sevsdast wrote:

What do you do as an owner anyways?

The whole league is created by everyone.  Very democratic here.  You'll notice that we love a good poll.  After the owner draft owners are then in control of a particular team.  They can then expand that team's identity how they would like.  They can make team traditions, pick fights for rivalries, build the stadium, etc.  Eventually we are going to play our league out in a fantasy football league so that the 'historical narrative' spirit of the boards is a living one.  

Dan O'Mac's Thoughts on the AltFL West:

Los Angeles:
I was expecting more options with a side view, but didn't see how that would work without looking too similar to the Nashville Predators. Colors are okay, and will be a unique scheme it appears.

San Diego:
This was a close one for me. Same colors, so that wasn't much of a factor. I decided on the more naval themed than ship themed option with Option B. Having the logo in the wordmark was a nice touch, and the logo can be stripped down to just the shield or the anchor fairly easily.

Arizona:
I love how bright Option A was, and the move to make the Scorpion into an "S" was a nice move. However, I didn't like how massive that made the tail look, and ended up getting a more centipede look from it than scorpion. Option B was more in mind of what I was picturing when I heard the name Scorpions. I do think that A had the better wordmark, but the logo still put B over A in my voting.

Utah:
With 6 entries, I started by ruling out Option B. I wasn't quite sure what I was supposed to be looking at, and once I came to the conclusion that it appeared to be a bite out of Utah with the raptor peeking out of it, the logo left me wanting more. I ruled out C next. Although I liked the idea, nothing about it made me feel the logo said "Raptor". It felt a bit generic to me. I ruled out A and F because I wasn't a fan of the skull route. Though in looking at it a second time, I'm not sure F was going for a skull, or just a white colored raptor. I did feel F's wordmark was most primal feeling of any of the options. When it came to D and E to get my vote then, I went with E as the action of the leaping and the more definition on that raptor, plus the eye in the "A" of the wordmark was better in my opinion, so I went that route.

Seattle:
So this one was hard. I really liked all three of these, and quite unexpectedly, none featured green much, which is something I've come to expect with all Seattle concepts. I loved A's color scheme, and the way the fish was colored. For B, I liked the way it was meant to look like native imagery, and I think that logo would work well on a helmet. C had nice use of the burgundy (?) and light blue, and the fish jumping in front of the S is done well. Overall, I voted for A, but had I looked at them at a different time, I may have voted differently.

Portland:
Much like Seattle, this was tough. C was the first one I ruled out. Combining a bear's head into a paw just didn't do it for me, though it was a very well done logo. I would've liked to see the outline on the wordmark be the same size as the outline on the logo. I liked that B went Red, White, and Blue. It's actually not a common color scheme for the league. However, I felt the bear head to be too generic for me. On the flip side, I liked how unique the design of the bear head on A was. However, really liked the design of the paw print on D, especially with the claws being trees, and had to give them my vote.

sevsdast wrote:

Come on! I have more posts than n00bthtpwnz!

It's not about the posts, he had expressed interest when the league was being developed and thus earned the right to be an owner. 

sevsdast wrote:

Come on! I have more posts than n00bthtpwnz! Sorry if this offends you but these are facts.

And yes, you may have more posts that they do. But I've already started skimming past most of your posts because they aren't adding to things. Yes, provide input and your thoughts, interact with the creators. But let them tell the story. Provide cities for expansion, new players, team names, etc. when the creator asks for them. Providing good, positive feedback (and yes, constructive criticism is good feedback) is awesome, helpful, and will build the community.

sevsdast wrote:

What do you do as an owner anyways?

 
Fall in love with other owners and merge teams to make one big happy team..... Unless I’ve been doing this wrong.