(04-10-2013 01:32 PM)UHCougar Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 12:16 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 11:38 AM)UHCougar Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 09:06 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Since Texas State wasn't an established brand, they don't really count in this...

But I do like the new look better...

. . . you're so right; the 34,000 students enrolled in the 5th largest university in Texas behind Texas, Texas A&M, Houston, and Texas Tech, with a history that dates back to 1899, and includes a President of the United States of America, just isn't an "established" brand . . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_State...San_Marcos

Bit is right. The name "Texas State University" or "Texas State University-San Marcos" is not an established brand.

LBJ's diploma from that institution (see image below) bears the name "Southwest Texas State Teachers College".

The question was whether an NCAA team completely re-branded. . .

Texas State is one of the schools that has undergone a major overhaul of its "brand" in the last 10 years. . . since the school was founded as Southwest Texas State Teachers College (LBJ's diploma above), then become just Southwest Texas State, and now Texas State, this university has overhauled pretty much everything about itself. The athletic's teams "look" is entirely different in just the last two or three years.

And just because you may not have ever heard of them, doesn't mean it's not an "established" brand. There isn't a person in Texas that doesn't readily recognize the Texas State power cat logo, colors, etc. It is equally as well-known by more total people than most of the teams in the AAC. I guarantee there are just as many people who recognize the Texas State logo as the West Virginia logo before it started playing in the Big XII. This school has won multiple football national titles in the divisions in which they have played. They have exploded into one of the largest universities in the country. Their move to FBS is a continuation of the re-brand.

Sometimes the tunnel vision of people on this board confound me.

The entire nation doesn't live in Texas, and more of the nation has heard of every ACC program than has heard of Texas State...

You might not like to admit that. But it's true...

Every nation I've ever been to has had somebody there tell me "Go Mountaineers", when I'm wearing my WVU gear. How many people outside of Texas would recognize Texas State gear, especially since it's undergone such changes...

Talk about tunnel vision. Texas isn't the world either, dude. Travel around a bit and see for yourself.

BTW, I've been to Texas, and have even lived there. Have you ever been to West Virginia?

I have absolutely NOTHING against TXST but I think you are really over stating their brand with "everybody in Texas knows it and recognizes it"

That's just not true.

TXST is best known in San Antonio and Austin because those two areas are where they traditionally draw students from.

Outside those two areas you rarely if ever see any TXST gear or stickers.

If you show an average Texas resident outside that area the Bobcat logo, most are not going to be able to identify it as TXST.

Now they are growing and expanding and getting more and more kids from outside their traditional SA-Austin-New Braunfels corridor but their brand is just not at the level you are implying it is at yet.

(04-10-2013 01:58 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 01:32 PM)UHCougar Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 12:16 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 11:38 AM)UHCougar Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 09:06 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Since Texas State wasn't an established brand, they don't really count in this...

But I do like the new look better...

. . . you're so right; the 34,000 students enrolled in the 5th largest university in Texas behind Texas, Texas A&M, Houston, and Texas Tech, with a history that dates back to 1899, and includes a President of the United States of America, just isn't an "established" brand . . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_State...San_Marcos

Bit is right. The name "Texas State University" or "Texas State University-San Marcos" is not an established brand.

LBJ's diploma from that institution (see image below) bears the name "Southwest Texas State Teachers College".

The question was whether an NCAA team completely re-branded. . .

Texas State is one of the schools that has undergone a major overhaul of its "brand" in the last 10 years. . . since the school was founded as Southwest Texas State Teachers College (LBJ's diploma above), then become just Southwest Texas State, and now Texas State, this university has overhauled pretty much everything about itself. The athletic's teams "look" is entirely different in just the last two or three years.

And just because you may not have ever heard of them, doesn't mean it's not an "established" brand. There isn't a person in Texas that doesn't readily recognize the Texas State power cat logo, colors, etc. It is equally as well-known by more total people than most of the teams in the AAC. I guarantee there are just as many people who recognize the Texas State logo as the West Virginia logo before it started playing in the Big XII. This school has won multiple football national titles in the divisions in which they have played. They have exploded into one of the largest universities in the country. Their move to FBS is a continuation of the re-brand.

Sometimes the tunnel vision of people on this board confound me.

The entire nation doesn't live in Texas, and more of the nation has heard of every ACC program than has heard of Texas State...

You might not like to admit that. But it's true...

Every nation I've ever been to has had somebody there tell me "Go Mountaineers", when I'm wearing my WVU gear. How many people outside of Texas would recognize Texas State gear, especially since it's undergone such changes...

Talk about tunnel vision. Texas isn't the world either, dude. Travel around a bit and see for yourself.

BTW, I've been to Texas, and have even lived there. Have you ever been to West Virginia?

Look, I'm not saying that Texas State is on par in national brand awareness with a West Virginia. To argue that would be silly. But to dismiss the 5th largest university in Texas with an near 10-year sustained enrollment over 30,000, and a history that dates back to 1899, as not an "established brand" is equally silly. . .

Contrary to what you think, "most" people in this country couldn't name the members of the Mountain West, AAC, ACC, Big East, or BIG for that matter. . . we in the bubble on this board too often forget what the regular "fan" really knows about his own conference, much less about others . . . and as to my "traveling around the country," last year for work, I visited 31 states, including West Virginia . . . so, yes, I know something about the academic world and university sports . . .

And for the 10th Man, you are terribly underselling the common knowledge of Texas State, certainly in Texas . . . the fact is that a major source of students for Texas State has always been the Houston area . . . the Dallas/Ft. Worth area is growing fast . . . Texas State has been a well-known name among virtually every teacher, guidance counselor, athletic coach, parent, and high school senior in Texas for more than 30 years. To deny that is just silly. . .

Again, the continued tunnel vision on this board continues to confound me.

(04-10-2013 02:45 PM)UHCougar Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 01:58 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 01:32 PM)UHCougar Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 12:16 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 11:38 AM)UHCougar Wrote:  . . . you're so right; the 34,000 students enrolled in the 5th largest university in Texas behind Texas, Texas A&M, Houston, and Texas Tech, with a history that dates back to 1899, and includes a President of the United States of America, just isn't an "established" brand . . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_State...San_Marcos

Bit is right. The name "Texas State University" or "Texas State University-San Marcos" is not an established brand.

LBJ's diploma from that institution (see image below) bears the name "Southwest Texas State Teachers College".

The question was whether an NCAA team completely re-branded. . .

Texas State is one of the schools that has undergone a major overhaul of its "brand" in the last 10 years. . . since the school was founded as Southwest Texas State Teachers College (LBJ's diploma above), then become just Southwest Texas State, and now Texas State, this university has overhauled pretty much everything about itself. The athletic's teams "look" is entirely different in just the last two or three years.

And just because you may not have ever heard of them, doesn't mean it's not an "established" brand. There isn't a person in Texas that doesn't readily recognize the Texas State power cat logo, colors, etc. It is equally as well-known by more total people than most of the teams in the AAC. I guarantee there are just as many people who recognize the Texas State logo as the West Virginia logo before it started playing in the Big XII. This school has won multiple football national titles in the divisions in which they have played. They have exploded into one of the largest universities in the country. Their move to FBS is a continuation of the re-brand.

Sometimes the tunnel vision of people on this board confound me.

The entire nation doesn't live in Texas, and more of the nation has heard of every ACC program than has heard of Texas State...

You might not like to admit that. But it's true...

Every nation I've ever been to has had somebody there tell me "Go Mountaineers", when I'm wearing my WVU gear. How many people outside of Texas would recognize Texas State gear, especially since it's undergone such changes...

Talk about tunnel vision. Texas isn't the world either, dude. Travel around a bit and see for yourself.

BTW, I've been to Texas, and have even lived there. Have you ever been to West Virginia?

Look, I'm not saying that Texas State is on par in national brand awareness with a West Virginia. To argue that would be silly. But to dismiss the 5th largest university in Texas with an near 10-year sustained enrollment over 30,000, and a history that dates back to 1899, as not an "established brand" is equally silly. . .

Contrary to what you think, "most" people in this country couldn't name the members of the Mountain West, AAC, ACC, Big East, or BIG for that matter. . . we in the bubble on this board too often forget what the regular "fan" really knows about his own conference, much less about others . . . and as to my "traveling around the country," last year for work, I visited 31 states, including West Virginia . . . so, yes, I know something about the academic world and university sports . . .

And for the 10th Man, you are terribly underselling the common knowledge of Texas State, certainly in Texas . . . the fact is that a major source of students for Texas State has always been the Houston area . . . the Dallas/Ft. Worth area is growing fast . . . Texas State has been a well-known name among virtually every teacher, guidance counselor, athletic coach, parent, and high school senior in Texas for more than 30 years. To deny that is just silly. . .

Again, the continued tunnel vision on this board continues to confound me.

I never did dismiss Texas State. I merely said they had never established themselves as a brand name in college football prior to becoming Texas State, so discussions about them changing a brand nobody in the nation knew was outside the realm of the discussion, for the purpose at hand. The purpose at hand was the changing of well known brands, which Texas State hasn't been. Did you forget that? You totally missed that point and went off on a rant that has now lasted 3 pages...

Texas isn't the center of the Earth, no matter how much Texans like to think it is. If it wasn't for all the folks from Tennessee, Texas would still be a part of Mexico. So lighten up, Francis...

(04-10-2013 02:58 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I never did dismiss Texas State. I merely said they had never established themselves as a brand name in college football prior to becoming Texas State, so discussions about them changing a brand nobody in the nation knew was outside the realm of the discussion, for the purpose at hand. The purpose at hand was the changing of well known brands, which Texas State hasn't been. Did you forget that? You totally missed that point and went off on a rant that has now lasted 3 pages...

Texas isn't the center of the Earth, no matter how much Texans like to think it is. If it wasn't for all the folks from Tennessee, Texas would still be a part of Mexico. So lighten up, Francis...

(04-09-2013 07:40 PM)Caltex2 Wrote:  Has a school ever changed their look entirely? I don't mean schools that changed their name such as St. John's, Miami U and Arkansas State because of the mandate to change because of Native American sensitivities.

Has a team done a pro-sports style change of colors and logo? A nickname change might have also happened, though I already laid out what I'm not looking for.

(04-10-2013 09:06 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Since Texas State wasn't an established brand, they don't really count in this...

But I do like the new look better...

Actually, the original OP didn't have any limitations about "established brands" or otherwise, that was entirely your desire to diminish a new FBS school. . . so I didn't "miss" anything . . . maybe that wasn't your intent, but it was certainly the effect . . . Texas State has completely overhauled is "brand" as much as any FBS school in the country . . . and it's old SWT brand was as well known by millions and millions of people in their region certainly as West Virginia is known in theirs, and until you joined the Big XII, I would argue more well known . . .

(04-09-2013 07:40 PM)Caltex2 Wrote:  Has a school ever changed their look entirely? I don't mean schools that changed their name such as St. John's, Miami U and Arkansas State because of the mandate to change because of Native American sensitivities.

Has a team done a pro-sports style change of colors and logo? A nickname change might have also happened, though I already laid out what I'm not looking for.

Maryland and their awful "Any Given Sunday" uni's comes to mind...

Texas State is fine, though I don't see how they re-branded other than changing their school name.

Clearly you have some personal connection there and its fine but you are way overselling it.

I live here in DFW and make routine trips to Houston and SA. I see more LSU Tiger emblems on cars in DFW and Ole Miss emblems in Houston than I see TXST emblems in either place. SA and Austin? Plenty of bobcats logos. It is what it is.

I have actually seen people here in Dallas openly confuse it with KSU's power cat because they don't know the difference.

My point is that if you randomly picked 10 Texans who aren't avid college sports fans and showed them the bobcat logo, I'd guess maybe 3 of them could correctly guess that it belongs to TXST.

TXST is a regional school and regional brand that is working hard to better establish themselves as a statewide brand and school and there is nothing wrong with that. You're just jumping the gun a little with these claims that they are already there.

the UAB mascot went from a pink dragon to a sandiego chicken rip off to a Big Gay Viking to the current dragon we use today

(04-10-2013 03:55 PM)Caltex2 Wrote:  Texas State is fine, though I don't see how they re-branded other than changing their school name.

New name, new logos, new color schemes, new division of play, new conference (two actually), etc. . . other than that, same school that's been around since 1899. . .

(04-10-2013 11:41 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  Beat me to Florida Tech becoming UCF (bet they wish they could reverse that one)

Also, its fair to say that Texas State-San Marcos is known in the state but is not well known at all outside of Texas. Sort of like how most people outside Cali don't know there is a California State-San Marcos (cougars, rather than bobcats)

Also, here is current enrollment size. It currently stands:

1) Texas A&M - 52,378
2) UT-Austin - 52,213
3) Houston - 40,747
4) North Texas - 35,836
5) Texas State - 34,229
6) UT-Arlington -33,267
7) Texas Tech -32611
8) UT-San Antonio -30,607

those numbers are outdated..uta is ahead of texas state..

(04-10-2013 04:22 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  . . . My point is that if you randomly picked 10 Texans who aren't avid college sports fans and showed them the bobcat logo, I'd guess maybe 3 of them could correctly guess that it belongs to TXST. . .

. . . you would be wrong.

and my connection. and the reason I've argued the point with Texas State, is that like UT-San Antonio, Old Dominion, James Madison, Arkansas State, Louisiana, etc., it is one of the schools that is only a financial investment, conference move, and/or head coach away from becoming the next Boise State, Louisville, etc. . . . Texas State's "re-branding," marketing strategies, etc. to me, is what is currently exciting in college athletics and college realignment . . .

These schools are the reason that the consolidation of college football/athletics into 4-5 "power conferences" is a bad thing for college sports in general . . . we are on the verge of never seeing another Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Miami, Boise State, etc. be able to achieve the highest levels of college athletics . . .

(04-10-2013 03:55 PM)Caltex2 Wrote:  Texas State is fine, though I don't see how they re-branded other than changing their school name.

I always remember them being maroon and gold with a big swt...in the old days they were mostly a teachers college and they didnt offer much guy stuff and being close to san antonio, it was close enough for folks to send their daughters off to if they wanted to go out of town to school and not too far away. they had at least a 3:1 girsl to guys ratio and the girls there were really good looking. it has always been a good party school.

(04-10-2013 11:58 AM)Wedge Wrote:  This thread was originally supposed to be about college teams completely overhauling their team colors and logos... most of the examples given here are minor tweaks; none of these schools is doing anything drastic like changing the school colors from scarlet and gray to orange and black.

If these minor changes count, then you could say that Oregon changes their look almost every football season.

well my school is not a national brand but uta used to be the rebels and our football colors were red white and blue. later changed to mavericks and a different shade of blue and white and the mascot was a pistol pete type of guy called sam maverick . now the ut system has forced in some orange so the colors are orange and blue and the mascot is a horse head just like boise state's. just one of the many ways they drove away supporters after dropping football...

It is not new but Kent State has undergone many logo changes but none were as drastic as the original. Way back in the day when we first started sports (I think this is WWI type era) Kent's original colors were Purple and Orange and we were going to be the Silver Foxes named after the University President's pet Silver Foxes. The legend goes due to an accident the colors on some uniforms faded to a more blue and gold color and that color combo was liked better so they became the school colors. The Flashes name was chosen later in a vote. Some at times think we should change our mascot to the black squirrel due to their local presence but that has not gotten far.

Iowa State did a significant rebranding a few years ago.

Indiana moved from Bobby Knight red uniforms to their school color maroon/crimson (?).

Oregon. Oregon. Oregon.

I think you will be hard pressed to find any longtime FBS schools that have undergone wholesale rebranding in the last 30+ years unless it was related to Native American names. There have of course been several examples at lower levels.

Glassboro State becoming Rowan
Southern Colorado becoming Colorado State - Pueblo
Ricks College becoming BYU - Idaho (and dropping intercollegiate athletics)

But this trend is not even necessarily new.

Balboa became Cal Western became US International became Alliant. Finding examples in the FBS realm is difficult because most FBS schools are flagships, land grants, state schools, or large private institutions. The only real chance is at the lower levels or the 'directional' schools. And even the 'directionals' tend to keep their existing colors and mascots when donning a new name.

(04-10-2013 10:16 PM)chess Wrote:  Indiana moved from Bobby Knight red uniforms to their school color maroon/crimson (?).

Indiana hasn't changed their basketball uniforms, and won't. The basic style predates Knight's tenure by many years. See http://www.indystar.com/article/20130308...as-schools

(04-10-2013 02:45 PM)UHCougar Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 01:58 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 01:32 PM)UHCougar Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 12:16 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 11:38 AM)UHCougar Wrote:  . . . you're so right; the 34,000 students enrolled in the 5th largest university in Texas behind Texas, Texas A&M, Houston, and Texas Tech, with a history that dates back to 1899, and includes a President of the United States of America, just isn't an "established" brand . . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_State...San_Marcos

Bit is right. The name "Texas State University" or "Texas State University-San Marcos" is not an established brand.

LBJ's diploma from that institution (see image below) bears the name "Southwest Texas State Teachers College".

The question was whether an NCAA team completely re-branded. . .

Texas State is one of the schools that has undergone a major overhaul of its "brand" in the last 10 years. . . since the school was founded as Southwest Texas State Teachers College (LBJ's diploma above), then become just Southwest Texas State, and now Texas State, this university has overhauled pretty much everything about itself. The athletic's teams "look" is entirely different in just the last two or three years.

And just because you may not have ever heard of them, doesn't mean it's not an "established" brand. There isn't a person in Texas that doesn't readily recognize the Texas State power cat logo, colors, etc. It is equally as well-known by more total people than most of the teams in the AAC. I guarantee there are just as many people who recognize the Texas State logo as the West Virginia logo before it started playing in the Big XII. This school has won multiple football national titles in the divisions in which they have played. They have exploded into one of the largest universities in the country. Their move to FBS is a continuation of the re-brand.

Sometimes the tunnel vision of people on this board confound me.

The entire nation doesn't live in Texas, and more of the nation has heard of every ACC program than has heard of Texas State...

You might not like to admit that. But it's true...

Every nation I've ever been to has had somebody there tell me "Go Mountaineers", when I'm wearing my WVU gear. How many people outside of Texas would recognize Texas State gear, especially since it's undergone such changes...

Talk about tunnel vision. Texas isn't the world either, dude. Travel around a bit and see for yourself.

BTW, I've been to Texas, and have even lived there. Have you ever been to West Virginia?

Look, I'm not saying that Texas State is on par in national brand awareness with a West Virginia. To argue that would be silly. But to dismiss the 5th largest university in Texas with an near 10-year sustained enrollment over 30,000, and a history that dates back to 1899, as not an "established brand" is equally silly. . .

Contrary to what you think, "most" people in this country couldn't name the members of the Mountain West, AAC, ACC, Big East, or BIG for that matter. . . we in the bubble on this board too often forget what the regular "fan" really knows about his own conference, much less about others . . . and as to my "traveling around the country," last year for work, I visited 31 states, including West Virginia . . . so, yes, I know something about the academic world and university sports . . .

And for the 10th Man, you are terribly underselling the common knowledge of Texas State, certainly in Texas . . . the fact is that a major source of students for Texas State has always been the Houston area . . . the Dallas/Ft. Worth area is growing fast . . . Texas State has been a well-known name among virtually every teacher, guidance counselor, athletic coach, parent, and high school senior in Texas for more than 30 years. To deny that is just silly. . .

Again, the continued tunnel vision on this board continues to confound me.

What's with this ripping on the AAC brands? Cincinnati and UConn are better known than half of the teams in Power 5 conferences. We're no UT-Austin, but saying that any Texas school that's not located in Austin or College Station has better brand recognition than us is crazy. Only 8% of Americans live in Texas, compared to 40% that live in the Northeast/Great Lakes, where everyone has heard of UC and UConn.

(04-10-2013 05:09 PM)runamuck Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 11:41 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  Beat me to Florida Tech becoming UCF (bet they wish they could reverse that one)

Also, its fair to say that Texas State-San Marcos is known in the state but is not well known at all outside of Texas. Sort of like how most people outside Cali don't know there is a California State-San Marcos (cougars, rather than bobcats)

Also, here is current enrollment size. It currently stands:

1) Texas A&M - 52,378
2) UT-Austin - 52,213
3) Houston - 40,747
4) North Texas - 35,836
5) Texas State - 34,229
6) UT-Arlington -33,267
7) Texas Tech -32611
8) UT-San Antonio -30,607

those numbers are outdated..uta is ahead of texas state..

UT Arlington is also now larger than unT.