Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Jaguar's new logo


Recommended Posts

Well, the last logo change for the Pats was in 2000. And look how well that worked. It was nothing to do with Belicheck, Brady, Adam V or the strong defense. It was the new logo (which looked no different from the previous version I hasten to add) which turned them into a 'near' Dynasty...... 

 

Maybe Khan is onto something....

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a graphic designer, my thoughts, which I'll break up into parts:

 

ERaZlVW.png
 

Overall look: Yea, the new logo looks more feminine. It's due to the slender head with a more whiter color palette, whereas the original is more black dominant. On the other hand, this whiter palette allows a stronger backdrop for more detail clarity, including more black decal spots and accentuated eyes and mouth, so the white is a double-edged sword.

 

The Black Decal Spots: I like the black decal spots on the new one better due to its slightly more airbrush feel, since the original black spots looked like pasted on Cheetos shapes.

 

Ears: The new logo's ears are more detailed and erect, signifying aggressive alertness -- both important qualities for football players. The original's are sloped down, exhibiting a more timid look.

 

Mouth: The new logo has a clearer delineation where the mouth begins and ends, whereas the original just trails off into black. I also like the new logo's mouth stretched into a grin. In the context of football, this grin gives off a sadistic nature. The longer tongue also plays into this.

 

Eyes: The new logo's eyes have more diagonal energy and are looking forward, suggesting the Jaguars are looking toward the future. The original's are more neutral looking with dilated pupils, and are inclined more towards observing the viewer and/or forward, which is to say the Jaguar looks confused.

 

-----

So yea, I like this new logo better, but I'd still like it to be more masculine. I suppose I'm fine with the whiter palette, but they should play with the head's shape more. Make the head stouter. These football players are big men. Give them a big Jaguar!

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a graphic designer, my thoughts, which I'll break up into parts:

ERaZlVW.png

Overall look: Yea, it looks more feminine. It's due to the slender head with a more whiter color palette, whereas the original is more black dominant, which accentuates a higher volume area. I'd like to see the new one more black and stout.

The Black Decal Spots: I like the black decal spots on the new one better due to its slightly more airbrush feel, since the original black spots looked like pasted on Cheetos shapes.

Ears: The new logo's ears are more detailed and erect, signifying aggressive alertness -- both important qualities for football players. The original's are sloped down, exhibiting a more timid look.

Mouth: The new logo has a clearer delineation where the mouth begins and ends, whereas the original just trails off into black. I also like the new logo's mouth stretched into a grin. In the context of football, this grin gives the logo a sadistic nature.

Eyes: The new logo's eyes have more diagonal energy and are looking forward, suggesting the Jaguars are looking toward the future. The original's are more neutral looking with dilated pupils, and are inclined more towards observing the viewer.

-----

So yea, I like this new logo better, but I'd still like it to be more masculine. Make the head stouter. These football players are big men. Give them a big Jaguar!

Interesting breakdown there ReMeDy. I felt like I was watching a cheetah take down a giselle on the African plane, especially with the ears back & non-dilated pupils. Personally, I think the graphic designer should had manipulated the width of the bridge of the nose more making it smaller, modifying the jawline closing it more, & making the whiskers thinner, less pronounced, and more cat like realistic.

Cheetahs are more menacing with a closed mouth, gleaming, night vision eyes, & crouched & sloped down shoulder blades right before they attack their prey at lightning fast speed. Translation: Show more of the cat's physique, tone, & muscle mass in attack mode not just the head.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting breakdown there ReMeDy. I felt like I was watching a cheetah take down a giselle on the African plane, especially with the ears back & non-dilated pupils. Personally, I think the graphic designer should had manipulated the width of the bridge of the nose more making it smaller, modifying the jawline closing it more, & making the whiskers thinner, less pronounced, and more cat like realistic.

Cheetahs are more menacing with a closed mouth, gleaming, night vision eyes, & crouched & sloped down shoulder blades right before they attack their prey at lightning fast speed. Translation: Show more of the cat's physique, tone, & muscle mass in attack mode not just the head.

Like this: 

 

http://youtu.be/iarsmqA3dck

 

http://youtu.be/30UaROwbA8Y

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting breakdown there ReMeDy. I felt like I was watching a cheetah take down a giselle on the African plane, especially with the ears back & non-dilated pupils. Personally, I think the graphic designer should had manipulated the width of the bridge of the nose more making it smaller, modifying the jawline closing it more, & making the whiskers thinner, less pronounced, and more cat like realistic.

Cheetahs are more menacing with a closed mouth, gleaming, night vision eyes, & crouched & sloped down shoulder blades right before they attack their prey at lightning fast speed. Translation: Show more of the cat's physique, tone, & muscle mass in attack mode not just the head.

 

I looked up Jaguars growling and actually it's much like the drawing.

 

Jaguar-2.jpg

 

jaguars_fad3d1aa.jpg

 

But there's something about it that looks too cartoon-y. I think it's the lack of jagged edges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice explanation, now I know why I felt the way I did when I saw it.  I'm still good with it and even more so now that real Jags have been shown on this thread.  Saw it on ESPN Sport Center side bar too.  Catching.

 

Grumpy cat?  Ummm, not so impressed-

 

qm.gifGrmpyKat_JagsLogo_zps2ff2970b.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked up Jaguars growling and actually it's much like the drawing.

 

 

 

 

 

But there's something about it that looks too cartoon-y. I think it's the lack of jagged edges.

Excellent point Vance! Way to childish & cartoonish in scope in both mascot drawings. They remind me of Tony The Tiger on a Frosted Flakes cereal box. No fear or intimidation whatsoever. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

PS where are his whiskers on the left side? Are they combed down with hair gel? The Panthers logo has both sides...

 

Whiskers on both side's of a cat's face...Check. Tougher & more menacing NFL emblem...Check. The female leader of the pride leader not liking whiskers rubbing up against them & demanding a trim...Check  haha

Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked up Jaguars growling and actually it's much like the drawing.

 

Jaguar-2.jpg

 

jaguars_fad3d1aa.jpg

 

But there's something about it that looks too cartoon-y. I think it's the lack of jagged edges.

 

Usually thick black strokes give off that cartoon-y vibe, which both logos have, but because the new logo uses a lot more white, the black stroke is accentuated, whereas in the original, the black stroke blends into some of the other black in the original logo, so it's less pronounced.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Usually thick black strokes give off that cartoon-y vibe, which both logos have, but because the new logo uses a lot more white, the black stroke is accentuated, whereas in the original, the black stroke blends into some of the other black in the original logo, so it's less pronounced.

I always like getting a glimpse into the creative process of any artist whether they are an illustrator, dancer, or musician. Thanks for letting me peek behind that elusive curtain of talent & inspiration ReMeDY.   :thmup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dang!  You beat me to the LA comment.  

 

Wouldn't surprise me in a year or two.  I'm surprised they put a team there in the first place.  Many people there are Dolphins or Bucs fans.

Many people here in Indy were Bears, Bengals, Steelers, Browns or Rams fans.  In fact, many were seemingly brown paper bag fans for a long while.  It is really impressive what a well managed team and a few wins can do for a fan base.  You might have said the same thing about Indy as recently as 1997.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I certainly understand the Ingram intrigue but I'd have to go with Kerrigan here. His body has a lot more left in the tank than Ingram and his body is as healthy as can be due to Washington's dominant young d-line. Kerrigan could certainly give us 1-2 years of above average play! 
    • I remember it like yesterday, then read the reasons shortly after the selection, and they made sense.  Edge played at The U, which ran the stretch, and the Colts were running it as well.  Edge also had fewer miles on his legs, due to being in running back by committee for most of his career there.  Lastly, Edge was the better receiver and pass blocker.    I sometimes wonder if Ditka thought about making that insane offer to the Colts first? 
    • I don't care how he tested (especially this year, when all those pro-day tests are under serious question)... I care how he plays and how he looks on tape. Players that didn't test off-the-charts are some of the best playmakers in football - Mahomes ran 4.82 with 30 inch vertical. I'd take him over any of the best athletes in the league making plays on the move. With that said... I don't see Mac Jones in similar light even though they tested very similarly. I don't think he's stuck in mud in the pocket. But I do not think he has enough mobility to scramble when needed. He will be one of the worst scrambling starting QBs in the league IMO. I think him scrambling will be extremely rare in the league. I just don't think he has the mobility and physical talent to do it while launching the ball downfield.    I like him too. But there are levels to this thing. I like him as a late first-second round QB. I think he can be a good productive QB in the right system(Shannahan system for example). I don't like him enough to give up 3 1st round picks + 3d for him, though. This is my whole contention here. He's just not THAT type of player IMO. Lance and Fields are. 
    • You may end up being right, but I hope that we add some talent here   As a HUGE Ohio State fan....  I WANT Lewis to step up....  He seemed to improve a bit, but, in my opinion there needs to be a talent influx on the DE   I have a recurring nightmare of Patrick M........ getting 30 seconds to throw...
    • Also, just because I'm starting to feel some kind of way about this, Mac Jones is getting short changed these days. He's a really good prospect, and people are treating him like he's an unathletic bum with no arm.   Blake Bortles went #3 in 2014. Sam Darnold went #3, and Josh Rosen went #10 in 2018. None of them were unable to succeed due to athletic shortcomings. Mac Jones tested just as good, if not better, than all of them. (Bortles was actually pretty good as a scrambler, despite his mediocre testing.) I already used the Jared Goff comparison; he went #1 in 2016, and went to the SB in 2018. Mac Jones tested as good as Goff.   He doesn't have super speed or quickness, but he's not stuck in mud. He moves well enough to stay alive in the pocket, and he has enough movement ability to scramble when needed. He doesn't have a cannon of an arm, but his arm is not deficient. He's very good from the pocket, he processes well, not a one-read thrower, very accurate, and tough.    If Bortles, Darnold and Goff could go top five in the last 7 years, so can Mac Jones. Of course, he needs to be better than them to live up to that draft status, but again, their issues weren't about lacking athleticism.    Just saying, again, the anti-Mac stuff is getting a little overboard. I like Fields and Lance better, but Mac Jones being desirable isn't entirely outrageous.
  • Members

    • MikeCurtis

      MikeCurtis 2,371

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • stitches

      stitches 8,444

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • AustinnKaine

      AustinnKaine 347

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DoubleE Colt

      DoubleE Colt 50

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Hoose

      Hoose 1,195

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DeepseaColt

      DeepseaColt 3

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • GoColts8818

      GoColts8818 4,690

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Shive

      Shive 2,299

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Solon

      Solon 94

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • TonyBungee

      TonyBungee 181

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...