The "Defenders" no longer, says former DC staffer

XFL Football discussion.
Gopher123
Quarterback
Posts: 395
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2021 7:07 pm

Re: The "Defenders" no longer, says former DC staffer

Post by Gopher123 »

I’m not sure the XFL has as much say in this as people are speculating. A few months back I saw a series of tweets about the XFL renewing the trademarks of all their teams. Most all the teams had theirs renewed but I remember specifically they were having trouble with getting the Defenders renewed. This is very likely that and nothing more, the league may just have no choice but change it. I don’t see this as a sign all the teams are rebranding or DC won’t have a team. Again, let’s not jump to conclusions until we know more.
User avatar
MarkNelson
UFLBoard Correspondent
Posts: 1638
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: The "Defenders" no longer, says former DC staffer

Post by MarkNelson »

So, if that is true, then Washington needs to be rebranded.

Also, Houston needs a new logo, because of the NFL's legal action.

...and new brands need to be created for rumored teams in San Antonio and Orlando, unless they retain the branding of the teams that are moved there. (possibly New York and Tampa)

Lastly, the rumored move of the LA Wildcats to Las Vegas. Will they move the Wildcats brand there? I doubt it.

So, I see the names and branding for Seattle Dragons, Dallas Renegades and St. Louis BattleHawks being the same going forward.
XFLBoard https://xflboard.com/news/author/mnelson/
XFLXtra https://xflboard.com/xfl-xtra/
Author: “XFL 2020: Rise and Fall” https://xfl2020book.com
Coming soon: “XFL 2023: Rise”
Favourite Leagues: XFL and CFL | Fan of the Winnipeg Blue Bombers
Tank55
MVP
Posts: 2804
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:57 pm

Re: The "Defenders" no longer, says former DC staffer

Post by Tank55 »

Oh interesting. Here's some chatter on Reddit about it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/xfl/comments/t ... rk_update/

And the USPTO letter on the trademark application where they say there is "likelihood of confusion":

https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?c ... x=0&page=1

Honestly, the "Defenders" name was the weakest part of the brand. If they can keep the logo and uniforms, I'll be happy enough. Maybe they can swing a trade with the USFL for the far superior Federals name.
2020 East Division Champions
2021 February Monthly T-Shirt Giveaway Champion
User avatar
SamTheRam28
Quarterback
Posts: 315
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 11:16 pm

Re: The "Defenders" no longer, says former DC staffer

Post by SamTheRam28 »

Tank55 wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 9:08 pm Devastating, if true. To what end? Why even buy the IP?
I've wondered that for a while now. If you're going to rebrand the league with an unrecognizable logo and color scheme (no color scheme at all actually), then change team names and identities, what is even the point of buying the league? They could have very easily just started their own new league without inheriting the debts of the XFL.
St. Louis BattleHawks
herns
Head Coach
Posts: 1391
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2021 10:53 am

Re: The "Defenders" no longer, says former DC staffer

Post by herns »

SamTheRam28 wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 10:29 am
Tank55 wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 9:08 pm Devastating, if true. To what end? Why even buy the IP?
I've wondered that for a while now. If you're going to rebrand the league with an unrecognizable logo and color scheme (no color scheme at all actually), then change team names and identities, what is even the point of buying the league? They could have very easily just started their own new league without inheriting the debts of the XFL.
I don’t think it’d be as exciting as saying the xfl is back if they said the rock football league is starting. Also xfl came with all the data that was used for 2020 which is all really valuable
GregParks
UFLBoard Correspondent
Posts: 2095
Joined: Tue May 28, 2019 8:09 pm

Re: The "Defenders" no longer, says former DC staffer

Post by GregParks »

herns wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 10:33 am
SamTheRam28 wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 10:29 am
Tank55 wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 9:08 pm Devastating, if true. To what end? Why even buy the IP?
I've wondered that for a while now. If you're going to rebrand the league with an unrecognizable logo and color scheme (no color scheme at all actually), then change team names and identities, what is even the point of buying the league? They could have very easily just started their own new league without inheriting the debts of the XFL.
I don’t think it’d be as exciting as saying the xfl is back if they said the rock football league is starting. Also xfl came with all the data that was used for 2020 which is all really valuable
Good point on the data - I think that was important too. Remember, when they bought they league, they initially didn't close the door on 2021 and had planned a 2022 start. If we take those comments at face value, they probably would've kept most of the trademarks and logos (Johnson and Garcia at various times showed new stuff, like the weightlifting belt, with the old logo) simply because the turnaround time on that would've been too quick for a major rebrand. So changing things may not have been a plan from the beginning, but developed over time.
@gregmparks
herns
Head Coach
Posts: 1391
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2021 10:53 am

Re: The "Defenders" no longer, says former DC staffer

Post by herns »

Gopher123 wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 9:00 am I’m not sure the XFL has as much say in this as people are speculating. A few months back I saw a series of tweets about the XFL renewing the trademarks of all their teams. Most all the teams had theirs renewed but I remember specifically they were having trouble with getting the Defenders renewed. This is very likely that and nothing more, the league may just have no choice but change it. I don’t see this as a sign all the teams are rebranding or DC won’t have a team. Again, let’s not jump to conclusions until we know more.
https://twitter.com/the_markcast/status ... jTTh3Y8tUA

Looks like they own the defenders name just maybe not using it
4th&long
MVP
Posts: 6474
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2019 2:27 pm

Re: The "Defenders" no longer, says former DC staffer

Post by 4th&long »

GregParks wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 8:34 am
4th&long wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 10:31 pm
GregParks wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 10:02 pm Yeah, it wouldn't surprise me if teams were all re-branded. I wouldn't be in favor of it, but this new ownership showed in the re-branding of the league logo that they weren't married to anything necessarily from 2020 (and if they hadn't come up with the "two sides of the 'X' merging into one" branding it wouldn't have surprised me if they had ditched "XFL" for something else, too).

To be quite frank, I'm not sure how much equity had been built up in such a short amount of time with these names to where a re-brand would be seen as audacious to the general public (i.e. not us). Maybe the BattleHawks.

I figured if the XFL is really behind in getting things ramped up for 2023, having to spend the time and energy to re-brand the teams would be a hassle they wouldn't want to deal with, not to mention lawyers fees to apply for new trademarks and paying designers to come up with new logos and nicknames. Could've saved a few bucks there.
But I do disagree a bit, the short XFL had been favorable in fans eyes. Not only do they risk not leveraging that but actually could alienate those fans who - lets face it - just want XFL 2.0 back. Now maybe they will keep branding for cities they stay in, who knows.
XFL 2.0 is not coming back. People need to deal with that at this point.
That's the point I keep making - yet everyone is comparing USFL to XFL - as if XFL 2.0 is coming back.

XFL 3.0 is to XFL 2.0 as USFL 2.0 is to USFL 1.0 - Period.

So everyone saying (more on Twitter than here) that XFL is better than USFL (and vice versa) is referencing something that's GONE.

So my question is if this XFL is so different from prior liked XFL, why the excitement for XFL? I mean sure I want winter/spring FB and I'm all in. But to me they are all the same. What I see in USFL has been pretty good. I do like winter over spring personally. But has USFL on field been so diff from XFL 2.0 to really turn people off? Doubtful.
Would some fans much prefer games be local so they could attend - sure. But from a TV viewing prespective that's moot. So the only diff is 3/4 of games w/o fans.

Right now its wait and see what XFL 3.0 will be.
GregParks
UFLBoard Correspondent
Posts: 2095
Joined: Tue May 28, 2019 8:09 pm

Re: The "Defenders" no longer, says former DC staffer

Post by GregParks »

4th&long wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 11:58 am
So my question is if this XFL is so different from prior liked XFL, why the excitement for XFL?
Do you make room at all for the possibility that, even though you may disagree, others may like the new ownership, like what they've said they want this league to be about, like the head coaching hires, and believe they've made a lot of good moves since taking over?
@gregmparks
MGB01
MVP
Posts: 3313
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:42 pm

Re: The "Defenders" no longer, says former DC staffer

Post by MGB01 »

GregParks wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 1:11 pm
4th&long wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 11:58 am
So my question is if this XFL is so different from prior liked XFL, why the excitement for XFL?
Do you make room at all for the possibility that, even though you may disagree, others may like the new ownership, like what they've said they want this league to be about, like the head coaching hires, and believe they've made a lot of good moves since taking over?

You're really asking our Donnie Woods that? :D
Post Reply