new cornell "logo"

anyone see the new logo? any thoughts?

It felt like I was routing for another team. Are these jerseys the new logo or was that just a fund raising gimick?

they were their third jersey... they only were them once

The jerseys you saw at the Sacred Heart game are meant to be auctioned off at the Harvard game this coming Friday. It's basically a fundraiser. You probably won't see them on the ice again, at least not until next year at the earliest.

There is a new Cornell identity but it has nothing to do with the to-be-auctioned sweaters the team wore Saturday night. Perhaps that is the "logo" to which littleredfan was referring in his initial posting. More on that here:

[www.news.cornell.edu]

And here:

[www.cornell.edu]

The founding year appears to have taken precedence over the founder's identity.

So, does this replace the Big Red Square?

Yup, the Big Red Square a.k.a. the so-called J.C. Penney logo (I never saw that, myself) is officially retired.

Finally, a president who gets results

ahh identity, logo, emblem, insignia, i get them all confused. big red box stunk, this one seems a definite improvement imho, although i dont get the A.D. part. does anyone think it was B.C.?

some non-religious folks may even find the a.d. part infringing.

any pics of these third jerseys?

If you get offended by seeing "A.D." then I think you really need to start taking the world a little less seriously...

Perhaps for Andrew Dickson without the White?

Here's a pic of the jerseys from the Daily Sun...they're better than I imagined they would be, although I hope this doesn't become a regular thing.



I see Reebok created them. They're jumping into the hockey market now, and kind of off-topic, but there's an interesting column on ESPN.com about Reebok and Nike perhaps boosting hockey's popularity through marketing products in a similar way to how they've created shoe wars in basketball. Story here: [sports.espn.go.com]

Well, actually, in Israel and in Jewish religious documents I've seen the use of "C.E. " for "Common Era" and B.C.E. for "Before Common Era."

So some people have legitimate reasons for not using "A.D."

Yes, I've seen CE and BCE and understand the reasoning. Makes perfect sense in the context you mentioned. But that ooesn't change my point for this context.

Those unis are... well. fugly.

But I really like the "identity," because it means I will finally be able to get a decent Cornell windshield sticker.

Not sure if it's just a matter of taste or if they looked better in person, but I really liked them. I've got some photos coming. Unfortunately, I was on my second backup lens since one's in transit and one's being cleaned by Nikon "Like a Sedated Sloth On Vacation" Factory Service. I'll have one or both ready for Harvard though.

The red is too dark. If you close your eyes a little, that and the big C makes them look like tOSU hockey jerseys.

I noticed that the red is darker than the pads in the photo, but if they got darker pads or a more CU red color, I wouldn't mind having them as a permanent 3rd jersey...I actually really like them. Maybe I'm weird, but I think they look classy.

Jordan

The broad white stripe across the chest makes the numbers impossible to read on i1sports. I like the "real" unis, but these could have been a lot less attractive.

I'd have to agree with the OSU comment, though I do think it looks more classy, less flashy.

As for color, I'm all for letting RPI have theirs back.

Deep, Carnelian, red would be cool for Cornell except there's as much deep, dark red in the league as bright red. In our league, we've already got Harvard and Colgate vs. Cornell that could go either way and Union, RPI (?), and anybody else (?) wearing red-red.

When a college is founded, it would be nice to think about color schemes in terms of how ridiculous it looks on overweight 50-year-old alumni. And I do believe there was a time a generation ago when some Cornell players had to travel with red blazers as opposed to navy blazers with the Cornell logo on the pocket. Whether that's red red or Carnelian red, it's not a pretty sight.

I'm an overweight 44 year old alumnus, and I happen to think red-red looks just fine on me. Not that I'd ever be caught dead in a red blazer, either red-red or carnelian.

Although given the general decrease in apparent fashion sense that occurs with age, my judgement may not be worth a damn.