Big Ten Logo Reactions
December 14, 2010 at 4:46 pm Tina Hay 5 comments
Yesterday’s unveiling of the new Big Ten logo and new division names is meeting with harsh criticism in some camps. Case in point: This short piece on the New England Sports Network’s site is called “New Big Ten Logo Looks Like it Took 25 Seconds to Make.” (Ouch.) You can read a couple of other snarky articles here and here.
Some of the negative comments have been aimed more at the names of the new conference divisions: the Leaders Division and the Legends Division. But the part that fascinates me the most is the reaction to the new logo and its variants. This is why I could never be a designer: I don’t have a thick enough skin. You do all this research, kick around all these ideas, bring to bear all this specialized knowledge, and come up with something you think meets the client’s needs—and then people immediately jump in and start trashing it.
I really started paying attention this afternoon when I discovered that the design was done by Pentagram Design. I probably could count on one hand the number of design firms I know by name, and Pentagram would be at the top of the list. One of their partners is DJ Stout, who used to be the art director at Texas Monthly (a great magazine) and who been a terrific speaker at our national editors’ conference a couple of times. Another partner is Michael Bierut, who has done design work for everyone from Benetton to Walt Disney to the New York Jets. He’s kind of a legend in the field—and he was one of the two lead designers on the new Big Ten logo.
Here is a blog entry on the Pentagram site explaining a bit of their thinking behind the logo and showing it in a couple of different contexts. I have to say that when I see it in use—on a water bottle or a football field—I actually kind of like it.
What are your thoughts on the new look? And the new divisions? Feel free to post a comment below.
Tina Hay, editor
Entry filed under: Other Penn State sports, Penn State football. Tags: Big Ten divisions, Big Ten logo, DJ Stout, Michael Bierut.
Subscribe
1. tom | December 14, 2010 at 5:41 pm
I can’t possibly put into “family publication friendly” words what my thoughts on the design are.
What I find most disappointing about this debacle isn’t so much the design from Pentagram as it is the fact that the Big Ten committee approved> it. Pentagram can’t force anything through. They had to have presented several candidate designs and this was the one the committee chose. All that can be said to that is “WTF were they thinking???”
2. Silverstone Jewelry Design | December 14, 2010 at 5:48 pm
As a designer, I know how personally other designers can take criticism, so I’ll leave it at “disappointing.” Of course, that is not to say there were not other, more inspired designs suggested and offered that were turned down by the “committee.” Maybe “blah” was the closest they could come to what they wanted, and the others were too “out there” for the public?
3. Bill MacBlane | December 14, 2010 at 6:41 pm
The division names are laughably stupid. Embarassing, if you care what anyone thinks. What idiot…or idiotic committee sat back and said “yeah, Leaders and Legends…no one’s gonna mock that”?
4. R Thomas Berner | December 14, 2010 at 9:41 pm
It doesn’t say BIG TEN. It says B1G TEN.
And I know, Tina, your job is public relations, not journalism, but referring to other comments as snarky has turned you into a Big Ten attack dog. :-)
5. dave stong | December 15, 2010 at 8:05 am
I love the “BIG” and “10″ in a single word. It’s a very effective logo type. Placing the word “TEN” under the logotype feels wrong, though; like it was added to help gain acceptance.