Picture of New Secondary Log here

[Boardon Hamsay]

Looks like a nipple

Maybe we should NSFW the thread

[Steef]

Arkansas has had a lot of different logos.

Here is a page with several of them on there.  This is just another one.

https://www.google.com/search?q=arkansas+razorbacks+logo&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=0RhPU7e0KOan8gHrkoGACw&sqi=2&ved=0CCgQsAQ&biw=1620&bih=933#imgdii=_

That was fun to look at. Thanks, UU.

You know, I always liked the Hog in popcorn Hog. I just didn't like the popcorn.

Slobberin' Hog is a terrible looking Hog, but it was around so long it became classic.

Our current Hog is classy...but kind of generic.

I was hoping the new logo would have some "attitude". But this thing looks more like a cartoon.

[FS Hog]

We lost slobber hog to the single logo mandate.

What will we call this goffy looking little pig?

The why are we copying the ASU red wolf logo hog?

[(notOM)Rebel123]

Horrible.

^^^THIS^^^

[ChitownHawg]

I don't get it. There is more fretting on Hogville about logos, red, and uniforms than I thought possible from a group of men and a few women.

People keep posting "We are messing with tradition!", then someone goes and shows otherwise. Maybe it has to do with me being in marketing and understanding a brand can get stale. I am not trying to minimize your concern. I just find the angst strange.

[Steef]

I don't get it. There is more fretting on Hogville about logos, red, and uniforms than I thought possible from a group of men and a few women.

People keep posting "We are messing with tradition!", then someone goes and shows otherwise. Maybe it has to do with me being in marketing and understanding a brand can get stale. I am not trying to minimize your concern. I just find the angst strange.

1. Hogville can and will fret over anything. For years.

2. It's the off season and we don't even have practice reports much.

3. It APPEARS so far, that the new logo sucks. Admittedly, we have only seen the very worst possible iteration. Perhaps it will improve.

4. They've been tinkering with our "brand" for several years now, with little success.  Remember the tusks under the armpits? The anthracite was controversial. The white helmets. Changing the red. Etc. That pot has been constantly stirred for a while.

Its not JUST that theyre changing things. Some of us enjoy new looks. But it would help if the new look was better than the old one.

They need to hire a better design team and get their stuff together.

[Pig In The City]

I don't get it. There is more fretting on Hogville about logos, red, and uniforms than I thought possible from a group of men and a few women.

People keep posting "We are messing with tradition!", then someone goes and shows otherwise. Maybe it has to do with me being in marketing and understanding a brand can get stale. I am not trying to minimize your concern. I just find the angst strange.

I have no issue with changes to the brand.  I have been all for it but when you do it, please do it professionally and with style.  Enough said.

[JONAS]

This looks better.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[dj shanon "Notshavin" smeya]

Hakuna Matata

[PonderinHog]

It doesn't look mean. It looks depressed.

He only remembers our record for the last two seasons.

[Ragnar Hogbrok]

We lost slobber hog to the single logo mandate.

What will we call this goffy looking little pig?

Mugshot Hog

[razoredge178]

It looks like the HOG has antlers on its snout.

[Mike Irwin]

The baseball Hog was extremely popular with the Baum Stadium crowd. It was copied from a wall design element you can still see on the outside of Baum. I seem to recall that it was dropped about 10 years ago. I remember some grumbling about the decision.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[PorkRinds]

I think it's highly entertaining that there are people talking and crying about a logo they haven't seen yet.  How can you call it a 'horrible logo" when all you've actually seen is a 2 inch square rendering in embroidered stitch?  You can't...

[The_Iceman]

We haven't even seen the official logo yet. It all gets released tonight.

[jacobp]

The baseball Hog was extremely popular with the Baum Stadium crowd. It was copied from a wall design element you can still see on the outside of Baum. I seem to recall that it was dropped about 10 years ago. I remember some grumbling about the decision.

I have a very old t shirt that was passed down to me that has that logo on it. Its one of my prized possessions.

[Mike Irwin]

I think it's highly entertaining that there are people talking and crying about a logo they haven't seen yet.  How can you call it a 'horrible logo" when all you've actually seen is a 2 inch square rendering in embroidered stitch?  You can't...

They're not blind. They've seen it. They don't like it. I assume that means if the University puts it on a shirt or a hat they won't buy that shirt or hat. I know I wouldn't.

[PorkRinds]

They're not blind. They've seen it. They don't like it. I assume that means if the University puts it on a shirt or a hat they won't buy that shirt or hat. I know I wouldn't.

Really mike?  The actual logo isn't released until later today.  Are you claiming that the 2in embroidered hat is really representative of the logo that will be released today?  Sure, it's a rendering of the logo obviously, but it's not the actual logo.  I'll wait and see before I cry like a toddler about it. 

[BornaHog]

Really mike?  The actual logo isn't released until later today.  Are you claiming that the 2in embroidered hat is really representative of the logo that will be released today?  Sure, it's a rendering of the logo obviously, but it's not the actual logo.  I'll wait and see before I cry like a toddler about it.

   If it is what it will look like when put on the back of a hat, like the picture of it implicates. I will not buy any hats with the new secondary logo on them!

   Just my opinion of the look of the pictured, new secondary logo!   
   WPS    :razorback: :razorback: :razorback: :razorback: :razorback: :razorback:   GHG

[PorkRinds]

   If it is what it will look like when put on the back of a hat, like the picture of it implicates. I will not buy any hats with the new secondary logo on them!

   Just my opinion of the look of the pictured, new secondary logo!   
   WPS    :razorback: :razorback: :razorback: :razorback: :razorback: :razorback:   GHG

If it looks like that, I won't buy them either.  I'm just going to wait until the actual logo is released before I make an opinion of the logo.  Maybe I'm underreacting. 

[Kevin]

The baseball Hog was extremely popular with the Baum Stadium crowd. It was copied from a wall design element you can still see on the outside of Baum. I seem to recall that it was dropped about 10 years ago. I remember some grumbling about the decision.

second best logo behind slobbering hog

[ChitownHawg]

1. Hogville can and will fret over anything. For years.

2. It's the off season and we don't even have practice reports much.

3. It APPEARS so far, that the new logo sucks. Admittedly, we have only seen the very worst possible iteration. Perhaps it will improve.

4. They've been tinkering with our "brand" for several years now, with little success.  Remember the tusks under the armpits? The anthracite was controversial. The white helmets. Changing the red. Etc. That pot has been constantly stirred for a while.

Its not JUST that theyre changing things. Some of us enjoy new looks. But it would help if the new look was better than the old one.

They need to hire a better design team and get their stuff together.

Steef, I agree the logo is ugly. I just find it funny some on here really fret about the logo and color of red. They seem to focus on this mythical idea of tradition. Even when people have shown them tradition isn't as concrete as they thought.

It will be interesting to see what the actual logo looks like.

[Mike Irwin]

Really mike?  The actual logo isn't released until later today.  Are you claiming that the 2in embroidered hat is really representative of the logo that will be released today?  Sure, it's a rendering of the logo obviously, but it's not the actual logo.  I'll wait and see before I cry like a toddler about it.

Maybe you're the one making assumptions. You're assuming the so called "real thing" will look a lot different. I'm not making that assumption. Maybe you're the one crying like a toddler complaining about the reaction of people who don't like it and believe they have a right to say so. It's boils down to a person's point of view. You think one thing. Apparently many others think something else. Wow. What a shock.

[ChitownHawg]

Hey what is going on around here? All of this discontent! This is Hogville where discontent goes to die. Can't we all just get along? 

[ClearEyes]

Just win games. :razorback:

[PorkRinds]

Maybe you're the one making assumptions. You're assuming the so called "real thing" will look a lot different. I'm not making that assumption. Maybe you're the one crying like a toddler complaining about the reaction of people who don't like it and believe they have a right to say so. It's boils down to a person's point of view. You think one thing. Apparently many others think something else. Wow. What a shock.

You're right, I do assume that the actual logo will look different from a blurry picture of a 2 inch tall embroidery on the back of a hat.  Maybe that's a wild assumption.  It's like when my toddler says 'I don't like it" before I even put dinner down in front of her.  Sure, she may not.  But at this point she doesn't even have enough info to know whether or not she likes it.  I'm sure there are those that just don't even like the IDEA of a secondary logo, which is a legit argument.  Acting as if you know what it will look like by looking at that hat is a stretch.  Unless you've seen it, and it's an exact rendering of the digital logo, in which case I'll withdraw my argument and defer to your expertise.

[ricepig]

http://m.arkansasrazorbacks.com/mobile/ViewArticle.dbml?atclid=209474031&

[The_Iceman]

http://m.arkansasrazorbacks.com/mobile/ViewArticle.dbml?atclid=209474031&

Interesting.

[Wildhog]

Can probably expect something very similar to those.

If that's the case,  I like it.

The new logo will probably go on the neck.

[ricepig]

Can probably expect something very similar to those.

If that's the case,  I like it.

The new logo will probably go on the neck.

E
Yep, just put it in place of Never Yield, or whatever was there. I'm not going to throw the bathwater out just yet, I may tonight. There have been plenty of items that were ugly before that didn't sell, I know, the university sends me emails all the time with blowout discounts.

[Mike Irwin]

Call me extremely skeptical. Going back for years (long before Jeff Long took over) the athletic department has a history of totting out marketing ideas without any real testing. It's like some guy goes to a design team and says, come up with a new logo. They do and he says, Looks cool to me, let's sell it.

Now maybe they've done some extensive testing with this so called "new look" that I don't know about. But it's likely that something like that would get out. The people they test it on would talk.

Just seems like to me when you unveil a new look you would have a good idea fans will like it. Jeff Long's original plan to unify the logo as "one look" was a good idea IMO.

I'm going to the awards show tonight so I'll see how this new look, looks in person.

[PorkRinds]

Call me extremely skeptical. Going back for years (long before Jeff Long took over) the athletic department has a history of totting out marketing ideas without any real testing. It's like some guy goes to a design team and says, come up with a new logo. They do and he says, Looks cool to me, let's sell it.

Now maybe they've done some extensive testing with this so called "new look" that I don't know about. But it's likely that something like that would get out. The people they test it on would talk.

Just seems like to me when you unveil a new look you would have a good idea fans will like it. Jeff Long's original plan to unify the logo as "one look" was a good idea IMO.

I'm going to the awards show tonight so I'll see how this new look, looks in person.

All fair points.

[ChitownHawg]

Call me extremely skeptical. Going back for years (long before Jeff Long took over) the athletic department has a history of totting out marketing ideas without any real testing. It's like some guy goes to a design team and says, come up with a new logo. They do and he says, Looks cool to me, let's sell it.

Now maybe they've done some extensive testing with this so called "new look" that I don't know about. But it's likely that something like that would get out. The people they test it on would talk.

Just seems like to me when you unveil a new look you would have a good idea fans will like it. Jeff Long's original plan to unify the logo as "one look" was a good idea IMO.

I'm going to the awards show tonight so I'll see how this new look, looks in person.

Any marketer worth their salt would do market testing. If they haven't then they need to find someone who will. No excuse of sending funds on a concept that hasn't been tested. And I agree market testing would be hard to keep quiet about, so this doesn't bode well.

Keep your fingers crossed the Athletic Marketing Department gets lucky!   

[PorkRinds]

Any marketer worth their salt would do market testing. If they haven't then they need to find someone who will. No excuse of sending funds on a concept that hasn't been tested.

Considering how involved Nike is with this project, I'd just have to assume it was tested. 

[ChitownHawg]

Considering how involved Nike is with this project, I'd just have to assume it was tested.

Depends. They could only be involved with the graphic design.

[PorkRinds]

Depends. They could only be involved with the graphic design.

The article posted above said that they came here and interviewed players, coaches, alumni, and students and that our people went to the Nike headquarters as well.  It has the potential to be a massive bomb, but with Nike involved it gives me hope that it will be legit.  Much more hope than if some random guy in the marketing dept just came up with an idea and ran with it.

[EastexHawg]

This is exactly right.  Why go to all the trouble of getting one brand then diluting that brand with a secondary logo?

To get the "I have to have all the newest stuff" people to go out and spend a bunch of money buying it.  It's the same reason Jerry Jones came up with the hideous Cowboys "alternative jersies" 20 years ago. 

Sheeple and their money are soon parted.

[The_Iceman]

The article posted above said that they came here and interviewed players, coaches, alumni, and students and that our people went to the Nike headquarters as well.  It has the potential to be a massive bomb, but with Nike involved it gives me hope that it will be legit.  Much more hope than if some random guy in the marketing dept just came up with an idea and ran with it.

Guess some didn't read the article.

[ricepig]

To get the "I have to have all the newest stuff" people to go out and spend a bunch of money buying it.  It's the same reason Jerry Jones came up with the hideous Cowboys "alternative jersies" 20 years ago. 

Sheeple and their money are soon parted.

And the university benefits.

[Soooie21]

We got to complain about something...

[ChitownHawg]

Guess some didn't read the article.

Apparently not since they only talked with inner circle people. This is not what I am talking about with a market study. I worked on one project with Nielsen Research where we had a database of 32,000 consumers. What would concern me the most is the inner circle they met with. Notice there are no fans included. The people they met would be no different than saying we met with the management team and staff, but no customers.

Which brings us back to what Mike said - something like that would have leaked. If the design hits it out of the park then no problem. If sales are non existent then...

The phases of GIG were centered on understanding the traditions at Arkansas and responding to constant feedback from University constituents. Nike visited the University of Arkansas campus and met with coaches, student-athletes, alumni and staff members. Then, the Nike team provided feedback and insight into their proposed strategy based on what they heard and saw during their visit. Afterwards, Nike revealed the initial design concepts and provided an opportunity for feedback. The new brand expressions and designs were then incorporated into uniforms and apparel with an additional opportunity for feedback

[PorkRinds]

Apparently not since they only talked with inner circle people. This is not what I am talking about with a market study. I worked on one project with Nielsen Research where we had a database of 32,000 consumers. What would concern me the most is the inner circle they met with. Notice there are no fans included. The people they met would be no different than saying we met with the management team and staff, but no customers.

Which brings us back to what Mike said - something like that would have leaked. If the design hits it out of the park then no problem. If sales are non existent then...

The phases of GIG were centered on understanding the traditions at Arkansas and responding to constant feedback from University constituents. Nike visited the University of Arkansas campus and met with coaches, student-athletes, alumni and staff members. Then, the Nike team provided feedback and insight into their proposed strategy based on what they heard and saw during their visit. Afterwards, Nike revealed the initial design concepts and provided an opportunity for feedback. The new brand expressions and designs were then incorporated into uniforms and apparel with an additional opportunity for feedback

Alumni aren't fans? And here I thought we were some of the biggest fans!   

[Kevin]

should have met with a committee of hogville members

[WizardofhOgZ]

The baseball Hog was extremely popular with the Baum Stadium crowd. It was copied from a wall design element you can still see on the outside of Baum. I seem to recall that it was dropped about 10 years ago. I remember some grumbling about the decision.

While we're talking about logos that were extremely popular, this one - sported by our 1994 National Champions - was always one of my favorites.  And I know many others who feel the same way.  I never understood why they "decommissioned" this logo:

[Inhogswetrust]

should have met with a committee of hogville members

Or regular fans.

[ChitownHawg]

Alumni aren't fans? And here I thought we were some of the biggest fans!   

I am an alum and no one asked me my opinion. My guess is the article probably should have said alumni / booster / BOT.

I doubt they asked the alumni association for their database. Could have and used a simple online survey and then they could have said they surveyed all alumni in the association's database.

[ricepig]

I am an alum and no one asked me my opinion. My guess is the article probably should have said alumni / booster / BOT.

I doubt they asked the alumni association for their database. Could have and used a simple online survey and then they could have said they surveyed all alumni in the association's database.

They didn't say all Alumni, your feelings hurt?

[SONofHAM]

Surely we can come up with a better name for the yearly U of A awards banquet.  The Hogspy's is the worst name ever.  We basically copied ESPN's Espy awards who took that name from the Grammy's and Emmy's.  We can't be more original?

[Wildhog]

Surely we can come up with a better name for the yearly U of A awards banquet.  The Hogspy's is the worst name ever.  We basically copied ESPN's Espy awards who took that name from the Grammy's and Emmy's.  We can't be more original?

Now I do agree with this.

[GBHawg]

This is a screen capture from the promo video.  Can't tell a whole lot, but you can at least get a basic idea.