It's not just a logo it's the literal branding Formal name: University of South Carolina Primary name: South Carolina Informal name: UofSC, replacing USC UofM works, UofSC is a mouthful
hey fucboii Arkadin i hope you took time out from pondering the merits of beating women to reflect on our second natty in three years
Formally, yes. Informally, no. Are you saying that you and every other fan are going to call us that?
Posts like this make me think winning a national championship must not be what it’s cracked up to be.
We won’t because we are old Carolina. But the younger generation will because that’s how the school is going to teach them.
No. You asked how we were supposed to chant it. The literal answer is with your voice box. The practical answer is we won't.
Do you not see why that makes this branding embarrassing? We are going to try to brand ourselves something that sounds retarded. Which was the point of my comment that you apparently missed.
It's pretty awesome except for the eye strain. I feel like I haven't slept since Sunday and have consumed a shit ton of coverage, so my eyes are pretty scratchy right now.
john fairfax we have been #UofSC and @UofSC online for a while. It's not something to say out loud but a way to have an identity in "digital spaces." Our website is also sc.edu, not usc.edu which is So Cal. I think the logo looks a little weird with the font but knowing how it was created to be used, i.e. as a tiny avatar pic for social media accounts, it's not a big deal.
Is this what they’ve pushed out? Or is it the starting point and they’re going to start trying to use uofsc verbally?
Idk, it's too much of a mouthful to become common IMO. I don't think "they" are trying to change hearts and minds of local supporters and alumni. Just think they're trying to be tech and marketing savvy with regional/national/international populations. It's not a particularly beautiful logo but think about how simple the logo for Facebook or Twitter or something is. This is a little garnet square you use online. For instance, I bet you won't see what's on the front of podiums change to that:
Actually here you go, this is the plan apparently. Looks like they chopped the "1801" off the palm tree logo
Kotsar and Silva got in foul trouble tonight and I was like fuck it, let Lawson and Bryant lead the way
Are you guys implying that the announcer who said 9-9 SEC would get anyone in this year was doing a force fed puff piece?
Craziest part is who we’ve beaten in this stretch. UF and MSU are supposed to be good, Mizzou always beats us, and Vandy’s weird ass gym is near impossible to win in and yet, a team that lost to Wofford by 20 managed to do it. What a time to be alive
Hmmmm, the next stretch of the schedule isn't looking too easy @ LSU Auburn @ Ok St Tenn @ UGA @ UK Tennessee is #3, Kentucky 12, Auburn 14, LSU receiving votes
fwiw the guy who's been doing bubble projections for years for espn and now the athletic said this about UofSC Matthew S. Jan 15, 9:57pm Any chance South Carolina can get into the bubble conversation with a strong SEC performance? The non conference slate was a disaster, but injuries have to be factored in. Would 11-7 or 12-6 in the SEC with a couple quality wins earn them a look? Eamonn Brennan STAFF Jan 16, 12:43am 1 like @Matthew S. I'd lean more toward the 12-6 side of things, but it's not impossible. Like we're saying a lot these days, it is still early. And yes, the committee does take injuries into account, particularly if a team's performance is drastically different with/without injured players, etc.