Worst Logo Tournament - Los Angeles Kings vs. Columbus Blue Jackets

[GFS]

Which logo is worse?

This tournament features logos eliminated in the first round of the Logo Tournament. For the first round, 1st seed = lowest % votes in previous tournament and 16th seed = highest % votes. For subsequent rounds, seeds will be redone based on the percentage of votes each logo received in their previous matchup.

R16	QF	SF	F
1) ANA 178 16) OTT 7 2) LAK 104 15) STL 11 3) CAR 109 14) SEA 45 4) WSH 115 13) SJS 13 5) CBJ 112 12) WPG 57 6) DAL 169 11) VAN 71 7) NSH 21 10) TBL 68 8) FLA 9) VGK	1) ANA 8) TBD 2) LAK 7) CBJ 3) WSH 6) CAR 4) TBL 5) DAL	TBD TBD TBD TBD	TBD TBD

Click to read more...

 

[MikeyMike01]

LA is going to be tough to beat

 

[Ceremony]

LA's doesn't make any sense. You have a team called the Kings, all the possible imagery that goes along with that, or that they've used in the past, and you have... a big black arrow pointing down. Awful.

 

[jetsforever]

Really close IMO

 

[tarheelhockey]

LA's doesn't make any sense. You have a team called the Kings, all the possible imagery that goes along with that, or that they've used in the past, and you have... a big black arrow pointing down. Awful.

It’s a hybrid of their past logos.

Shield from 1967-86, colors from 1987-97, font from 1998-01, crown from 2002-2010.

It’s a good idea in theory, but doesn’t work so well in execution.

That said, it’s still better than Columbus. At least the shield shape looks kind of OK from a distance, as on a jersey or merch. It has a shape anyway. Columbus is just a visual mess.

 

[Guttersniped]

It’s a hybrid of their past logos.

View attachment 716730

Shield from 1967-86, colors from 1987-97, font from 1998-01, crown from 2002-2010.

It’s a good idea in theory, but doesn’t work so well in execution.

That said, it’s still better than Columbus. At least the shield shape looks kind of OK from a distance, as on a jersey or merch. It has a shape anyway. Columbus is just a visual mess.

Either of these is way better.

Columbus isn’t very good but super bland and bad is a deadly combo. Having the crown so detailed and then making it so small is goofy.

Taking out Royal Purple too is a major fail. Going from better logos to worse. A lot not to like.

 

[TheDawnOfANewTage]

It’s a hybrid of their past logos.

View attachment 716730

Shield from 1967-86, colors from 1987-97, font from 1998-01, crown from 2002-2010.

It’s a good idea in theory, but doesn’t work so well in execution.

That said, it’s still better than Columbus. At least the shield shape looks kind of OK from a distance, as on a jersey or merch. It has a shape anyway. Columbus is just a visual mess.

It’s a reference to the downward trajectory or their logo game. It’s like a buddy who used to be fun and now spends all his time talking about crypto, disappointment.

CBJ still worse though. I can’t unsee a cartoon star pointing the flag thing towards god knows what. Like a power rangers or Captain Planet thing on acid.

 

[baabaa]

LA's doesn't make any sense. You have a team called the Kings, all the possible imagery that goes along with that, or that they've used in the past, and you have... a big black arrow pointing down. Awful.

Isn't it supposed to be a shield? I always thought that. I mean that makes more sense. Kings and Knights and all that.

 

[johnjm22]

Most Kings fans hate the current logo and uniforms. It's all the more frustrating considering we have such sweet original and retro variations that would be infinitely better.

 

[johnjm22]

LA's doesn't make any sense. You have a team called the Kings, all the possible imagery that goes along with that, or that they've used in the past, and you have... a big black arrow pointing down. Awful.

Isn't it supposed to be a shield? I always thought that. I mean that makes more sense. Kings and Knights and all that.

I think it's supposed to be like a royal banner:

 

[baabaa]

I think it's supposed to be like a royal banner:

That works too.

 

[EdJovanovski]

Kings AINEC

 

[No Fun Shogun]

In a vacuum, it might be close.

But I’m detracting points from LA for intentionally not using a superior logo from their own past.

The home plate has my vote.

 

[Evergreen]

The thick, simple lines of the "home plate" and "LA" part of the Kings' logo combined with the finer, more detailed lines of the crown is just terrible design.

 

[banks]

The thick, simple lines of the "home plate" and "LA" part of the Kings' logo combined with the finer, more detailed lines of the crown is just terrible design.

THANK YOU!

The Crown is already it's own logo. Having a logo-within-a-logo is just abysmal. It's like using a bunch of different fonts in the same sentence.

The Kings might have the worst logo in the league.

 

[Tufted Titmouse]

It’s a hybrid of their past logos.

View attachment 716730

Shield from 1967-86, colors from 1987-97, font from 1998-01, crown from 2002-2010.

It’s a good idea in theory, but doesn’t work so well in execution.

That said, it’s still better than Columbus. At least the shield shape looks kind of OK from a distance, as on a jersey or merch. It has a shape anyway. Columbus is just a visual mess.

1988 is perfection imo

 

[tarheelhockey]

1988 is perfection imo

I think most people would agree, and ironically the 1988 logo is conceptually identical to the current one. The individual elements are cribbed from prior logos, and in isolation they don’t look great: the crown is kind of an over-detailed blob, the “Los Angeles” is in a font so small it almost disappears, the speed lines are unnecessary and over-busy, and the shape is kind of weird. But it all comes together so that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, and it looks good on a jersey or hat.

 

[Kingfan1967]

Why is Columbus strangling the Dallas Stars ?

 

[BringTheReign]

In a vacuum, it might be close.

But I’m detracting points from LA for intentionally not using a superior logo from their own past.

The home plate has my vote.

Bingo. We have some of the freshest logos, colors, and jerseys in all of sports and we still stick with this one.

 

[HanSolo]

Honestly, I think LA should have just kept rocking the 2002 crown. It's still part of their current crest but the crest is just...off. Still it's a cleaner look than Columbus' logo.

 

[Stive Morgan]

Every time I look at that LA logo, all I see is a baseball plate and find myself longing for that vibrant purple & gold crown. I don't give a shit if it matches the Lakers or not, it looks great, and that's all that matters.