White Husky or Blue Husky?

[Husky25]

I agree that it is unlikely that they go back to the "original" logo. I think its more likely that they go in the direction of Pitt and pretty much eliminate the use of the husky logo entirely, or if not entirely, at least mostly. How often do you see the Pitt Panther on anything? Or the UCLA Bruin or the Oregon Duck? they exist and show up on occasion but it isn't a major element. I think that will be the final outcome here, too. UCONN will be the primary identifier. And the word Huskies. But the logo, not so much. Over time it will be dropped entirely or replaced by something more like the white "penfield husky" and nobody will really say anything publicly.

Are we sure it wasn't because the new panther logo wasn't too expensive to reproduce? It is quite detailed. The Patriots rebranded to the flying Elvis partially because Pat Patriot was very detailed and expensive.

 

[Adios]

GET RID OF THAT AVATAR!!! I went to the University of Connecticut. Not the University of Oak Leaf!!! Do you know how badly you are misrepresenting the Unversity without the state crest in that seal? For shame, '08!

Edit: The original quote in 1999 referred to the University of Oak, not Oak leaf. Husky25 regrets the mistake.

Charter Oak.

This new logo sucks.

 

[UConnDan97]

One thing seems certain to me: after having read many of the comments on the Boneyard and on UConn's Facebook page, the major problem is not that we are changing logos, but that the change is inconsistent with 70 years of brand history. White dog, unlike any of the other huskies around the country. If they go to a Penfield-like white logo, a large portion of UConn Nation will be satisfied. C'mon, President Herbst...c'mon, Nike...."Just do it!"

 

[jrazz12]

One thing seems certain to me: after having read many of the comments on the Boneyard and on UConn's Facebook page, the major problem is not that we are changing logos, but that the change is inconsistent with 70 years of brand history. White dog, unlike any of the other huskies around the country. If they go to a Penfield-like white logo, a large portion of UConn Nation will be satisfied. C'mon, President Herbst...c'mon, Nike...."Just do it!"

You're giving WAY too much credit to this fan base. Guaranteed, if the Penfield remix came out first, the uproar would be just as loud. It's just that a decent size of Boneyarders like yourself have found a middle ground, and I'm not entirely opposed to the white remix. The logo and shape itself of the mark is good, that's why the white one can work too. That gives credit to the actual design, which so few people want to do.

I ventured over to the facebook page to check out the entertainment and have a few laughs. I left that experience feeling embarrassed by our representation. People complaining about the cost when it was a free design, people complaining about the fact that the athletic department is changing the athletic logo and WHAT ABOUT THE ACADEMICS? Morons.

Others complaining that it looks like Northeastern (not even close), Washington (a very old version, and even then, not really). Guess what? Huskies look like huskies. Even if they're all white. "But it looks like a wolf". Guess what dipsh1ts, huskies look like wolves. Even the white ones. Others saying no one recognizes us by this husky. No , it's a new brand.

And there was an overwhelming amount of people (who all happen to be about 60 and female, and thus why Facebook is terrible) complaining about losing the smiling, licking samoyed.

The Boneyard has been markedly better in its response, with a few noisy stragglers. And for the record, this dog is still very white and in a way that is unique. The blue fur adds to the mark in a way that is going to look fantastic on our jerseys and helmets. And likely the reason why there's blue fur at the top. Wait til you see it on the jerseys and see the contrast and the husky really pop, likely in a way that the all white would not. This is what brand designers and managers are for.

Bottom line that people need to understand, the ONLY reason we have such an attachment to that damn samoyed is because we won with it. And won with it a lot. People associated us with it because we were always on tv, always winning. We will do the same thing with new Jonathan, and people will know us.

No, we didn't distinguish ourselves from Washington and Northeastern and Northern Illinois because our dog was all white. We distinguished ourselves because we're better than those schools. At everything. Winning made the mark and made us a national player. We'll do it again

 

[BugsyCT]

One thing seems certain to me: after having read many of the comments on the Boneyard and on UConn's Facebook page, the major problem is not that we are changing logos, but that the change is inconsistent with 70 years of brand history. White dog, unlike any of the other huskies around the country. If they go to a Penfield-like white logo, a large portion of UConn Nation will be satisfied. C'mon, President Herbst...c'mon, Nike...."Just do it!"

On the contrary, from what I've seen on Facebook, their major beef IS the fact that we're changing logos - period. The big issue about the all-white Husky seems to be here on the 'Yard.

Somebody posting there has a FB page going titled "Bring back the old UConn logo." Their tagline is (no joke): NOBODY WITH A SOUL LIKES THE NEW UCONN LOGO!

Ya gotta love hyperbole.

 

[UConnDan97]

I respectfully disagree with you both (shocking, I know).

jrazz, we HAVE CERTAINLY distinguished ourselves by having an all-white husky from the other universities. It was so important to us that we insured that we kept an all-white Jonathan every year. It was not by accident that from Jonathan II all the way to Jonathan XIII, the dog was an all-white husky. So the idea that our only attachment to the previous logo was the victories earned underneath it is preposterous. There was not nearly the same uproar from the 1996 upgrade as there has been for this one (I was on campus during the change), and the major reasons are color and consistent brand image.

Bugsy, I have seen literally hundreds of "all-white" comments on Facebook. There have been at least three UConn FB posts since the release, the latest one being a Q&A (solely dealing with the overwhelmingly negative response). As for the person commenting about people with souls, I don't put stock in one idiot's posts. It's the hundreds of others that I would put stock in...

 

[jrazz12]

I respectfully disagree with you both (shocking, I know).

jrazz, we HAVE CERTAINLY distinguished ourselves by having an all-white husky from the other universities. It was so important to us that we insured that we kept an all-white Jonathan every year. It was not by accident that from Jonathan II all the way to Jonathan XIII, the dog was an all-white husky. So the idea that our only attachment to the previous logo was the victories earned underneath it is preposterous. There was not nearly the same uproar from the 1996 upgrade as there has been for this one (I was on campus during the change), and the major reasons are color and consistent brand image.

Bugsy, I have seen literally hundreds of "all-white" comments on Facebook. There have been at least three UConn FB posts since the release, the latest one being a Q&A (solely dealing with the overwhelmingly negative response). As for the person commenting about people with souls, I don't put stock in one idiot's posts. It's the hundreds of others that I would put stock in...

Yeah but I think this all white thing is internal. I don't believe for a second people outside of UConn primarily recognize us as having a white husky and that's how they distinguish us from the other huskies teams. They recognize the samoyed only because that image has been used as we've been dominating nationally. If we made this run with the new image, people would recognize us with that.

The white only dog is entirely internal to UConn, and I can appreciate the sentimentality. I just don't care. It's a logo. And it's only been around since 2002. And the athletes and coaches that actually represent us and wear it, chose it and like it. As long as they win with it, I'm good.

 

[CAHUSKY]

I respectfully disagree with you both (shocking, I know).

jrazz, we HAVE CERTAINLY distinguished ourselves by having an all-white husky from the other universities. ..

Except our logo was a samoyed not a Husky. We distinguished ourselves by having an entirely different breed of dog as our logo. Whats worse, having the wrong breed as your logo or changing the color?

 

[BugsyCT]

You must be looking at different threads there than me, Dan. Most of the complaints I'm seeing are that it looks like a wolf. Not nearly as much about an all-white Husky as you're saying. (But I didn't scroll through all of them so I could be wrong - pretty much got the gist right away that 99.999% of them hate the new logo.)

 

[upstater]

I'm not a huge fan of the all-white one. I can't quite pin it...maybe something to do with the lack of contrast? The blue one looks a lot better, IMO.

You did a great job on it, Pen, but I just prefer the blue one.

Maybe it's the bald headline? I mean, I did suggest the toupee come off, but... now the husky is bald.

 

[UConnDan97]

Yeah but I think this all white thing is internal. I don't believe for a second people outside of UConn primarily recognize us as having a white husky and that's how they distinguish us from the other huskies teams. They recognize the samoyed only because that image has been used as we've been dominating nationally. If we made this run with the new image, people would recognize us with that.

The white only dog is entirely internal to UConn, and I can appreciate the sentimentality. I just don't care. It's a logo. And it's only been around since 2002. And the athletes and coaches that actually represent us and wear it, chose it and like it. As long as they win with it, I'm good.

People outside of UConn absolutely recognize us as having a white husky. It's how they tell our merchandise from the other schools with huskies as their mascots. And while I can respect that you don't care about the sentimentality because it is only a logo to you, to me and many others it is the embodiment of the UConn experience. Jonathan has had a long and storied tradition for fans and alumni...

 

[upstater]

Yeah but I think this all white thing is internal. I don't believe for a second people outside of UConn primarily recognize us as having a white husky and that's how they distinguish us from the other huskies teams. They recognize the samoyed only because that image has been used as we've been dominating nationally. If we made this run with the new image, people would recognize us with that.

The white only dog is entirely internal to UConn, and I can appreciate the sentimentality. I just don't care. It's a logo. And it's only been around since 2002. And the athletes and coaches that actually represent us and wear it, chose it and like it. As long as they win with it, I'm good.

I know no other teams with Husky logos win like UConn does, but honestly, I couldn't tell the other Huskies apart until this week. The color code is key for that, it helps with UW's. But in general, if you put Houston Baptist, Northeastern, UW, N. Illinois etc. after changing all colors to sepia, I wouldn't have been able to tell the difference. I think the white makes it that much more distinctive.

 

[BugsyCT]

Penfield had the right idea. Just needs some highlight adjustments in the right places, and then it would probably work.

 

[UConnDan97]

You must be looking at different threads there than me, Dan. Most of the complaints I'm seeing are that it looks like a wolf. Not nearly as much about an all-white Husky as you're saying. (But I didn't scroll through all of them so I could be wrong - pretty much got the gist right away that 99.999% of them hate the new logo.)

Bugsy, I just went back on Facebook, and I see that there are two separate UConn pages. There is UConn, which I'm assuming is run by the university. Then there is UConn Huskies (I'm not sure if they are run by the university or not). If you are patient enough to sift through both of those pages and their most recent posts, you'll get a strong sentiment for the color change...

 

[BugsyCT]

Bugsy, I just went back on Facebook, and I see that there are two separate UConn pages. There is UConn, which I'm assuming is run by the university. Then there is UConn Huskies (I'm not sure if they are run by the university or not). If you are patient enough to sift through both of those pages and their most recent posts, you'll get a strong sentiment for the color change...

Fair enough - I'll check 'em out.

 

[jrazz12]

People outside of UConn absolutely recognize us as having a white husky. It's how they tell our merchandise from the other schools with huskies as their mascots. And while I can respect that you don't care about the sentimentality because it is only a logo to you, to me and many others it is the embodiment of the UConn experience. Jonathan has had a long and storied tradition for fans and alumni...

Alright let me ask you this: do you think outsiders saw the old logo and said, "Oh that's UConn, because it's all white." Or "that's UConn because I see it on their jerseys and on broadcasts."

You're saying our definition and recognition comes from the color. I disagree. It comes from us doing something with the logo. I think the dog itself was the distinction, not the color.

 

[upstater]

Alright let me ask you this: do you think outsiders saw the old logo and said, "Oh that's UConn, because it's all white." Or "that's UConn because I see it on their jerseys and on broadcasts."

You're saying our definition and recognition comes from the color. I disagree. It comes from us doing something with the logo. I think the dog itself was the distinction, not the color.

The dog was unusual, to say the least. Easily recognizable. The new one is an improvement, but not as distinct.

 

[jrazz12]

I know no other teams with Husky logos win like UConn does, but honestly, I couldn't tell the other Huskies apart until this week. The color code is key for that, it helps with UW's. But in general, if you put Houston Baptist, Northeastern, UW, N. Illinois etc. after changing all colors to sepia, I wouldn't have been able to tell the difference. I think the white makes it that much more distinctive.

Sure the color is different from the others. But I believe we get recognized by repetition, and not by color. In a few years, everyone will know us by this mark just because we're all over tv, winning (assuming we get out of this ebola virus of a conference)

No question this mark brings us closer to the other Huskies, but that's inevitable if we're actually displaying a Husky now.

And my issue isn't with you guys, because you guys support the change of logos. And I actually like the white one (I think the more blue is just better). My issue is with the "Woe is me. My precious tongue wagging Jonathan has been murdered and my Cheerios were stale this morning" crowd who have the brand management abilities of pistachio nuts.

 

[UConnDan97]

Alright let me ask you this: do you think outsiders saw the old logo and said, "Oh that's UConn, because it's all white." Or "that's UConn because I see it on their jerseys and on broadcasts."

You're saying our definition and recognition comes from the color. I disagree. It comes from us doing something with the logo. I think the dog itself was the distinction, not the color.

Outsiders would say that it's UConn because they see it on their jerseys and on broadcasts. And they now have an image of what UConn looks like. When they see a Penfield-type derivation, they can make the connection (much in the same way that we all make the connection when ESPN puts up the all-white "U" with a tongue hanging out, before they go to commercial break during one of our games).

Let me put it another way; if the Notre Dame logo suddenly had a blond beard and an all-gold jacket, do you think it would be well-tolerated? How about if the "U" for Miami went all orange, instead of one-half orange and one-half green? These things matter to large programs with national prominence, and we are indeed a large program with national prominence...

 

[UConnDan97]

No question this mark brings us closer to the other Huskies, but that's inevitable if we're actually displaying a Husky now.

The first part of your statement is the main reason I'm upset, obviously. The second part of your statement is not necessarily true in my opinion, and I think that Penfield proved it. The all-white Penfield version will NEVER be mistaken for a Washington Husky, and that is the main point of my arguments. Jonathan is "our" thing, and that's why I feel we should preserve it...

 

[upstater]

No question this mark brings us closer to the other Huskies, but that's inevitable if we're actually displaying a Husky now.

I agree with all else you wrote, but not this. There are all-white huskies. So it's not inevitable at all.

 

[GlastonTim]

I just talked to a sophmore from Northeastern and he thinks the new logo looks like theirs. Same marking and coloring.

 

[jrazz12]

Outsiders would say that it's UConn because they see it on their jerseys and on broadcasts. And they now have an image of what UConn looks like. When they see a Penfield-type derivation, they can make the connection (much in the same way that we all make the connection when ESPN puts up the all-white "U" with a tongue hanging out, before they go to commercial break during one of our games).

Let me put it another way; if the Notre Dame logo suddenly had a blond beard and an all-gold jacket, do you think it would be well-tolerated? How about if the "U" for Miami went all orange, instead of one-half orange and one-half green? These things matter to large programs with national prominence, and we are indeed a large program with national prominence...

Ok I agree with that. But two things: I don't think there's that much difference between the new logo and the remix. I think both are good. I think the more blue will look better with the uniforms. If you can support one, you can support the other because they're similar. My impression is that is where most reasonable people are. The non-Facebook types.

And my preference would actually be something in between the Penfield and the current. A little bit less blue, just from a stylistic perspective. But more blue than the Penfield so that we can showcase our colors and make those eyes come out of the head.

But, in the end, I don't think the differences are that major, and not worth fighting over. Like I said to upstater, it's not you guys that I'm really arguing with. It's the no-change types.

 

[jrazz12]

I just talked to a sophmore from Northeastern and he thinks the new logo looks like theirs. Same marking and coloring.

He's wrong

 

[UConnDan97]

He's wrong

I think he was referring to this one:



God almighty, the other one is terrible!!! It looks like Donnie Darko!!!