I'm a bit baffled as to why any of our fans wouldn't want our club name on the shirt. Especially enough to bother arguing about it.
There was also an interview with Curtis Davies last night on talk sport with Danny Murphy. Curtis elevated his status even further IMHO - he spoke really well. Worth having a listen.
Exactly Kemps. It's even as simple and straight forward as that. Though it's the work of a visionary to have no name, apparently.
You are always right of course. No point in having any debate or discussion on any topic is there? Not having the name on it means very little beyond the supporter base.
I think it's down to people arguing with the same people, no matter what the subject. It happens a lot on here and it actually voids any debate.
That's precisely the point though mate, can't you see that? How can we possibly attract supporters and grow band awareness if half the time people have no idea what team we are.
Aye...in hindsight I edited my post to mention that fact And yes - Curtis is a very intelligent footballer and one senses that his understanding of the psychology of how to motivate players is of paramount importance. I reckon he would make an excellent manager one day.
From the stands, with my eyesight I can hardly read the numbers on the back of the shirt, let alone the name on the badge. But name or no name, it has never affected me enjoying a game !!!
I've been doing this since the early 80's, I've operated over a dozen brands in that time, most started from scratch, others were licensing agreements of which Lambretta is obviously the most well known, but that didn't start until 1997. My experience also comes from doing business in this field for 35 years, that doesn't just involve what I've seen happen with my own brands, but what I've experienced in the business as a whole. Just as anyone in any field has a much wider understanding of the business they're in, than only their own business. I'll give you an example of one of the most recognisable logo's in the world. In 1971 Nike launched the swoosh logo and they spent a fortune promoting the brand and the logo, by 1980 they had 50% of the US sport shoe market and were rapidly expanding around the world. By the end of the 80's they were massive, one of the top two sportswear brands in the world, with an enormous marketing spend on advertising and sponsorship, yet even they would not use the swoosh logo without the word Nike until 1995. To cease using the brand name alongside the logo, you need the logo to be a brand in it's own right and that takes decades of success, we're nowhere near being in that position and that's why it's a mistake. This has all got a bit narrow and has all been centred on the badge, but the badge is obviously just symptomatic of a bigger problem with the branding of the club as a whole, something that I hope will be addressed by the new owners.
I never said we shouldn't have our name on. I would reinstate the old badge. As for the current one just a tiger's head would, in my opinion, be preferable with nothing on it least of all badly spaced figures.
Every football league team has one - see below quiz (which is also quite fun) http://www.sporcle.com/games/g/footballleague_nicknames
The key question for me is - what does removing the club name achieve? Save for making a spiteful old twat happy, that is.
They pay about 25% of the going rate, and that's if I'm being generous to them. It's actually more like 15-20%.
Guess for a few years it'd be a passion project. If I was good at what I did and could afford to I'd probably be happy to work for them if I could help them progress.
