http://www.mlive.com/spartans/index.ssf/2010/01/tom_izzo_offers_support_for_sp.html

I didn't hear about the MSU logo change until my friends started posting angry statuses about it on Facebook. Then they started joining groups opposing the design, and threatening to not buy anything associated with the new logo. Upon all this I decided to check out the new design. Personally, I didn't really like it either. Maybe it's because of the whole stretched out, pointedness shape of it all. Or maybe it's because I don't like change.

I think that was the main concern most people had with this new logo. Change. Everything I heard was about keeping tradition. Throwing away a perfectly good logo because Nike wants some money is no good reason to do so.

Tom Izzo brought up a good question though. What is tradition? All the teams would be the same, as would the State jerseys and colors. And throughout the years, State has had many logo changes. Why is this one so much different?

After reading the article and considering this, I think, from a marketing standpoint, this logo change is a good move.

First, it gives State a stronger brand. Branding is so important and sometimes branding needs to change to keep up with the times. And besides, branding is so much more the experience and reputation a team gives than just a logo.

It gives them an identity. State was one of the few schools who got this opportunity with Nike. Maybe this will be the one that sticks. It's different and modern yet it's still the same logo and holds the same history of State's brand.

I think people will get used to this eventually. People always cause an uproar when something is changed, but eventually they get used to it and accepting it. This will be no different.