They Command No Respect

 

As anticipated, the NFL's Washington Football Team unveiled their new mascot and logo on February 2. After 18 months of contemplation, a year and a half of brainstorming and vetting ideas, the big brains within the Washington Football Club committed to....

The Commanders

At this point, everyone on Twitter has made the same jokes. But I'm going to put them here too, because they're funny, and this mascot is lame. For starters, team names often have shortened nicknames. The Patriots are known as the Pats, the Packers are called the Pack, the Cavaliers are known as the Cavs, etc, etc. The Commanders...  wearing maroon... The Commies is just too easy!

Also, a name like Commanders is going to invoke allusions to other things....  like commanding organizational skills....

I guess it is an Organized Sport...

Even better than a cheap hook joke, most Gen Xers, and elder Millennials will more than likely make the GI Joe comparison...

Anyway...  I obviously think this choice is a joke. But apparently, I'm not alone. The Washington Post conducted a survey between February 2 and the 14th. As you can see below, fans who like or love the new name account for only 41%. Negative Opinions add up to 49%, and if you include "no opinion" as being apathetic and therefore also negative, that equals 60% of all polled. In addition, it appears most fans would have preferred remaining the Washington Football Team, which was the placeholder name until they came up with a new one. 

Interest level	Percentage points
Love	5%
Like	36%
Dislike	32%
Hate	17%
No Opinion	11%

Team name	Percentage points
Washington Football Team	43%
Commanders	26%
Redskins	22%
Other	5%
No opinion	5%

It seems this franchise can't get a break. But then again, all these investigations into office conduct doesn't really make me sympathetic. In addition to lukewarm response to their new name, the team has also been called out for their new logo (shown above). Apparently they trademarked the dates for the Superbowls, not the championship season. This sounds like semantics (and it is) but the Superbowl played in Febuary of 1983 was for a season mostly played in 1982. This article explains the issue, and its pretty funny, because its such a stupid problem to have. 

At least they are no longer clinging to their old mascot and nickname. And I think most of us can agree on that. And perhaps all these issues they're having now is just karma earned from decades of propping up a racist slur. 

The Spiders are Dead, Long Live the Guardians

 I post an awful lot about Indian mascots. Last Winter I posted about Cleveland Baseball's decision to drop their racist name and search for a new one. Well... search they did, and they found one. Please welcome the new Cleveland mascot, the .... 

At first it seems pretty lame. If you remember, before the Indians, Cleveland's baseball team was the Spiders. There was plenty of speculation the franchise would go back to the Spiders moniker. Instead they chose this nonsense. It sounds awkward. 

I looked into it though. It makes sense for Cleveland. Way more sense than using a Native mascot. In 1932, Henry Herring and Frank Walker built a bridge across the Cuyahoga River. The bridge itself isn't very memorable, but at the ends stand four giant statues. These statues represent the progress of transportation, and each hold a mode of transportation representing that progress, from hay wagon to automobile. 

These statues are known as the Guardians of Transportation. And there you have it.... the Cleveland baseball team has officially partnered with the Ohio Department of Transportation.  

The Indians are Dead, Long Live the Spiders

 

Last week, The Cleveland Baseball Franchise released the above statement. The New York Times broke the story that a name change would be announced the day before, and on December 14th, there it was. 

2020 was an incredibly awful year, but for the Change the Mascot organization that has been battling to leave old native themed sports mascots in the past, this year has been a huge success. Since the 70s this movement has been successful in changing mascots at the grade school and collegiate level, and in minor and semi pro leagues. Professional league teams, though, have resisted. 

Something changed this year, making the previously improbable finally a reality. The worst professional league offender, the Washington Redskins, retired the name and logo. They changed to the classy, simple Washington Football Team, and started using a wordmark instead of an Indianhead. And now, following suit, the Cleveland Indians, one of the oldest American baseball teams, using the same name for 105 years, has decided to change. 

This shouldn't be a huge surprise. Cleveland has been making strides in the last few years to move to this obvious conclusion. They retired their racist caricature mascot Chief Wahoo in 2018. However, like the mascot, the Indian name will survive for one more year, the 2021 season being its last. And the franchise will undoubtedly hold onto the trademark as long as possible by releasing Indians imprinted merchandise periodically. I wouldn't be so concerned about this. It's a business decision, and in a year, the franchise will be rebranded and busy peddling their new rebranded merchandise. 

Speaking of that... I hear the franchise may be planning on resurrecting the mascot from a Cleveland precursor franchise. The Spiders could be the second arthropod mascot of a major league team, after the Charlotte Hornets. University of Richmond might be pissed. 

A cause for celebration, surely, even though the Indians could have done as Washington did, and discontinue use immediately. Instead they will wait an entire season. Below is an article from the Washington DC ABC affiliate, which showcases reaction tweets from Indian fans. Some are uplifting and supportive, and some are disappointedly not. 

Thanks for the Memories

I posted about the State of Maine banning American Indian mascots entirely, in name and symbol. Apparently this is the first state to do so, following California's partial ban that targeted the name Redskins exclusively.

Following this event, a middle school in Ohio is also contemplating a name change. While this is not that eventful on its own, I think the coverage is interesting. The masthead above has the link (click it). Also, linked here....

The school appears to be moving in the right direction, but, like with all institutions fearing public backlash, they're being cautious and seeking public opinion first by survey. Apparently majority consensus determines wrong or right. Imagine Lincoln issuing a survey before signing the Emancipation Proclamation.

The story tries to show both sides of the issue. Predictably, the reasons for keeping the mascot are limited to tradition, keeping it "just for the memories". Nostalgia isn't a reason to even have a mascot to begin with. Keep in mind, this particular story involves a middle school, not a high school or university, or professional club.

There are younger people interviewed expressing need for change, and of course, older people who want the mascot to stay. All people interviewed are beyond Middle School age, by the way, and one woman is 71 years old. I wonder what actual middle school students think about the issue. I know, it's a crazy idea, asking the group most affected by this symbol (even if they're affected at all).

Hopefully, the White Oak middle school, and the City of Cincinnati will do the right thing.

Some ideas for the future....

Cincinnati has several nicknames, some more old school than others. But... Queen City, Blue Chip City, and Porkopolis can lend themselves to some pretty cool mascot ideas.

School Mascots derived from Porkopolis would be the most fun
https://www.designevo.com/create/logos/pig.html

Racists Ruin Everything

This post may get whiny real quick. But, it is something I've been thinking about for a while, and watching unfold in real time. White Nationalism/Supremacy and Neo-Nazis are co-opting whatever cultural heritage I have, and it sucks.

Growing up, for lack of better information, I thought I was half German, and equal remaining parts Irish, Scottish and English. Turns out, I'm mostly German, maybe a bit Polish, and also smaller equal bits Irish, Scottish and English. So, really, from the start, this confrontation with the bad sides of my cultural make-up should have been foreseen.

seems like a natural friendship

What exactly am I talking about? White Supremacy, obviously, and specifically, all the crazy propaganda and symbolism. Hate groups, specifically white racist hate groups, love symbolism. They fly them on flags, and get them tattooed. Most of the iconography these groups use are linked directly to the Third Reich, or are specific to the Klan, which can easily be avoided. But they also like to co-opt a narrow set of culturally specific iconography, most of which just happens to also be mine.

Pretty obviously, anything German, or Germanic related has already been discovered, and reimagined by supremacy groups, mostly by Hitler's Nazis. White Supremacists are fond of Norse and Germanic runic symbols, and Crusader-era crosses. I am not Scandinavian, but a lot of the Norse imagery used by these groups is shared by Germanic people. Anyone would be hard-pressed to find anything Germanic that hasn't been used or utilized in one way or another by one or more hate groups. Even the part of me that may be Polish isn't immune. There are Polish Nationalist groups out there, and Poles and Germans do share ancient history, and a fascination with eagle logos. The Anti-Defamation League has a long annotated list of Hate Symbols here.

even this unofficial football logo is suspect

Speaking of Germanic/Norse imagery, there is nothing White Supremacy loves to do more than pine for the good old days when Europeans lived like kings in "racially pure" times. The times when waging wars against the evil Muslims in the Holy Land was a cultural past time, and everyone north  and west of the Mediterranean needed lots of sunblock. The Middle Ages is right in the white supremacy wheelhouse. There are plenty of articles out there about the struggles Medieval Studies is having with white supremacy, like this one from The Chronicle of Higher Education. But, they also like to go even further back... before Christianity gobbled up Europe and consolidated the cultures. Before Christians and Crusades, before the Romans even, there were Celts.

The Celts, if you hadn't ever taken a European history class, are this Iron Age (800-450 BC) cultural group that spanned Europe from the Urals (Russia) to the Iberian Pennisula (Spain). By the first century AD, the Celts were absorbed by, or pushed further west by Romans and Germanic tribes. The last remnants of this culture that used to span Europe exist within Irish, Scottish, Welsh, and Brittanic culture groups, and even then it barely lives on through language.

However, White Supremacy groups view the Celts as the mythical Aryan master race, which was a theory highly prized by Hitler's Nazi party, and therefore by all descendant Neo-Nazi ideologues. Aryan, a word used for other culture groups from the Indian sub-continent, had been used by Freidrich Max Muller, and later Arthur Gobineau, and Charles Morris. But this "Aryan" race probably never existed, and are early terms created to explain ancient culture shifts. Modern and contemporary Archaeology names early proto-cultures very differently.

Regardless of historical truth, these racist groups use Celtic imagery also. In addition to all of the other stuff, Celtic knots and Irish crosses also have been taken by the White Supremacists.
Sierra Lumota at the University of Pennsylvania wrote about her experiences with the National Policy Institute here, which includes a bit about a tattoo artist specializing in Celtic imagery.

So... here I am, a white dude in the United States, a country with its own history of racist icons, Nazi sympathizers, and White Nationalist fervor, unable to enjoy, or display any cool cultural symbolism without worrying that I may be confused for these other hate groups.

I just want to be Knotty

I have no desire to belong to or be associated with these die hard ideologues that believe in half-truths, mythologized histories, and hate-filled rhetoric. I wish they'd picked someone else's cultural groups when cherry picking their iconography.

Parodies Piss Off Racists

The other day Frederick Joseph, a Manhattan area activist, went out wearing a Washington football team parody t-shirt. Instead of the Indian head mascot, the logo featured the bust of a white dude with the term "caucasians" underneath instead of the actual team name. He documented it on instagram and twitter.

Joseph's interactions with the public were actually not that surprising. He said himself, the reactions were disappointing, but not unexpected. Sports fandom can be pretty rabid and nonsensical to start with, but the backlash to Colin Kaepernick and the whole national anthem craziness doesn't make rude, obnoxious and ignorant responses to such a subtle parody shocking. You can read all about this public opinion experiment on several news outlets, including The Washington Post, USA Today, Yahoo Sports, YouTube and many others.

Predictably, Washington fans lept to defend themselves. Joseph pointed out a particular poll was cited as evidence that 9 out of 10 American Indians polled think the current mascot name is okay. I posted about this poll before. Joseph points out the poll was debunked by The Nation, and Joe Rosenstein wrote about the dubious poll for the Huffington Post as well. It took me a while to track down these articles, after searching for terms such as "Redskins Poll Debunked", or "false Redskins poll" or other similar phrases. The results were dominated by the original press releases by the Post and CBS, and even ESPN celebrating the original Washington Post poll.

These articles confirmed my earlier suspicions of foul play. It is a bit of a coincidence that the Washington Post, which covers Washington football, conducted and published the poll. But also, the poll, done by telephone, only polled 504 people claiming to be Native, without any sort of background check, or confirmation of actual Indian status. This highly publicized poll attempts to counter similar polls and studies done across the country by various other civil rights groups, and universities.

Once again, it seems that a false or misleading narrative has garnered the loudest, most easily found voice on this subject. The good news is change will come. The right people, in the right places are agreeing with these sentiments. California banned Indian mascots from all high school athletic departments. Lord Jeff is no longer the unofficial mascot at Amherst College. The Laughing Brave and Chief Wahoo are no longer part of the Braves or Indians marketing. These are big strides, and the end game will be a Washington football namechange. It's coming, patience. 

Purple Hairy Elephants!

Awhile ago, I wrote about Amherst College, and their recently solved dilemma regarding their problematic namesake, Lord Jeffery Amherst. The college had publicly severed ties with the unofficial mascot, and adopted their first official mascot, the mammoth.

On October 20, 2017, they announced their official mascot design/logo. It's pretty cool. I posted it below. This is a follow up to this blog post right here.

The Mighty Mighty Arabs

I have become invested in mascot name changes for a while now. I've posted about this before a few times, mostly in reference to The Washington Football Team. Recently, a high school in upstate New York has decided to change their 68 year old Redskins name to the Legends (apparently, a legend is a Knight). 

Good for them. It's always nice to see a group of people choose to do the right thing, even though moving away from tradition is difficult. Al Jazeera reported on this in their article here. An eighth grade girl chose the new logo and name and unveiled her winning designs at a town meeting. 

Of course there are opponents of the name change. Nothing is ever easy, apparently. And of course these people oppose the new mascot for the same old and tired reasons. Why should they turn their backs on 68 years of tradition? They apparently had no problems turning their backs quite literally on the 13 year old designer during the town meeting. The president of the town council was interviewed by local television and expressed his disappointment with these people. The news coverage is below. 

Apparently these proud Lancaster people who just want to hold on to their heritage turned the meeting into an ugly display, as reported by the Buffalo News. Some of them thought it appropriate to yell "Heil Hitler", which I don't understand. Are they being supportive of Nazis, or calling the council Nazis? Either way I don't get it. Nazis were all about using offensive and demeaning iconography, but why would you want to bring that up? It doesn't help your argument. And calling the council Nazis makes no sense. They are changing the mascot to be more inclusive and neutral, not because they are fascists who believe in a super race.  



 
In other name changing news, my favorite "accidentally racist" mascot received a makeover the other day. Coachella Valley has officially changed their name from the Arabs to the Mighty Arabs, and updated their logo from cartoonishly offensive to slightly more dignified. Al Jazeera reported about this too. The logo has been replaced, and the mascot and similar iconography removed. However, it's a pity they will no longer be belly dancing on sidelines. 

As an aside, the State of California has declared the Redskins mascot to be banned in the state as of 2017. I'm sure opponents of this are declaring that their state is targeting the four schools in the entire state that use the mascot. But... that's exactly what's going on. 

The superintendent of Coachella Valley said something truly important about his mascot change, something that opponents don't seem to realize or care about. He said the decision was easy for his school district because communities need to "forever keep our eyes, ears, and hearts open to the feelings of others even when no disrespect or harm is intended."

Did it Eat the Basketball? Charlotte Part two

The Charlotte NBA basketball team recently petitioned to rename their team the Hornets, after a team that played there in the '90s but had since moved to New Orleans.  The New Orleans club abandoned the Hornets name and colors before this season.  Since the Hornet mascot is unused, and far more suited for a team in the famous Hornets Nest of the American Revolution, the club was granted the requested rebranding.

Next of course came debates about what the new rebrand would look like.  The club chose to use colors from the past (teal and purple), but there had been no consensus as to the logo.  I wrote about concepts in an earlier post, which took research of the highest caliber.  I came out of that surprised to discover how many people were fond of (truly loved) the old "Hugo" logo.  In my opinion it may actually be the worst logo in modern sports (the last 30 years).  It is a minor league mascot at best, a cartoon worthy of the Kid's Corner fan club, and yet it was the primary logo of two major sports clubs.  So, I am happy to see it (finally) retired, and relegated to throwback nights and nostalgic fans.

The other day, the Charlotte Bobcat/Hornets released their new primary logo, which is below.  While it is definitely an improvement over Hugo, it is still pretty frustrating.  I'm sure seeing it for yourself will tell you why.  Also, the title of this post is a pretty good clue.  According to press releases that accompanied the release of the logos, the club seemed pretty committed to not only including a basketball into the logo, but making said basketball part of the insect.

primary

secondary logo

mascot logo

Back to Charlotte

 To expand on my other logo design posts, the Charlotte Bobcats (i.e. worst expansion team in the history of the NBA) will be allowed to change their name to the Hornets after this season, as that name was abandoned by the New Orleans club.  This makes perfect sense for a team that has struggled for identity since it's debut in 2004.  The original Hornets franchise left Charlotte in 2002 for New Orleans, and although the city of Charlotte was awarded a new franchise, the fan base hasn't been the same.

So, the Hornets will return to Charlotte next year.  The club has already pledged to bring back the original teal and purple colors.  The question I have is whether the club will use a new logo, or just bring back the old cartoon logo used by the original Charlotte Hornets, and then by the New Orleans Hornets.  Just in case everyone forgot... the old logo looks like this:

The hornet's name is Hugo, and he looks a little jittery.  Too many sodas, perhaps?  I hate logos like this for professional teams.  It's the mascot.  The Red Sox don't have a picture of Wally the Green Monster as a primary logo.  Minor league teams have cartoony logos like this.  Worst logo in NBA history?  probably.  I'm glad it's currently retired.  

Here are some concepts that I consider far more respectable and professional for a major league club: 

vote here

a more abstract hornet that has more of an insect-like vibe as opposed to a saturday morning disney cartoon from thje '90s feel.  This one also alludes to a representation of the basketball without actually showing a basketball.

source

This is part of a concept that promotes the use of the old logo as a primary, and this logo as a secondary, and patch.  However, I think it would do nicely as a primary.  It bridges the old Bobcats identity with the new Hornets rename and colors.  

full concept

Hornets are pretty difficult for designers to do without looking like comic books, apparently.  But if the club really felt it necessary to have a logo that sells to children, then I'd rather go with this modernized and toughened up hornet.  He's sleeker and dangerous looking, and not as minor league as Hugo.

original

This is another one from a bigger concept that focuses on the Hugo logo.  Also pitched as a secondary and patch, the honey comb shape idea is intriguing, even though hornets don't make honey.  But it is a departure from the circle logos used by everyone else.  

99 Designs submission

99 Designs showcases design contests.  This one is from designer Eren G.  Also submitted was the same design with an orange basketball replacing the purple one above.  The design concept incorporates the Queen City and Hornets Nest nicknames for Charlotte and puts to rest the ridiculous Hugo logo, replacing it with an elegant insect design that can be taken seriously, and still appeal to children.  Best design so far, sure.

Of course, they could revert back to the true original logo, used only for the 1988 draft.  It is similar to the Canadien's red and white Canadian Hockey logo, but I think it is different enough to not have to worry about copyright infringement or brand confusion.  The original original logo looked like this: 

Whats in a Name Change Part Two: Dead by Racism

I like graphic design, specifically logo design, and especially the concepts that didn't make it.  I posted some designs before when the New Orleans Hornets changed their name and image to the New Orleans Pelicans at the end of the last NBA season.  Sports teams seem to lend themselves easily to reimaginings and redesigns.

The Washington football team is taking heat from many places recently, aside from the usual disgruntled American Indians.  recently the 99designs community held a contest for Washington football team designs.  Please go to the linky link to see them all, below are my favorites.  

Pelicans: a Follow Up

Apparently, about a week after I posted about the New Orleans Hornets proposed name change, the New Orleans franchise released this press release showing their new logo and colors.

They look like this:

Nicely done, New Orleans.  Nicely done.

Also, they have an alternate logo that looks like this:

Mascots and Design: part two

I am a big fan of design. I flirted with the idea of being a graphic designer back in college, but chickened out after convincing myself that I'd never be as talented as every other graphic designer who had ever made money at it. However, it has remained a curious hobby. Sports logos are an interesting thing, to me. And not just professional sports either. There is great potential to brand and market a team, organization, or school around a particular icon or theme. Sometimes I feel like this potential is wasted by schools and teams that just borrow from other more famous professional logos. I digress though.

Chris Creamer's Sports Logos is a huge internet database and online community devoted to logo design. They do a good job researching and categorizing sports logos, offering a pretty comprehensive history of sports iconography. I was pretty disheartened then, when I read this article about the Atlanta Braves decision to change the design of the BP baseball cap they were going to offer.

click me

That is the Screaming Indian, or Laughing Brave. In case you aren't up on your classic Major League Baseball mascots, it was retired and replaced by a tomahawk logo in 1966. For more about the Indian mascot issue, see a post I wrote earlier Mascots: Is the Name The Fighting Hitlers Already Taken?

The writer of this article about the Atlanta Braves design choice is not only insensitive to the issue of Indian iconography in sports, but isn't very eloquent in how he frames his disagreement with the franchise's decision to not be racist.

He states: 

The Atlanta Braves have cowered in the corner, yielding to a tiny minority of voices and have made a last-minute change to their BP cap design. But they don’t even have the nerve to issue a press release saying that they chickened out and didn’t want to step on anyone’s toes. They didn’t say that they decided that honoring their past wasn’t worth offending the white guilt of some writers. They didn’t say that they wanted to be in the news one more time for bowing the the infinitesimal pressure they might have read in the comments section of some article about their new BP hats.

The article sounds like a kid whining because his parents didn't show up to his baseball game like they promised. Halfway through the article, I half expected to hear Will Smith start singing, "Parents just don't understand!" Reading this article, and a few of the comments underneath, crushed my optimism that this nation has made great strides in the racism department. In fact, I was amazed at the selfishness. Really, this is all about a disgruntled consumer that won't be able to buy the hat he wanted. In fact, nostalgic fans clinging to the Braves racial identity are truly in the minority, which makes his whole statement that much sillier and ironic. The loudest voices are not necessarily the majority of voices.

I encourage reading the rest of the article, linked right here. It is also worth reading comments. To be fair, from a design perspective, the laughing Indian is a much better design than the Atlanta A crossed with a tomahawk. However, that is a pretty poor argument to have when faced with the racially insensitive implications of both designs. At least the tomahawk isn't an actual Indian doing a characteristically Indian thing (he is presumably screaming a war-cry).

A comment from the comment section gave me hope that not every sports fan is an insensitive, shallow racist. It reads as such:

Does this article have a point, or did you just feel the need to incoherently rant about some related subjects? Seriously, there's no sense of organization to this piece at all. You go from attacking the Braves organization for (wisely) backing down from the use of a potentially offensive design to criticizing them for using something simple, and then somehow you get to needlessly attacking the "self-entitled, unintelligent, hipster wannabes" who you perceive to be the root of the problem? Pick a subject and stick to that, don't just jump around from idea to idea without any sort of rhyme or reason. I'm not saying that I completely disagree with you - I think the logo, in this day and age, is a bit much, but there are certainly worse depictions of Native Americans that need to be stamped out first (looking at you, Washington Redskins). However, the way you go about constructing your argument makes you sound like an angry high schooler. Also, this all seems like a thinly veiled attack at Paul Lukas, who's been very vocal about his opposition of these sorts of caricatures. Maybe it's just me, though.

The writer of the article missed the point that the organization made an effort to be familiar with the feedback presented regarding their choice of icon and theme that they identify with. They made a choice to not aggravate a sensitive topic for a group of people in this country. Instead of understanding the issue, the writer of the article attacks what he considers to be a group too small to be taken seriously, thereby dismissing the entire civil rights stance.

Personally, I believe the Braves made a good decision to retire a culturally insensitive icon over 30 years ago, and then decide it was probably a bad idea to resurrect that icon. Hopefully soon we will arrive at a time when the Indian sports mascot is seen in the same light as minstrel shows, and there won't be a tomahawk, or laughing brave, or Chief Wahoo, or arrow head to be seen representing any sports franchise.

What's in a Name Change?

Recently, the new owner of the New Orleans Hornets had decided he wanted to change the name of his franchise to something more New Orleansy.  This, of course, makes sense.  A sports team ought to identify itself with the city it resides in, and the fans it wants to connect with.  I'm sure there are hornets and other wasp-like insects in the bayou, but they aren't what anyone would think of when trying to picture the city of New Orleans.

If I was going to change the name of the New Orleans franchise, and the Utah Jazz was too stingy to part with the name that ought to be in the Big Easy, I'd have a few good ideas.  The Brass was a name that was thrown around as a possibility.  Not only does it allude to the horn section of the jazz bands that make the city famous, but allows the team to take advantage of brass balls jokes.  Also on the short list are the Bull Sharks (not bad, but hybrid names like Mud Hens, Jethawks, Mighty Ducks, or River Monsters just make me think of minor league teams and their cartoon logos), Rougarou (it's a cajun word for werewolf...), Swamp Dogs (also a good name for a minor league baseball team... and also makes me think of body odor, for some reason).

The favorite name, and the one most likely to be chosen (nothing "official" has been submitted yet) is the Pelicans.  Speaking of minor league baseball, the Pelicans is also the name of a long defunct New Orleans minor league franchise.  Apparently the brown pelican is the Louisiana state bird.  I'm sure Louisianans all know this and are very proud.  I don't know the state bird of the state I live in, so...  I'm assuming people in Louisiana who like sports don't know or care either.

I was pretty doubtful that this name would be able to capture what the new ownership is hoping for, a new stronger connection to the community of New Orleans.  Like many other commentators and reporters in the sports community, my first thought was choosing the pelican as a mascot for a professional sports team in one of the biggest leagues in the world is a huge laughable mistake.

Then I saw these fan generated logos and designs and decided this may actually work out.  One can only hope the official design team takes some pointers from these, and also from Jay-Z 's successful redesign of the Nets franchise logo and colors.

This circular design makes me think of university.  It also makes the bird far less goofy.  The color scheme doesn't match up, however.  There are rumors that red/navy/gold are proposed instead of the blue/purple used now.  Also, mardi gras colors (yellow/green/purple) are used by the Hornets now as alternate colors.  

The XFL called.  They say this one is awesome.  It is a pretty badass design, but seems more suited for lacrosse or roller derby than the NBA.  Also, I'm not sure how well a jesters hat will go over if you're trying to be taken seriously.  

Simplicity.  This reminds me of the new Nets look.  Not overly complicated, but still clever, incorporating the mascot, and the importance of music to the city.  It does look like a logo for an automobile company though.  

This one also makes the pelican seem less goofy.  Incorporating the NOLA logo used as an alternate now is a good idea to bridge the new with the old identities.  The top hat is pretty cool too.  Once again, the color scheme would change...

This one seems more appropriate for the minor leagues.  The bird looks smushed.  However, I do like circular designs.  

Note how it incorporates the fleur di lis design seen in the old Hornets patch.  the color scheme is able to be changed easily.  It's simple, easily recognizable, and not silly.  

I've used the term minor league a lot in this post.  This one fits into that category too.  The floating bird head looks stupid.  I'm betting the real logo, when revealed, will look more like this than any of the others.  Because I'm a pessimist.