The other night my brother and some friends sat down at a local restaurant after a baskeball game to catch up and eat some good and cheap happy hour food. In the midst of our table conversations my eyes focused on the television that was replaying the sports highlights of the day when all of a sudden that big “O” that the University of Oregon uses as their iconic logo fills the screen to preface the upcoming segment on the university’s basketball team.

Now, a lot of you may be wondering why I’m choosing to write about their new identity. Not only am I a University of Oregon alumni (class of 2005, yaw!) but I follow their sports, especially their football team, which all don their trademark “O” symbol and University of Oregon typeface. The biggest reason however are my strong opinions of the icon that surface ever since it was revealed and every time I see it today.  Now, the iconic “O” and new typeface weren’t always the symbolic representation of the University of Oregon. Prior to the year of 2000, the institution carried its traditional logo consisting of a “U” and “O” combined in the classic block typeface that is similar and recognizable as those on letterman jackets.  The football team that year introduced the new logo on their uniforms.  From then on, other sports followed to carry the new look.  By the year of 2002, University heads wanted to unify the school image under one branding scheme in order to avoid confusion and create a stronger presence as an institution.  A great debate ensued as to which logo the University should carry to represent itself as an institution – “classic UO” or “modern O”.  Eventually, the new look won out and is now what represents the school not only on athletic uniforms but letterheads, business cards, websites, and other canvases that also bear the emblem. Now is this transformation considered a good thing or bad thing?

On a personal level, I’ll give it one point for looking good on the football helmets.  The “O” is crisp, simple, and clean on those shiny helmets and gives the team a look from the future (the curves of the logo flow cohesively with those of the helmet giving, a greater perception of speed and swift agility compared to their classic logo).  But that’s where it stops.  Beyond those helmets I feel that it doesn’t provide a professional representation of the University.  On sports uniforms the new typeface that is placed across the chest has a stylistic quality that makes them look cheaper.  The type is designed in a font that is not timeless but more representative of a playful one from a video game.  It is also less fitting on business cards, letterheads, and other promotional material for the school where the traditional logo carried more prestige and history throughout its years of association.  From a design point of view, I’ve been thoroughly disappointed with its inability to adapt to various contexts in order to provide the solid and professional appearance it needs to represent the university.

On a marketing level its brilliant.  The first attribution can be given to the sports uniforms.  Sports attract major audiences throughout the nation and its definitely grabbed everyone’s attention.  There was a buzz when the new football gear was introduced in 2000.  Marketing heads didn’t stop there.  In recent years, their football uni’s have evolved with multiple looks and combinations to accompany the new identity and emphasize the university’s brand evolution. Try the neon green (some call it puke green) helmets, jerseys, and pants.  Carbon fiber helmets look sharp.  The all white “storm trooper” outfits will need several washing machines after each game.  Details such as the “diamond plate” pattern on the shoulder pads as well as this year’s addition of “duck wings” have continued to garner more attention.  All of this has people around the nation paying attention to what is the next wardrobe coming out of the UO football team’s locker room (rather than paying attention to the team and its season outlook).

Through the establishment of the new UO identity, Duck sports fans have also added in an extra characteristic to their culture by placing their hands together in the shape of an “O” during football and basketball games (much easier than creating a “U” and “O” with your hands).  This resounding gesture by fans has only boosted the presence of the logo and increased recognition of UO fans and alumni.  During home football games, one can witness the entire stadium of Duck fans cheering with their hands clasped together to form symbol.

Its without question that the presence of the University of Oregon has increased its visibility throughout the nation with the addition of the new logo. While I can’t argue that is has been successful, my dislike still rests on its design execution.  I admire their desire and attempt to stray away from the “classic look” that so many universities across the nation already carry.  Being unique and wanting to stand out above the rest is always important.  However, during their design development they lost the ability to carry over the prestige that is resembled in their previous logo.  Originally focusing on how their design will look strictly on football helmets, they failed to recognize its adaptation to other contexts.  Their approach should have included more studies in how they can merge the past and the future into the new look for the university.  Instead, the end result produced a new look that has garnered new attention but in the process the old look was completely left behind and with it went the university’s professional appearance. Thanks for reading, I had to get that off my mind because its what I always think about every time I see their new logo.

*Apologies for all of my referrals towards the football team, I am a die hard fan and its a case study of the new logo that I have paid the closest attention towards.  GO DUCKS!

Tags: oregon ducks logo, oregon logo, university of oregon logo

This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 27th, 2010 at 1:57 am and is filed under Branding, Logos. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.