clean, elegant, and ferocious all at once...
Click to expand...
I would love it as the primary logo too. I was trying to figure out why it wasn't being used as the primary logo and at first I thought it was because they wanted to have a tie-in to the history of the franchise (which obviously they do) but I think the other (maybe larger) part of it is that the lion/ball logo doesn't immediately provide a place to put "Sacramento Kings". It wouldn't work to embed the words inside the logo and bracketing the design on the top and bottom would ruin some of the simplicity and elegance of the design.

But I VERY much hope the Kings do what the Nuggets did and use their secondary logo for the center court mark.
 
2

206Fan

All-Star
#69
#69
funkykingston said:
I would love it as the primary logo too. I was trying to figure out why it wasn't being used as the primary logo and at first I thought it was because they wanted to have a tie-in to the history of the franchise (which obviously they do) but I think the other (maybe larger) part of it is that the lion/ball logo doesn't immediately provide a place to put "Sacramento Kings". It wouldn't work to embed the words inside the logo and bracketing the design on the top and bottom would ruin some of the simplicity and elegance of the design.

But I VERY much hope the Kings do what the Nuggets did and use their secondary logo for the center court mark.
Click to expand...
Every primary NBA logo has to have either the city name, or the team name(including a basketball lol). With the lion case, I don't know where they'd be able to fit the name. I think the Lion logo looks much cooler without any words on it. It look very simple and clean. I'm really curious as to where they'd put that logo on the jersey. Will it be a small patch? How about on the floor?

My favorite NBA logo is probably the Hawks. It looks amazing in every way possible.

I know not too many people like the new Clippers logo, but it actually does look nice now. Very distinguishable, and even looks like a paper clip.
 
LPKingsFan

LPKingsFan

All-Star
#70
#70
206Fan said:
My favorite NBA logo is probably the Hawks. It looks amazing in every way possible.
Click to expand...
I never realized this until now, but it seems we are following the Hawks route with this. The main logos for both are a re-working of a former franchise classic. The fonts are somewhat similar too. I wouldn't be surprised if the Kings also have an alternate road jersey with "SAC" similar to the Hawks's "ATL", especially since one of the leaked alternate logos appears to be heading in that direction already.
 
VF21

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#74
#74
funkykingston said:
I don't think anyone is arguing. And I'd say new logos and uniforms are a relatively important thing for a sports team. Just seems overly negative to jump into a thread about the Kings new logos just to say that you hate them and imply that nobody cares and it's not worth discussing.
Click to expand...
You're probably right (in fact I know you are). I should know better than to post when I'm having a craptastic day. Sorry...
 
E

ESP47

All-Star
#76
#76
Bricklayer said:
The first tone looks like the same garbage logo we had when the Kings first showed up. Hi, we're pussies, slap us around a bit.

However I like the alternates. The "SAC" one improves the main and makes it a more iconic thing, and the lions are cool, even if the full standing lion is borrowed from some heraldic device, I have seen.

Edit -- or possibly from Lowenbrau as somebody else points out. :)


This is the best:

Click to expand...
I disagree. We don't need some scary menacing logo. There's nothing scary or menacing about a bunch of guys playing a game for millions of dollars. The best logos are the classic ones with no fluff and no pointless crap to try and look intimidating. Baseball has by far the most wearable logos and half of theirs are just the first letter(s) of their team name or city. The Kings need to keep it classy and not look like an expansion WNBA team trying to make a statement.
 
chasen4r1

chasen4r1

Starter
#78
#78
VF21 said:
Who effing cares what color the freaking seats are? When the arena is full, nobody will see them and when there's nobody there... well, nobody will be looking at the empty arena anyway right?

I want comfortable seats with decent cup holders. They can be covered in zebra print or florescent striping and it won't make any difference at all.

What are we going to argue about next? What color uniforms/shirts the ticket takers will be wearing?

/end rant
Click to expand...
I dont understand the negativity here. I think this is a perfectly safe place to discuss logos/colors/seat colors/etc.
 
funkykingston

funkykingston

Super Moderator
Staff member
#80
#80
VF21 said:
You're probably right (in fact I know you are). I should know better than to post when I'm having a craptastic day. Sorry...
Click to expand...
We're all Kings fans - we get it. When other things are frustrating in life having the team you love continue to be mired in losing just adds to it. But every day is a new day.

You're still free to hate the new logo though. ;)
 
John Galt

John Galt

Starter
#82
#82
smart people calling the shots on aesthetics... this is pretty nice (even though I know these are just guesses). Silver & Purple feels pretty modern.

But I've just been in a good mood lately I guess - I think it is a function of having hit rock bottom with the Karl drama... what can possibly happen to the Kings that will bug me at this point :)
 
Bricklayer

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#83
#83
Padrino said:
by "in color/in context," i mean on a jersey/on the court. divorced from that context, many logos around the league don't hold up well. and your contention that it's "some weak ass poopoo" is, of course, entirely subjective. a logo needn't strike fear into the hearts of the enemy, or whatever it may be that you value in a logo's design, especially when striking such a pose becomes an empty gesture as the losses pile up. personally, i prefer a minimal aesthetic, and i've long hated the existing "clip art logo," which funky described perfectly above. so while i was hoping to see a completely new and original redesign, i'm also not upset to see them updating the older, much more minimal logo to commemorate the franchise's history. and while "those beloved joe axelson days" will not be fondly recalled for the quality of the on-court product, it's not as if things have been much better in the last decade. the kings have had a grand total of only eight winning seasons in the thirty-one years they've been in sacramento, after all...
Click to expand...
The problem is that everything associated with the logo we are going back to is associated with abject and complete failure. There is no honor or love associated with it. Its like the Clippers saying hey, we should go back to our 1995 logo. That logo is a logo of a vagabound and strictly second class franchise decades removed from its old glory, and awaiting a change before its new glory. And there is absolutely nothing special, arresting, charismatic, or iconic about it.

During the time of that logo (started in 1971-72, ran to 1993-94) the franchise was moved 3 times, was a perennial basement team, made the playoffs 6 times in 23 years, and had exactly 4 winning records in 23 seasons. The Lakers spanked us 41-4 in a first quarter under that logo. We set an all time consecutive road loss streak under that logo. Its the logo of Joe Axelson and Joe Kleine and Jerry Reynolds and Dick Motta and Ralph Sampson. Its one of the losingest weakest logos in all of American professional sports. Its easily the worst and losingest of all of the Royals/Kings logos too. And THIS is what we go back to?

Of our four primary looks (because this is now the 5th iteration of the same logo because of the turmoil the team has always been in with it):


1945-46 to 2056-57 (12 seasons -- but only counts as NBA from 1948-49 onward, so 9 seasons)
7 playoffs in 9 yrs
6 winning records in 9 yrs
1 title
357-263 .576




1957-58 to 1970-71 (14 seasons)
7 playoffs in 14 yrs
5 winning records in 14 yrs (+ 1 .500 record)
525-582 .474

1971-72 to 1993-94 (23 seasons)
6 playoffs in 23 yrs
4 winning records in 23 yrs
771-1115 .409





1994-95 to 2015-16 (22 seasons)
9 playoffs in 22 yrs
8 winning records in 22 yrs
811-955 .459



Gimme the lion ball any day of the week. This is like going back to baby blue jerseys fulltime and having our guys run around making L signs on their forehead after made baskets. Under this logo the Sacramento Kings were every bit as bas as the Kings of the last 10 years. In the first 9 years we had it in Sacramento, we broke 30 wins ONCE, in our inaugural season here.
 
Last edited:
P

peacelate

Bench
#85
#85
If you want to change the direction of the franchise, start winning games! That's the key to re-branding this franchise.

A cool logo doesn't mean squat if you are still a bottom feeder. If this team jettisons towards the top 5 of the West, is anybody in their right mind going to care about the logo?
 
funkykingston

funkykingston

Super Moderator
Staff member
#86
#86
The Sacramento Kings history is full of losing. They could have created an all-new logo and without fixing the oncourt product that logo too (no matter how fierce or bad-ass or charismatic or iconic or connected to the city of Sacramento it is) would also be associated with losing. I get the desire to start fresh, but honestly this is enough of a departure for me while paying homage to a long history, even if it has been marked mostly with sub par results.

Team logos are like band names. They are pretty meaningless without the context of the band connected to them. In my opinion, "The Beatles" is a terrible band name in the abstract. In context? Different story completely.

The Lakers logo is bland. The Celtics logo is too busy not to mention pulling together an impressive amount of stereotypes such that you couldn't get away with it today. For that matter the Kings logo associated with the winning years with Webb, Vlade, Peja etc was always terrible IMO. The Rockets won their titles behind Dream with possibly the ugliest logo and uniforms they ever had. Obviously I want my team to have a cool logo, but it's the team that forms the impression behind it.

And while it definitely borrows from the older logos, IMO this is the best logo this franchise has ever had, not that it's saying much.

And this isn't the red, white & blue of Cincinnati, KC & early Sacramento years. It's a nod back with an updated feel and a new color scheme. Now it's up to Vivek, Vlade & co to create some positive association between this new/retro logo and the team it represents.
 
funkykingston

funkykingston

Super Moderator
Staff member
#87
#87
206Fan said:
Color schemes leaked!
Purple, Silver, and White.

They released these potential mocks:
Click to expand...
If these are legit it's interesting that they are going with purple & silver and not purple & black. Makes me wonder what the uniform color scheme is. First assumption is that it's the same - purple & silver. That could be very cool. Purple & black is relatively rare as a team color scheme but it also doesn't give a lot of contrast. Depending on how it's done, purple & silver uniforms (with the black alternate hopefully staying) could be awesome.

And then the glory days purple & black can become a throwback just like the baby blues or the Rochester dark blues.

In any event, I really hope the lion/ball really is monochromatic. It will work much better (and in a lot more places) as a single color than a two tone.
 
One and Done

One and Done

Bench
#90
#90
Generally I'm not a fan of core logo changes...maybe it's the marketer in me...I think it devalues the brand a bit, and is usually a sign that a company needed to be rebranded as a way to escape negative associations of the past.

However, if we're to stomach a logo change, this isn't bad at all. I like how it brings back some of the old (even though I never really liked the logo), and simply tweaks it a bit. The color scheme? Not so much...I would've liked stronger, deeper hues of purple and silver...and also, after seeing the monochromatic black mocks, I think they could have made better choices as to where to place the silver, the purple etc.

But criticism aside, the lion logos are pretty awesome!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.