The Vancouver Whitecaps MLS Logo: Losing History
Whereas a storm of controversy has followed the unveiling of the Portland Timbers MLS logo (a subject we will return to this week), the Vancouver Whitecaps identity shift in their MLS expansion team branding did not make much of a ruffle when it was also announced recently. This is somewhat surprising, because the Whitecaps actually showed even less interest in paying homage to the club’s history in its other incarnations with the same team name than Portland did (albeit, the Timbers did it in a cack-handed way).
The MLS Whitecaps are trying to tie in their identity to the history of the Whitecaps in Vancouver, most notably to the NASL-era Whitecaps from 1974 to 1984, including their 1979 championship. So, on the back of Vancouver’s MLS jersey it reads “Since 1974″. And the Whitecaps news release on the logo unveiling said the following:
The new brand and logo, which will be used throughout the club come November 2010, draws its inspiration from the spectacular geography of Western Canada’s largest city, as well as the club’s long tradition of success. The new brand will see Whitecaps FC continue their long tradition of using white as one of their primary colours, while the club have also incorporated the colour of ‘deep sea’ blue as a reflection of Vancouver’s natural landscape.
At Brand New, a design blog, the verdict on the new logo is positive, comparing it favourably to its immediate predecessor, the current USSF D-II Whitecaps’ logo:
This is a very welcome change, as the old logo looked like a whitewater rafting attraction you would find somewhere in an interstate; it’s really amazing they sold any merchandise with that silly thing. In contrast, the new logo is no nonsense and it screams “don’t mess with me.” It’s actually a surprisingly hard-edged logo in this era of bubbly friendliness, almost leaving without points of comparison. But once you get past that initial reaction to the change, the logo is a little dull and not too sophisticated. It feels as if it needed one more round of refinement to make the typography sit a little more comfortable in those spaces, or make the mountains a little more interesting beyond just repeating the same shape six times.
On a more positive light, it wants to look like an international soccer team crest, and that’s not a bad thing to strive for.
There’s no doubt the current USSF D-II team’s logo was a cartoonish travesty that completely failed as an update to the Whitecaps classic NASL logo. But maybe the actual point of comparison should be that 1979 incarnation, a very good piece of design-work, and it’s somewhat surprising the new MLS logo is such a radical departure from it, especially given the team is trumpeting its connection to that team’s identity and success.
That 1979 logo replaced the original logo for the Whitecaps from their first season in the NASL in 1974, an effort that tied the club much more into country than city:
The 1979 change was a radical one, but one that made sense for the team’s local identity.
“With all logos, they tend to evolve over a period of time,” said Paul Barber, the Whitecaps CEO. But the new Whitecaps logo really stretches the concept of evolution, and does not succeed as a revolutionary change, either. The new logo is a radical re-conceptualisation of the club’s identity that loses the warmth of the 1979 version that was still present even in the USSF D-II club’s poor logo. There may be a formal tie to the whitecap waves that dominated the classic 1979 logo in the new logo with the blues and the bottom half of the logo perhaps evoking waves, but in terms of style, it’s a complete reversal: angular, jagged, cold and sterile are the feelings the 2011 MLS logo evokes in me. It does not evoke anything of the history of the club or its previous success.
To illustrate our point, let’s look at them together side-by-side:
The Whitecapsfan blog makes much the same point about the coldness of the logo and its departure from the club’s past identity:
The City of Vancouver has an odd relationship with sporting tradition. Perhaps it is because we are living on the West Coast that we demand constant change and newness. Look at the Vancouver Canucks for instance. They joined the NHL back in 1970 with a great uniform. The colours were great, the logo was great, but it was deemed not good enough. Subsequently there have been so many changes to the look of the Vancouver Canucks it makes your head spin and you wonder which team you are really watching. It gives the Canucks a sense of impermanence and weakness other NHL teams like the Boston Bruins or the Montreal Canadians simply don’t have.
The Vancouver Whitecaps acted accordingly today, largely dispensing with tradition. There is no wave and no soccer ball to be found in the new logo, just a cold geometric pattern (the logo consists of three diamond shapes: one large and two smaller, with the name Vancouver Whitecaps FC written in the middle). There really is no love or affection in the image. There are no organic forms. It reminds me of going to the art gallery and seeing a cold geometric piece of modern art. It is utterly humorless, and completely lacking in charm. It has the same emotional appeal as the Hamburg FC logo: austere and geometric. It must have been designed by someone with German ancestry… It makes me feel as though we are not joining Major League Soccer, but the German Bundesliga!
The logo is meant to reflect the North Shore mountains and their reflection in the ocean, but does so in such a cold geometric manner that it fails to capture the organic beauty of our city. It is too corporate, like an automobile company logo, and does not contain the love of our club. I far prefer the Seattle Sounders Logo, which more accurately reflects a familiar attraction of Seattle’s skyline. There is charm, humour and love there.
This, for point of comparison, is the Hamburg logo mentioned:
Welcome to the world of cold and sterile logos, MLS Vancouver Whitecaps.
Being new to the design world and a soccer fan for much longer, I feel somewhat untethered the traditional view of what good design should be in the sport…. at least apart from the corporate branding gurus think it should look like (which is almost always hamfisted and ridiculous.) I actually felt like Vancouver’s effort was far more corporate and logo-ish than Portland’s, no matter the fury. It looks like a rejected design from the Winter Games, and less like a badge.
The 90′s badge is an abomination, an example of that time when everyone tried to appeal to the kiddies. Don’t even get me started on the Sounders USL logo. It’ll put me on suicide watch. Look Johnny, an Orca playing soccer with a 70′s ball. Isn’t that rad? Thank God they couldn’t work an “X” into the name.
On the other hand, I don’t understand the need to depict a wave or a soccer ball in the logo at all. You could make a fine looking badge that represents the city, BC, and all it’s interesting history. The nickname need not be involved at all, in fact it’d be hard to do so without being cheesy. For example, the Space Needle is the prominent element in the Sounders badge, with the blue representing the Sound (not that I’m a huge fan of that effort either. It rates a “meh.”)
The original cresting wave should be part of the design – period.
But what’s worse than what happened with the logo is what happened to the jersey. A single blue hoop on white is unique. A white jersey is generic.
These are two branding opportunities lost.
The Timbers muffed it a little bit. They should have at least had a contest or something. But the ‘caps… wow. It looks like they’re saying the “white caps” are mountain peaks instead of waves now. It looks like a Colorado Avalanche jersey, or better yet, the Colorado Rockies NHL team from the 70s.
http://boards.sportslogos.net/index.php?showtopic=73610&view=findpost&p=1345353
“One thing that I did want to touch on, was the wave that is present in our current logo and the 1979 logo. This was a point of contention for me and I pushed to have it not included in the new logo. The primary reason is that we do not have that type of ‘surfing’ wave in Vancouver. As a result, the whitecaps in the ocean are at the crest of ‘chops’, which are sort of mini-waves created by wind. The wave in our previous logos always seemed out of place, like they belonged on a team on the California coast somewhere. As a result, our new logo was an attempt to get back to the true meaning of the name of the club – so whitecapped mountains and water, and no giant wave.”
I liked Vancouver’s new identity before, but think this is a reasonable explanation for the shift.
Interesting explanation, thanks for the find. But it still seems chilling, and more of an excuse (if a well-made one) to cut something out that didn’t fit the ‘brand’ they want – blue=water, so it’s OK to remove the wave?
The identity of the club is tied to that wave going back to 1979, like it or not. I just don’t really appreciate this current fad for trying to attach a team’s identity to the past but doing it in such a selective manner (see Timbers, Portland).
I guess the wave just doesn’t register for me as “iconic” in the way the Timbers’ axe does. Vancouver’s had many more logo changes (and a name change) over that timeframe, and as was pointed out the original intent of the name was to reflect both the mountains and water. The new icon is representative of both aspects (if in a minimal sort of way) but the name is the real icon in Vancouver.
I’m sure there may have been a more effective graphic solution out there but that’s always the case. Maybe a secondary mark with a altered wave could be developed.
Superb article. I was more offended by the uniform than by the Logo, but I find the new logo is a far inferior product to the iconic 1979 logo. Ryan McKee’s explanation for the change to the wave is simply unbelievable and is indicative of the current Whitecaps staff and their ignorance of club history. There is no excuse for such poor taste! Time to fire the staffers who came up with these abominations.
Bring back the 1979 logo and uniform I say!
Just a few responses. The Whitecaps name always referred to both the white mountain caps, and the crest of ocean waves. Vancouver (as the Whitecaps) hasn’t had many logo changes as JL Murtaugh implies. The original one in 1974, the new logo in1979, and that abomination in 2001 (not the 90s as mentioned in a comment above). I’m quite sure the 2001 abomination was created to reflect that the club was minor league-and it looked it.
Ryan McKee’s explanation is official Whitecaps spin, I’ve heard the exact explanation of them not wanting the “surfing wave” on another site by a different member of the Whitecaps staff. The explanation is ridiculous. Who says that the 79 logo wave is a huge surfing wave? it could easily be, as I’ve always believed it to be, a foot high wave on a windy day with a little white crest on the top. Anyone watching any of the local newscasts last night from the beaches of Vancouver could see them out on the water in the background. They really should come up with better spin, that one doesn’t hold water-pun intended.
The most offensive thing about the new uniform on the other hand, is it’s price. Fans are supposed to pony up $120 for a chance to advertise for Bell Canada?
Astute article. The Whitecaps re-brand has left a bad taste in my mouth and says a lot about the way in which modern sports clubs work. I have a place in my heart for the original ’79 logo, and hoped against hope that the MLS club wouldn’t screw it up too badly. They did worse, really. I guess it speaks to just how far modern clubs have bought the ‘consulting’ and ‘marketing’ theories hook, line, and sinker. The simple, organic and truly representative nature of the ’79 logo was no longer a possibility in the club/corporation/marketing tie-in. Pretty tragic way to present yourself to the great sea of unwashed i.e. new fans. When you bury your history, you are left with a very hollow result.
I’ll never understand people who think that the old and original is somehow best. The new brand is just fine. It’s distinct, recognizable, and stylish. That’s all it needs to be. The old brands are just that, OLD.
The original wasn’t the best. The original was the red/white ’74-’78 logo. Fans like the ’79-’84 set-up because it was one of those few, truly representative logos that provided a link to a club that achieved great things in Vancouver. If the idea was to completely divorce the club from its roots/traditions, why not call them the Vancouver whateverthehells and just be done with it. Buying back the Whitecaps name in 2000 was done to re-connect the club with the past. Coming up with a bottled water logo in 2010 for the club has been a huge mis-step. We’re not some new entity joining MLS in a sense because we’ve had a long history, and this is but the latest chapter.
Yes, yes, a thousand times yes.
From a NY-based ‘Caps supporter who was there when they won the Soccer Bowl.
I wonder if the NASL style ball had something to do with them moving away from the 79-84 logo. Maybe the starry ball is a registered trademark somewhere.
I can see how the new logo may come off as a little cold, but at least it was an improvement over the carnival attraction looking logo they had before.
On a side note, since we’re talking about logos and whatnot, am I the only one who think the American/Canadian flags on the left arm are a little too much? Don’t get me wrong, I’m no traitor. But, I just think it would be better to leave that space up for something else. I vote for the Chicago flag for the Fire.
Think the caps should stick with the old logo’s , very identifable trademark in vancouver.
Should also scrap the idea of a water front stadium and move back to the old PNE grounds
where currently there is a temporary stadium called New Empire stadium.
Same location as old empire stadium , same orientation , just a great location for many reasons.
BC LIONS are playing there while they renovate BC Place and attendance is abundant just like the old days.
There is a reason for this , most of the people who want to attend the whitecaps and lions games aren’t from Vancouver. They are from the basket of minor soccer and football communities that lie as far away as 100km
east of the city.
The commuting logistics and history I might add are that when the fad of a new BC Place STADIUM wore off , very few of the fans from the outlying communities wanted to enjoy the grid lock of 1 st ave to commute to BC PLACE.
Attendance plummeted.
The logistics of the old PNE Empire stadium grounds is THAT it’s 5 minutes off the freeway which makes for a quick entry and exit for anyone wanting to attend CFL or MLS games.
Attendance will struggle eventually at the BC PLACE location , AGAIN , markedly affecting interest in the teams which ultimately means poor attendance.
Regarding the old NASL SOCCER BALL recieved AN e-mail about inquiry I made to people who hold the NASL trademark and apparently the new NASL , HAS A PROTOTYPE RETRO STYLE BALL BEING DEVELOPED for heritage nights and what not. GOOD ON THE NASL , HOT SELLER!!
Nice post. +1
i like this post,, thanks.
Cool logos. Thanks for sharing history in making.
It’s a great example of how important it is to trust such things as sports logos to professionals. This could help to avoid such results.
Cold and sterile? The Hamburg logo is the hottest one by far. It screams of fervor, focus, and devotion to a perpetual immanence. All of the Vancouver logos are muppet babies in comparison.