Friday, April 24, 2015

Two Rebrands: One Good, One Bad

I'll never understand the timing of certain things.  For example, why do some college teams change their logo in the middle of the school year instead of waiting until the summer?  In recent years, I've seen a number of schools tweak their logo/branding at midseason, which, again, doesn't make much sense to me, but I'm not the one making the decisions here.

Anyway, the reason I bring this up is because in the last week or so, two major Division I schools did just that.  They updated their branding at midseason.  One got it right.  North Carolina made minor alterations to create a more uniform brand.  Army, on the other hand, I don't know what they're doing.  Actually, it's not "Army" anymore.  It's "Army West Point" now.  Yeah, I know.  More on that later.

First, let's talk about North Carolina.  If I wasn't telling you about it right now, you probably wouldn't even know that the Tar Heels went through a minor rebranding.  Again, it was more of a streamlining than anything else.  They didn't do anything extreme.  Carolina Blue is a very distinct color that's all theirs.  Doing anything to change that would've been incredibly stupid.  And they realized that.

Instead they, along with Nike, made some minor tweaks so that all of the uniforms look the same regardless of sport.  Each team will still have the Carolina Blue and white, but they'll be limited to only the prescribed accent colors.  Some teams had been experimenting with different color schemes, and this rebranding will stop that.  They also made all the fonts the same and came up with various wordmarks, and said how you can and cannot use each.  (If you want to read the 50-page branding guide, it's actually kind of interesting.)

Perhaps the biggest change North Carolina made is one that I think we can all agree is an actual improvement.  Outside of the Carolina Blue, the most distinct thing about the Tar Heels is the argyle pattern that's been on the men's basketball uniforms since 1991.  Well, starting next season, that won't be exclusive to men's basketball.  They're using it as a uniform accent for every team.  And it looks awesome!  Seriously, check out the new football helmet and tell me that isn't sick.

Of course, they didn't touch the interlocking "NC" logo, which, along with the Carolina Blue color, is the most identifiable part of the brand.  Evidently the logo was slightly modified, but it was so subtle that you can't even tell the difference.  Basically, I think they just adjusted the size/proportions so that it can't be distorted.

Now compare that to the hot mess that is Army's rebranding.  Other than the colors, they basically changed everything.  The new logo's fine, and I like it that black will still be the primary color for their uniforms.  The football team's long had those black and gold helmets, which I think are the most identifiable elements of Army's athletic identity.

However, they missed the mark in one key area.  For some reason, as a part of the rebranding, they announced that they no longer want to be referred to as "Army."  Instead, they want to be known as "Army West Point," just in case there's any confusion with "Army Topeka." 

Here I think Army made a major mistake.  People have known the school as just "Army" for almost a century, going back to those football battles with Notre Dame in the early 1920s.  And they're not suddenly going to start adding the "West Point" just because you asked them too.  Especially since there isn't any reason to.  It's not like it's shorter.

The root of the problem, I think, is that Army was having its own athletic identity crisis.  The Academy often refers to itself simply as "West Point," and a lot of the uniforms say that rather than "Army."  I think the new name is a result of their wanting to incorporate the "West Point" that they identify themselves as with the "Army" that the rest of the country knows.  Nobody would've gone for just "West Point," so joining the names had to be some sort of compromise.

They have acknowledged that "Army West Point" doesn't exactly roll off the tongue, and they've said that using the full name won't be appropriate in all situations.  "Army West Point-Navy" doesn't have quite the same cachet.  Basically, they're giving people an out to keep using the name "Army," since they knew everyone was going to anyway.

I think the whole "Army West Point" thing is going to backfire.  Schools try this every once in a while and it never works.  St. Francis Brooklyn is really the only one that I can think of where they made the name change and no one seemed to care.  But that's because "St. Francis Brooklyn" is easier to say than "St. Francis (NY)," which is a distinction that always has to be made when referring to that school, which is in the same conference as Saint Francis (PA).

But there are two other schools I can think of that tried to change their name the way Army is, and neither one had the desired effect.  The first is the University at Buffalo.  They're trying incredibly hard to rebrand themselves as "New York."  Except no one will have it.  If you look at their uniforms in practically any sport, the "New York" is the big part of the name and "Buffalo" is in much smaller text.  Buffalo is the largest school in the State University of New York system, but people associate "New York" with the city, not the state.  Not even NYU, a school whose full name is New York University, goes by "New York."  You only hear it referred to as "NYU."

Miami, Ohio, meanwhile, decided a number of years ago that they don't want to be referred to as "Miami, Ohio."  They just want to be "Miami."  Except there's already a school called "Miami."  It's the one in the ACC.  By not wanting people to include the Ohio, you're almost saying you want them to think you're the Hurricanes.  But you're not.  You're the RedHawks.

No one's going to confuse Army West Point with another school, which is another reason why the "West Point" isn't needed.  West Point and the U.S. Military Academy are uniquely linked.  If you say "West Point," people know what you're talking about.  It's been that way for more than 200 years, and it's not changing anytime soon.  The fact that "West Point" hasn't been included in the athletic teams' names until now doesn't change that, either.

There were good intentions, I'm sure, when they decided to change the name from "Army" to "Army West Point."  I'm sure plenty of people were consulted and they all gave the thumbs up.  You'd have to think that something like this might've needed Congressional approval, too.  But it's something that's just not practical, and I think the execution will be much more difficult than anyone imagined.  It was unnecessary, impractical, and, sadly, probably won't work.  That is, unless they change it to "Navy Annapolis," too.

No comments:

Post a Comment