02-24-2021, 02:27 PMDuff101 Wrote:

02-24-2021, 12:53 PMEmiko Wrote: Don't be upset. I mean like i said it's just branding and not a representation of how i feel about people on the team.

Regional/historical :clap: connection :clap: is :clap: priority :clap: one :clap: for :clap: team :clap: branding

IMO any team that doesn't have some sort of regional connection can’t be ranked above C unless they've had that name for a billion years (IE NHL Bruins or Red Wings)

Texas, Atlanta, New Orleans and Chicago have the strongest regional connections IMO and can't be ranked below B, even if Chicago's logo isn't my favorite

The issue is that like I said it's just something I don't like. The branding could be connected to a region and it's something that could be easy to tell to someone who's from the states. But for a person not from America I do not understand the logos of some of them.

Then there's the thing of yeah they're significant to the region but that doesn't excuse something that I personally might not like.

I would say go read my reasoning for doing this again. It's basically me going hey, branding is something super important to me and if I'm not somewhere I like branding wise then it could potentially put me closer to going inactive. I explain why also.

I ranked them on appeal to me personally not cultural ties or anything like that. As a result yes something even if it fits can fall below the grades you set out.

As I said thought this isn't an attack on anyone on the team and if you like the thing that's great it's just not for me and I wanted to write a fun article.