akzipper

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.

Meh. It's definitely not amazing.

I do agree that most people know of the Akron Zips, so the Z works. Unfortunately I don't think the higher ups at UA feel that way.

I just want something is recognizable as Akron and can stand the test of time. There are plenty of letter/monogram logos that are instantly recognized. Auburn's AU, Oklahoma's OU, Alabama's A, Dayton's UD, Michigan's M, etc. The new Cleveland Guardians C is brand new but already pretty recognizable. It's basic, but had subtle touches that give it uniqueness and resemblance to the team's namesake. Our logo doesn't have to literally spell out Akron or Akron Zips. I also don't think a kangaroo or something cheesy like a zipper is needed. I can't tell you how many times people asked me why I had an A/Donkey logo on my hat or vehicle.

I think the only thing worse than the current script "logo", would be Akron in papyrus font.

I just keep thinking about the last time Guthrie and Miller rebranded a school. It ended up looking like this...

Same. I feel like I am overly critical and nit-picky when it comes to rebranding. I just hope it isn't something amateurish and actually looks like a top notch D1 school logo. I tend to get an idea of an ideal rebrand in my head and set the bar too high. There's a level of jealously there too. It would be a dream project to rebrand my alma mater or favorite sports team. Which is exactly what happened when the Cleveland Guardians were announced. Luckily their new logos have grown on me and I'm sure eventually a new Akron logo would too. Having said that, I own nothing that has the script Akron on it and never will.

I mean it HAS to be better than the script Akron, but I'm expecting to be disappointed.

I'd hope that guys like Groce and Moorhead already had their "taste" of big-time programs and are happy trying to build up a program like Akron instead. Not that they don't deserve another shot, but it seems like it would be way less stressful. But that's just me talking and obviously I'm biased.

This seems like good news.

They should allow all of us alumni who were at UA during the Ianello/Arth eras to attend as well. We deserve a preview of what real football looks like.

This never would have happened if he was still required to sit out a year. Don't agree with the decision at all, but it's not my life. Every season guys are drafted from mid-majors. Want to get noticed by NBA scouts? Play well and help your team make a run in the tournament. Be the next Steph Curry, CJ McCollum, Gordon Hayward, etc.

The more UCLA wins, the more our loss hurts. We'll always wonder what could have been. Hopefully the Zips use it as fire for next year and can make a run and prove this season wasn't just a fluke.

Crazy to think that the last 3 MAC teams to make the tournament all won their games. It was nice to see an Akron team that actually looked like they belonged. Much better than the KD teams that were lucky to keep it within 10 the whole game and never had a real shot. Even if those teams had much more talent.