Logo no-go
By Ben Knight
Â
Sorry for the long absence, folks. I’m very much in off-season mode, and my life has become quite interestingly busy (in two cities!) behind the scenes. Onward! will become a regular part of my life again come spring, but there will still be intermittent (and, I hope, amusing) updates throughout the winter.
Last week, the not-quite-so-breakaway group of former USL-1 owners who are now trying to pass themselves off as the new NASL held an annual general meeting, and issued … a logo.
If you’re a fan of the old – the REAL – NASL, you probably recognize the typeface. It is exactly (or no worse than 97 per cent of exactly) what the old league used.Â
And this has me feeling concerned.
As an avid tabletop sports gamer, I’ve invented quite a few imaginary leagues in my time. Generally, they’re a hodge-podge of ideas from all over the place. I never felt that grabbing used logos was particularly honourable, but certainly it happened from time to time.
NASL-2 is feeling more and more like a league someone just dreamed up. And it is, of course. The someones in question just happen to own real soccer teams, and want to get the heck out of the league they were in.
And of course I understand there was a lot of last-minute edge work to deal with, significantly including hammering out a deal with the United States Soccer Federation so the second tier of men’s pro soccer in the United States and Canada could actually kick off come spring.
But, honestly, this is getting sloppy. First, you grab the name of an old, legendary and still-loved league which you will never even remotely equal. Then, just in case we didn’t get the point, you boost its logo.
It feels like that nerdy friend-of-a-friend who’s always nagging you to come see the toy train set in his basement. I love trains – and I adored the NASL – but this is getting embarrassing.
It’s one thing for a league to be a hurriedly thought-out, largely improvised idea. It’s another thing – entirely – to look like one.
If you want to be taken seriously, NASL-2 – and if you’re going to be home to the Vancouver Whitecaps and Montreal Impact, you’d darn well better be the real deal – please lose the shortcuts, and create your own identity.
Otherwise, guys like me are going to spend all the attention we give you writing about what you’re not, instead of what you are.
So … what are you?
Onward!



January 24th, 2010 at 6:27 pm
I disagree, while I am to young to remember the “old” NASL, I think it’s great that they are using the name and logo because it keeps tradition alive, something which is prevalent throughout the world of soccer. Many fans of the “old” NASL may recognize and identify with the same logo and name as the league which they grew up knowing. Creating an entirely new identity would mean they would have to explain that identity to potential fans.
January 25th, 2010 at 9:08 am
Ben
Get over it already!!
January 25th, 2010 at 11:41 am
I’m also a fan born in early 80s who never saw or felt the NASL “glory days”. This new NASL is my only connection to the glory soccer past. I’m happy to see a “new” NASL but I do hope the old NASL past will be properly honoured i.e. they wouldn’t claim the 2011 champions to be the 17th champion in NASL history, but the 1st of the new NASL.
It would’ve been much harder to sell the general public on a completely new league identity - which could’ve meant less success, a less profitable league and, ultimately, less soccer. No-one wants that!
January 25th, 2010 at 4:26 pm
Right there with you. I was more than a little uncomfortable with the name choice. The NASL is dead, and I’d've much preferred it be left dead. Using the name seems like a cheap shortcut, hoping to piggy back on good will that they have no responsibility for or connection to.
Apparently they’re talking about doing it respectfully, and so maybe I should hold my cynicism until after they’ve been around for a while to see if they can match their own high expectations.
For now, though, I’ll remain very skeptical.
January 25th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
The ‘new’ league was thrown together quickly - no doubt about it. Having said that, I’m not offended by the use of the name. The NASL had a lengthy history (of which only the last 5-8 years - the Warner/Steve Ross period - are ever discussed in depth, of course). It’s been 25 years since that league imploded, so expecting the new NASL to have the same owners or executives is not reasonable. It is, in every way, a new league trying to capitalize on the old.
Is this a bad thing? The old NASL had some good years, but there were significant problems even in the best of times. I don’t know that the name brings the instant credibility that the owners want, but it is at least something. If they’d come up with their own new name, honestly, wouldn’t casual football (and non-football) fans have just shrugged and said “sure, good luck”?
Despite what their website says (the new NASL is the result of years of planning and desire to develop the game… yawn), we all know it is the result of a badly mishandled sale by Nike and an unbelievably ill-considered approach by the new owners. Had Nike not sold the league, or had NuRock not been the selected buyer, I’m fairly certain that there would be no “new” NASL. I don’t know what NuRock thought they were buying, nor what Nike told them they were selling. However, one suspects that legal action between buyer and seller looms…
The whole “alliance” thing with the three remaining USL-1 teams (two of which are far from “stable”) does baffle me… Were I Mr. Gulati, I’d have been inclined to insist that the new league offer charter membership to those teams as well, but not take the extraordinary step of forcing a ‘temporary’ merger. The term “shackled to a corpse” springs to mind…
So Puerto Rico and the others are grandfathered into NASL/USL for a year. And then? Does Gulati really think that the USL will manage to reorganize itself into a strong ’second’ league in 12 months?
January 25th, 2010 at 10:18 pm
I have a train set! Who wants to play!!
But seriously, I’m really not sure what to make of this new NASL setup. I’m a big fan of nostalgia…but not at the expense of ruining some cherished memories.
If they’re taking the name, I don’t mind the logo recycling. What I do have a problem with, is the website. I believe perception is a key ingredient to respect, and that site was made by ‘beginners to Photoshop’.
This new league is somehow reminding me of the Beckham ankle scenario….’Welcome to the League David!! What’s that - you can’t play for a while?? Oh nuts.’ It’s all getting off on the wrong foot.
I wish the NASL luck and will watch from a distance with curiosity. But right now, I still wonder what will happen once Montreal and Vancouver leave for MLS.
January 26th, 2010 at 12:27 pm
As someone who is old enough to have actually attended NASL matches I am with Ben on this one. The NASL at its peak was very good, but it died a death for a reason and this “new league” may yet be cursed by its legacy.
They might have been better off not recycling the name.
Too late now though, so let’s see how it goes.
January 26th, 2010 at 10:59 pm
Okay…. maybe we can let it slide if they just name it NASL… but they boosted the logo as well and that’s just lame.
and i agree the website is awful, how can anybody seriously follow a league that is so half ass put together?
January 27th, 2010 at 12:05 am
I find it pretty funny to read some many complaints about the website. It’s as if you all believe this is the final form that it will take??? Until a few weeks ago, they didn’t even know if they would actually have a sanctioned league to play in!! Yet once the situation was resolved, the website went up immediately. Why? Probably because they realized that fans would want a way to keep tabs on this new league. Now, is there a lot of content on there yet, no there isn’t. But what exactly do you expect… a schedule? Not finalized yet. Team rosters? Some of them don’t even have one yet! So exactly what kind of content do you all expect??? I have no doubt that as things become official, and we near the start of the new season, we will see a lot of stuff added to the website. A little bit of common sense can go a long way….
January 27th, 2010 at 7:31 pm
John Bladen…
I read somewhere that the USL after Nike discontinued its sponsorship became a losing money pit and the teams in question are starting this NASL as an alternative,possibly better managed….One question however remains who will replace the Whitecaps and Impact,once they move to MLS?{their reserve teams?
January 28th, 2010 at 5:08 pm
Megas:
I was referring to how poorly put together the actual framework and graphics of the website are. I did not, and do not, expect loads of content until a further date.
I should clarify — they outsourced the website to a professional company. As a customer worried about making an impression, wouldn’t you want something visually better?
Even with little to no time to put something together, it can be done better. Thankfully, the website has nothing to do with the quality of play and entertainment value in the league.
January 28th, 2010 at 11:34 pm
MM:
The only thing I have heard regarding the “future” of the new NASL (assuming it has one) is that the Whitecaps have considered the idea of not withdrawing from the league when they move to MLS. Last I heard, the thinking was they would move their ex-USL-1 franchise to another western city (Edmonton was rumoured, but I consider that to be speculative as yet) and continue to compete in the USL.
Both the Whitecaps and Impact have reserve teams that play in other leagues (if I remember right, pretty much all of them are affiliated with the lower tiers of USL, which must make the future for the Academy/residency programs a little murky, I would imagine). It is possible they could continue to run these teams either as NASL or USL clubs. However they would likely lose the ability to use them as feeder clubs, given that MLS “discourages” in house development under such systems (as far as I know, any player your franchise develops becomes fodder for the league, not your club exclusively).
I’d suggest that MLS’ player development & rights restrictions is one of the biggest obstacles to be worked through in order for the league to be considered “big time”. My understanding is that Barcelona pulled the pin regarding the Miami joint venture largely because they would not be able to “use” the franchise the way they wanted, either for player development or marketing purposes (both of which are “league” initiatives in MLS).
January 29th, 2010 at 7:45 pm
John Bladen…
Why would “mls” be against all that?
January 30th, 2010 at 9:25 pm
As far as I know Vancouver is still in negotiations with Garber and MLS on the way the team will handle its academy and team reserves.
If negotiations go Vancouvers way I think it may set a standard on how this issue is approached with other teams in the MLS, of course I’m just specualting and could be way off.
February 2nd, 2010 at 7:46 pm
I hope that Whitecaps push it that the teams in MLS absolutely have to have academies and reserves etc…