New logo

[JTrue]

3 minutes ago, MikeG said:

The thing that has bothered me for some time is the changing of the type of bull from Brahman to the Toro type. And this new logo clearly is not a brahman bull.

 

ok-- perhaps not everyone's idea of what a bull is supposed to look like but it was our mascot and now it seems like that ship has sailed. About the only remnant seems to be our Rocky mascot and only in the grey colors.

When they did that statue installation on MLK plaza, I knew it was over for the Brahman at USF.

perhaps a minor point but it seems like some person at some point in marketing decided to change our breed of bull either out of ignorance or laziness or tweaking the image to better fit some expected idea of what a bull looks like. And that to me is a shame. Can you imagine the uproar if some one did something similar with the Texas Longhorn images used? But most simply moved on without giving a ****.

Brahman got left behind for just Bulls about 30 years ago. A **** may have been given in the past, but not by anyone under 50 at this point.

[MikeG]

2 minutes ago, JTrue said:

Brahman got left behind for just Bulls about 30 years ago. A **** may have been given in the past, but not by anyone under 50 at this point.

I am over 50.  I give a ****

[NewEnglandBull]

4 minutes ago, MikeG said:

She goes to almost all the games in football -- I remember talking and taking pictures with her when we bumped into her at the Pittsburgh game in 2001. She has always been a big supporter of our sports teams and is an excellent ambassador in this respect. As much as I was not happy with her handling of the CJL situation - I get that ultimately she has to be the president of the entire school first and foremost. Some times that means being tough minded as far as budgeting or whatever is concerned. Doesn't mean she is not a fan of our teams. Look at that purse-- it is a freaking USF football! Cut her some slack buddy

If you read my follow up with someone else on this thread I agreed in terms of being a fan relative to supporting the student athletes. She does an excellent job. But from what I hear she is not a “fan” from an institutional/budget/strategic perspective. Yes, I do cut her some slack as I would rather her focus be more on academics than sports, but from what I know/hear she is not always all in with athletics when she should be.

[JTrue]

1 minute ago, MikeG said:

I am over 50.  I give a ****

Proving my point. You care, but I don't. And I've never heard anyone on campus even make a passing reference to the change.

[JTrue]

1 minute ago, NewEnglandBull said:

If you read my follow up with someone else on this thread I agreed in terms of being a fan relative to supporting the student athletes. She does an excellent job. But from what I hear she is not a “fan” from an institutional/budget/strategic perspective. Yes, I do cut her some slack as I would rather her focus be more on academics than sports, but from what I know/hear she is not always all in with athletics when she should be.

What would "all in" look like from her perspective? Our athletics department already operates at about $20 million loss every single year and the rest of the university and students pay for it. That's tough for any academic to swallow.

[I like GOOOOLD (and green)]

This whole branding situation is going on too long and risks becoming a circus.  I don't understand why there can't be any consistency.  It seems like the harder they try, the uglier the logos get.

[NewEnglandBull]

4 minutes ago, JTrue said:

What would "all in" look like from her perspective? Our athletics department already operates at about $20 million loss every single year and the rest of the university and students pay for it. That's tough for any academic to swallow.

Good question...I was quoting someone I know who works in the dept. It could potentially be decisions that grow the program but costs more to do it. It could also include administrative policies and hirings. But I agree with your point $20 mil loss is a problem. 

Edited September 6, 2018 by NewEnglandBull

[Brad]

Maybe the bull change happened at the same time we chucked the “Golden Brahmans” as our mascot.  I don’t remember. 

[MikeG]

6 minutes ago, JTrue said:

8 minutes ago, MikeG said:

I am over 50.  I give a ****

Proving my point. You care, but I don't. And I've never heard anyone on campus even make a passing reference to the change.

so because you don't hear about it "on campus", I am just supposed to not have a opinion? I have had this opinion for decades-- that they gave up on a unique bull for a general idea of a bull. They did not lean into the mascot-- they pushed it aside-- maybe because they didn't like his hump or something who knows. The change happened when they went from one logo to the goat versio, as if he threw off the hump. Understand I am not saying "oh go back to that image!" - I just find it was a change forced onto the rest of us by some person in marketing just like any of these other mish mash of logos

[MikeG]

5 minutes ago, Brad said:

Maybe the bull change happened at the same time we chucked the “Golden Brahmans” as our mascot.  I don’t remember. 

this was the mascot I knew when I transferred to USF in 1985. Cartoonish? perhaps. Unique? absolutely. Marketable? apparently not

Edited September 6, 2018 by MikeG