I like that! Leigh changed their good one to one thats awful, we should change back!

i really like the new widnes vikings name and club badge. i wasnt keen on the old town crest or the name chemics,although iv watched widnes for 36 years. maybe that because im not from widnes,and didnt identify with the old crest and name.

[url=http://img816.imageshack.us/i/hullkr.jpg/[/url



Uploaded with [url=http://imageshack.usImageShack.us[/url



I've always wanted us to revert to this crest.

What have you got at KR now?

Every time I see the new Vikings logo it makes me think of three boobs hanging down. Like the three-boobed women from Total Recall doing press ups.



Might be just me though

On Keighley's shirt for next season we've got the current club badge on one side and the old coat of arms on the other.

I never understood the argument that those names were meant to bring children into the game either. I would argue 95% of children who go to games simply want to copy whatever their dad goes, and wants to feel apart of the sociological lineage of dad going to games, like his dad, and his dad, and so on so forth. Or the other way around, children dragged to games by zealous parents. All this regardless of mascot caricatures of arbitrary chosen nicknames.



If you want to bring people into the game, surely, it's people within 20-30 bracket, and those within that bracket easily amused by a Wildcats crest possibly aren't the right demographic in the first place.

I don't think that crest has ever been used on our shirts, IIRC it was created for the clubs centenary in 1983 and has been used periodically since on various merchandise.

No offense, but I think that's complete rubbish.



If you want to bring people into the games, you don't pick such a restricting demographic. You try and appeal to as many as possible. Kids, teens, adults, pensioners, disabled, women, ethnic minorities, etc. Find something for everyone, not concentrate on one tiny demographic that probably represents a tiny proportion of the crowd anyway.



And 20-30? Most of the people I know got into the game in their early teens, and not because of their parents, because of their friends.



Team nicknames and mascots are great marketing tools for primary school children. In the schools I've worked in, it has often been the kids dragging the parents down rather than the way you've said.

As for the OP, IMO the ones that don't work are:



Harlequins - Rugby union team

Warriors - NRL team, and are more famous for being just "Wigan"

Wildcats - Two nicknames? And the badge is awful



The ones that are borderline are:



City Reds - again, two nicknames and are both associated with bigger clubs in the area. But they're both quite short so it isn't too bad

Giants - a bit boring, but they need a nickname because Huddersfield is a bit of a mouthful to say!



The ones that work well are:



Rhinos

Bulls

Tigers

Saints

Dragons

Imitation. Sport in general, is more or less, an adult environment, which is good for children to be embraced into, unlike when your son wants to have a sip of your beer. My point remains, that arbiturary nicknames make no difference, and I don't see how a child inspired by them, has enough persuasion power for non-RL parents to fork out ticket prices, and time off to accomodate what is, an "adult" environment regardless of what furry mascots there may be.



And even though, the 20-30 bracket may seem to be a bit hazy and specific. It's common sense to aim for a demographic who have full incomes, and young families which reinforces the process in my previous post.

You’ve ruined that badge for me now. I used to see the sails and prow of a Viking ship sitting low in the sea, as Viking ships did. Now all I see is breasts!