akzipper

At this rate I think the field is going to be done before the cam is up and running.

I agree completely. I miss the old font. The new one seems overly generic and bland. Joe Bosack, the designer of both the old and new Akron branding, noted that the old Akron font was the first font he ever created and was a bit rough. I've used the font before and I can agree that it has some issues. A nice hybrid/evolution of the original font would have been my choice for sure. But I think the people in charge wanted something completely new.

Yeah they never want any logos upside down on TV, so everything always faces the same way. High schools sometimes have logos flipped to face the home and away sides, but it almost never happens in college or professional sports.

Here's the tweet: New branding looks good on the car. Man would I love to see an Akron Zips car running a few Nascar races.

It's crazy to me how Fanatics has completely monopolized sports apparel markets online. The Akron Bookstore site, Lids, Guardians/MLB shop, NFL Shop, MLB Shop, NHL Shop, everything is basically the same site with the same selections. The worst part is at least half of the stuff is manufactured by Fanatics too and it is the worst quality apparel I have ever seen. Horrible selections when it comes to Guardians stuff and only two Akron items with the new logo. I'm not interested in the plain blue hoodie and shirt. My guess is they won't have a decent selection until the fall. Having said that, I was surprised how much Guardians stuff I found at Khols up here in Erie. Usually stores here only sell Pittsburgh teams and Penn State garbage. Even though there are just as many Cleveland fans. My wife has a million dollars worth of Khols cash so I took advantage of that to get some discounts.

This is incorrect. I've always noticed a lot of people wearing some school in Columbus' gear. Even to Zips games. I've been told that's the only real school in Ohio.

Are you looking for the gold/blue one from the 80s? Because they have the yellow/blue one from the 90s here.

What sucks is that technically any D1 basketball team can make it to the Final Four and even win a championship. He mentions 10 conferences in FBS branching off. I can get on board with that. I just can't imagine only have teams in 5 conferences eligible to make the playoff. That means we'll never see a smaller school make a jump like TCU, Cincy, UCF or Houston, we'll never see upsets like Boise State in the Fiesta Bowl or schools like NIU getting their shot against the big guns. The Zips probably have a one in a million chance at ever winning a championship. But when those odds are officially 0, what is the point? Go undefeated and we get to play in the Boca Raton Bowl or Idaho Potato Bowl? No thanks. In a perfect world the 10 FBS conferences break away from NCAA for football. Strengthen schedules by removing FCS opponents, expand the playoffs and give every conference an automatic bid. Maybe the G5 schools have a play-in tournament or something? I just don't want the Zips to be left behind.

They updated the OSU logo in 2013, but it's still not great. The block O alone is just too basic and can easily be mistaken for Oklahoma or something by casual fans. My hope is that after a few years people will start recognizing the "A" logo as Akron, and the wordmark underneath will no longer be needed. I don't think there are any other blue/gold schools that use an A logo or start with an A. So we already have that going for us. It's officially been added to the SportsLogo database and I have to say it looks pretty sharp when compared to other logos. I really have gone 180 in my feelings toward it. Each day I feel like I like it even more.

Speaking of basketball courts. If anyone here has some money laying around they can buy this on eBay.

Anyone who still hates the new logo needs to see this page. Look at the rest of the MAC. The Zips easily have the nicest, most professional looking logo out of that whole group.

Agree 100%. Most college logos are simple letterforms. But have been around so long that nobody really thinks about it anymore. The new A would be one of the top logos in a lot of conferences. Just because it's different than what we're used to, doesn't mean it's bad.

It's not that we had 9 logos in history, we had 9 different marks introduced as a set in the 2000s. Z logo, full kangaroo, kangaroo head, primary kangaroo head with A, etc. For one school that is a LOT. It prevents you from having one unique mark that every recognizes as Akron. This is what the new logo accomplishes. It's simple, clean and unique enough to become iconic. I hated it first. It's different and especially a hard adjustment for a school recognized by it's unique mascot. But at the end of the day, a big chunk of the major schools in the country are most known for a simple letter mark like this. Notre Dame, Alabama, Oklahoma, Georgia, UNC, Duke, etc. Of course most schools have a mascot marks, but I see no reason why Akron can't have Zippy stick around in a minor role like the ND fighting Irishman or Alabama's elephant.

The designer Joe Bosack made some comments on a design board I thought were interesting. He did the original logos back in the 2000s and gave some insights. He also confirmed that the new logo takes small touches from all of the Zips previous logos. Serifs from the motion and oval A. Sharp edges and angled lines from the most recent logos

I think I'm past the anger and depression stages, landing on acceptance. It is what it is at this point. Nothing we can do about it and hope the logo sticks around long enough to become recognized as "Akron." Having success on the field or court will go a long way. I absolutely hated the Guardians logos, but bought a hat the second they went on sale. The Browns logo is literally a piece of equipment and I own plenty of gear with that dumb helmet on it. The Cavs have had dozens of logos in the past 10 years and none are anything special. Collectively NE Ohio has some of the worst branded sports teams. We had some nice logos, but I can agree with the inconsistencies and "gimmicky" style. The new brand definitely has the feel of something that could have been used by a big time college for decades and should stand the test of time.

Those were actually tweeted out by the basketball and football accounts, along with white and gold football helmets. I'd assume they are probably official.

That helps because It probably would be better if the Z was more apparent. I wonder if something more subtle could achieve the same effect?

Looks decent on the JAR court and InfoCision Field. I'll give them credit there.

I posted my thoughts on a graphic design board and I think that the logo may be worth saving after seeing different applications. It's not terrible. The problem is that 99% of the time it seems like the generic "AKRON" font is right beneath it. It's unnecessary and amateurish. When the A is alone, I can definitely see myself buying that hoodie. Maybe after 5 or so years of the new logo, people will know it's Akron and we won't need the label underneath anymore.

This is just one of those projects you do just to get it over with, cash the check and never let anyone know you did it.

Yup. The people paying the bills get what they want. They wanted a simple design and that's exactly what happened. I'd say there's a good chance Joe Bosack did this redesign too, as they were in charge of the GB rebrand.

The best part is that it does say AKRON, right underneath the A. That's how you know a logo is boring and generic. You need to actually spell out the school underneath so people know what it is.

The new logo is having a rough time on social media. Almost unanimously disliked. The only positive comments are from people employed by the university. Doubt the people in charge care enough to listen though. Their opinion is probably just "People don't like change, they'll get over it." The problem is that most of us have been around UA much longer than them and the school means more to us.

Do I love it? No. Do I like it though? No. Is it okay? Sure. Is it better than Script Akron? Absolutely? Seems to be a lot of disappointed people on social media. A nice secondary Kangaroo or Z logo would have helped bring the whole brand together. "Unifying" a brand doesn't mean you only can have one logo. It just means that you have a main primary logo that is used most often, with others sprinkled in to expand your brand.