I just posted my thoughts in KSR's comments so here they are on the new re-design of the UK interlocking logo...FWIW...the Billy Gillispie equivalent of logo design, and yes, this should go as fast as he did.
The new UK logo is cartoonish and unprofessional, and I despise how it looks and hate how we in almost near secrecy changed it without fan input . You do NOT make a “K” by writing it in the manner of this new logo. This looks like it was done by a five-year old. Nike’s full block “K” design in its apparel graphics was very well designed and done but had to be thinned in one part (top diagonal line) due to the difficulty in sizing it to fit its allotted space. A full block “K” of any type is difficult to do and to make look good along with the other letters it accompanies. I point this out because our 1997 UK interlock is part of that difficulty seen from the nature of the letter “K” yet was still designed well enough to be professional and distinctive. Now, apparently someone thought it would be proper to give it an overhaul. What we have now–at the center of our new football field by the way–is this goofy looking thing that does not invoke pride or do what a logo is supposed to do. And why change? We had a New York Yankees-style timeless logo that could have stood the test of time (like theirs, and it will never change), but we really goofed that up royally. Shame on whomever is responsible for that. And did the fans get a vote? The answer is no–I’m surprised and frankly very disappointed that UK chose this and also did not give the fans a chance to give feedback. The original interlocking UK did NOT need changing–what we needed was a distinctive new design for a wildcat logo and associated other logos/graphics similar to the ones associated with EKU. I do realize that many, yourselves on the radio show included, do not see much of a difference and in so doing could care less about it. However, there is no question in business or in sports that logos are vital to a team’s following and success. A logo is supposed to inject spirit and pride in one’s feeling about his or her team. Mitch Barnhart should re-think this very awful design–truly one of the worst designs in all of sports. Finally, design a new wildcat, and by all means keep the original, distinctive interlocking UK…no need to change for either the Yankees or the Kentucky Wildcats.
To many of you, like Matt and Ryan discussing this yesterday morning on their show, graphic design may be a challenge. So, not much of the above, or really any of the discussion of this matter, will ultimately make much sense. But, to those of us who are artistically inclined and involved, and who DO care about things like logo design, it means a lot. Logos are very important. They exist for significant reasons. Big money is spent each day in this graphic design business. Evidence of this can be seen in sports, especially true of smaller colleges and schools who previously had relied upon branding and images for their schools that were second rate in design. Now, we're in a different era. Have you noticed how even small schools have great designs for logos, many of them newly designed and updated in the last several years. Even they are spending big bucks to ensure branding of their name is put into the "brightest of lights."
As a Big Blue fan from birth and a 1978 graduate of UK, I place a high amount of importance on how we are portrayed nationally and attach a lot of pride to our logos and traditions of the past and present. This new design is embarrassing to me. Bear in mind that this again is no small matter. Alumni and fans should be able to provide feedback on this kind of issue--UK is dead wrong for not soliciting our thoughts. I can only hope that others will let their voice be heard and this can properly be shelved inn favor of the original interlocking UK or another update to the logo. I am in favor of the logo package I referenced earlier--that belonging to EKU. Their "Colonel" design and accompanying package of branding designs is something UK should strongly consider doing, i.e., wildcat design by itself, UK by itself, UK with wildcat, etc.
There now. It's off my chest.
The new UK logo is cartoonish and unprofessional, and I despise how it looks and hate how we in almost near secrecy changed it without fan input . You do NOT make a “K” by writing it in the manner of this new logo. This looks like it was done by a five-year old. Nike’s full block “K” design in its apparel graphics was very well designed and done but had to be thinned in one part (top diagonal line) due to the difficulty in sizing it to fit its allotted space. A full block “K” of any type is difficult to do and to make look good along with the other letters it accompanies. I point this out because our 1997 UK interlock is part of that difficulty seen from the nature of the letter “K” yet was still designed well enough to be professional and distinctive. Now, apparently someone thought it would be proper to give it an overhaul. What we have now–at the center of our new football field by the way–is this goofy looking thing that does not invoke pride or do what a logo is supposed to do. And why change? We had a New York Yankees-style timeless logo that could have stood the test of time (like theirs, and it will never change), but we really goofed that up royally. Shame on whomever is responsible for that. And did the fans get a vote? The answer is no–I’m surprised and frankly very disappointed that UK chose this and also did not give the fans a chance to give feedback. The original interlocking UK did NOT need changing–what we needed was a distinctive new design for a wildcat logo and associated other logos/graphics similar to the ones associated with EKU. I do realize that many, yourselves on the radio show included, do not see much of a difference and in so doing could care less about it. However, there is no question in business or in sports that logos are vital to a team’s following and success. A logo is supposed to inject spirit and pride in one’s feeling about his or her team. Mitch Barnhart should re-think this very awful design–truly one of the worst designs in all of sports. Finally, design a new wildcat, and by all means keep the original, distinctive interlocking UK…no need to change for either the Yankees or the Kentucky Wildcats.
To many of you, like Matt and Ryan discussing this yesterday morning on their show, graphic design may be a challenge. So, not much of the above, or really any of the discussion of this matter, will ultimately make much sense. But, to those of us who are artistically inclined and involved, and who DO care about things like logo design, it means a lot. Logos are very important. They exist for significant reasons. Big money is spent each day in this graphic design business. Evidence of this can be seen in sports, especially true of smaller colleges and schools who previously had relied upon branding and images for their schools that were second rate in design. Now, we're in a different era. Have you noticed how even small schools have great designs for logos, many of them newly designed and updated in the last several years. Even they are spending big bucks to ensure branding of their name is put into the "brightest of lights."
As a Big Blue fan from birth and a 1978 graduate of UK, I place a high amount of importance on how we are portrayed nationally and attach a lot of pride to our logos and traditions of the past and present. This new design is embarrassing to me. Bear in mind that this again is no small matter. Alumni and fans should be able to provide feedback on this kind of issue--UK is dead wrong for not soliciting our thoughts. I can only hope that others will let their voice be heard and this can properly be shelved inn favor of the original interlocking UK or another update to the logo. I am in favor of the logo package I referenced earlier--that belonging to EKU. Their "Colonel" design and accompanying package of branding designs is something UK should strongly consider doing, i.e., wildcat design by itself, UK by itself, UK with wildcat, etc.
There now. It's off my chest.
