Log in

View Full Version : I know this will spark a lot of shit...

Kane Knight
02-25-2005, 10:34 PM
Because it involves the F, and so many people seem very emotionally attached.

However, in the WWE's "Piper" video, announcing him as the new member of the HoF class of '05, there's at least one unobscured shot of the oldschool WWF logo. Did they screw up, do it deliberately, or have they reached some sort of agreement with the WWF? Just idly curoius and bored.
Volchok
02-25-2005, 11:07 PM
they still show the old WWF logo like the one Cena uses.. only one they blur out is the scratch WWF logo.. i dont know why tho..
Gouda
02-25-2005, 11:13 PM
It's because the old school one is yellow. Since the scratch logo is white, people are more likely to confuse it with a panda.
M. Banana
02-26-2005, 10:06 AM
It's because the old school one is yellow. Since the scratch logo is white, people are more likely to confuse it with a panda.

:rofl:
Marcyo
02-26-2005, 01:57 PM
:rofl:

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Pepsi Man
02-26-2005, 02:34 PM
Actually, I do recall reading quite a while back that they've been cleared to use the old block logo in old footage, but not the scratch logo. No clue why though.
tucsonspeed6
02-26-2005, 04:42 PM
I always assumed that the Fund was tired of getting embarrassed by being associated with the "Attitude" WWF, with their Howard Stern/Jerry Springer antics always going on. I don't think they had as much of a problem with the old school WWF, so they kinda let it go.
Bo
02-27-2005, 08:37 PM
I think they relate to the old school logo as the "Federation Years".
Kane Knight
02-28-2005, 12:29 AM
I always assumed that the Fund was tired of getting embarrassed by being associated with the "Attitude" WWF, with their Howard Stern/Jerry Springer antics always going on. I don't think they had as much of a problem with the old school WWF, so they kinda let it go.

That was part of the problem, I know that much. Simply that they thought the WWF had gone too far in their "antics." I know approaches were made on that ground (Though I don't know how serious they were, how they were received, or how hard they pushed) before the deal ended and the lawsuit craziness began.

So it might make sense, it just seemed to me that the problems of "association" and "market confusion" wouldn't make any sense when differentiating between two logos with the same symbolism. Though if Pepsi Man is right, and they specifically cleared it, who am I to argue?

It may also be a timeframe issue.

I just thought it was a bit F'ed up.