------
--or--
------

I think if LARRY COON'S from the bottom one is used with the top version, it'll be quite good.

How do you perceive either version of this new logo achieving more than your original? Also, not to get too technical, but is this logo for website masthead use only? I can't see how any of these would be applied effectively to other media.

--
Nick Hladek

I'm sorry to say this, but apart from letter Q, old logo looks much much better.
___________
Robert Koritnik

For a sports logo, the vertically arched letters are a much better design than the radial/perspective letters. Always use vertically arched letters for sports. Always.

Is there a less ridiculous place you could put Larry's name? I find it really irritating since I have no clue who he. And, unless he's the commissioner of NBA salaries, I don't care.

So just about six years have passed... who wants a new version to critique?

(Note this is very much a rough draft)

I think the basketball from the old logo adds a lot. The new logo, without it, looks a bit bland.

I think Larry's name needs to be integrated better into the overall design. Right now it looks sprinkled on top, like an afterthought, and a bit detached from everything under it.

I agree that the vertically stretched letters are much stronger. The horizontal stretching is gratuitous and looks kind of comical.

I just went and looked at the website, wondering what the application of the graphic was. Given the utilitarian and plain formatting of the rest of the site, I think it actually works pretty well.

If it were me, I would put "Larry Coon's" inside of the "plinth", stretched across the entire width, with stars, and reintroduce the basketball behind, I might make it an orangy basketball color instead of grey just to add a bit of pop to it.

Not a fan of your last try with the red ball. It's going to leave a huge amount of white space at the top of the page to no benefit.