SO MUCH FOR A 'SECONDARY' LOGO! LIES! LIES! LIES!

by **MrMustang1965** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 4:08 pm

Got an order form in the mail today for the SMU Kick-off Luncheon on Wednesday, August 17, 2005. Guess what? That so-called 'secondary' red Mustang logo is PROMINENTLY displayed on the return form, as well as on the pamphlet itself!

The ONLY place the 'traditional' & 'classic' running red Mustang logo is seen on the entire pamphlet is on the side of the football helmet in the photo on the front flap!

LIES! LIES! LIES!

This new 'secondary' red Mustang logo is already being pushed down our throats!!!!!!

by **BUS** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 4:23 pm

Just another impression, in advertising terms.

Chill guy. The season is almost here.

by **Bergermeister** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 4:30 pm

They're gonna (try to) shove it down your throat. That little invite is just the tip of the iceberg. Wait until they fire up the scoreboard graphics at YOUR Ford Stadium. And then there is the game program. And on and on.

by **jtstang** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 4:31 pm

MrMustang1965 wrote:LIES! LIES! LIES!

This new 'secondary' red Mustang logo is already being pushed down our throats!!!!!!

You should burn your Mustang Club card on the steps of Moody in protest.

by **MrMustang1965** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 4:32 pm

Bergermeister wrote:They're gonna (try to) shove it down your throat. That little invite is just the tip of the iceberg. Wait until they fire up the scoreboard graphics at YOUR Ford Stadium. And then there is the game program. And on and on.

by **MrMustang1965** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 4:35 pm

jtstang wrote:
MrMustang1965 wrote:LIES! LIES! LIES!

This new 'secondary' red Mustang logo is already being pushed down our throats!!!!!!

You should burn your Mustang Club card on the steps of Moody in protest.

jt: I've seriously thought about it! :shock:

by **Eddie P** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 5:20 pm

Wow. That's all I've got to say. Are we short on our meds around here?

For the record, the FRONT page of the pamphlet featrues the new lettering , right next to a BIG football helmet with the RUNNING MUSTANG. I counted four (4) additional traditional running mustang logos throughout the pamphlet, all on the helmets of players. I also thought the greatest fear was that the secondary logo would be replacing the mustang on the helmet? This was never going to happen, but I thought this was the greatest fear, as opposed to some new shirts and hats.

What, may I ask, are the "traditional" letters used to spell SMU anyway? Palatino? Times New Roman?? Are the white lines encasing the word "SMU" that offensive? That vile??

I have never seen such angst over some lettering on a mail-out...goodness. Also, I agree that there is "new mustang head" in the middle of the return form...it is a whopping 1.5 inches long by 1.5 inches wide...on an 8.5 by 11 inch piece of paper. I could measure all of the traditional running mustang logos, combine them and, well, I would start to feel a little silly. But without calculating, I might consider this the primary logo.

by **Stallion** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 5:35 pm

LIES! LIES! LIES!
---- Gomer Pyle 1965

by **Eddie P** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 5:58 pm

Well, it could have been 1.4 inches wide...

by **LakeHighlandsPony** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 6:06 pm

I remember the day after our beloved white helmets were taken from us I called to complain and this rude secretary claimed I was the ONLY one who was unhappy. This is how you shove stuff down the throat of your fan base-isolate and claim it is just them that doesn't like it.

by **ALEX LIFESON** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 7:13 pm

Hmmmmmmmm they told me I was the only one to complain! drats! double drats! I wish instead of brainstorming new logo ideas (and ways to slip them past us) why can't our people figure out a way for us to get out of the football toilet?

by **1982Express** » Tue Jul 12, 2005 12:17 am

You know what is my favorite part about Mr. Mustang? He did not go to SMU. That really is not relevant to the topic here, but since he seems to be the main voice of complaints about SMU football, then its nice to know it is coming from someone who went to Sam Houston State. If he talks this much on this forum, he must be extra active on the Sam Houston messge board.
So Mr. Mustang, I love reading your complaints because it reminds me that SMU does not have to claim you as an alumnus. The good Lord blessed SMU there.

by **MrMustang1965** » Tue Jul 12, 2005 12:47 am

1982Express wrote:...since he seems to be the main voice of complaints about SMU football...

I very seldom complain about SMU football. That would be the job of Stallion, jtstang and ponysnob and several others on this board. I've been accused more than once of being a major 'sunshiner' on this board, though. :lol:

by **Fresh** » Tue Jul 12, 2005 12:49 am

If only all PonyFans had his passion. Here's a guy who didn't go to SMU and cares more passionately about our school than many of our alums do. And you find fault in his enthusiasm?

by **couch 'em** » Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:12 am

1982Express wrote:You know what is my favorite part about Mr. Mustang? He did not go to SMU. That really is not relevant to the topic here, but since he seems to be the main voice of complaints about SMU football, then its nice to know it is coming from someone who went to Sam Houston State. If he talks this much on this forum, he must be extra active on the Sam Houston messge board.
So Mr. Mustang, I love reading your complaints because it reminds me that SMU does not have to claim you as an alumnus. The good Lord blessed SMU there.

Wow....... I never thought I'd see the day where someone actually called 1965 anything but a proud sunshiner, much less the 'main voice of complaints'.

Since you are supposedly so old and went to SMU so long ago, 1982express, I'll let you know about 2005. Nobody cares about SMU - especially anyone who was a student since 1990, and even more especially anyone who didn't go to SMU. It is idiotic to put down anyone who cares about SMU whether you agree with them or not.

Furthermore, I'm more than proud to have 1965 as a fellow supporter of SMU. I can't say you've earned that level of respect thus far.

SO MUCH FOR A 'SECONDARY' LOGO! LIES! LIES! LIES!

SO MUCH FOR A 'SECONDARY' LOGO! LIES! LIES! LIES!

Re: SO MUCH FOR A 'SECONDARY' LOGO! LIES! LIES! LIES!

Re: SO MUCH FOR A 'SECONDARY' LOGO! LIES! LIES! LIES!

Who is online