Opinion BY Christian Palino

Not so Golden State Warriors

This is one of those occasions where — and let me show my cards early here — the rebranding effort is so poor it is hard to know where to begin. For those that may not follow the National Basketball Association (NBA), the Golden State Warriors have been in California, and more specifically in the Bay area, since moving out here in 1962 from Philadelphia. They were first based out of San Francisco and then moved to Oakland after nine seasons, where they have since resided. The current redesign marks the first rebranding effort by the team since 1997. Apparently, the sale of Warriors merchandise as part of the NBA marketing initiative Hardwood Classics was so popular that the Warriors franchise could not overlook the opportunity to try and recreate some of the magic nostalgia that was selling so well.

“This new logo pays homage to our organization’s rich history and unique standing in the Bay Area sports community,” said Warriors’ President Robert Rowell. “The throwback uniforms we’ve worn as part of the NBA’s Hardwood Classics initiative in recent years have been extremely popular with our fans, and we set out to design a new look that was clean and traditional in that same spirit. We are grateful to the NBA and adidas for providing us with a magnitude of creative freedom, along with invaluable expertise, during this process.”
— Press Release

This review is not in defense of the previous logo. The comic blue warrior with lightning-bolt-wielding-typography in hand is hokey at best — a true cacophony of strange gradients and even stranger blue and white highlights. The concept lacked heart and innovation and the rendering is a rather true reflection of that same lack of inspiration. But then again it did look enough like other professional sports teams to fit into the league, whereas this new logo looks like it was made in a rudimentary graphics application on a Franklin by your son’s or daughter’s middle school history teacher for a field trip.

The idea to rebrand the Warriors with nostalgic wit is not lost on me — I appreciate the intention to return to a simpler graphic presentation that connects the team with its hometown and history (I’ve always been a fan of the Celtics’ retention of their historic leprechaun). The problem with this primary logo is not its intent to capture the past, it is in how that was conceptualized and then executed.

Video unveiling the new logo.

To start, the new logo attempts to recreate the classic feeling of the Golden Gate bridge logo from the late 1960s, but rather than choosing that historic and iconic bridge (or the well-known Bay Bridge), they opted to use a yet-to-be-finished Bay Bridge. I can understand not wanting to use the Golden Gate bridge which has a direct association to San Francisco and instead opting for a bridge that more clearly stands for connecting the bay area, but the future Bay Bridge seems oxymoronic here.

The various new logos of the Warriors.

Then there is the execution. Nothing about this execution could be called good or professional. Not the formal properties of the bridge composition, not the poorly conceived and handled illustration, not the off-set containing circle, not the overstated Copperplate Gothic and its thoughtless kerning, not the color use, not its ability to be reproduced — nothing. This juvenile primary logo is compromised even further by the partial logo’s imposition of a basketball in the background. The secondary logos make a slightly better attempt at capturing the atmosphere of the professional league in the 70s and 80s — but they too suffer from being handled by unskilled hands.

History of the Warrior’s logo.

Thanks to Alan Frantz for first tip.

Rico’s comment is:

That’s some seriously wonky curve-fitting of the Copperplate (“Warriors” in particular). Leaving aside the fact that they used Copperplate to begin with (I love Fred Goudy as much as the next guy, but man, Copperplate needs to die a slow death), it would be nice if they paid a little more attention to the details and actually fitted the serifs to match the curve of the type. They stick out at all kinds of disjointed angles if you allow Illustrator to just wrap the type for you (eg., see the relation between the right arm of the W and the top of the A, yuck).

On Jun.22.2010 at 06:24 AM

Roth’s comment is:

Should’ve brought back the cock-sock.

On Jun.22.2010 at 06:29 AM

Deano’s comment is:

They should have gone back the clasic 1966-71 “The City” uni and call it a day.

On Jun.22.2010 at 06:37 AM

Paul’s comment is:

The “climax” of that video is one of the saddest things I’ve seen in recent memory.

On Jun.22.2010 at 06:47 AM

drew kora’s comment is:

Yikes. You really brought the hammer down on this one, but it needed it. This is really really sad.

On Jun.22.2010 at 06:48 AM

Matthew Moore Design’s comment is:

I actually like the concept, but bad execution. I’ll be surprised if that winds up being the jersey design. “Golden State” is so small it’s hardly legible.

Maybe the NBA and Adidas shouldn’t have been so “no-touch” with this project…

On Jun.22.2010 at 06:53 AM

Erwin’s comment is:

I was actually considering recommending this rebrand to be put on Brandnew, but here it is already!

I’m thoroughly disappointed by this “rebrand”, although it’s quite what I expected it to be. The new logo is downright amateurish and uninteresting to look at… I find it very disturbing that it lacks consistancy, without the white basketball lines in the back the logo looks dull and empty, but adding the lines doesn’t improve the logo either, it’s just ugly no matter what… And the type doesn’t help!

Thanks for the additions regarding uniforms etc., this way I don’t have to wait until official releases. The uniforms are probably even uglier than the logo. The number inside the logo is a big mistake, the uniform as a whole resembles the Lakers or Pacers uniforms way to much! It’s just so boring. This trend to simplify or clean things up is okay, but try to be a little bit more unique while you’re at it…

There’s a lot to complain about regarding the previous logo and uniforms, but at least it was original, unique, and crafty. The new logo just lacks passion and a professional touch.

Funny thing is, this rebrand wouldn’t have taken place if the Warriors had actually won anything during the last 15 years, it solely exists to bring back those good old days when Don Nelson’s offense would still win you games, and when Tim Hardaway wasn’t openly a gay-hater yet.

Hopefully with Stephen Curry and sans Nelson, golden times will return to the bay area. I guess for some, a rebrand was necessary to accomplish that goal…

Meanwhile, in Utah, the Jazz return to their old logo from the eighties, not sure which colors they’re going to use though.

And how do Sixers fans feel about the reinstalling of their old logo and uni’s? Improvement? Does it help?

On Jun.22.2010 at 07:14 AM

Everett’s comment is:

I can appreciate what the designers were tying to do, but sadly, they failed miserably. I’d be happy to see some random squinty-eyed animal in garish colors and pointy swoosh-spikes rather than this.

On Jun.22.2010 at 07:38 AM

Tom’s comment is:

I agree, this new logo looks like it was thrown together in five minutes. In response to the last comment regarding the Sixers old logo making a comeback, personally I have always loved their old logo and I am so glad they got rid of that black, gold, red and blue swooshy, sparkly monstrosity. The old 76ers logo is a perfect example of a simple, timeless sports logo which you don’t see a lot of these days.

On Jun.22.2010 at 07:39 AM

Nate B’s comment is:

So, so terrible. Copperplate was such a bad choice. The logo looks amateurish at best and is a complete disaster. Better luck next year?

On Jun.22.2010 at 07:58 AM

ScottyM’s comment is:

I agree with everything stated in this post.

The epitome of missed opportunity. A close look at the “W” and you’ll see the most atrocious work presented here on BN this year. Absolutely unconscionable the lack of integrity and attention to detail on this mark.

On Jun.22.2010 at 07:58 AM

Courtny Cotten’s comment is:

@Paul - That’s what I thought too haha!

@Christian - Do we know if this was all in house or a contracted design job? I’m interested in finding out who was responsible for the execution and if this ended up being a design by committee project. Looks to be the case. I doubt if ultimately the designer involved had any say in the long run. Feel a bit disheartened to know someone spent time working on this and all they could come up with is Copperplate Gothic. At least TRY some custom type work, you get style points for that.

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:01 AM

John McCollum’s comment is:

From worse to worser.

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:05 AM

monty’s comment is:

I’m just happy the Pacers no longer have the ugliest logo in the NBA.

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:07 AM

Eric’s comment is:

So, they brought back putting the player’s number inside the circle (which I like), but to make it fit, they faux-condensed the Copperplate? Wow.

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:11 AM

Tom’s comment is:

If this is the best they could do, why not just put the logotype “Warriors” back on it and call it a day? Really??

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:16 AM

Joshua’s comment is:

I agree with Roth (nice one by the way). I think Jackie Moon is even snickering at this logo. I think this could’ve been a “brothers, cousins son who is still in art school and does logos” type of deal, or a design by (brain dead) committee. This would have been better if updated from what were success points for the vintage logo. Look for this to change in another year.

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:16 AM

Andy Charly’s comment is:

Copperplate doesn’t need to go, it just shouldn’t be used here, and in a lot of the other places it’s used, but there are appropriate uses for it.

This, I just don’t know what to say. It’s not very strong in the execution, thought I don’t see why it’s inappropriate to use the new Bay Bridge in the logo. That’s going to be an icon connecting the cities for years to come.

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:19 AM

Andy Charly’s comment is:

It’s not allowed to change for at least a few seasons. Three, five maybe.

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:20 AM

Michael McWatters’s comment is:

They should donate this logo to a local mom-and-pop insurance agent or CPA.

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:22 AM

Martin Boath’s comment is:

Another sports team badge on Brand New?

Seriously? No, really, seriously?

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:22 AM

ck’s comment is:

How utterly and completely depressing. Was this done in-house, by non-designers? I can’t imagine this having been done by any self-respecting, professional designer. Why can’t a team that pays athletes (athletes!) millions of dollars per year spend a little money on something so important as a team logo. It’s just baffling.

I might need to stop subscribing to Brand New, it’s more often than not just a complete #%@$ing downer to be a witness to.

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:26 AM

Erwin’s comment is:

@ Courtny

I wouldn’t be surprised if the assignment was kept inhouse. The task was simple: bring back the old logo’s and, as a bonus, maybe modernize it a little bit. But not too much. The colors had to be the yellow/gold and blue, no doubt about it. Bring back the circle and put a bridge in it. The basketball lines in the back are the biggest cliche in bball-logo’s, but I guess it works most of the times. Putting the players number inside the circle was probably the uniform feat they were most proud of, and rightfully so, it’s typically a Warriors thing. Bringing back the Wild West font from the eighties was a nono IMO, and luckily they didn’t. But Copperplate was a bad choice no doubt.

All in all this job required no creativity whatsoever, it’s a simple copy of the previous logo’s. The job had to be done as cheap and as fast as possible. By bringing back the original colors and, in a way, the original logo, it should be enough to please the fans.

Personally I would’ve liked them to create something fresh with the cable car as a basis, not on the back of the jersey, but in the logo.

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:26 AM

Jason D’s comment is:

It’s one thing to tap into the past like the Sixers to revive a classic identity that looks great. There is nothing in the Golden State’s past that has looked good and sadly the trend continues. Total disaster.

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:27 AM

Todd’s comment is:

I actually like this rebrand, if only because it is such a drastic improvement over their previous look, which I always considered to be one of the worst in the NBA - if not all of sports. Sure, we can scrutinize the font choice and execution, but I have to consider this an upgrade.

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:33 AM

Adam’s comment is:

This is terrible. The mark is uninspired and poorly executed. The bridge shape is incredibly bad, and the offset circles surrounding the bridge look accidental and awkward. I hope the reconsider this decision.

MLS > NBA

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:33 AM

Rosie’s comment is:

I’m surprised the comments here are so mild.

I can’t believe that this is the final version. Sure, the concept is good, but holy cow, is the execution terrible. It looks like a high school student that knows how to use illustrator made this. The bridge “icon” is not thoughtfully drawn whatsoever. It seems like someone just used the pencil tool, traced over a drawing of the bridge, and just adjusted some of the widths of their strokes.

Also, why is the gold circle not centered in the blue? Why does the blue circle itself seem wobbly? And why would anyone think they could just use the Type on a Path tool for a logo and just leave it as is?

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:37 AM

Ezequias Viana’s comment is:

Não gostava da antiga e não gostei da nova.

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:43 AM

katie’s comment is:

for some reason I want a chiquita banana right now.

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:46 AM

Larry W’s comment is:

KILL IT WITH FIRE!!!!!!!!!

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:52 AM

jay’s comment is:

How about a post on the 76ers, Jazz and Magic’s rebranding for a little comparison? I’d like to have some of the other NBA teams rebrandings to compare this to.

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:54 AM

Bugsy’s comment is:

I’m not a graphic designer, but I sue love the new one compared o that previous thing. My only criticism is that it looks like the Chiquita banana sticker.

I’m sick of these newfangled jerseyes and colors in all sports. Retro rocks, back to the basics.

On the other hand, thank God for franchies like the Canadiens and Red Wings in the NHL who never change their jersey, logo, colors, etc. Sick of sports teams changing their logos every 3 years. *puke*

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:59 AM

EMD’s comment is:

Why not just go back to the 66-71 era jerseys and be done with it?

“The City” jerseys and look are the sweetest things ever. Just wear those forever!

On Jun.22.2010 at 09:12 AM

Terry Biddle’s comment is:

I’m in shock. This’ll get recalled like Gray Davis.

On Jun.22.2010 at 09:13 AM

Alex’s comment is:

Sports teams’ identities have no place on BrandNew. Seriously.

On Jun.22.2010 at 09:20 AM

jonathan’s comment is:

Wow… Freaking awful!

On Jun.22.2010 at 09:23 AM

Nate Maggio’s comment is:

C’mon everyone, the mark isn’t 84% bad. It think it is nice to look at. The “bridge” idea works well too because it honors the past (San Francisco’s Golden Gate) and their present (Oakland’s Bay Bridge).
And outsiders may not know this, but the 1966-1971 (“The City”) logo has become VERY popular in both SF and Oakland. It has become the Bay Area’s unofficial mark, especially in the “urban market.” I am not surprised they wanted to capitalize on that.
And yes, the typography is BAD. And the secondary marks are generic and ugly too.

On Jun.22.2010 at 09:23 AM

Christian Palino’s comment is:

Courtny Cotten’s comment is: @Christian - Do we know if this was all in house or a contracted design job?

While we tried to identify a design credit, we’re uncertain about who takes responsibility for its crafting. The franchise president notes working with Adidas and the NBA to create this work, so somewhere in there likely lies the credit.

On Jun.22.2010 at 09:38 AM

Drake Hollander’s comment is:

In the sentence “…but the future Bay Bridge seems oxymoronic here,” I think the word you were looking for was “anachronistic.” An oxymoron is when two terms contradict, an anachronism is when something is in a misplaced period. Hence, the graphical reference to the past with a bridge clearly from the future would be anachronistic.

On Jun.22.2010 at 09:40 AM

cody’s comment is:

It’s called ‘throwback’ for a reason… it’s only there for collective sentimental value and nonstalgia which makes up for what is a dated, now-crappy design…

Unfortunately, this new sadness will be with us, every day, year in, year out till someone does something about it.

On Jun.22.2010 at 09:43 AM

Jacob’s comment is:

Although I loathe the typeface used for this one, I welcome the move away from ’90s-style, overdone sports team logos.

On Jun.22.2010 at 09:44 AM

TheJonGates’s comment is:

I had heard the reason the new bridge is offset is to allow the players number to fit within the circle of the large logo on the front of jerseys.

Golden State Warriors: Keep the mark and get rid of the Copperplate after a season or two. But really, who are you? The problem with this team is that until this new mark was announced it had a poorly executed warrior a la the Silver Surfer as an identity.

Build from who you were, who you are, and who you want to become.

Sorry guys, but Oakland isn’t and never was as cool as “The City.”

On Jun.22.2010 at 09:53 AM

qwertyale’s comment is:

ruined.

On Jun.22.2010 at 09:58 AM

Fatimah’s comment is:

I’m going to cry.

On Jun.22.2010 at 09:59 AM

Fatimah’s comment is:

I’m going to cry.

On Jun.22.2010 at 10:00 AM

Eric MacLeod’s comment is:

Have you seen the Warriors play? The crappy re-brand fits a crap basketball team.

On Jun.22.2010 at 10:17 AM

Kyle’s comment is:

Why the sports identity critique backlash? At the top of the page it says, “Opinions on corporate and brand identity work.” Professional sports teams are brands. Just because you’d rather see financial institutions and insurance companies, it doesn’t mean these reviews lack relevancy.

On Jun.22.2010 at 10:19 AM

guizaffari’s comment is:

What were they thinking?

WHERE IS THE F*CKING WARRIOR???

WAS HE A F*CKING TRANSFORMER AND TURNED INTO A BRIDGE???

On Jun.22.2010 at 10:36 AM

Jason Tselentis’s comment is:

It’s a shame, but not surprising to see this. For starters, all the bad NBA teams have bad logos. The only place where a redesign has ever delivered success is in the NFL: Elway’s Broncos and Sapp’s Bucs come to mind, as each won a Super Bowl after a redesign.

The NBA jumping on this retro kick is just an attempt at trying to bring back the good old days. But, Golden State needs more than “feel good” vibes. They’re a second to third tier team in a division loaded with talent, and better logos.

On Jun.22.2010 at 10:48 AM

D.tails_d.tails’s comment is:

Quite fitting for a city that revolves around itself really. Oaklanders and Seattle-ists smirk on and on and on.

On Jun.22.2010 at 10:52 AM

Andreas Lanjerud’s comment is:

Haha, a golden state bridge transformer. A must-have toy for every kid.

On Jun.22.2010 at 10:56 AM

Juan Manuel’s comment is:

I cannot believe how could they decide to lose the strength of the old brand. The new one does not tell me anything, I feel it empty of emotion, sports, velocity, concepts that a basket team brand should have understanding the history of the NBA itself. Really a pity!!!

On Jun.22.2010 at 10:57 AM

cube23’s comment is:

Poor poor Warriors fans, I had actually gotten used to the current logo before they changed it into this eyesore! Good point Christian on the “future” Bay Bridge, I had no idea they were rebuilding it. And Copperplate, WTF, REALLY???? How freaken early 90’s is that?? Honestly, this logo and the Oklahomo Thunder logo (wordmark???) look like something I would have done in my first year of design school in the 90’s …

On Jun.22.2010 at 11:12 AM

Alex P.’s comment is:

Looks like the Hardwood Classics are still going to be extremely popular with the fans.

On Jun.22.2010 at 11:19 AM

Martin Boath’s comment is:

@Kyle – no one anywhere says they want to see more ‘financial institutions and insurance companies’. Nor did anyone say professional sports teams aren’t brands. Indeed, no one even questioned whether the reviews of these sports teams’ logo were relevant or not.

What is worth considering is that:

a) the world of branding is far bigger and far more diverse than this – it has to be admitted that there has been something of an overload of this ‘type’ of work on Brand New of late – certainly disproportionate to the work that could be featured.

b) and yes, this sort of work is branding but it is an exceptionally narrow and clichéd market in which almost all of brands adhere to a ‘me too’ approach, be it NFL, MLS, NBA or NHL.

On Jun.22.2010 at 11:20 AM

SOKO’s comment is:

I THINK you over analyzed it a bit. The rant comes off kind of a bit ” from the desk of the anal retentive graphic designer “. the real point is this: Are they the GOLDEN STATE BRIDGES or THE GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS ?
They have gone back to a logo fit for a design firm or a bank and not a sports team.

On Jun.22.2010 at 11:22 AM

Mychal McCabe’s comment is:

This isn’t a net-positive re-imagining of the retro identity their news release alludes to.

The new Bay Bridge is a design no one wanted foisted in the name of expediency on a city that’s used to that kind of thing. About the only good that will come of it, aside from needed seismic integrity, is the shoreline park they intend to develop at the base of the old bridge. For the Warriors to adopt it in an act of clunky illustration is tone deaf at best.

They’ve also squandered Oakland’s recent embrace of our ‘less cool’ (eh hem) status as “The Town” - a t-shirt selling phenomenon that picked up steam in the wake of the Warriors playoff success in ‘06. The Hardwood Classics idea ran alongside a cultural moment that saw everyone and their brother buying city-specific hoodies and track jackets (Harlem, Los Angeles, Dublin, Moscow, etc.). This work takes that moment in Warriors history as a starting point, and then strips it of specificity and piles on some corporate banality.

Abandoning “Thunder” squanders their own investment in that identity element. My office is next to a holding lot with a couple of trailers that the Warriors use for community events - Thunder is all over them. Sure he looks like an escapee from a comic book or video game, but the new work is crushingly generic.

On Jun.22.2010 at 11:30 AM

Marco Moreno’s comment is:

It’s so bad, it’s horrible. How can that make sense to anyone? Wow.

On Jun.22.2010 at 11:34 AM

bob smith’s comment is:

Utterly shocking. It literally feels like an assault on graphic design. I couldn’t even get through the unveiling video. Wow. Where do you start indeed..

On Jun.22.2010 at 11:56 AM

Nick Irwin’s comment is:

This makes me hurt.. faux-copperplate doesnt belong on a pro teams logo BUT overall, Professional sports teams’ logos DO belong on brand new.

On Jun.22.2010 at 12:21 PM

Fred Carriedo’s comment is:

If today was April 1st, I would of thought this was a joke.

On Jun.22.2010 at 12:26 PM

Paul Pruneau’s comment is:

Boring, uninspiring, unmemorable.
Enough said.

On Jun.22.2010 at 12:37 PM

Web Design Kent’s comment is:

I don’t think its all that bad as a jumping off point, not the finished article and much better than the previous one.

On Jun.22.2010 at 12:39 PM

Taylor’s comment is:

So… why does the secondary logo say SF when they play in Oakland? I get that they USED to be in San Francisco, but now they’re not.

On Jun.22.2010 at 12:39 PM

Jennifer Moline, PsPrint’s comment is:

I agree with Nate Maggio’s comment:

“C’mon everyone, the mark isn’t 84% bad. It think it is nice to look at. The “bridge” idea works well too because it honors the past (San Francisco’s Golden Gate) and their present (Oakland’s Bay Bridge).
And outsiders may not know this, but the 1966-1971 (“The City”) logo has become VERY popular in both SF and Oakland. It has become the Bay Area’s unofficial mark, especially in the “urban market.” I am not surprised they wanted to capitalize on that.”

It’s true — this logo and idea have been HUGE in the Bay Area in the past several years, with people proudly wearing Oakland and San Francisco shirts like I’ve never seen before, and I’m talking natives, not tourists. I never thought I’d buy a Warriors shirt, but now I might. But I also love minimalism and retro.

On Jun.22.2010 at 12:42 PM

Andrea’s comment is:

Yes, the logo is bad.

But to wonder if it was created by an agency or in-house…what are you implying? Does it matter? I’ve seen good and bad work from both types of designers. And you know what? There really isn’t a difference between the two. Being an in-house creative, I have to speak up whenever any misconceptions about in-house designers is brought up.

I handle four brands in my in-house department. I have clients to keep happy just like any agency. Just because my clients are in the same building as I am doesn’t mean I am any less of a designer.

On Jun.22.2010 at 12:45 PM

Ken Peters’s comment is:

This doesn’t say “retro” or “vintage”, it says “amateurish” and “clip art”.

Seriously, look at that typography. Was everybody drunk when they approved this? The word “Warriors” is too high on the right, and not for a legitimate reason for optical balance, but because it’s just wrong.

Design this uncreative, and so incompetently executed diminishes the design profession overall. The parties responsible for this garbage should be ashamed, including the league and the team.

On Jun.22.2010 at 01:04 PM

Annette’s comment is:

When I first looked at this, I thought the “Before” and “After” pictures had gotten mixed up accidentally. Yes, this new logo looks 80s/90s— in the worst possible way. At least the old one was somewhat dynamic in spite of its problems. This is flat and lifeless. I agree with those who said they should have just gone back to using “The City”. That version wasn’t perfect either, but at least it made more sense.

On Jun.22.2010 at 01:11 PM

Gunter Soydanbay’s comment is:

While the old logo of the Warriors is mediocre at best, the new one looks like a feeble attempt to look more retro.

Interestingly, this is not the only bad NBA logo change of this summer. Couple of weeks ago, Orlando Magic took the exact opposite direction and created a new logo. I recently reviewed it. I am curious to hearing your thoughts.

On Jun.22.2010 at 01:12 PM

Nicole’s comment is:

The Hardwood Classics logo (esp. the one that says “The City”) is all over the place in the Bay Area and I think that logo it looks really classy and modern in its vintageness.

In fact, it’s so popular that people make rip-offs of it all the time for other cities in the bay- there’s a version for Oakland and one for the Bay Area as a whole, at least.

This version is terrible. The worst. It’s not even as well constructed as the unofficial rip-offs of the old logo I see on hipsters around Rockridge.

Come on, SF! You’ve got the most graphic designers per square inch outside of NYC. Some of them are even sports fans. You can do way-the-fuck better.

On Jun.22.2010 at 01:18 PM

Carlos Montalvan’s comment is:

I can’t even begin to describe all the things wrong with this work. Unbelievably, I read that Adidas had some sort of advisory role on this. All I can say is, as a Warriors fan and a graphic designer, I am ashamed to root for this logo. Let’s hope the team gets bought so they have an excuse to rebrand again.

On Jun.22.2010 at 01:18 PM

GUS the Gamer’s comment is:

The FAIL is strong on this one

On Jun.22.2010 at 01:25 PM

Tim Gengler’s comment is:

I would have preferred they return to any of the 1971-1997 iterations or, if they’re willing to call San Francisco home as Secondary Logo B suggests, stuck fully with the classic bridge mark.

I don’t mind the secondary designs, but that primary logo and its text in particular are ‘turrible.’ It’s as though they captured the lack of quality of a classic sports identity minus any of the charm.

And the jersey itself is too close to the current Indiana Pacers’ jersey.

This is a missed opportunity, much like another young team slowly building itself up, the Oklahoma City Thunder.

On Jun.22.2010 at 01:44 PM

Lydia’s comment is:

Really?

I definitely agree that it looks like the Chiquita Bananas logo. That was the first thing I thought of.

On Jun.22.2010 at 01:49 PM

Jade’s comment is:

Hey, at least the colors are nice, and everything feels very established, contained and bankerly. I think the GS Warriors Retirement Fund Management Firm made a good choice (though the inner circle is just a hair off-center).

On Jun.22.2010 at 02:09 PM

Brian Son’s comment is:

Talk about going backwards.

On Jun.22.2010 at 02:15 PM

Flip’s comment is:

Harsh, prima dona comments here. I’m not a graphic designer, but I think this is a hit. I think it will be warmly received. Cooperplate, while not my first choice, isn’t all inappropriate. The SF wordmarks are odd, but the Bay Bridge is a nice connection to Oakland. Obviously “The City” jerseys were popular, yet had absolutely nothing to do with Warriors. Same here. I’m wondering what the comments will be like here when this is viewed as a success.

On Jun.22.2010 at 02:34 PM

David’s comment is:

This is exhibit A why the Golden State Warriors will always be bad. If these are the decisions made by upper management about logos just think about how they approach everything else. This logo actually makes me a little sick to my stomach.

The reason I got into design was to potentially have the chance one day to design a logo for a professional sports team. This makes me sad…

On Jun.22.2010 at 02:59 PM

peter’s comment is:

Too many current NBA teams doing the blue and yellow:
Golden State, Denver, Memphis, New Orleans, Oklahoma City (sorta)

On Jun.22.2010 at 03:04 PM

mister_eaves’s comment is:

I agree: Too many sports logos recently on Brand New. More variety, please.

On Jun.22.2010 at 03:30 PM

Mojo’s comment is:

That video reeks. Template from Motion, combined with what looks like a cookie cutter background from LiveType? Perhaps Motion again? I can’t remember which, but I do remember it from 7 years ago. But I guess it fits their retro look.

On Jun.22.2010 at 04:16 PM

Barclay D’s comment is:

Still thinks it beats Utah and Orlando’s new looks.

On Jun.22.2010 at 05:44 PM

Wendy Maynard’s comment is:

I don’t like the font, but I like the mark.

On Jun.22.2010 at 06:21 PM

Tez’s comment is:

*WOW* What a back step.

On Jun.22.2010 at 06:50 PM

Kylie’s comment is:

Alright, the type is bad and the holding shape is weird, but this is still a pretty cool logo and totally ballsy (no pun intended) for a sports team mark. I certainly prefer this to even the most expertly drawn jagged-edges-and-gradient-heavy animal (or in this case, blue man) illustration.

On Jun.22.2010 at 07:14 PM

Oluzen’s comment is:

Por favor confirmar que es una broma…!

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:22 PM

Matt’s comment is:

Actually not that bad

On Jun.22.2010 at 08:40 PM

Matt the Brave’s comment is:

From a sports standpoint, this logo looks weak. If I were a fan of the Warriors, I’d be a bit upset because this jersey would not necessarily strike fear into the hearts of my opponent. Really, it’s powder-puff blue and gold. Woo.

For a good throwback design, look at the Atlanta Hawks. They took their jerseys from the late 1950s and redesigned them to make them current; on top of it, they look much better than the jerseys that immediately preceded them and has become at least as iconic as the ‘pac-man’ jerseys of the 1980s. Another good example from sports is having the NHL return to their original sweaters (or in some cases, more iconic), but tweaking them to match the standards of today’s logo needs.

One thing that caught my eye: the bottom of the circle seems to be floating in terms of depth. In one picture, the circles should be concentric, but they are not. In others, they are. It also seems that the numbers on the front of the jersey are put there lazily. I know they were trying to go for a throwback idea there, but it just doesn’t work very well. It makes it difficult to distinguish what player it is.

On Jun.23.2010 at 01:25 AM

Chuck Spidell’s comment is:

These are similar colors used in my junior high school, over 15 years ago. The Warriors look like Wimps now. California golden yellow? Seriously?

On Jun.23.2010 at 05:13 AM

Stephanie’s comment is:

Andrea - Thanks I was going to say the same thing. I also notice often on this site the implication that something poorly executed or off-target may have been done in-house. I was just at the HOW conference and fully 75% of the participants in one of my sessions were in-house designers. The majority of us out there working fall into this category. It’s thankless, but we’re surely no less designers than anyone out there in agency-world.

On Jun.23.2010 at 06:01 AM

Charlie Pratt’s comment is:

Stephanie -

I was an in-house designer and am now running my own shop. I can only speak for my process, but getting salaried for general design skills yields general design results. For me, it wasn’t motivating at all.

Getting compensated on a project to project basis—as well as going after the clients that motivate me naturally—captures my focus and passion much better than simply being a designer on perpetual monthly retainer.

I don’t think just BECAUSE you’re in-house means you’re bad, but I think the creative arts need that motivation & passion to survive. If you can find that as an in-house designer, my hat’s off to you, you’re blessed.

To the subject at hand: This brand mark is atrocious.

On Jun.23.2010 at 07:33 AM

Scott’s comment is:

The first thing I thought, it looks like a foursquare badge icon. The second thing I though, it looks like a small unknown college team logo not an NBA logo. Font choice is really bad and I usually like copperplate!

On Jun.23.2010 at 07:58 AM

Rodrok’s comment is:

I really hope this is not the new trend, this logo doesn’t make the game that more exciting, and I’m sure kids wont we so attracted to it. I think this a very egoistic decision from some melancholic executive.

why should we go back in design evolution?

so much progress for nothing…

My current design dream project is to design a logo for a professional team, but this is definitely not what I have in mind for the final outcome.

On Jun.23.2010 at 08:15 AM

niko’s comment is:

the old lightning bolt zulu warrior mess had to go. This is better, but not where it needs to be.

On Jun.23.2010 at 10:25 AM

Walt’s comment is:

@ Alex - If sports rebranding projects don’t belong here, why do they get tons of comments? It is a branding project for a large organization that creates a large amount of revenue and that people recognize/associate feelings with. What else does it need?

The logo is bad, just plain bad. I get what they were going for, but they should have just stuck with “The City” and updated it a bit. Great idea, poor execution. The sad part is, that it will sell, the consumer won’t have a choice, so the NBA will think this is a good idea since it “sold” and do it more often (Raptors, I am looking at you). This is one of many poor sports logos that have come out recently and I am afraid it won’t end anytime soon.

On Jun.23.2010 at 10:43 AM

Erwin’s comment is:

@ Walt

By Raptors, do you mean they should abandon their old dino logo? Because this is something I can agree with. I like their footprint logo, which is actually their secondary logo, a lot better, and think they should make it their primary logo! (if they haven’t already done that)

The case with many NBA logo’s is that halfway through the nineties, a dozen or so teams thought it would be a cool idea to completely ignore their traditional colors and go with crazy color schemes (teal, brown, black, orange, babyblue, darkish blue, grey). They also switched to the wellknown hyperdetailed angry animal logo’s of which we can all sum up a few examples.

Not only the Warriors, but also the Grizzlies, Raptors, Hawks, Pistons, Timberwolves, Sonics, Wizards, Sixers (and many more) broke tradition and wore those messy, detailed uniforms in all sorts of unmatching colors…

Luckily the last few years those teams are realizing they made a mistake, and are returning to their traditional colors, but here comes my problem: they keep their nineties logo and simply change the color scheme to their traditional colors, with horrible results!

See the Jazz’ latest experiment: it’s the third time they changed their logo’s colors, and again, it looks terrible! They decided to bring back the musical note (which is a cool idea), but please, get rid of the nineties logo then! Many teams went the easy route and simply recolored their old logo’s instead of completely getting rid of them. (Pistons, Nuggets, Raptors, Jazz, Hawks, Bucks). Meanwhile they add a secondary logo which often becomes way more popular than the primary logo (f.e. Raptors). But they never get rid of the old logo…

What I’m trying to say is, if the Warriors went the easiest route, they’d just recolored their old logo with the yellow and the blue (this is the real trend that a lot of teams get away with), instead they opted to create a new logo (be it a copy of past logo’s). And while the new one is horrible too, I’m just glad they brought back the yellow and blue! One more objection: as a result of this retro movement, too many teams go back to red, white and blue color schemes, which is kind of boring IMO. I expect the Wizards to change colors, and the Pacers will also soon switch to their original blue, and then the Pacers and Warriors jerseys will look nearly identical…

On Jun.23.2010 at 12:22 PM

Adam’s comment is:

I absolutely hated the old Warrior on roids, but this is a horrible redesign. Although I’m not a fan of the off center circle or the bridge design, I could give it a pass if a well thought-out font brought the whole thing together, but it doesn’t. At all. And at first look of the jersey design, I immediately thought Denver Nuggets. They should’ve stuck with The City design or the outlined Cali design, but this was the WRONG way to go.

On Jun.23.2010 at 12:50 PM

Mark’s comment is:

It’s good

I can’t find anything wrong with the new logo it’s a big improvement over the previous one.

On Jun.23.2010 at 03:59 PM

nicholas’s comment is:

I really wish this site would change its URL to

www.pissed-at-the-world.com

On Jun.23.2010 at 04:14 PM

John’s comment is:

Sports teams’ identities have no place on BrandNew. Seriously.

Really? Well, neither do amorphous blob marks paired with a gray Gotham-esque logotype with accompanying over-wrought marketing weasel-speak press releases.

Please.

On Jun.23.2010 at 04:35 PM

Will Burnett’s comment is:

This might as well be the logo for some middle school basketball team. It’s just disgusting.

On Jun.23.2010 at 06:28 PM

Christine’s comment is:

Is any one else bothered that Warriors isnt really centered at the bottom of the circle? I just want to slide it around to the left a bit.

On Jun.23.2010 at 09:54 PM

jmk’s comment is:

ironically not a single jersey will be sold.

On Jun.23.2010 at 11:42 PM

Tobias Goth’s comment is:

Lame typeface, not an ounce of gold in California Golden yellow, insipid artwork. Come on Warriors you can do much better!

On Jun.24.2010 at 06:14 AM

MSGDS’s comment is:

Wow, a complete disaster.

On Jun.24.2010 at 09:38 AM

g-sppud’s comment is:

This should make all cringe - designers and non-designers alike. Wow. It’s so bad there’s just not even a stating point for critique.

And for all who think that sports logos are too low brow - quit being such pretentious assholes. Sports franchises need branding just like everything else does. This forum is great for it’s diversity of brands examined from cities to non-profits to corporations to sports.

I’m sure you would all turn down the work if a team came knocking at your door right? You guys just keep polishing your monocles and thinking you’re better than everyone else.

On Jun.24.2010 at 09:53 AM

Kelli’s comment is:

Constructively critiquing this would just be beating a dead…logo. I’m just going to simply say “sad face”.

On Jun.24.2010 at 10:23 AM

Matt Beahan’s comment is:

The uniform on that info sheet ISN’T the new uni, that’s just a mock-up. Trust me, the actual jerseys are… well, not quite as bad.

Part of the problem with NBA logos is that everything’s handled in-house by the league & Adidas. Thus we are left with recolours, recycling and the blandest logos outside of baseball. We’ll likely never see a truly quirky NBA logo again, like the old Bucks or Nuggets logos.

And if you think this is bad, wait until you see what the Utah Jazz have done. Recoloured one logo (for the second time in 10 years!) and brought back an old one. Just lazy.

On Jun.24.2010 at 02:21 PM

Sonny G’s comment is:

Phew…glad to read that I’m not the only one who finds this new branding to be some of the most lazy uninspired work in professional sports…

I’ve been doing graphic design for the better part of 15 years now, and it reminds me of some of the junk that the college kids I help out with Photoshop crank out in an afternoon then ask me to tell them what is wrong with it (It takes a ton of strength to not just tell them to let me take their seat and just redo the entire thing for them alot of times…lol). It shows no thought, no originality (although I guess they can get away with that having admitted that it was inspired by a throwback design), and ZERO attention to detail.

I was actually hoping they’d do something alot more dramatic when I heard that they were working on a new look…especially since the Warriors are my second favorite team behind the Lakers (born in LA, live in the bay area now). I would have liked to see something a bit more “hard” looking; I was actually joking with a friend that it’d be cool if they stole the logo from the movie the Warriors and swapped their pallate to black grey and red (with a hint of light blue for whatever reason)…that too might not have been original, but at least it would have looked a helluva lot cooler than this…

I really hope that these uninspired vanilla ice-cream style looks for teams wont become the next big thing…

On Jun.24.2010 at 03:18 PM

Alex’s comment is:

No, to all of you who responded. You didn’t get my point. Most fans of the team are going to welcome this throwback look. I understand analysis of corporations, but sports teams are just on another level. It’s not about “conveying emotion, etc.” It’s, in this case, about designing a throwback concept that people will remember and embrace. A sports fan is no going to care about Copperplate Gothic, in other words.

On Jun.24.2010 at 03:52 PM

Brent Morris’s comment is:

I have it from a very reliable/high-up source- that all decisions regarding Uniforms and design come from the NBA and Reebok.

On Jun.24.2010 at 05:31 PM

david e.’s comment is:

This obviously isn’t very good, but I have to say I’m glad to see people are moving away from that ’90s heavy-vector-“woodcut” style of illustration for professional sports logos (you know what I mean, right?). I hope all of those logos are done away with.

On Jun.24.2010 at 05:49 PM

TZ’s comment is:

This reminds me of the 2009 Gatorade logo. The font does not say “athletic” or “moving fast” the font would be better suited on a bank or something of that nature.

Also the basketball is gone, now the logo can mean anything since it is just a bridge for an icon. The icon is nice but does not belong on a sports jersey.

They did manage to exagerate it to look vintage. Maybe too vintage.

On Jun.25.2010 at 01:29 AM

Stephanie’s comment is:

Wow, that video left me underwhelmed, to say the least. The bridge definitely looks like a first round sketch. If this was a student project I’d suggest he go back and try curving the support cables on the bridge some to give it a more sweeping feeling (instead of those stick-straight lines). As for Copperplate, I am of the opinion it should NEVER be used with anything other than a straight base-line. A curved path is just asking for trouble because the letters will never line up properly with how wide and straight they are.

And I didn’t see it right away, but now that some people have mentioned it, I can only see that logo on a banana.

On Jun.25.2010 at 07:37 AM

JDE’s comment is:

I’m neither a designer nor aficionado. I am merely a fan of the team. (Not asking for pity) I have to say I think the new logo is a HUGE step in the right direction over what we have had the past decade.

I see an updated version of The City logo. Team name in simple script, circle logo with a bridge, number inside. Cool.

The problem I have is that this particular version seems incomplete. It seems like an early draft. The idea to use the new Bay Bridge is inspired, but the execution is off. Everything is just off. The perspective of the bridge, the lettering, everything. Off.

But I am thrilled with the concept and hope they fix this. It needs some work from a seasoned, creative professional.

On Jun.25.2010 at 08:28 AM

joel’s comment is:

i’m on board with JDE. as a designer, GSW fan, and Bay Area resident i can truly appreciate the logo (however atrocious the typography is). the logo is a great blend of classic and modern themes, bringing the retro style with the new bridge. everybody keeps railing on the “boring-ness” of the logo, but this is less an intimidating mascot than a symbol of the bay. the one time the Warriors tried to include an actual ‘Warrior’ in the logo was disastrous (though i do have an awesome retro-style t-shirt that shows the warrior as a b.a. Spartan).

and for the folks who said we should go back to ‘The City:’ what since does it make to use a less-dynamic version of the recent re-work with a nickname for San Francisco?

On Jun.25.2010 at 01:18 PM

Jacob Halton’s comment is:

that video is a joke. Any of the past logos look much cooler.

What chump would rather buy this stupid banana bridge on a hat or jacket than any of the older, more awesome logos, the lightning bolt W would look WAAAY cooler on a throwback jersey

On Jun.25.2010 at 05:54 PM

sfaustina’s comment is:

So sad. :( speechless

On Jun.25.2010 at 09:09 PM

Ana’s comment is:

I won’t beat a dead horse about the design. But seriously, does California need another sports team in blue & gold?

On Jun.25.2010 at 10:44 PM

Bill Dawson’s comment is:

OK, this is hideous. Is that supposed to be the Bay Bridge?

I would have thought that the NBA practiced more stringent quality control on the graphic identities of their franchise teams. So much money is made off of team merchandise, that it needs to be commercial and appealing to the base. I see nothing appealing in this logo that would make a new fan want to buy anything bearing the mark.

This mark says nothing about California (The Golden State, in case that’s lost on anyone). It says nothing about Warriors, and it says nothing about basketball. But still, it’s greatest sin? It’s boring.

An utter failure.

On Jun.26.2010 at 03:03 AM

mike s.’s comment is:

Looks more like the logo for a bridge and tunnel authority than a basketball team.

On Jun.26.2010 at 03:28 AM

Rob Loukotka’s comment is:

This is unbelievable.

I’m an avid reader of Brand New, I normally just read the RSS and don’t comment (although I should, I love the voting feature). But this logo commands me to comment.

It’s so terrible, that were you to post that anywhere near April 1st I would have thought it was a joke.

Has anybody identified the company / agency / person responsible for this? There must be a incredibly huge and systemic problem with this team, and the NBA itself to allow this to happen. You’d think somebody somewhere in this process would have begged for this logo not to go public.

Ahh, it’s just really embarrassing. I would not be surprised if this team goes through an entirely new rebranding before next season is over.

Ouch.

On Jun.26.2010 at 07:49 PM

don_draper’s comment is:

You’re roasting this, yet the Orlando Magic get off scot-free for doing much worse?

lol. I miss the days when team owners would get their leggy secretaries to draw the logos. graphic designers, who need ‘em?

And copperplate gothic rules you jealous elves.

On Jun.28.2010 at 11:31 AM

Erika’s comment is:

To top off an uninspired, poorly executed logo, their website was “redesigned” too and scares me even more. http://www.nba.com/warriors/index_main.html

On Jun.28.2010 at 01:34 PM

Ashley Tankersley’s comment is:

Fae Koppinger

On Jun.29.2010 at 09:00 PM

tayf’s comment is:

For a city reknowned for it’s creative.. this is terrible representation. I mean, by all means be inspired with a throw back style but HOLY SHIT COPPERPLATE GOTHIC?? PLEASE

Whatever you don’t visit Erika’s link to copperplateogothica.com, I died.

On Jul.01.2010 at 10:56 AM

BJMRamage’s comment is:

wow, on close views it looks really horrible…sloppy lines awful typograph…

simple and clean but doesn’t have the “fun” of some other sports logos.

bad, very bad.

On Jul.02.2010 at 07:05 AM

JaySticLe’s comment is:

Isn’t Copperplate Gothic the same font that the XFL used? I believe so, and this will be just as successful.

On Jul.04.2010 at 09:58 AM

dmon’s comment is:

other than some of the lines being too thin on the top part of the bridge, I do not agree that the bridge illustration is as bad as everyone else is saying.

On Jul.09.2010 at 04:53 PM

Adam’s comment is:

I follow basketball but I guess I missed this one. The new updated logo I have to agree is horrible, it seems like it lost the little spark and characteristic that it had before.

On Jul.13.2010 at 09:12 AM

james ’s comment is:

To bad they could’nt even come up with there own logo notice the date

http://www.oaklandbrewing.com/

On Jul.13.2010 at 07:53 PM

LED TVs’s comment is:

Examine using cost which i paid,It happens to be nicely whole lot than that,I examine.

On Jul.16.2010 at 07:12 AM

Jeremy R.’s comment is:

Too much Golden State, not enough Warriors. I hear Warriors, look at the logo, and think “Oh look, a bridge.” Obvious references aside, the logo should reflect the team first, and the city second. Hopefully they’ll get a better logo sooner. But I shouldn’t talk…

… I’m a Knicks fan.

On Jul.16.2010 at 03:43 PM

dashante van benshoten(danny fortson)’s comment is:

how is this spose to represent the warriors? it looks horrible! First jamarcuss russel now this

On Jul.16.2010 at 05:13 PM

DJ Mbenga’s comment is:

I like it!

On Jul.16.2010 at 05:15 PM

coco crisp’s comment is:

it reminds me of kosta perovich. Do you remember him? probably not!!!!!!

On Jul.16.2010 at 05:17 PM

Jamarcuss russel’s comment is:

i cant believe what danny fortson said. I just got released and arrested!

On Jul.16.2010 at 05:19 PM

javonn Walker ’s comment is:

Me and Jamarcuss go way back dont mess with him danny! I got released to!

On Jul.16.2010 at 05:22 PM

JT O'sullivan ’s comment is:

stop fighting we should be like DJ Mbenga. P.S. Im a good quarterback!Ryan Leaf helped me be good!

On Jul.16.2010 at 05:29 PM

Gary K’s comment is:

I personally liked generation 8, from 1988 to 1997. It was clean with enough pizzazz with the slanted text.

For this one, with the blue bridge on gold background, your eyes just focus on how it looks like a big “L”, as appropriate as it may be.

On Jul.16.2010 at 07:31 PM

Jason Warth’s comment is:

As a former enthusiast of professional sports logos (the old Milwaukee Brewers “mb” / glove logo is what opened my eyes to the magic of design when I was 4 or 5 years old), I agree that this effort is completely amateurish. I applaud the decision to return to a more classic design, but like many, I find the execution severely lacking.

- leaving aside the choice of typeface, the fact that the method of arrangement (i.e. Illustrator’s type-on-a-path feature) is so apparent that it’s appalling. I don’t object to the notion of an all-digital design process (assuming it leads to great results), but when you can “see” the software in the final design—you’ve failed.

- The choice of Copperplate is so obviously poor that I think it makes more sense to critique the strategy of the typeface selection. I think the branding would be vastly improved with a modern (custom) sans serif. The juxtaposition of that style of type next to the “retro-classic” symbol would provide a nice balance, and would distinguish this branding as “definitively present-day” when compared to the numerous other historical jerseys that the team wears on occasion.

- The offset circle baffles me. It looks atrocious. I noticed that the circle was not offset in the logo that was displayed at the end of the 2nd video, so perhaps there’s hope. I also noticed some 3D shadowing in that version that improved the mark by giving it some depth.

- I have no objection to using the bridge. It makes sense to me. However, the illustration of the bridge is very unsettling. I can’t take my eye off the thinness of the suspension wire. It’s just awful.

- If they gave me (or any skilled designer) 30 minutes to improve this logo, it would be vastly improved, I’m sure.

-J

On Jul.18.2010 at 11:00 AM

PG’s comment is:

Wow, wasn’t expecting so many to hate on this new logo. Is it because the author of the post hates it so everyone feels the need as well? Ha!

Although, it’s not perfect, I love the main mark with the “Bridge”. The retro look works because of how popular those “The City” jerseys are. Too many sports logos now are overly complex and gaudy. There’s a certain charm with those simplistic, sometimes a bit generic, looking logos of past. Coke went retro and back to their roots not long ago so I don’t see how this can’t work. I mean it’s not like the new Warriors mark is poorly drawn, the “Bridge” is rendered pretty cleanly.

Yes, the typeface choice blows and I hate how it wraps around the main mark. The off center blue stroke is also annoying. But I think this is one of my new favorite NBA logos.

On Jul.21.2010 at 12:49 AM

Paul Buller’s comment is:

Didn’t I see this on the side of my banana this morning?

Pro sports logos have always interested me, INCLUDING the retro/old school logos. Sadly, this logo is a dart that missed the board. BUT, a great excuse to sell a ton of new merchandise and create a another new logo within 5 years.

On Jul.22.2010 at 11:54 AM

Mark’s comment is:

I don’t think the bridge is the problem, it’s drawn very nice, it’s the use of the Copperplate Gothic that’s the problem it cheapens the logo.

I could also go without the Chiquita Banana colors, the don’t seem tough and intimidating for a basketball team. Also the name “Warriors”isn’t really depicted here it’s just a bridge.

On Jul.22.2010 at 01:36 PM

Kyle’s comment is:

This is about as weak as the 2009-10 Warriors’ bench.

On Jul.29.2010 at 06:23 PM

legitimate work from home jobs’s comment is:

Thank you for a great post

On Aug.05.2010 at 10:24 AM

linas klieza’s comment is:

it looks like me on a sunday morning

On Aug.17.2010 at 03:54 PM

apoorv palkar’s comment is:

patrick o’bryant says hi to the man who thought this up! go raiders! p.s. doug is the best!

On Aug.17.2010 at 03:59 PM

james roday’s comment is:

this looks like the worst food i have ever eaten! it was not pretty.

On Aug.17.2010 at 04:01 PM

polis treegman lilac inc. ’s comment is:

I love this new look it is amazing who ever came up with this is a genius this is the most glorious thing i have ever seen i think all of the teams in the NBA should wear these jerseys i hope none of the warriors spill any food on it especially milk because it smells bad i hope the warriors love them and don’t drink milk this is as good as tac and the power of juju i highly advise people to watch it even though it’s shut off the air i have all one season oh yeah, also don’t spill coffee on the jerseys because it doesn’t come out in the wash i hope the warriors win the finals against miami because i hate cheeswisps and robots in my dreams juice is good for you so i think that the warriors should drink milk but don’t spill it the waarriors are so grand dj jazzy jeff like burritos and the song well alright just kidding but i love it it’s so catchy in fact i’m singing it now i hope the warriors love it too because i’m making CDs for them as gifts paste is sticky i know because i eat it yesterday ithink there was a hint of citrus in it once i saw a show and there was someone named citrus in it do the warriors like marshmellows because i think they are tangy my cat goog just jumped into the computer she turned virtual they should make a reality show about a kid named malcom being a middle kid oh wait they already did the warriors have class it’s wonderful isn’t it if the warriors left golden state i would be chewing celery which also tastes tangy and has a hint of citrus we have all learned many valuable lessons in friendship but the biggest lesson that we’ve learned through this letter (i think we all can agree on) is to never ever put stamps on the mail man’s nose and not Karl Malone i have learned my lesson and you reader shall too and as i conclude this letter i have three last words in a musical tone and they are: everybody hates chris

On Aug.17.2010 at 04:41 PM

John Millarr’s comment is:

who on earth just wrote the comment above mine? it doesn’t even make sense. about the logo- bad.

On Aug.18.2010 at 03:24 PM

devin vinnaterri’s comment is:

this logo is far out man… far out.

On Aug.18.2010 at 03:30 PM

sam henkins’s comment is:

this logo is neat it reminds me of the warriors logo

On Aug.18.2010 at 03:33 PM

kirk callahan’s comment is:

wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On Aug.18.2010 at 03:38 PM

the bruder bunch’s comment is:

logo bad. when are the sonics coming back? and when is kosta perovich coming back?

On Aug.18.2010 at 03:42 PM