Boro's new badge

[wilsoncgp 9,488 19.5k]

4 hours ago, RiseAgainst said:

Totally agree that the white band needs to be more than a blank billboard for whichever gambling company is currently excreting its wares onto our shirts. However, perhaps the reason an ad-laden white band doesn't look like anything to do with Boro is because it's never been a permanent fixture of our home kit. We've had bands of varying heights and thicknesses, lines (1990), even a sash, for God's sake. Then, in other seasons, we've had nothing at all.

If we have an all-red shirt one season and then the next we have a white band with "Gamble Your Home Away" written across it, of course it's going to look more like an ad than anything else. But that's primarily because there's no consistency in kit design. We need to establish the band as a permanent fixture, and then worry about sponsors (who could potentially go above or below the band, depending on layout).

Plus - and I realise this is a contentious opinion - if our sponsor wasn't from an industry with so much to be ashamed of, maybe it wouldn't look so terrible if they were within the white band area? You mentioned Garmin, who are a prestigious company - I'd have no beef with a modestly-sized Garmin logo in a significantly bigger white band, providing the latter is obviously part of the shirt design rather than just a continuation of the sponsor's branding.

I do understand where you're coming from and you might be right on the band if we stuck with it for longer, I don't know for sure. That's just where I stand with it right now, really.

I don't think the betting sponsor point is a contentious issue in terms of what we want splayed across our shirts. I don't think you'll find many who like or love it, at best people don't really care who it is. As it is, I'm just judging them on how well they fit with the shirt and I think if we stick with the band forever then we do create more opportunities for the shirt to look bad. I'm pretty sure that whoever pays the money will get what they want on our shirt so betting sponsor or anybody else, if what they want on our shirt has to be squished into the band then it's gonna look crap.

I appreciate this is a sensitive subject on the matter of a lot of our sponsors for the last 20 years so I don't mean this to come across as naive or insincere but just a general rule of thumb, the quality of the shirt for me isn't hindered by a sponsor so long as the kit accommodates it in the best way. The green Ramsdens logo was awful but it looked worse when in the white band. The Unibet stuff in this and last season's shirts are disgustingly large but the shirt looks better for them being accommodated outside of the full white band. And as said before, 888.com and 32Red in the band looked inoffensive and the shirt itself shone despite still being a frame for the sponsor. Unless we get very lucky, we're always going to need a shirt sponsor and it has, for me, been a case of making or breaking a kit some years.

I should say one of my all time favourites though is the year we only had local sponsors, so all the replica kit was sponsor-free. That was a year with a white band and a really nice collar too.

[Redcar Rioja 6,780 6.6k]

3 hours ago, wilsoncgp said:

I do understand where you're coming from and you might be right on the band if we stuck with it for longer, I don't know for sure. That's just where I stand with it right now, really.

I don't think the betting sponsor point is a contentious issue in terms of what we want splayed across our shirts. I don't think you'll find many who like or love it, at best people don't really care who it is. As it is, I'm just judging them on how well they fit with the shirt and I think if we stick with the band forever then we do create more opportunities for the shirt to look bad. I'm pretty sure that whoever pays the money will get what they want on our shirt so betting sponsor or anybody else, if what they want on our shirt has to be squished into the band then it's gonna look crap.

I appreciate this is a sensitive subject on the matter of a lot of our sponsors for the last 20 years so I don't mean this to come across as naive or insincere but just a general rule of thumb, the quality of the shirt for me isn't hindered by a sponsor so long as the kit accommodates it in the best way. The green Ramsdens logo was awful but it looked worse when in the white band. The Unibet stuff in this and last season's shirts are disgustingly large but the shirt looks better for them being accommodated outside of the full white band. And as said before, 888.com and 32Red in the band looked inoffensive and the shirt itself shone despite still being a frame for the sponsor. Unless we get very lucky, we're always going to need a shirt sponsor and it has, for me, been a case of making or breaking a kit some years.

I should say one of my all time favourites though is the year we only had local sponsors, so all the replica kit was sponsor-free. That was a year with a white band and a really nice collar too.

As we change Shirt designs annually (and take a long time in the planning of it to do so), is it asking too much of designers to incorporate sponsors logos into their design brief as well as the simple brief of the shirt being red with a white band?

It seems to me that the shirt and the band isn't the problem, it's what people do with it afterwards and what they stick on it and where they stick it. Football will never go back to sponsor free shirts so we have to accept it, live with it, accommodate it and work with it.

[wilsoncgp 9,488 19.5k]

8 minutes ago, Redcar Rioja said:

As we change Shirt designs annually (and take a long time in the planning of it to do so), is it asking too much of designers to incorporate sponsors logos into their design brief as well as the simple brief of the shirt being red with a white band?

It seems to me that the shirt and the band isn't the problem, it's what people do with it afterwards and what they stick on it and where they stick it. Football will never go back to sponsor free shirts so we have to accept it, live with it, accommodate it and work with it.

Well the problem there may well be you're talking about 3 parties: the club, the designers and the sponsor. It may well not be the case that the sponsor has made a decision about the design of their part of the shirt by the time the designers are making it. It certainly felt that way with the last genuine chest band shirt we did. Kindred shoved a ton of crap together and it ended up being squashed into the band.

Sponsors are paying us money at the end of the day too, I suspect (perhaps wrongly) that they will have a great deal of control over what they deliver and when as part of the process. I wouldn't be surprised for there to be some files floating around at the time of concepting the kit with a kit design that contains the current season's sponsor logos on them, with that essentially being subject to change based on Kindred's future desires.

[Humpty 3,857 9.5k]

Or just buy a shirt without the sponsor. I did that this year and it looks soo much better without the sponsor. As long as the club keeps offering this option there's no problem 👍

[TeaCider24 13,969 18.6k]

9 minutes ago, Humpty said:

Or just buy a shirt without the sponsor. I did that this year and it looks soo much better without the sponsor. As long as the club keeps offering this option there's no problem 👍

They only offer it to those who go in to the club shop though, which is no good for those who live outside of Teesside. 

I'll definitely be taking it up in the seasons where I think the kit looks better without the sponsor, but I'd say both look better with it this time around.

 

[Humpty 3,857 9.5k]

Personally I rarely think a sponsor makes a strip better and I struggle to understand how you can think this sponsor (three lines of text!) makes the shirt better?

FWIW i live outside the area and still managed to get hold of one.

[TeaCider24 13,969 18.6k]

1 hour ago, Humpty said:

Personally I rarely think a sponsor makes a strip better and I struggle to understand how you can think this sponsor (three lines of text!) makes the shirt better?

FWIW i live outside the area and still managed to get hold of one.

I just think that both shirts look a bit bare without it, more so the away top, and I'm not somebody who's bothered by a gambling sponsor.

Did you order it or get somebody to collect it for you?

[boro-unger 4,083 17.3k]

9 hours ago, TeaCider24 said:

They only offer it to those who go in to the club shop though, which is no good for those who live outside of Teesside. 

I'll definitely be taking it up in the seasons where I think the kit looks better without the sponsor, but I'd say both look better with it this time around.

 

The club told us in an MSF meeting (can't remember who it was exactly) that if you email the club shop, they should be able to sell and ship you a sponsorless shirt remotely. 

[TeaCider24 13,969 18.6k]

46 minutes ago, boro-unger said:

The club told us in an MSF meeting (can't remember who it was exactly) that if you email the club shop, they should be able to sell and ship you a sponsorless shirt remotely. 

Ahh, that's alright then, it's a bit strange that they don't advertise that, they specifically said that you had to go in to the shop on the website.

There were plenty of people on FMTTM who wanted a sponsorless shirt but didn't live locally, so thought it was hard luck.

[Downsouth 6,744 36.2k]

I like the idea of a sponsor-less shirt especially for the younger fans

[Redcar Rioja 6,780 6.6k]

12 hours ago, wilsoncgp said:

Well the problem there may well be you're talking about 3 parties: the club, the designers and the sponsor. It may well not be the case that the sponsor has made a decision about the design of their part of the shirt by the time the designers are making it. It certainly felt that way with the last genuine chest band shirt we did. Kindred shoved a ton of crap together and it ended up being squashed into the band.

Sponsors are paying us money at the end of the day too, I suspect (perhaps wrongly) that they will have a great deal of control over what they deliver and when as part of the process. I wouldn't be surprised for there to be some files floating around at the time of concepting the kit with a kit design that contains the current season's sponsor logos on them, with that essentially being subject to change based on Kindred's future desires.

All large organisations have guidelines as thick as a Bible over their logo's covering pantone shades, fonts, positioning, measurements, ratio's, what to include on what lines and where or what can be included/excluded ad nauseum. In very rare exceptional circumstances we may not know next years sponsor (I can only think of one such scenario over nigh on thirty years). The Club entrust the designers (who I assume come back with three or four options?) it's just another part of the design brief and an obvious one at that. 

[boro-unger 4,083 17.3k]

2 hours ago, TeaCider24 said:

Ahh, that's alright then, it's a bit strange that they don't advertise that, they specifically said that you had to go in to the shop on the website.

There were plenty of people on FMTTM who wanted a sponsorless shirt but didn't live locally, so thought it was hard luck.

Yeah we have asked about some other things (like game by game tickets for the family zone) re why they aren't advertised. Some things do seem to be kept secret unnecessarily imo. 

The general feeling I get is that if you message the club shop or ticket people about something, they can usually help you out (depending on what you ask for of course). 

[Humpty 3,857 9.5k]

9 hours ago, TeaCider24 said:

I just think that both shirts look a bit bare without it, more so the away top, and I'm not somebody who's bothered by a gambling sponsor.

Did you order it or get somebody to collect it for you?

Fair enough. Each to their own mate.

I made the trip for a home game, walked in asked for one in my size and they gave me one. I'm a medium and it was a home top FWIW.

[Humpty 3,857 9.5k]

Unless there's a stand out sponsor that adds to the shirt or a good cause, i can't imagine buying another with a sponsor as long as they're offering them.

[Humpty 3,857 9.5k]

6 minutes ago, boro-unger said:

Yeah we have asked about some other things (like game by game tickets for the family zone) re why they aren't advertised. Some things do seem to be kept secret unnecessarily imo. 

The general feeling I get is that if you message the club shop or ticket people about something, they can usually help you out (depending on what you ask for of course). 

Priority tickets for hospitality for example.