RedlessWardrobe said:

---

CNHTH said:

---

https://imgur.com/a/X8KmjD8
Seeing the court in person it really isn't that bad.
What I don't like is the state outline in just blue. It's bland and too many blue lines. Imho it would look amazing if they filled the outline of the state with the darker colored hardwood that appears in the paint areas

---

Surprise surprise, I think it sucks. Again even in the world of athletics why are we conforming to the layout of other universities? The number one public university conforms with everyone else? And one more counter argument to the "align with the state" proponents. I note that on the state flag, the bear is standing on a patch of green (grass?), and there is a red horizontal stripe along the bottom. Should we change our colors to green and red to project the correct image? I rest my case on this issue.

---

calumnus said:

---

https://images.app.goo.gl/m7obmyz8wWBnBctH7

We are "California" the entire state. The only people who tried to deny that are fans of a private school called "Southern California" or a directional southern branch called "California, Los Angeles." Now that we are in separate leagues, skrew them.

Wisconsin represents the entire state even though there is a "Wisconsin,Green Bay," Texas represents the entire state even though there is a "UTEP" and other UTs, North Carolina represents the entire state even though there is a NC Charlotte….on and on.

We are California. Live it. Deal with it.

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

CNHTH said:

---

https://imgur.com/a/X8KmjD8
Seeing the court in person it really isn't that bad.
What I don't like is the state outline in just blue. It's bland and too many blue lines. Imho it would look amazing if they filled the outline of the state with the darker colored hardwood that appears in the paint areas

---

Surprise surprise, I think it sucks. Again even in the world of athletics why are we conforming to the layout of other universities? The number one public university conforms with everyone else? And one more counter argument to the "align with the state" proponents. I note that on the state flag, the bear is standing on a patch of green (grass?), and there is a red horizontal stripe along the bottom. Should we change our colors to green and red to project the correct image? I rest my case on this issue.

---

If you knew your Cal history, you'd know that the Cal walking bear was not based on the state flag. In fact, when the Cal walking bear flag was commissioned in 1872 (see, https://calbears.com/sports/2013/4/17/208216540.aspx), the California state flag was different from the current one (see, ).

The grizzly bear was chosen because it represented the state and was the state's symbol. The gold color was chosen because of its association with our great state's (recent) history. In short, our alma mater's teams are the California Golden Bears because they represent the entire state of California, not just some jerk water location therein.

---

calumnus said:

---

https://images.app.goo.gl/m7obmyz8wWBnBctH7

We are "California" the entire state. The only people who tried to deny that are fans of a private school called "Southern California" or a directional southern branch called "California, Los Angeles." Now that we are in separate leagues, skrew them.

Wisconsin represents the entire state even though there is a "Wisconsin,Green Bay," Texas represents the entire state even though there is a "UTEP" and other UTs, North Carolina represents the entire state even though there is a NC Charlotte….on and on.

We are California. Live it. Deal with it.

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

CNHTH said:

---

https://imgur.com/a/X8KmjD8
Seeing the court in person it really isn't that bad.
What I don't like is the state outline in just blue. It's bland and too many blue lines. Imho it would look amazing if they filled the outline of the state with the darker colored hardwood that appears in the paint areas

---

Surprise surprise, I think it sucks. Again even in the world of athletics why are we conforming to the layout of other universities? The number one public university conforms with everyone else? And one more counter argument to the "align with the state" proponents. I note that on the state flag, the bear is standing on a patch of green (grass?), and there is a red horizontal stripe along the bottom. Should we change our colors to green and red to project the correct image? I rest my case on this issue.

---

If you knew your Cal history, you'd know that the Cal walking bear was not based on the state flag. In fact, when the Cal walking bear flag was commissioned in 1872 (see, https://calbears.com/sports/2013/4/17/208216540.aspx), the California state flag was different from the current one (see, ).

The grizzly bear was chosen because it represented the state and was the state's symbol. The gold color was chosen because of its association with our great state's (recent) history. In short, our alma mater's teams are the California Golden Bears because they represent the entire state of California, not just some jerk water location therein.

---

I'll be the first to admit that I'm close to clueless on Cal history, and the history of the flag. But this whole issue is about branding. People across the area, state, and country don't give a sh*t about Cal history. All I can conclude is that when the script California is backed by an outline of the state, it makes Cal's brand look like a dozen other universities' cookie cutter display. And the fact that this would be a "new look" makes the whole thing a lot worse. UC might as well stand for University of Copycats.

---

HoopDreams said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

CNHTH said:

---

https://imgur.com/a/X8KmjD8
Seeing the court in person it really isn't that bad.
What I don't like is the state outline in just blue. It's bland and too many blue lines. Imho it would look amazing if they filled the outline of the state with the darker colored hardwood that appears in the paint areas

---

Surprise surprise, I think it sucks. Again even in the world of athletics why are we conforming to the layout of other universities? The number one public university conforms with everyone else? And one more counter argument to the "align with the state" proponents. I note that on the state flag, the bear is standing on a patch of green (grass?), and there is a red horizontal stripe along the bottom. Should we change our colors to green and red to project the correct image? I rest my case on this issue.

---

If you knew your Cal history, you'd know that the Cal walking bear was not based on the state flag. In fact, when the Cal walking bear flag was commissioned in 1872 (see, https://calbears.com/sports/2013/4/17/208216540.aspx), the California state flag was different from the current one (see, ).

The grizzly bear was chosen because it represented the state and was the state's symbol. The gold color was chosen because of its association with our great state's (recent) history. In short, our alma mater's teams are the California Golden Bears because they represent the entire state of California, not just some jerk water location therein.

---

I'll be the first to admit that I'm close to clueless on Cal history, and the history of the flag. But this whole issue is about branding. People across the area, state, and country don't give a sh*t about Cal history. All I can conclude is that when the script California is backed by an outline of the state, it makes Cal's brand look like a dozen other universities' cookie cutter display. And the fact that this would be a "new look" makes the whole thing a lot worse. UC might as well stand for University of Copycats.

---

do you mean we are copying Idaho?

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

CNHTH said:

---

https://imgur.com/a/X8KmjD8
Seeing the court in person it really isn't that bad.
What I don't like is the state outline in just blue. It's bland and too many blue lines. Imho it would look amazing if they filled the outline of the state with the darker colored hardwood that appears in the paint areas

---

Surprise surprise, I think it sucks. Again even in the world of athletics why are we conforming to the layout of other universities? The number one public university conforms with everyone else? And one more counter argument to the "align with the state" proponents. I note that on the state flag, the bear is standing on a patch of green (grass?), and there is a red horizontal stripe along the bottom. Should we change our colors to green and red to project the correct image? I rest my case on this issue.

---

If you knew your Cal history, you'd know that the Cal walking bear was not based on the state flag. In fact, when the Cal walking bear flag was commissioned in 1872 (see, https://calbears.com/sports/2013/4/17/208216540.aspx), the California state flag was different from the current one (see, ).

The grizzly bear was chosen because it represented the state and was the state's symbol. The gold color was chosen because of its association with our great state's (recent) history. In short, our alma mater's teams are the California Golden Bears because they represent the entire state of California, not just some jerk water location therein.

---

I'll be the first to admit that I'm close to clueless on Cal history, and the history of the flag. But this whole issue is about branding. People across the area, state, and country don't give a sh*t about Cal history. All I can conclude is that when the script California is backed by an outline of the state, it makes Cal's brand look like a dozen other universities' cookie cutter display. And the fact that this would be a "new look" makes the whole thing a lot worse. UC might as well stand for University of Copycats.

---

I'm with you on it looking ugly and giving off lemming vibes. But the argument that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university or that it's not representative of the entire state is absurd. Our alma mater is the University of California. All the others are satellite schools.

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

CNHTH said:

---

https://imgur.com/a/X8KmjD8
Seeing the court in person it really isn't that bad.
What I don't like is the state outline in just blue. It's bland and too many blue lines. Imho it would look amazing if they filled the outline of the state with the darker colored hardwood that appears in the paint areas

---

Surprise surprise, I think it sucks. Again even in the world of athletics why are we conforming to the layout of other universities? The number one public university conforms with everyone else? And one more counter argument to the "align with the state" proponents. I note that on the state flag, the bear is standing on a patch of green (grass?), and there is a red horizontal stripe along the bottom. Should we change our colors to green and red to project the correct image? I rest my case on this issue.

---

If you knew your Cal history, you'd know that the Cal walking bear was not based on the state flag. In fact, when the Cal walking bear flag was commissioned in 1872 (see, https://calbears.com/sports/2013/4/17/208216540.aspx), the California state flag was different from the current one (see, ).

The grizzly bear was chosen because it represented the state and was the state's symbol. The gold color was chosen because of its association with our great state's (recent) history. In short, our alma mater's teams are the California Golden Bears because they represent the entire state of California, not just some jerk water location therein.

---

I'll be the first to admit that I'm close to clueless on Cal history, and the history of the flag. But this whole issue is about branding. People across the area, state, and country don't give a sh*t about Cal history. All I can conclude is that when the script California is backed by an outline of the state, it makes Cal's brand look like a dozen other universities' cookie cutter display. And the fact that this would be a "new look" makes the whole thing a lot worse. UC might as well stand for University of Copycats.

---

do you mean we are copying Idaho?

---

Are you sure that isn't a Boise State Broncos helmet instead of an Idaho Vandals helmet?

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

CNHTH said:

---

https://imgur.com/a/X8KmjD8
Seeing the court in person it really isn't that bad.
What I don't like is the state outline in just blue. It's bland and too many blue lines. Imho it would look amazing if they filled the outline of the state with the darker colored hardwood that appears in the paint areas

---

Surprise surprise, I think it sucks. Again even in the world of athletics why are we conforming to the layout of other universities? The number one public university conforms with everyone else? And one more counter argument to the "align with the state" proponents. I note that on the state flag, the bear is standing on a patch of green (grass?), and there is a red horizontal stripe along the bottom. Should we change our colors to green and red to project the correct image? I rest my case on this issue.

---

If you knew your Cal history, you'd know that the Cal walking bear was not based on the state flag. In fact, when the Cal walking bear flag was commissioned in 1872 (see, https://calbears.com/sports/2013/4/17/208216540.aspx), the California state flag was different from the current one (see, ).

The grizzly bear was chosen because it represented the state and was the state's symbol. The gold color was chosen because of its association with our great state's (recent) history. In short, our alma mater's teams are the California Golden Bears because they represent the entire state of California, not just some jerk water location therein.

---

I'll be the first to admit that I'm close to clueless on Cal history, and the history of the flag. But this whole issue is about branding. People across the area, state, and country don't give a sh*t about Cal history. All I can conclude is that when the script California is backed by an outline of the state, it makes Cal's brand look like a dozen other universities' cookie cutter display. And the fact that this would be a "new look" makes the whole thing a lot worse. UC might as well stand for University of Copycats.

---

I'm with you on it looking ugly and giving off lemming vibes. But the argument that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university or that it's not representative of the entire state is absurd. Our alma mater is the University of California. All the others are satellite schools.

---

For the final time (hopefully.). I am not arguing that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university. I am simply stating that from a branding perspective it wouldn't be a good move to decide that just because now we're in the ACC we should start representing ourselves in a different way. The current problem does not lie with the message, it's with the messenger.

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

CNHTH said:

---

https://imgur.com/a/X8KmjD8
Seeing the court in person it really isn't that bad.
What I don't like is the state outline in just blue. It's bland and too many blue lines. Imho it would look amazing if they filled the outline of the state with the darker colored hardwood that appears in the paint areas

---

Surprise surprise, I think it sucks. Again even in the world of athletics why are we conforming to the layout of other universities? The number one public university conforms with everyone else? And one more counter argument to the "align with the state" proponents. I note that on the state flag, the bear is standing on a patch of green (grass?), and there is a red horizontal stripe along the bottom. Should we change our colors to green and red to project the correct image? I rest my case on this issue.

---

If you knew your Cal history, you'd know that the Cal walking bear was not based on the state flag. In fact, when the Cal walking bear flag was commissioned in 1872 (see, https://calbears.com/sports/2013/4/17/208216540.aspx), the California state flag was different from the current one (see, ).

The grizzly bear was chosen because it represented the state and was the state's symbol. The gold color was chosen because of its association with our great state's (recent) history. In short, our alma mater's teams are the California Golden Bears because they represent the entire state of California, not just some jerk water location therein.

---

I'll be the first to admit that I'm close to clueless on Cal history, and the history of the flag. But this whole issue is about branding. People across the area, state, and country don't give a sh*t about Cal history. All I can conclude is that when the script California is backed by an outline of the state, it makes Cal's brand look like a dozen other universities' cookie cutter display. And the fact that this would be a "new look" makes the whole thing a lot worse. UC might as well stand for University of Copycats.

---

I'm with you on it looking ugly and giving off lemming vibes. But the argument that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university or that it's not representative of the entire state is absurd. Our alma mater is the University of California. All the others are satellite schools.

---

For the final time (hopefully.). I am not arguing that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university. I am simply stating that from a branding perspective it wouldn't be a good move to decide that just because now we're in the ACC we should start representing ourselves in a different way. The current problem does not lie with the message, it's with the messenger.

---

I'm honestly not sure what you mean. Cal has always been the flagship university for the State of California. I also don't recall Cal ever branding itself as other than that. While the UC Regents and the UC System have tried to push back and claim Cal is just one of the many schools within the UC system, I don't recollect Cal ever participating in that until recently with the adoption of "B for Berkeley" and the dropping of the "Cal" and "California" monikers.

Maybe I just have not been paying enough attention, if so, please feel free to provide me with the proofs of Cal's previous representations that it's not the state's flagship university.

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

CNHTH said:

---

https://imgur.com/a/X8KmjD8
Seeing the court in person it really isn't that bad.
What I don't like is the state outline in just blue. It's bland and too many blue lines. Imho it would look amazing if they filled the outline of the state with the darker colored hardwood that appears in the paint areas

---

Surprise surprise, I think it sucks. Again even in the world of athletics why are we conforming to the layout of other universities? The number one public university conforms with everyone else? And one more counter argument to the "align with the state" proponents. I note that on the state flag, the bear is standing on a patch of green (grass?), and there is a red horizontal stripe along the bottom. Should we change our colors to green and red to project the correct image? I rest my case on this issue.

---

If you knew your Cal history, you'd know that the Cal walking bear was not based on the state flag. In fact, when the Cal walking bear flag was commissioned in 1872 (see, https://calbears.com/sports/2013/4/17/208216540.aspx), the California state flag was different from the current one (see, ).

The grizzly bear was chosen because it represented the state and was the state's symbol. The gold color was chosen because of its association with our great state's (recent) history. In short, our alma mater's teams are the California Golden Bears because they represent the entire state of California, not just some jerk water location therein.

---

I'll be the first to admit that I'm close to clueless on Cal history, and the history of the flag. But this whole issue is about branding. People across the area, state, and country don't give a sh*t about Cal history. All I can conclude is that when the script California is backed by an outline of the state, it makes Cal's brand look like a dozen other universities' cookie cutter display. And the fact that this would be a "new look" makes the whole thing a lot worse. UC might as well stand for University of Copycats.

---

I'm with you on it looking ugly and giving off lemming vibes. But the argument that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university or that it's not representative of the entire state is absurd. Our alma mater is the University of California. All the others are satellite schools.

---

For the final time (hopefully.). I am not arguing that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university. I am simply stating that from a branding perspective it wouldn't be a good move to decide that just because now we're in the ACC we should start representing ourselves in a different way. The current problem does not lie with the message, it's with the messenger.

---

I'm honestly not sure what you mean. Cal has always been the flagship university for the State of California. I also don't recall Cal ever branding itself as other than that. While the UC Regents and the UC System have tried to push back and claim Cal is just one of the many schools within the UC system, I don't recollect Cal ever participating in that until recently with the adoption of "B for Berkeley" and the dropping of the "Cal" and "California" monikers.

Maybe I just have not been paying enough attention, if so, please feel free to provide me with the proofs of Cal's previous representations that it's not the state's flagship university.

---

Wow. All I'm talking about on this subject is the decision to add an outline of the state of California to the mid court emblem on the freakin' basketball court, not all of this other stuff. It's not neccessary. The absence of a state outline doesn't mean that the university doesn't represent the state of California, but a typical sports fan is not going to stop and consider what we represent, whether or not they're looking at the state outline. The more obvious conclusion is going to be that our school, and our updated "logo", is just like a bunch of other schools. Who wants that?

And let me remind everyone that the reason the Warriors started using the whole "Golden State" thing, was that in the early seventies after owner Franklin Mieuli decided that he no longer wanted the Warriors playing half their games in SF and half in Oakland - but all in Oakland, he changed the name from the San Francisco Warriors to the Golden State Warriors, (as opposed to the "Oakland Warriors") because he didn't want to alienate the West Bay fans from continuing to follow the team. It didn't really have anything to do with the state of California.

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

CNHTH said:

---

https://imgur.com/a/X8KmjD8
Seeing the court in person it really isn't that bad.
What I don't like is the state outline in just blue. It's bland and too many blue lines. Imho it would look amazing if they filled the outline of the state with the darker colored hardwood that appears in the paint areas

---

Surprise surprise, I think it sucks. Again even in the world of athletics why are we conforming to the layout of other universities? The number one public university conforms with everyone else? And one more counter argument to the "align with the state" proponents. I note that on the state flag, the bear is standing on a patch of green (grass?), and there is a red horizontal stripe along the bottom. Should we change our colors to green and red to project the correct image? I rest my case on this issue.

---

If you knew your Cal history, you'd know that the Cal walking bear was not based on the state flag. In fact, when the Cal walking bear flag was commissioned in 1872 (see, https://calbears.com/sports/2013/4/17/208216540.aspx), the California state flag was different from the current one (see, ).

The grizzly bear was chosen because it represented the state and was the state's symbol. The gold color was chosen because of its association with our great state's (recent) history. In short, our alma mater's teams are the California Golden Bears because they represent the entire state of California, not just some jerk water location therein.

---

I'll be the first to admit that I'm close to clueless on Cal history, and the history of the flag. But this whole issue is about branding. People across the area, state, and country don't give a sh*t about Cal history. All I can conclude is that when the script California is backed by an outline of the state, it makes Cal's brand look like a dozen other universities' cookie cutter display. And the fact that this would be a "new look" makes the whole thing a lot worse. UC might as well stand for University of Copycats.

---

I'm with you on it looking ugly and giving off lemming vibes. But the argument that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university or that it's not representative of the entire state is absurd. Our alma mater is the University of California. All the others are satellite schools.

---

For the final time (hopefully.). I am not arguing that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university. I am simply stating that from a branding perspective it wouldn't be a good move to decide that just because now we're in the ACC we should start representing ourselves in a different way. The current problem does not lie with the message, it's with the messenger.

---

I'm honestly not sure what you mean. Cal has always been the flagship university for the State of California. I also don't recall Cal ever branding itself as other than that. While the UC Regents and the UC System have tried to push back and claim Cal is just one of the many schools within the UC system, I don't recollect Cal ever participating in that until recently with the adoption of "B for Berkeley" and the dropping of the "Cal" and "California" monikers.

Maybe I just have not been paying enough attention, if so, please feel free to provide me with the proofs of Cal's previous representations that it's not the state's flagship university.

---

Wow. All I'm talking about on this subject is the decision to add an outline of the state of California to the mid court emblem on the freakin' basketball court, not all of this other stuff. It's not neccessary. The absence of a state outline doesn't mean that the university doesn't represent the state of California, but a typical sports fan is not going to stop and consider what we represent, whether or not they're looking at the state outline. The more obvious conclusion is going to be that our school, and our updated "logo", is just like a bunch of other schools. Who wants that?

And let me remind everyone that the reason the Warriors started using the whole "Golden State" thing, was that in the early seventies after owner Franklin Mieuli decided that he no longer wanted the Warriors playing half their games in SF and half in Oakland - but all in Oakland, he changed the name from the San Francisco Warriors to the Golden State Warriors, (as opposed to the "Oakland Warriors") because he didn't want to alienate the West Bay fans from continuing to follow the team. It didn't really have anything to do with the state of California.

---

If you're limiting your objection to the inclusion of the state's outline on the court, then I believe we're in agreement. However, from your previous posts, it sure seemed like you were objecting to Cal representing the entire state of California as its flagship university. Perhaps I misunderstood your prior posts.

Incidentally, I recall reading before that the Warriors were able to call themselves the "Golden Stare" (as opposed to the "San Francisco," "Oakland," or even the "Bay Area" Warriors because they also played some home games in San Diego during that transition period. Additionally, per the Warriors's history page on NBA.com, "The team became the San Francisco Warriors after they relocated to the West Coast in 1962, and changed its name to the Golden State Warriorssymbolizing a team belonging to all of California, the Golden State -- upon settling into a new home in Oakland in 1971." (See, https://www.nba.com/warriors/news/behind_the_name.html.) As such, it looks very much like the Warriors were trying to represent the entire state of California.

---

HoopDreams said:

---

YES to California
YES to CAL
NO to State outline on center court
YES to C
NO to B

NO to Berkeley in Cal Athletics (except for subtle references, and never as major logos on courts, fields and uniforms)

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

CNHTH said:

---

https://imgur.com/a/X8KmjD8
Seeing the court in person it really isn't that bad.
What I don't like is the state outline in just blue. It's bland and too many blue lines. Imho it would look amazing if they filled the outline of the state with the darker colored hardwood that appears in the paint areas

---

Surprise surprise, I think it sucks. Again even in the world of athletics why are we conforming to the layout of other universities? The number one public university conforms with everyone else? And one more counter argument to the "align with the state" proponents. I note that on the state flag, the bear is standing on a patch of green (grass?), and there is a red horizontal stripe along the bottom. Should we change our colors to green and red to project the correct image? I rest my case on this issue.

---

If you knew your Cal history, you'd know that the Cal walking bear was not based on the state flag. In fact, when the Cal walking bear flag was commissioned in 1872 (see, https://calbears.com/sports/2013/4/17/208216540.aspx), the California state flag was different from the current one (see, ).

The grizzly bear was chosen because it represented the state and was the state's symbol. The gold color was chosen because of its association with our great state's (recent) history. In short, our alma mater's teams are the California Golden Bears because they represent the entire state of California, not just some jerk water location therein.

---

I'll be the first to admit that I'm close to clueless on Cal history, and the history of the flag. But this whole issue is about branding. People across the area, state, and country don't give a sh*t about Cal history. All I can conclude is that when the script California is backed by an outline of the state, it makes Cal's brand look like a dozen other universities' cookie cutter display. And the fact that this would be a "new look" makes the whole thing a lot worse. UC might as well stand for University of Copycats.

---

I'm with you on it looking ugly and giving off lemming vibes. But the argument that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university or that it's not representative of the entire state is absurd. Our alma mater is the University of California. All the others are satellite schools.

---

For the final time (hopefully.). I am not arguing that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university. I am simply stating that from a branding perspective it wouldn't be a good move to decide that just because now we're in the ACC we should start representing ourselves in a different way. The current problem does not lie with the message, it's with the messenger.

---

I'm honestly not sure what you mean. Cal has always been the flagship university for the State of California. I also don't recall Cal ever branding itself as other than that. While the UC Regents and the UC System have tried to push back and claim Cal is just one of the many schools within the UC system, I don't recollect Cal ever participating in that until recently with the adoption of "B for Berkeley" and the dropping of the "Cal" and "California" monikers.

Maybe I just have not been paying enough attention, if so, please feel free to provide me with the proofs of Cal's previous representations that it's not the state's flagship university.

---

Wow. All I'm talking about on this subject is the decision to add an outline of the state of California to the mid court emblem on the freakin' basketball court, not all of this other stuff. It's not neccessary. The absence of a state outline doesn't mean that the university doesn't represent the state of California, but a typical sports fan is not going to stop and consider what we represent, whether or not they're looking at the state outline. The more obvious conclusion is going to be that our school, and our updated "logo", is just like a bunch of other schools. Who wants that?

And let me remind everyone that the reason the Warriors started using the whole "Golden State" thing, was that in the early seventies after owner Franklin Mieuli decided that he no longer wanted the Warriors playing half their games in SF and half in Oakland - but all in Oakland, he changed the name from the San Francisco Warriors to the Golden State Warriors, (as opposed to the "Oakland Warriors") because he didn't want to alienate the West Bay fans from continuing to follow the team. It didn't really have anything to do with the state of California.

---

If you're limiting your objection to the inclusion of the state's outline on the court, then I believe we're in agreement. However, from your previous posts, it sure seemed like you were objecting to Cal representing the entire state of California as its flagship university. Perhaps I misunderstood your prior posts.

Incidentally, I recall reading before that the Warriors were able to call themselves the "Golden Stare" (as opposed to the "San Francisco," "Oakland," or even the "Bay Area" Warriors because they also played some home games in San Diego during that transition period. Additionally, per the Warriors's history page on NBA.com, "The team became the San Francisco Warriors after they relocated to the West Coast in 1962, and changed its name to the Golden State Warriorssymbolizing a team belonging to all of California, the Golden State -- upon settling into a new home in Oakland in 1971." (See, https://www.nba.com/warriors/news/behind_the_name.html.) As such, it looks very much like the Warriors were trying to represent the entire state of California.

---

Yes, I'm happy to say we are in agreement about what the University of California represents.

When Franklin Mieuli settled on "Golden State", was he really trying to have the Warriors represent the state of California or did he not want to alientate residents of San Francisico from supporting his team? If you really think the answer to this is the former, then your awareness of basic business strategy may be slightly lacking.

---

HoopDreams said:

---

YES to California
YES to CAL
NO to State outline on center court
YES to C
NO to B

NO to Berkeley in Cal Athletics (except for subtle references, and never as major logos on courts, fields and uniforms)

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

CNHTH said:

---

https://imgur.com/a/X8KmjD8
Seeing the court in person it really isn't that bad.
What I don't like is the state outline in just blue. It's bland and too many blue lines. Imho it would look amazing if they filled the outline of the state with the darker colored hardwood that appears in the paint areas

---

Surprise surprise, I think it sucks. Again even in the world of athletics why are we conforming to the layout of other universities? The number one public university conforms with everyone else? And one more counter argument to the "align with the state" proponents. I note that on the state flag, the bear is standing on a patch of green (grass?), and there is a red horizontal stripe along the bottom. Should we change our colors to green and red to project the correct image? I rest my case on this issue.

---

If you knew your Cal history, you'd know that the Cal walking bear was not based on the state flag. In fact, when the Cal walking bear flag was commissioned in 1872 (see, https://calbears.com/sports/2013/4/17/208216540.aspx), the California state flag was different from the current one (see, ).

The grizzly bear was chosen because it represented the state and was the state's symbol. The gold color was chosen because of its association with our great state's (recent) history. In short, our alma mater's teams are the California Golden Bears because they represent the entire state of California, not just some jerk water location therein.

---

I'll be the first to admit that I'm close to clueless on Cal history, and the history of the flag. But this whole issue is about branding. People across the area, state, and country don't give a sh*t about Cal history. All I can conclude is that when the script California is backed by an outline of the state, it makes Cal's brand look like a dozen other universities' cookie cutter display. And the fact that this would be a "new look" makes the whole thing a lot worse. UC might as well stand for University of Copycats.

---

I'm with you on it looking ugly and giving off lemming vibes. But the argument that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university or that it's not representative of the entire state is absurd. Our alma mater is the University of California. All the others are satellite schools.

---

For the final time (hopefully.). I am not arguing that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university. I am simply stating that from a branding perspective it wouldn't be a good move to decide that just because now we're in the ACC we should start representing ourselves in a different way. The current problem does not lie with the message, it's with the messenger.

---

I'm honestly not sure what you mean. Cal has always been the flagship university for the State of California. I also don't recall Cal ever branding itself as other than that. While the UC Regents and the UC System have tried to push back and claim Cal is just one of the many schools within the UC system, I don't recollect Cal ever participating in that until recently with the adoption of "B for Berkeley" and the dropping of the "Cal" and "California" monikers.

Maybe I just have not been paying enough attention, if so, please feel free to provide me with the proofs of Cal's previous representations that it's not the state's flagship university.

---

Wow. All I'm talking about on this subject is the decision to add an outline of the state of California to the mid court emblem on the freakin' basketball court, not all of this other stuff. It's not neccessary. The absence of a state outline doesn't mean that the university doesn't represent the state of California, but a typical sports fan is not going to stop and consider what we represent, whether or not they're looking at the state outline. The more obvious conclusion is going to be that our school, and our updated "logo", is just like a bunch of other schools. Who wants that?

And let me remind everyone that the reason the Warriors started using the whole "Golden State" thing, was that in the early seventies after owner Franklin Mieuli decided that he no longer wanted the Warriors playing half their games in SF and half in Oakland - but all in Oakland, he changed the name from the San Francisco Warriors to the Golden State Warriors, (as opposed to the "Oakland Warriors") because he didn't want to alienate the West Bay fans from continuing to follow the team. It didn't really have anything to do with the state of California.

---

If you're limiting your objection to the inclusion of the state's outline on the court, then I believe we're in agreement. However, from your previous posts, it sure seemed like you were objecting to Cal representing the entire state of California as its flagship university. Perhaps I misunderstood your prior posts.

Incidentally, I recall reading before that the Warriors were able to call themselves the "Golden Stare" (as opposed to the "San Francisco," "Oakland," or even the "Bay Area" Warriors because they also played some home games in San Diego during that transition period. Additionally, per the Warriors's history page on NBA.com, "The team became the San Francisco Warriors after they relocated to the West Coast in 1962, and changed its name to the Golden State Warriorssymbolizing a team belonging to all of California, the Golden State -- upon settling into a new home in Oakland in 1971." (See, https://www.nba.com/warriors/news/behind_the_name.html.) As such, it looks very much like the Warriors were trying to represent the entire state of California.

---

Yes, I'm happy to say we are in agreement about what the University of California represents.

When Franklin Mieuli settled on "Golden State", was he really trying to have the Warriors represent the state of California or did he not want to alientate residents of San Francisico from supporting his team? If you really think the answer to this is the former, then your awareness of basic business strategy may be slightly lacking.

---

I doubt we'd ever know exactly what his intentions were when he opted for "Golden State," but I'm pretty confident he was trying to increase the team's footprint and fanbase beyond SF by branding the team the "Golden State" Warriors. Heck, he even had the team play home games in San Diego! You cannot seriously tell me that wasn't intended to increase the fan base beyond San Francisco. That's the business decision he made: to increase the fan base beyond that of SF. Sure he didn't want to alienate the SF fan base, but there was more to it than that. Two things can be true at the same time.

---

calumnus said:

---

Yes, in 1971-72 when the Warriors changed their name to "Golden State" and played most of their games in Oakland, they also played six home games in San Diego and added the map of California to their logo.
They could have easily just kept "San Francisco" like nearly every other pro team that moves to a nearby city does. Or gone with "San Francisco Bay Warriors" if they were trying to limit their geographic identity.

---

BeachedBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Yes, in 1971-72 when the Warriors changed their name to "Golden State" and played most of their games in Oakland, they also played six home games in San Diego and added the map of California to their logo.
They could have easily just kept "San Francisco" like nearly every other pro team that moves to a nearby city does. Or gone with "San Francisco Bay Warriors" if they were trying to limit their geographic identity.

---

I'm highly confident that in 71-72, Meuli wanted to use the name Bay City Rollers, but it was already taken!!!

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

calumnus said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

CNHTH said:

---

https://imgur.com/a/X8KmjD8
Seeing the court in person it really isn't that bad.
What I don't like is the state outline in just blue. It's bland and too many blue lines. Imho it would look amazing if they filled the outline of the state with the darker colored hardwood that appears in the paint areas

---

Surprise surprise, I think it sucks. Again even in the world of athletics why are we conforming to the layout of other universities? The number one public university conforms with everyone else? And one more counter argument to the "align with the state" proponents. I note that on the state flag, the bear is standing on a patch of green (grass?), and there is a red horizontal stripe along the bottom. Should we change our colors to green and red to project the correct image? I rest my case on this issue.

---

If you knew your Cal history, you'd know that the Cal walking bear was not based on the state flag. In fact, when the Cal walking bear flag was commissioned in 1872 (see, https://calbears.com/sports/2013/4/17/208216540.aspx), the California state flag was different from the current one (see, ).

The grizzly bear was chosen because it represented the state and was the state's symbol. The gold color was chosen because of its association with our great state's (recent) history. In short, our alma mater's teams are the California Golden Bears because they represent the entire state of California, not just some jerk water location therein.

---

I'll be the first to admit that I'm close to clueless on Cal history, and the history of the flag. But this whole issue is about branding. People across the area, state, and country don't give a sh*t about Cal history. All I can conclude is that when the script California is backed by an outline of the state, it makes Cal's brand look like a dozen other universities' cookie cutter display. And the fact that this would be a "new look" makes the whole thing a lot worse. UC might as well stand for University of Copycats.

---

I'm with you on it looking ugly and giving off lemming vibes. But the argument that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university or that it's not representative of the entire state is absurd. Our alma mater is the University of California. All the others are satellite schools.

---

For the final time (hopefully.). I am not arguing that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university. I am simply stating that from a branding perspective it wouldn't be a good move to decide that just because now we're in the ACC we should start representing ourselves in a different way. The current problem does not lie with the message, it's with the messenger.

---

I'm honestly not sure what you mean. Cal has always been the flagship university for the State of California. I also don't recall Cal ever branding itself as other than that. While the UC Regents and the UC System have tried to push back and claim Cal is just one of the many schools within the UC system, I don't recollect Cal ever participating in that until recently with the adoption of "B for Berkeley" and the dropping of the "Cal" and "California" monikers.

Maybe I just have not been paying enough attention, if so, please feel free to provide me with the proofs of Cal's previous representations that it's not the state's flagship university.

---

Wow. All I'm talking about on this subject is the decision to add an outline of the state of California to the mid court emblem on the freakin' basketball court, not all of this other stuff. It's not neccessary. The absence of a state outline doesn't mean that the university doesn't represent the state of California, but a typical sports fan is not going to stop and consider what we represent, whether or not they're looking at the state outline. The more obvious conclusion is going to be that our school, and our updated "logo", is just like a bunch of other schools. Who wants that?

And let me remind everyone that the reason the Warriors started using the whole "Golden State" thing, was that in the early seventies after owner Franklin Mieuli decided that he no longer wanted the Warriors playing half their games in SF and half in Oakland - but all in Oakland, he changed the name from the San Francisco Warriors to the Golden State Warriors, (as opposed to the "Oakland Warriors") because he didn't want to alienate the West Bay fans from continuing to follow the team. It didn't really have anything to do with the state of California.

---

If you're limiting your objection to the inclusion of the state's outline on the court, then I believe we're in agreement. However, from your previous posts, it sure seemed like you were objecting to Cal representing the entire state of California as its flagship university. Perhaps I misunderstood your prior posts.

Incidentally, I recall reading before that the Warriors were able to call themselves the "Golden Stare" (as opposed to the "San Francisco," "Oakland," or even the "Bay Area" Warriors because they also played some home games in San Diego during that transition period. Additionally, per the Warriors's history page on NBA.com, "The team became the San Francisco Warriors after they relocated to the West Coast in 1962, and changed its name to the Golden State Warriorssymbolizing a team belonging to all of California, the Golden State -- upon settling into a new home in Oakland in 1971." (See, https://www.nba.com/warriors/news/behind_the_name.html.) As such, it looks very much like the Warriors were trying to represent the entire state of California.

---

Yes, I'm happy to say we are in agreement about what the University of California represents.

When Franklin Mieuli settled on "Golden State", was he really trying to have the Warriors represent the state of California or did he not want to alientate residents of San Francisico from supporting his team? If you really think the answer to this is the former, then your awareness of basic business strategy may be slightly lacking.

---

You think Mueli was turning away fans if they were from Sacramento?

Why is it important to you that Cal NOT represent the entire state in the way other schools that bear their state's name do?

---

I sincerely mean no disrespect. But it is amazing to me that you continue to draw conclusions from my statements instead of taking them at face value. So let me answer your two questions:

1) Of course Mieuli was not turning away fans if they were from Sacramento. But the purpose of renaming the Warriors title as "Golden State" was primarily (above everything else) to avoid alienating the San Francisco fan base. Honestly, were you around in 1971? There was NO cable TV, NO internet, and fans did not travel out of their home areas the way they do today. The Warriors initially played a handful of games in San Diego. How long did that last? One, maybe two seasons, and that was it.

2) The fact that I am not in favor of adding an outline of the state to the Cal logo DOES NOT mean that they shouldn't represent the state. But the reality is, if you're trying to make this an issue pertaining to Cal ATHLETICS, nobody other than alumni really gives a sh*t. In this day and age, do you really think that a resident within the state of California is going to see that outline and for that reason think, "gee maybe we should follow Cal basketball, and maybe go to a game?" The reason for my opinion is that I think above everything else, it's indicating that now Cal wants to be like Indiana or North Carolina. A cookie cutter. To Big C's point - YES to California, YES to Cal, NO to State Outline.

---

calumnus said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

CNHTH said:

---

https://imgur.com/a/X8KmjD8
Seeing the court in person it really isn't that bad.
What I don't like is the state outline in just blue. It's bland and too many blue lines. Imho it would look amazing if they filled the outline of the state with the darker colored hardwood that appears in the paint areas

---

Surprise surprise, I think it sucks. Again even in the world of athletics why are we conforming to the layout of other universities? The number one public university conforms with everyone else? And one more counter argument to the "align with the state" proponents. I note that on the state flag, the bear is standing on a patch of green (grass?), and there is a red horizontal stripe along the bottom. Should we change our colors to green and red to project the correct image? I rest my case on this issue.

---

If you knew your Cal history, you'd know that the Cal walking bear was not based on the state flag. In fact, when the Cal walking bear flag was commissioned in 1872 (see, https://calbears.com/sports/2013/4/17/208216540.aspx), the California state flag was different from the current one (see, ).

The grizzly bear was chosen because it represented the state and was the state's symbol. The gold color was chosen because of its association with our great state's (recent) history. In short, our alma mater's teams are the California Golden Bears because they represent the entire state of California, not just some jerk water location therein.

---

I'll be the first to admit that I'm close to clueless on Cal history, and the history of the flag. But this whole issue is about branding. People across the area, state, and country don't give a sh*t about Cal history. All I can conclude is that when the script California is backed by an outline of the state, it makes Cal's brand look like a dozen other universities' cookie cutter display. And the fact that this would be a "new look" makes the whole thing a lot worse. UC might as well stand for University of Copycats.

---

I'm with you on it looking ugly and giving off lemming vibes. But the argument that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university or that it's not representative of the entire state is absurd. Our alma mater is the University of California. All the others are satellite schools.

---

For the final time (hopefully.). I am not arguing that our alma mater is not the state's flagship university. I am simply stating that from a branding perspective it wouldn't be a good move to decide that just because now we're in the ACC we should start representing ourselves in a different way. The current problem does not lie with the message, it's with the messenger.

---

I'm honestly not sure what you mean. Cal has always been the flagship university for the State of California. I also don't recall Cal ever branding itself as other than that. While the UC Regents and the UC System have tried to push back and claim Cal is just one of the many schools within the UC system, I don't recollect Cal ever participating in that until recently with the adoption of "B for Berkeley" and the dropping of the "Cal" and "California" monikers.

Maybe I just have not been paying enough attention, if so, please feel free to provide me with the proofs of Cal's previous representations that it's not the state's flagship university.

---

Wow. All I'm talking about on this subject is the decision to add an outline of the state of California to the mid court emblem on the freakin' basketball court, not all of this other stuff. It's not neccessary. The absence of a state outline doesn't mean that the university doesn't represent the state of California, but a typical sports fan is not going to stop and consider what we represent, whether or not they're looking at the state outline. The more obvious conclusion is going to be that our school, and our updated "logo", is just like a bunch of other schools. Who wants that?

And let me remind everyone that the reason the Warriors started using the whole "Golden State" thing, was that in the early seventies after owner Franklin Mieuli decided that he no longer wanted the Warriors playing half their games in SF and half in Oakland - but all in Oakland, he changed the name from the San Francisco Warriors to the Golden State Warriors, (as opposed to the "Oakland Warriors") because he didn't want to alienate the West Bay fans from continuing to follow the team. It didn't really have anything to do with the state of California.

---

If you're limiting your objection to the inclusion of the state's outline on the court, then I believe we're in agreement. However, from your previous posts, it sure seemed like you were objecting to Cal representing the entire state of California as its flagship university. Perhaps I misunderstood your prior posts.

Incidentally, I recall reading before that the Warriors were able to call themselves the "Golden Stare" (as opposed to the "San Francisco," "Oakland," or even the "Bay Area" Warriors because they also played some home games in San Diego during that transition period. Additionally, per the Warriors's history page on NBA.com, "The team became the San Francisco Warriors after they relocated to the West Coast in 1962, and changed its name to the Golden State Warriorssymbolizing a team belonging to all of California, the Golden State -- upon settling into a new home in Oakland in 1971." (See, https://www.nba.com/warriors/news/behind_the_name.html.) As such, it looks very much like the Warriors were trying to represent the entire state of California.

---

Yes, I'm happy to say we are in agreement about what the University of California represents.

When Franklin Mieuli settled on "Golden State", was he really trying to have the Warriors represent the state of California or did he not want to alientate residents of San Francisico from supporting his team? If you really think the answer to this is the former, then your awareness of basic business strategy may be slightly lacking.

---

I doubt we'd ever know exactly what his intentions were when he opted for "Golden State," but I'm pretty confident he was trying to increase the team's footprint and fanbase beyond SF by branding the team the "Golden State" Warriors. Heck, he even had the team play home games in San Diego! You cannot seriously tell me that wasn't intended to increase the fan base beyond San Francisco. That's the business decision he made: to increase the fan base beyond that of SF. Sure he didn't want to alienate the SF fan base, but there was more to it than that. Two things can be true at the same time.

---

Yes, in 1971-72 when the Warriors changed their name to "Golden State" and played most of their games in Oakland, they also played six home games in San Diego and added the map of California to their logo.
They could have easily just kept "San Francisco" like nearly every other pro team that moves to a nearby city does. Or gone with "San Francisco Bay Warriors" if they were trying to limit their geographic identity.

---