New Husky Logo?

[prankster]

forward facing

Why does he have gauges in his ears?

 

[upstater]

Not sure how far back you remember, but Cuse was actually the Orangemen, I believe they changed it due to accusations of it referencing Natives of that area or something to do with Protestants killing Catholics back in the day, something stupid though, always thought Orangemen was better than just Orange. Similarly St Johns who's original name was the Redmen, is now switched to the Red Storm. Marquette Warriors, now the Eagles. There's even talks of the Washington Redskins changing their mascot. Back in Elway's day, Stanford was the Indians, I still don't know why they're the Cardinals with a tree for the mascot.

You really don't know why these names are offensive? Can you imagine a team called the "Blackfaces" or the "Honkies"? What about the "Little Dicks"?

 

[Perspective]

You really don't know why these names are offensive? Can you imagine a team called the "Blackfaces" or the "Honkies"? What about the "Little Dicks"?

Nah. It's not about "offensive." It's about ownership. It's bad enough to the natives that they had their land taken - they don't also want to see non-natives profiting from their images.

Better counter examples would be - "New York White Skins." or "Cleveland Caucasians." I'm completely unoffended by those or anything like those, particularly considering that they're being used positively and are loved by the fans.

If somebody used the "New Jersey Honkies," I'd be offended, but not because of race. Rather, I'd be offended at how stupid the name is (are you offended as a Jew? No. I'm offended as a comedian.).

This is about somebody else profiting off of your image. It's about control.

Side Note - the Redmen was a reference to St. John's folks being dressed all in red, traditionally, and had nothing to do with skin color. They charged it to avoid idiots from "being offended," regardless of the source.

 

[upstater]

Nah. It's not about "offensive." It's about ownership. It's bad enough to the natives that they had their land taken - they don't also want to see non-natives profiting from their images.

Better counter examples would be - "New York White Skins." or "Cleveland Caucasians." I'm completely unoffended by those or anything like those, particularly considering that they're being used positively and are loved by the fans.

If somebody used the "New Jersey Honkies," I'd be offended, but not because of race. Rather, I'd be offended at how stupid the name is (are you offended as a Jew? No. I'm offended as a comedian.).

This is about somebody else profiting off of your image. It's about control.

Side Note - the Redmen was a reference to St. John's folks being dressed all in red, traditionally, and had nothing to do with skin color. They charged it to avoid idiots from "being offended," regardless of the source.

What about Redskins? Were they dressed in Red Skins? What about Cleveland's Indian?

 

[sammydabiz]

C'mon man, really? I have friends who live on the Res, that really care less and aren't offended at all. Their ancestors were great warriors, they look at it as respect more than anything else. It all comes down to $$$ and is fueled by the suits trying to get a piece of the pie. In no way is any Native American mascot depicted in a less than favorable light or mocked in any way. They're mascots of teams bc they were pretty bad ..... according to you maybe Notre Dame should no longer be the Fighting Irish or is it different because its a white mascot? My Greek friend hates USC because they're called the Trojans, lol, get a grip bro

 

[CL82]

Who else remembers the 10 ft tall inflatable Jonathan mascot that used to be at the games? That was probably the most unnecessary thing of all time.

They had to let him go after this embarrassing photo surfaced.

(BTW I think that that may be Emmert but I haven't heard any confirmation of that.)

In any event, they had an article about him on lost lettermen. He's found work, and is trying to get his life together.

I wish him the best.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

Better counter examples would be - "New York White Skins." or "Cleveland Caucasians." I'm completely unoffended by those or anything like those, particularly considering that they're being used positively and are loved by the fans.

If somebody used the "New Jersey Honkies," I'd be offended, but not because of race. Rather, I'd be offended at how stupid the name is (are you offended as a Jew? No. I'm offended as a comedian.).
.

Now this is a smart argument - if it doesn't offend the white dude, it can't offend anyone.

 

[Penfield]

Fierce

 

[prankster]

Now this is a smart argument - if it doesn't offend the white dude, it can't offend anyone.

 

[prankster]

Now this is a smart argument - if it doesn't offend the white dude, it can't offend anyone.

 

[ZenConn]

I like what nike did for UW.

In 2001, the UW finished a two-year collaboration with Nike to create a standardized color system and modern Husky logo

Wow. It took 2 years to do that?

 

[ZenConn]

That's a mascot I could get behind

Why get behind when you could be in front?

 

[sammydabiz]

My take on logo fiasco--->I'm not liking any of this,
For me, maybe bc I'm a UConn homer, but WE (speaking of Bball, could care less for UC football) are not Oregon State, Washington, WSU, etc etc
In terms of College basketball (men&women) we are GIANTS. No program in the last 15years have as many NC's as us. We are The Standard, not some podunk program trying to redefine themselves thru logo changes.
You'll never see Bama, USC, Texas, ND, OSU, UM change their identity in football (although the latter 3 get a little funky with the uni's at times) their traditional logo remains.
You'll never see Duke, UK, KU, NC, IU, UCLA change & we should be NO different. Leave that for Rutgers, ASU, and the Maryland's of the world.
As soon as we lessen ourselves by throwing away the image/logo that has screamed nothing but DOMINANCE for the past 20 years, people outside the bubble of true college bball fans, will eventually just relegate us as just another school. By no means should we ever again be just another school, we've achieved too much for that.

-Here's hoping they just tweak what we have a little bit, rather than a total "do-over", which I fear will be a big mistake. Especially as we start our journey outside the Big East.
-Besides a rising star in Coach Ollie, our biggest weapon is still our Tradition & rich history which Coach Calhoun help build, why threaten that with a total makeover? I'll never understand.

If the football team needs new helmets/jerseys, go ahead and do that, get crazy. But don't go and try to fix something that isn't broken, the Men's and Women's BBall programs have achieved too much and quite frankly earned the right to keep their identities. Haven't they given up enough for football already?

 

[AtlHusky]

Why get behind when you could be in front?

Your question falls under the category "If you have to ask..."

 

[John]

Does anyone remember the old Yankee Conference Jonathan logo where he's toting a rifle and has a minuteman hat on? Can't find an image of it online.

 

[sammydabiz]

Oh so your telling me, that when UConn men's team is mentioned on tv the interlocking U & C is used? Please buddy, it's the Husky, and it's been the same Jonathan Husky since 96 or so, right when we started to continually get national respect with Allen & co. Don't question my knowledge or love for UConn bball, I'll school ya everytime. Oh and by the way, our jerseys have continually been tweaked and changed ever so slightly throughout the years since then (which btw have represented Jonathan in some form on our shorts, thought you would of known that superfan) the one constant was Jonathan, which has always been used by ESPN when we are mentioned, not just the interlocking UC. Change your name to Outsider, your a joke. #weaksauce

As always, I enjoy that this is already a "fiasco" when the updated logo has not yet been revealed. But as a fan of UConn Basketball, I would think you would be on board with this. Since you are such a big fan, you would know that our basketball uniforms don't use the Jonathan logo. Instead they have UConn on the chest (in different fonts) and each team has their own logo on the shorts. You are missing is the main point of this rebrand and that is to unify the sports under one name (UConn), in one font style and one logo. Yes, there are going to be changes to Jonathan, but that doesn't erase the entire history of our programs (especially the ones that didn't use Jonathan).

When the logo comes out and you hate it, then fine, but at least hate it for the right reasons.

 

[BugsyCT]

Maybe we should go retro - hard to beat the Jonathan logo on our Dream Season shorts.

 

[prankster]

Maybe we should go retro - hard to beat the Jonathan logo on our Dream Season shorts.

Where did you get a picture of Doves shorts?

 

[joober jones]

Not sure how far back you remember, but Cuse was actually the Orangemen, I believe they changed it due to accusations of it referencing Natives of that area or something to do with Protestants killing Catholics back in the day, something stupid though, always thought Orangemen was better than just Orange. Similarly St Johns who's original name was the Redmen, is now switched to the Red Storm. Marquette Warriors, now the Eagles. There's even talks of the Washington Redskins changing their mascot. Back in Elway's day, Stanford was the Indians, I still don't know why they're the Cardinals with a tree for the mascot.

I wasn't living in the area until '92 so I guess I missed those days, though I do remember the Redmen

 

[sammydabiz]

I wasn't living in the area until '92 so I guess I missed those days, though I do remember the Redmen

Excellent avatar by the way

 

[junglehusky]

Does anyone remember the old Yankee Conference Jonathan logo where he's toting a rifle and has a minuteman hat on? Can't find an image of it online.

Found it here...

The many faces of Jonathan
Since first being introduced in 1934, the image of Jonathan the UConn Husky has changed over the years on team uniforms, flags and apparel.

In the 1950s, Jonathan was depicted quite simply (a) on team jackets. By the mid-1960s, Vermont illustrator Hubert Bushey re-created Jonathan as a Revolutionary War-era Minuteman (b) to reflect the state's history as one of the original 13 colonies.
During the 1970s, Jonathan's image returned to a more realistic form (c), which ultimately led to the familiar creation by Storrs artist Larry Wasiele (d), an image that has served UConn's growing legion of supporters and fans for the past 21 years.
As UConn moves forward in the 21st century, Jonathan also continues to evolve along with our growing and expanding public university. Rickabaugh Graphics in Ohio -- a leading identity design firm working with professional and college team logos -- has reintroduced the UConn Husky mascot with a fresh and dynamic look (e) to join the real dog, Jonathan XII, and the costumed Jonathan in representing the strong and proud traditions of the University of Connecticut.

 

[pepband99]

Is it wrong that I like A?
B and C are hideous, C reminding me of the new Pitt awful logo.
I could interchange D and E, though I prefer E.

 

[FluxTZ]

They all are set in a profile facing stance further leading me to believe the new logo may be forward facing.


Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[BugsyCT]

While we're digging into the archives, found this - can't really see it, but guessing it's a side profile Husky logo on Corny's shorts? We had some interesting early logos.

 

[junglehusky]

While we're digging into the archives, found this - can't really see it, but guessing it's a side profile Husky logo on Corny's shorts? We had some interesting early logos.

Looks like "C" with the blue and white inverted.