Rather than simply look at them and say "I like that one, I don't like that one." I decided to be systematic about this process. I devised five categories and ranked all 32 logos for each category. I then calculated the average to see where each logo fell out. Here are the categories:
Intimidation: Does the logo itself strike fear into it's opponent. This is simply the image, not the actual skill of the team. For example the Steelers are a great team and I would not want to face them, but their logo is not intimidating. On the contrary, the Buccaneers are not exceptionally good, but their skull and cross bones flying on a sword is pretty intimidating. Top intimidator: Panthers.
Historical Significance: This is where the historical weight of the team is rated. While the Cowboys' star isn't very intimidating, historically, Dallas has been a very good team and they would do well in this category. Something considered here was a change in logo. Had the Buccaneers been good under their previous logo, they would have suffered in this category as they have since radically changed their image. However, a team like the Patriots moves up because their winning ways have occurred under the new logo. Logo with the most history behind it: Packers.
General Aesthetics: Is the logo nice to look at? Is it well balanced? How artistic is the image itself? I took nothing else into account, I just asked: Is it pretty? Best looking logo: Cowboys.
Marketability: This rated the likelihood that people would buy something with this image on it. I was not attempting to calculate the total fan base of each team. Some of the characteristics I considered: "Is it fashionable?" "What would it look like reduced in size?" "Is it trendy?" "Are the colors 'In'?" Most marketable logo: Bengals.
Mascot Connection: To determine this, I imagined a non-football fan with the following quiz: One side of has all of the logos, the other all of the mascot names. Which ones would they know right away, which ones might they confuse for other teams, and which ones would be outright guesses. Best mascot connection: Dolphins.
In the case of a tie, I looked at the highest ranking each team had. For example: the Saints and the Bears both had 21. The highest placement for the Saints was a 10 in Marketability. The Bears ranked 5th in Historical Significance and therefore ranked higher overall.
Here are how the logos ranked: [ Ranking) Team name: Avg Score (Intimidation #, Historical Significance #, Aesthetics #, Marketability #, Mascot Connection #)]
32) Browns: 24.6 (I: 20, H: 16, A: 26, M: 32, MC: 29) 
31) Ravens: 24.2 (I: 18, H: 31, A: 32, M: 27, MC: 13) 
30) Giants: 21.8 (I: 30, H: 24, A: 9, M: 14, MC: 32)
29) Saints: 21 (I: 31, H: 23, A: 15, M: 10, MC: 26) 
28) Bears: 21 (I: 26, H: 5, A: 27, M: 16, MC: 31) 
27) Redskins: 20.6 (I: 22, H: 12, A: 31, M: 31, MC: 7) 
26) Jets: 19.8 (I: 29, H: 13, A: 25, M: 24, MC: 8) 
25) Bills: 19.6 (I: 12, H: 10, A: 29, M: 29, MC: 18) 
24) Dolphins: 19.4 (I: 32, H: 15, A: 23, M: 26, MC: 1)
23) Chiefs: 19.2 (I: 25, H: 14, A: 17, M: 15, MC: 25) 
22) Jaguars: 19.2 (I: 4, H: 30, A: 24, M: 23, MC: 15) 
21) Seahawks: 18.6 (I: 14, H: 21, A: 13, M: 25, MC: 20) 
20) Chargers: 18.6 (I: 19, H: 22, A: 22, M: 20, MC: 10) 
19) Falcons: 17.8 (I: 9, H: 18, A: 28, M: 17, MC: 17) 
18) Forty-Niners: 17.8 (I: 28, H: 3, A: 18, M: 12, MC: 28) 
17) Lions: 17.2 (I: 15, H: 9, A: 30, M: 28, MC: 4) 
16) Texans: 15.6 (I: 11, H: 32, A: 7, M: 7, MC: 21) 
15) Buccaneers: 15.4 (I: 5, H: 27, A: 12, M: 21, MC: 12) 
14) Colts: 15 (I: 23, H: 8, A: 8, M: 13, MC: 23) 
13) Panthers: 14.8 (I: 1, H: 29, A: 21, M: 9, MC: 14) 
12) Rams: 14.6 (I: 8, H: 19, A: 19, M: 22, MC: 5) 
11) Packers: 14.6 (I: 27, H: 1, A: 14, M: 4, MC: 27) 
10) Raiders: 14.4 (I: 7, H: 6, A: 20, M: 30, MC: 9) 
9) Bengals: 14.4 (I: 16, H: 28, A: 3, M: 1, MC: 24) 
8) Titans: 13.8 (I: 6, H: 26, A: 10, M: 5, MC: 22) 
7) Cardinals: 12.8 (I: 10, H: 20, A: 4, M: 20, MC: 10) 
6) Broncos: 12.6 (I: 3, H: 17, A: 6, M: 18, MC: 19) 
5) Cowboys: 11.8 (I: 21, H: 4, A: 1, M: 2, MC: 30)
4) Steelers: 10.8 (I: 24, H: 2, A: 1, M: 2, MC: 6) 
3) Vikings: 10.6 (I: 13, H: 25, A: 5, M: 8, MC: 2) 
2) Eagles: 10.2 (I: 2, H: 11, A: 16, M: 6, MC: 16) 
1) Patriots: 6.4 (I: 17, H: 7, A: 2, M: 3, MC: 3) Now, I know this looks like a major case of "homerism" but I worked very hard to be impartial. The Bengals' "B" ranked higher than the Patriots for Intimidation because of it's slicing stripes. I was surprised at how high the Arizona Cardinals made it overall. I'd be more than happy to list each category. I can do it with the logo images in future posts, or I can do it without images in the comments of this post. Please let me know which you'd prefer if you want me to list the five categories separately.
No doubt you have some emotional reaction to this list! Sound off! Let me know what I got right or what I got terribly wrong! This is my opinion. What's yours?
4 comments:
I found your system very detailed and interesting. Even though it remains a bit suspicious to see the Pats at #1, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt! :)
I'm just happy that my 'Boys made it as high as they did in your ranking system!
I also find it incredibly amusing that the subject of your post was logos, considering our conversation after church this past Sunday!
First I think that you had way to much time on your hands and two, I also find it a little suspect that they made the first. I would not rank them high for Intimidation, Mascot (I havent a clue at to what thier mascot would even look like) or Marketablty (to anyone other than a fan). I do think that it it a very Aestheticly pleasing, it does have that going for it.
It is nice to see you have some fun with football.
Marc...
I have nothing to say about logos... I hope you don't mind.
I read this opinion piece on the NYTimes today, and it made me think about you. I know you are in the camp that think that, at best, global warming/environmental issues are exaggerated. I like this 1% chance theory he talks about...because really: if we do everything we can to change the way we live and how we get power (oil, etc) and global warming turns out to be a hoax, I'd say it is a win-win situation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/opinion/09friedman.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
what's YOUR opinion???
a few random thoughts... and mind you I'm not looking back at the original post as I'm typing this...
First of all, I'm not surprised at the Pats being at the top of the list. Have you come up with a football-related list where you didn't think they were on top?? :-) That being said, I'm surprised that some of the similarly designed logos didn't fall closely behind the Pats (the Titans, Panthers & Seahawks all have that similar sense of rightward movement to them)
Second thought -- marketability is a bogus point. People wear hideous, unearthly colors and color-combinations in the name of honoring something they love. UT (Univ. of TN) football is a perfect example. Human beings (and yes I mean all of them) look bad in UT day-glo, pumpkin patch, crayola crayon orange -- and they look even worse with white as a secondary color. But people do not buy brand name or team brand merchandise because it's aesthetically pleasing, they buy it entirely to make a point. This goes for everything from GAP, to Abercrombie, to Tommy Hilfiger, to the Patriots.
So, I wonder how the ranking would change if you dropped marketability. I'd check this out myself, but clearly you have more time on your hands for such things! :-)
Post a Comment