I'd just like consistency.
Firstly if we start flitting from one to the other it would make our identity look muddled.
Secondly changing one part of Argyle (albeit an important one), the shirt, without changing all the other ways the current green is used (ground livery especially) would look a total mess.
Ian you especially dislike the word branding. I suspect it stems from the pitchfork reactionary in you, "them bleddy directors that came in from that there Lon Don with their imposed newfangled marketing ways, grrrr" :furious:
But substitute the word branding to 'identity' and you separate the process from the reactionary instinct. I doubt rebranding the word branding will convince you ian, but there is a logic to the outcome even if you rile against the process.
Having a consistent look, a standardised and clear identity not only looks tidy but gives a recognisable consistency to our identity.
I've always thought the darker green looks classier, more professional but I accept others feel differently. What needs to happen if we do ever change though is to address both my original observations. Firstly if we change we need to put a minimum decade or two during which we are bound to stick to it. Secondly if we ever change we need to change everything at once, shirts, merchandise, stadium paint, stationary and website etc.
Given the expense and hassle involved, allied to the split opinion of the fan base (and those who've known no different will only grow as the post 2001 generation gets bigger) you frankly could conclude, why bother?
