I didn't mind the survey tbh.

My main comments were about the emblem, our branding from now on and improving our apparel. All within the terms of reference I suppose but hey they took the time to ask.

I like the current emblem but tbh it belongs on a letter head, not a child's school bag. I also don't think it needs to be on the guernsey as it is almost the same image anyway.

Clearly the club is looking at how it can grow and resonate with more people. They've put the plan in place to (hopefully) do it on the footy field but I see no harm in working on the other aspects.

  On 20/03/2014 at 00:15, 1858 said:

improving our apparel.

MFC's hands are tied with the apparel. All the teams get their apparel made under the same license by the same company, so you'll notice they're pretty much all the same between clubs. One comment made to me from someone involved with that stuff once was "the stuff you'd think is ugly is the stuff that sells the most"... Disappointing, cos apart from maybe the retro playing jumpers, most of the apparel is pretty ugly, but we're simply not allowed to create our own as a club.

  On 20/03/2014 at 00:21, stuie said:

MFC's hands are tied with the apparel. All the teams get their apparel made under the same license by the same company, so you'll notice they're pretty much all the same between clubs. One comment made to me from someone involved with that stuff once was "the stuff you'd think is ugly is the stuff that sells the most"... Disappointing, cos apart from maybe the retro playing jumpers, most of the apparel is pretty ugly, but we're simply not allowed to create our own as a club.

It was more to do with the NB polo tops than the whole range but I take your point.

  On 20/03/2014 at 00:06, stuie said:

Which one of these...

a) Doesn't say what the team is called or at least have a picture of it's symbol

b) Looks like a purely corporate logo

c) Will never appeal to kids

d) Has too many elements, making it confusing and directionless

FCS, it doesn't even say "Demons" anywhere or have a demon, might as well put a fuschia on there!

• we are the Melbourne Football Club,
• the logo has our red yoke on navy blue just like our jumper
• it contains our traditional logo which everyone is raving about looking good on our training jumpers.
• it has the year we were established reinforcing the fact we are the oldest football club in the world

Richmond's emblem is like a cartoon picture

Hawks I have seen several junior clubs with this logo as it doesn't say Hawthorn

Our logo is a big step up from the previous logo being the red yoke on a navy background

  On 20/03/2014 at 00:51, Pennant St Dee said:

• we are the Melbourne Football Club,

We're the Melbourne Demons, but you wouldn't know it from our "logo"...

  On 20/03/2014 at 00:53, stuie said:

We're the Melbourne Demons, but you wouldn't know it from our "logo"...

Stuie jump onto youtube have a look at all the Brownlow medallists receiving there medals and all the premiership cups being presented

from the ........Football Club

  On 20/03/2014 at 00:56, Pennant St Dee said:

Stuie jump onto youtube have a look at all the Brownlow medallists receiving there medals and all the premiership cups being presented

from the ........Football Club

So we're NOT the Demons now? We're just the "Melbourne Football Club".....?

  On 20/03/2014 at 01:03, stuie said:

So we're NOT the Demons now? We're just the "Melbourne Football Club".....?

FCS stuie we the melbourne football club

the "Demons" is just a nickname

we were nearly 90 years old when we "acquired" the nickname

I like the emblem as our official "logo"

happy to have a demon symbol/name on apparel etc etc

would like to see a new modern demon symbol

we can have both - no problems

  On 20/03/2014 at 01:19, daisycutter said:

FCS stuie we the melbourne football club

the "Demons" is just a nickname

Right. Well good luck convincing kids to barrack for the "Melbourne Football Club" instead of the Bombers, or the Tigers, or the Hawks... Maybe we can tell them all about our ancient history...

  On 20/03/2014 at 01:19, daisycutter said:

FCS stuie we the melbourne football club

the "Demons" is just a nickname

we were nearly 90 years old when we "acquired" the nickname

I like the emblem as our official "logo"

happy to have a demon symbol/name on apparel etc etc

would like to see a new modern demon symbol

we can have both - no problems

Yeah, it was never an either/or situation in my mind.

I like the arrogance of the emblem. Collingwood has the Australian flag for crying out loud...

Get a Demon logo and do what you will with it.

Leave the emblem as it is.

  On 20/03/2014 at 01:21, stuie said:

Right. Well good luck convincing kids to barrack for the "Melbourne Football Club" instead of the Bombers, or the Tigers, or the Hawks... Maybe we can tell them all about our ancient history...

i notice you didn't quote my whole post - you'd make a good politician stuie

  On 20/03/2014 at 01:21, stuie said:

Right. Well good luck convincing kids to barrack for the "Melbourne Football Club" instead of the Bombers, or the Tigers, or the Hawks... Maybe we can tell them all about our ancient history...

So you reckon that telling them to go for 'the Demons' will get them on board? Bit scary.

Kids follow players they like. Howe, Franklin, Rioli, Dangerfield, etc.

They also follow who they are told to follow.

They don't pick a logo that looks like something out of Buffy the Vampire Slayer (god rest its soul) and go for a team.

If we were going to use the moniker of the club to sell it - we should have picked a more family friendly mascot...

de·mon

/ˈdimən/ Show Spelled [dee-muhn] Show IPA

noun

1.

an evil spirit; devil or fiend.

2.

an evil passion or influence.

3.

a person considered extremely wicked, evil, or cruel.

  On 20/03/2014 at 00:06, stuie said:

Which one of these...

a) Doesn't say what the team is called or at least have a picture of it's symbol

b) Looks like a purely corporate logo

c) Will never appeal to kids

d) Has too many elements, making it confusing and directionless

FCS, it doesn't even say "Demons" anywhere or have a demon, might as well put a fuschia on there!

Ours looks like it was designed by a committee. Like a lot of corporate branding, ends up throwing everything in rather thasn keeping it simple.

The colours are good though.

  On 20/03/2014 at 01:28, rpfc said:

So you reckon that telling them to go for 'the Demons' will get them on board? Bit scary.

Kids follow players they like. Howe, Franklin, Rioli, Dangerfield, etc.

They also follow who they are told to follow.

They don't pick a logo that looks like something out of Buffy the Vampire Slayer (god rest its soul) and go for a team.

If we were going to use the moniker of the club to sell it - we should have picked a more family friendly mascot...

de·mon

/ˈdimən/ Show Spelled [dee-muhn] Show IPA

noun

1.

an evil spirit; devil or fiend.

2.

an evil passion or influence.

3.

a person considered extremely wicked, evil, or cruel.

Tigers aren't friendly but they do ok... Magpies are friggin annoying but they have a few supporters... Think some are underestimating the impact of image, and I know for a fact MFC are seriously thinking about this stuff at the moment.

  On 20/03/2014 at 01:21, stuie said:

Right. Well good luck convincing kids to barrack for the "Melbourne Football Club" instead of the Bombers, or the Tigers, or the Hawks... Maybe we can tell them all about our ancient history...

You are kidding yourself if you think that is why kids follow those clubs.

Kids chop and change teams all the time as they grow up and we all know why they chose the sides they do

  On 20/03/2014 at 01:30, stuie said:

Tigers aren't friendly but they do ok... Magpies are friggin annoying but they have a few supporters... Think some are underestimating the impact of image, and I know for a fact MFC are seriously thinking about this stuff at the moment.

We all know for a fact they are thinking about image,

PJ has said it numerous times

The survey we received says it

Thank you Captain obvious

  On 20/03/2014 at 01:19, daisycutter said:

FCS stuie we the melbourne football club

the "Demons" is just a nickname

we were nearly 90 years old when we "acquired" the nickname

I like the emblem as our official "logo"

happy to have a demon symbol/name on apparel etc etc

would like to see a new modern demon symbol

we can have both - no problems

exactly.

we can, & should do both.

  On 20/03/2014 at 01:30, stuie said:

Tigers aren't friendly but they do ok... Magpies are friggin annoying but they have a few supporters... Think some are underestimating the impact of image, and I know for a fact MFC are seriously thinking about this stuff at the moment.

There are only so many ways you can go with hell spawn.

If you are truly worried about the image of our mascot - you should be advocating a move away from the Demon.

'Hey kids, look at this evil looking thing! Please like us!'

PSD is right - become a decent footy club that plays exciting footy and has some personality and personalities and you will get the kids to be Demons.

Not a new emblem and marketing campaign.

dunno why stuie is so worried about the kids

i haven't met one kid (who follows afl) or adult for that matter who didn't know melbourne were the DEMONS

they might not know we were also known as the redlegs (2nd nick) but they know who the dees are

  On 20/03/2014 at 01:47, rpfc said:

There are only so many ways you can go with hell spawn.

If you are truly worried about the image of our mascot - you should be advocating a move away from the Demon.

'Hey kids, look at this evil looking thing! Please like us!'

PSD is right - become a decent footy club that plays exciting footy and has some personality and personalities and you will get the kids to be Demons.

Not a new emblem and marketing campaign.

You need both.

The emblem is try hard, overly complicated crap, true to form with the previous administration. No point sugar coating it.

I hope this is a sign it is about to be changed to something simple, and easily identifiable, with something outside the box like a DEMON in it.

The red devil is a pivotal part of the Man United logo and identity.

The demon should be more prominent in ours too. Whether that be a separate logo to the emblem (which could work) or a new emblem altogether (probably unnecessary) it remains the same point.

Young people are receptive to imagery and identity. We will always be Melbourne but getting people to resonate with us e.g. Growth in Casey and the younger generation will take both good football and an identity that relates to people in a simple way.

I think the logo in rpfc's avatar is a great logo.

I don't know Stuie as a poster but I understand where he is coming from.

haha, as long as it's not the demon in p-man's avatar

  On 20/03/2014 at 02:08, P-man said:

You need both.

The emblem is try hard, overly complicated crap, true to form with the previous administration. No point sugar coating it.

I hope this is a sign it is about to be changed to something simple, and easily identifiable, with something outside the box like a DEMON in it.

I like the emblem.

We are a try hard, overly complicated club and we don't need a cereal box mascot for an emblem - we need to embrace our heritage in our emblem and then leave it there and move on to trying to win footy games.

Marketing can be done but if you want to convince kids to be Demons - getting Howe, Jones, Tyson and Hogan fit and firing and in the media will be better than yet another 'fierce' looking Demon like the one in my avatar.

As this thread shows, diehard supporters can't agree on the emblem. So let's cut the current and past administration some slack on the issue of corporate branding and accept that whatever decisions are made they are done with the best intentions for the good of the club.

Round 1 can't come quickly enough.

tried to fill out the survey but it just would not work ?