why not. jersey mockups 2.

[Rightupinthere]

I'm struggling with this butter lady business... What? When? Where? Why? How?

Fold the lass just below the hem of her skirt. Place her knees where the butter box is.

Viola! [sic], Topless trademark!

[Schadenfreude]

I believe I am the only one who liked the idea of wearing the same unis as the Browns.

No you're not.


The brown BG unis of the 80's (which look the most like the Browns) are classic.

+1. But, as I've said, the brown jerseys we have now might be better. I think I prefer the simpler white shoulder stripe to what the Browns have going on.

[Schadenfreude]

when it comes to switching to the retail i wont mind one bit. ill cheer for it.

That's kind of where I am. I get more comfortable with the retail logo every day. When I read that BG News article, it gives me hope we can go striaght to the retail logo and not mess around with this updated traditional logo any more. It isn't that good.

I've always liked the original traditional logo, and I like the fact that our helmets have, arguably, the oldest design in the MAC. I like stablity and tradition. When they came up with the logo committee a couple of years ago, I didn't see the need.

It is this line of thinking that makes me still unhappy with Gary Blackney's decision to junk what was probably a half century or more of tradition with brown football jerseys to go with orange.

But we do have a mix of styles right now, and it may be time to cut through the clutter and forge ahead with something that will serve us well in the decades to come.

I do think that's how they are looking at this decision, and I do think the retail logo will stand the test of time. It's very good.

I've seen this kind of acrimony before, by the way.

Time was when Ohio University had a big white paw print on a green helmet. It was a very good design.

I can remember the year Ohio University junked it to go with a white helmet with the word "Ohio" on it. My housemate at the time was an Ohio U. grad, and he was angry. And I agreed with him. I really liked the paw print.

And, yet: I think Ohio might have the best uniforms in the MAC right now. The white helmets are great. "Ohio" is a powerful word, and they use it well. Ohio U.'s decision is standing the test of time.

Our retail logo will as well. So, my hope is that we just get this over with.

Incidentally, my hunch is that will be able to justify this decision based on sales. I seem to remember reading here -- and who knows how accurate it was -- that the retail logo was selling very well. It will be interesting to see if they talk about that when the decision is made.

[Dayons_Den]

Iowa's helmet and logo have been brought up, but how abou their unis. Jeebus you think we shouldn't be "Browns clones" Well we know the story of why the Browns resemble the Falcons. But how about Iowa? Know why Iowa resembles the Steelers? When Hayden Fry took over in the late 70s Iowa had gold helmets with the hawk logo that resembles our old feathered flying falcon and non-descript uniforms. Fry comes in and has the tigerhawk logo created (very similar to our LT falcon) and has the uniforms modeled exactly after the Steelers. Iowa doesn't seem to mind to be using nearly identical designs to Pittsburgh, I dont' see why we should worry about resembling the Browns? And as TG pointed out that semblance is in colour scheme only.

[Warthog]

Incidentally, my hunch is that will be able to justify this decision based on sales. I seem to remember reading here -- and who knows how accurate it was -- that the retail logo was selling very well. It will be interesting to see if they talk about that when the decision is made.

I was going to mention this point as well. Here is the quote from the article:

"Another important part to the change is licensing and royalties. Last year, BGSU cleaned up in this department cashing in at over $147,000 worth of licensing revenue, compared to programs such as Miami and Toledo who were both around the $87,000 mark."

We are making 70% more on licensing then our two biggest rivals and we haven't fully converted to the retail logo yet. I think this issue will have some influence when the final decision is made.

[Jacobs4Heisman]

These are good points. Let's all remember the main focus of the university's marketing -- 17-18 year old HS students. The retail logo is very cool, and obviously appeals to the younger generation more than the traditional. If we have to go with one, I think this is the obvious move.

The University knows that the people that love the traditional logo are the most die-hard of fans, and that those people, for the most part, aren't going to stop the money flow because of a logo switch.

[1987alum]

Here's an interesting question - is the surge in revenue due to the retail logo being "new"? Will we get into a cycle where we re-tool the logo every few years to prop up sagging revenue? How much of the revenue can be directly attached to new logo merchandise vs. old logo merchandise?

[Schadenfreude]

Here's an interesting question - is the surge in revenue due to the retail logo being "new"? Will we get into a cycle where we re-tool the logo every few years to prop up sagging revenue? How much of the revenue can be directly attached to new logo merchandise vs. old logo merchandise?

It's an interesting question.

I certainly wouldn't want a new logo every few years to goose sales. I don't think we can assume this is the overall plan.

[Warthog]

Here's an interesting question - is the surge in revenue due to the retail logo being "new"? Will we get into a cycle where we re-tool the logo every few years to prop up sagging revenue? How much of the revenue can be directly attached to new logo merchandise vs. old logo merchandise?

Yes, that is a valid question. I was also wondering if the increased revenue might be due to the fact we have 3 logos. If we have just one, people might decide to pass on that hat/t-shirt/sweatshirt because they aren't enamored with the one logo. But given the choice of three, they can always find something they like.

[jeebus]

iowa however is a tad bigger a program then we are. they're known well and have a big fan base. with us...we look like a little school who's trying to get browns fans. as much as i hate to say it the playing field here isnt equal.

anyway...i just feel we should cultivate our own unique image. nothing will ever diminish the fact that we gave the browns their colors...but we need a new look...and i think orange looks sharp. look at a picture of us at home in orange vs. anyone. you notice US first. orange draws the eye.

furthermore i dont see why people bash when someone mocks up a black jersey and rants about how black isnt our color...well neither is white yet people are slapping each other's arse about putting as much white as possible onto our unis... our uniforms should be ORANGE and BROWN. thats it. no white pants, no black pants.

also...as much as you like the browns think of the non fans like me...despite what alot of bg students/alumn think this is NOT cleveland (although u'd never know it when every bar is tuned to the indians or browns)...there are other areas represented and in trying to reach a large audience you run the risk of alienating people... not a big arguement..but something to consider.

i guess what i'm saying is we've found a REALLY good looking uniform in the orange/orange combo... we have a nice SPECIAL OCCASION THROWBACK in the brown...lets stick with that idea.

[TG1996]

Yes, that is a valid question. I was also wondering if the increased revenue might be due to the fact we have 3 logos. If we have just one, people might decide to pass on that hat/t-shirt/sweatshirt because they aren't enamored with the one logo. But given the choice of three, they can always find something they like.

I had thought the same thing about more marketing $$$ because of a new logo, but had never considered it like this. Great point, WH!