That Whitecaps Logo, in Full (plus: Minor FC Edmonton News)
It's simple. It's annoyingly "representative": the mountains I can see, but the bits of the water are supposed to be waves? It looks like two Umbro logos tipped on their sides like Coke machines in a high school. The colours are weird, and it's hard to imagine how it'll look on an actual uniform. It is such a huge departure from anything the Whitecaps or 86ers have ever had that it forfeits twenty-four years of iconographic legacy.
I think it's terrific. Look at that thing! The trend in North American soccer lately appears to be towards simple, unambitious logos: witness AC St. Louis, the Philadelphia Union, etc. I think this is the greatest trend of all time. If Real Salt Lake changed their name, MLS would actually look and sound classier than half the leagues in Europe.
In truth, I like it better than the current logo. I feared I'd be alone in this because it's such a radical departure, but the reaction on the Southsiders forum is almost universally in favour and even the Twittersphere is approving. The old spit-curl-wave logo wasn't particularly beloved among the fandom (the point of the shield was off-center! You have no idea how much that has fucked me up over the years!) and by disclaiming ambition and shoving-in-every-possible-symbol disease, this logo attains a certain timeless elegance.
If I could change one thing, I might scrub the 'Vancouver' and the 'FC'. It's the 'FC' I particularly dislike - we know you're a football club, guys; no hockey team could pull off a logo like that. And you'd have to kill the 'Vancouver' in the name of balance. Just 'WHITECAPS' in big white letters. Yessss. Although that would run the risk of making it look like the icon for a construction company.
Speaking of construction companies, and on an entirely unrelated note, FC Edmonton unveiled their full slate of ticket prices today. The domestic friendly prices are unchanged from what I previously reported, and an end-zone seat at Commonwealth for the premiere international friendlies will set you back $25. Have you ever watched a soccer game from the end-zones at Commonwealth? I cannot physically describe to you how much I don't recommend it. For a seat you can actually watch a soccer game from, you're laying out $35. That's a lot of pie.
They're setting major-league prices for what is, so far, minor-league talent getting stomped into the FieldTurf by more illustrious adversaries. It would be nice to see Portsmouth or Colo-Colo, of course, if you were a soccer-starved Edmontonian. But if the fan pays $35 to see the famous team, watches the famous team win 6-0 over an overwhelmed FC Edmonton, and then is asked to shell out for season tickets the next year... that can't be a good start, can it?
3 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I’ve watched a few games from the end zone in Commonwealth. The famous friendly with Brazil just before USA ‘94 for one, and a couple of World Cup (dis)qualifiers as well. Normally I love the end zone, soccer or hockey, because it allows you to see the breadth of the play and affords two different views of the teams, one coming one going. Of course, I’m an ex-goalie in both sports. But in Commonwealth, yecch! There’s the Canadian football end zone which is 20 yards deep, and curling behind that is full width of the track, so if you’re sitting any number of rows back you’re 40 or 50 yards from the near goal line.
Twenty-five bucks? Wow.
by Bruce on Jun 8, 2010 3:02 PM PDT reply actions
I think that the “waves” underneath are actually supposed to be the reflection of the mountains in the water. I like it, but I’m still a huge fan of the old coat of arms for football clubs. But I guess those were probably around before the teams were. Does Vancouver have some kind of a coat of arms? I know my town does. But as is, I think it’s a good comprimise.
by chrsfrsn on Jun 8, 2010 8:24 PM PDT reply actions
I think the ‘waves’ at the bottom are actually a ‘V’ and a ‘W’ with the W missing the middle point, stuck behind the V if you know what i mean
by Steve on Jun 10, 2010 11:01 AM PDT reply actions

by 





