Hey Guys and Gals.

I'm interested in your thoughts regarding the new CFC logo.


In a nutshell - I'm not a fan of the 'updated' design. In fact, I think that it stinks.

Way back in Feb this year I sent the CFC an email detailing why I thought that the change was firstly unnecessary, and secondly - well - just a plain bad job. Some questions that I asked were:

*What was the reasoning behind updating the logo?
*What was the concept behind the design?

Much to my surprise I received an official reply from Ian Coutts regarding the 'updated' Carlton logo:



Was a redesign necessary? I'm not convincd that it was. Maybe refreshing the club's image was thought to be necessary to reflect the change of board and the youth orientated recruitment policy - unified behind a 'fresh' new logo. If so, I feel that they fell far short.

I feel that the designers really butchered the traditional CFC logo. It seems as if the formal 'serif' portions of the design have simply been shaved off, with no regard for the integrity of the overall design. Compositionally, it has lost a feeling of 'weight' and seems unbalanced and crude. It is a bland replacement for our famous and iconic image - and I can't help but feel mildly angry every time look upon it.

Am I being too critical? Is it simply not that important? What do you think?

Do you feel any of the 'six key attributes' in the design? Was a redesign necessary?

Please take your time to formulate a response - i'll include as many responses as possible as well as the result of the poll in an official reply to the CFC about the logo.

Thanks for your time.

I think the new design looks too simple, and losses a lot of the elegance of the previous logo.

I take on board what Ian Coutts said, but why not simply use the old logo with the 'notches' in place of the whole of the older logo? That would be my preference.

Initially I was against it, but then realised it is an attempt to appeal to younger fans.

Let's face it one of the big problems is not enough kids barracking for the club or being lost from Carlton supporting families.

While all of us 30-something supporters love the old logo's we are not the future of the club (frankly there are too many of us, the club needs a greater depth of demographics than it currently has). The laurel wreath logo looks very old fashioned.

I think it was a smart move in the end.

_________________
|♥♥♥♥♥♥| http://www.blueseum.org |♥♥♥♥♥♥|

I am constantly gobsmacked with why we are so f*&king blase about our history.

The logo should never have factored into any discussion about the above 6 attributes.

How the f&^k does caring come across in the new logo?

Statement - what statement?

Youthful - I saw Marc Murphy in the ads - that showed me the youth - did you see the old priest dropping off Fev - how youthful was he?

What's unique about constantly reinventing yourself based on changes at Board level and a new recruitment policy? Madonna doesn't re-invent herself as much.

The Dom Bagnato suits are stylish - that's all that we needed. Do you think he signed up with the club because of the blasted logo?

How about winning games for being unique?

Not to mention promoting a rookie would be even more innovative than that stupid logo.

_________________
“It is a state of mind, a system of belief, a way of seeing the world, a deep faith that, because you are Carlton, you belong to something great.” - Mike Fitzpatrick articulating what Out of the Blue means.

I think it was a horrible move. I and many others have pride in the older traditional logo. The 'new' logo actually looks outdated and not modern at all, it is not something that we can be proud of and no imagination whatsover went into it. It carries no potential of having any tradition to it and will no doubt be changed after a few or so years. Fine to have it on a car bumper sticker but that's as far as I would take it. The 80's jumper logo would have suited better even.

_________________
Between our dreams and actions lies this world

I don't like it!

I can appreciate the rationale, but still feel it was an unnecessary change.

And that's a nice career you've got yourself there titimus.

_________________
Click here to follow TalkingCarlton on twitter
TalkingCarlton Posting Rules

There's more to embracing younger fans than dicking around with our logo though. In the end I'm not going to lose sleep over it, but I think it was an ill conceived change. I'd like to know the demographics of our membership. While there's no doubt the club is right in chasing the younger fan I'd be surprised if the results of this poll are anything but a landslide in favour of the old design, and if the youth market was niche enough to drive this change then perhaps the club would have been better to push a sub-brand rather than changing something so dear to so many existing fans.

Personally, I'm more protective of our old, and seemingly lost, logo than staying at Princes Park or introducing an alternate strip.

I think the club could have handled this better. I'll be happy if I'm proved wrong.

I know bluehammer agrees with me:
http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB2/vi ... php?t=6580

_________________
Click here to follow TalkingCarlton on twitter
TalkingCarlton Posting Rules

I'm not taking a position with this post - but I can see what they're attempting:

* stylish

The suite and shoe sponsorship is the obvious thing. We also splashed out on an expensive ad campaign. Wasn't it in 2001 we had the crappy ad promising 'commitment' that seemed to be filmed on someone's camcorder?
See also the photos of our new recruits - no lining them up in the Heatley stand - we got stylish moody shots of them and their their famous numbers.

* innovative

We do not show innovation... I can't even bullshit this one.


* unique

This is where the Hughsey bit in the ad comes from. And the Priest, etc. Setting us apart from oter membership campaigns that focussed on the football. We, obviously, couldn;t focus on the football. The CFC logo was foregrounded in the ad - brand identification.

* caring
Rita and Jack Silvagni were thrown into the ad for this reason.

* making a statement

Ties into the Unique part. The campaign this year is about the golry of thwe past (Something OLD), the youthful promise of the future (NEW) and the forgrounding of our nickname - we're not reffered to as Carlton - we're reffered to as the "Blues". We're pulling away from simply being a footy team in Carlton to being the 'blues brand'.

* youthful
Marc Murphy, the non-traditional ad, the focus on the 'brand'.

This might also explain the removal of the latin - the move away from a footy-club logo to a brand. There's a reason Kentucky Fried Chicken became KFC - steamlined rebranding means you can focus on what you want - i.e. not the fried part, and in our case, not the 'football' part.

Just some thoughts...

I am and have always been in favour of the notches.

The one advantage of the new logo I can think of is that it's easier for kids to draw. I remember when I was young how I'd draw the logo over and over again but always lose patience with doing the little wreaths around the border.

I'm proud of the old logo, it's the classiest logo going around and it doesn't look like a bloody cartoon. The old logo oozes class and the new one look like a cheap ass screen print.

So I say it again...

BRING BACK THE NOTCHES

_________________
Congratulations CK95

i like the new emblem but i think its way too plain i think we should have kept the 'mens sana in corpore sano' bit at least.



didnt we have the most junior members a couple of years ago? i thought i heard something like that, may not be correct.

_________________
Last edited by true_blue3 on Mon Sep 26, 1981 5:07 pm; edited 92 times in total

Of course this poll will be a landslide against the new design.

This site is full of 30-somethings munching on romance bikkies (thanks AGRO ).

If you restricted the poll to those under 20 in the general population the result would be reversed.

That is what it is all about.

_________________
|♥♥♥♥♥♥| http://www.blueseum.org |♥♥♥♥♥♥|

http://carltonfc.com.au/default.asp?pg= ... eid=282247

it looks better with the carlton football club at the bottom

_________________
Last edited by true_blue3 on Mon Sep 26, 1981 5:07 pm; edited 92 times in total

I think the new logo looks fine on the jumper as I've got used to it.

Side by side as you've shown in the initial post...they're worlds apart.

_________________
"The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent." Qui-Gon Jinn 15-05-2005

"there’s more chance of me becoming the full forward for the [Western Bulldogs] than there is of any change in the Labor Party." Julia Gillard 18-05-2010

Neither.

the CFC logo, as worn on the front of the Carlton guernsey circa 60's, 70's and 80's was the greatest logo ever in the history of logo's.

The new one looks like a bunch of friggin chicken bones.

Top Post DownUnderChick.....

To me the new logo screams plain & boring.

We might be chasing the younger fans with this new logo but seriously do kids pick a team based on the logo??????

If the club wants to promote itself to the younger market here's an idea......go out to primary schools and give out stickers, hats, footy's and hold junior clinics......

_________________
That's right. Gather the nector my little drones and make honey. Honey for your children.......Fools!!!

yeah even though i dont remember us wearing that jumper i reckon the one we wore between 1933 and 1997 looks the best the last 2 as you say do look like 'chicken bones'.

this site has every jumper every club has ever worn:

http://www.footyjumpers.com/

i do like the older monogram more but think the new emblem looks better than the one before.

_________________
Last edited by true_blue3 on Mon Sep 26, 1981 5:07 pm; edited 92 times in total

If it aint broke.............don't fix it.

Agreed - the 33-97 logo ROCKS!!

_________________
"...that's the thing about opinion - you don't have to know anything to have one..." Andre Agassi commenting on Pat Cash 2004
"...the less you know - the more you believe..." - Bono 2006

Caring? Give me a f*cking break.

The new version is unbalanced. The position of the "F" among the "C"s is wrong, and without the "notches" it makes it unblanced to the right.

Taking the "official" one out of the wreath makes (or made) exactly the statement that Coutts said the new one did.

I'm looking forward to seeing how awesome the "80s" one looks on Saturday.

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.

Exactly KK, the new logo may as well say "does my bum look big in this?"

Yes. It @#$%&! does.

_________________
Congratulations CK95