I'm a tradationalist, like that the two Hull clubs have stuck to their city crests. Fads come and go, heritage lasts forever!









to make my point!

Chris, you are and always have been a dull boy - I was simply expanding on your point

Town Crests are the way to go, the current logos make RL look cheesy, it's not even dignified crests in the NFL, if we're going to go for mascots and names, we should look to simple, yet effective brands we can work with, instead of that which the Bulldogs have produced

Hark at you, Charles Saatchi.



They are called the 'Batley Bulldogs' and their brand appears to be a bulldog, looking appropriately fierce but friendly; how much simpler and more effective can it get?

You are such a great judge of character that I literally have nothing to argue this with.



Let me guess Vasty, you saw the name Wakefield, and instantly went into attack mode, briefly pausing for nanoseconds to take in miniscule details about the post, all the while frothing at the mouth and speaking in tongues.



Apparently if you had infinite vastman's typing on an infinite number of typewriters one of them would come up with the complete works of shakespeare word for word.

Look at the Batley logo:





Look at the NFL logos:





The Batley logo is cheesy, too complicated and amateurish. The NFL logos look clean, and simple, yet effective and impacting. That's what clubs should be designing towards. Not that. That's what I meant, I didn't make my point well however.

One of them has a Dolphin with a ing helmet on!



Don't go telling me that collection of 90s clip art is anything to write home about!

They are all design classics, with the exception of maybe the Titans logo. They are all recognizable around the world, and they are better than that pile of junk.

Are they balls. They are recognisable not because of good design but because of the immense marketing stroke of the NFL.



Cleveland Browns logo looks like something a sixth former came up with using the tools in Word 97.



Let's stop putting things on a pedestal just because they are popular or famous. Some of them are good but most are either generic or as cartoonish as the new Batley logo up there.



Nothing to write home about at all.



The San Fransisco logo might be recognisable but its still the letters SF in a circle, what's special about that?

Yes, but at least they are clean and simple.

Im not sure what you are getting at. How is the LA Raiders logo clean and simple and a bulldog's head in a crest isn't?



How is a dolphin wearing a helmet on a crest more simple than a wildcat logo?



Got to say I ing hate American Football, and I especially hate it when people overrate the things they do just because it caught on in the USA.



I'm looking at these logos and I can't for the life of me see anything remotely special. Some people are into it and that's fine but at the end of the day some of them are downright cheesy like the patriots logo.



None of those have the class of the Hull teams logos above or the Wigan crest. And if you're marketing to families, I see nothing wrong with the likes of the Batley logo and the Rhinos one et al and absolutely no difference between them and the ones you've shown me.



Adults go to watch the game, kids might be attracted to the badge and the mascots and that's fine too.

The only difference between those brands is that the NFL ones are recognisable and the Batley one isn't; given time, I'm sure wannabe Americans the world over will be wearing Batley Bulldogs hats and pretending to understand the rules of RL, just like the NFL.

If there was any justice!

Man,I really wish you had not come up with that.

It's pretty bad, although it has undergone a recent redesign (as mentioned previously)….







...IMO it's still not a patch on this one:







Ideally I would like the club to drop the Wildcats moniker altogether and return to being the Dreadnoughts, but that not going to happen.