For many students, alumni, faculty, and staff, a university is a home, a legacy, a stamp on personal identity. The colors, the crest, the mottos, the campus architecture—they all become part of someone's story.

So when an institution with a storied past announces a rebrand, the shift can feel disconcerting, even threatening. Yet change is not necessarily erasure. With transparent strategy and deep respect for heritage, rebranding a legacy university can serve as a bridge, anchoring pride in the past while guiding audiences toward an ambitious future.

Why Rebranding Feels So Personal

Universities are not neutral brands the way a new tech startup might be. Over decades (or centuries), they accrue rich symbolic weight: the seal on diplomas, the colors on jerseys, the visual identity tied to memories of lectures, dorm life, ceremonies, and community rituals.

When someone sees a beloved crest or reads a motto they’ve known for years, it can evoke nostalgia, loyalty, even generational identity. Alumni may see their own story reflected in those symbols; current students may see them as part of their belonging. Changing those symbols risks unsettling those emotional bonds.

Because branding in higher education is less about market appeal and more about collective identity, rebrands get judged not only on aesthetics or marketing rationale, but also on questions like: Does this still “feel right”? Are you honoring what came before? Will this change alienate or include? With emotional stakes that steep, legacy institutions must tread carefully.

The Fordham Rebrand Backlash

Fordham University’s 2025 rebrand offers a vivid contemporary example of how complex, and contested, such transformations can become.

What Fordham Changed (and Why)

This past July, Fordham unveiled a brand evolution intended to sharpen its identity. The refreshed brand elements center around the theme “For What Matters,” seeking to distill Fordham’s Jesuit mission, intellectual commitments, and civic purpose into a more compelling narrative.

Visually, the brand introduces a new Gothic “F” as the anchor of the logo, drawing from the University’s Gothic Revival architecture. The design also incorporates a shield drawn from the existing seal, aiming to bridge continuity and change.

Fordham’s marketing team says the rebrand was informed by research, feedback, and stakeholder sessions. They note that one driving factor was modernization, and the prior visual identity was developed before the digital era and did not scale well across small or digital formats.

They also cite brand-awareness challenges. For example, in New York, only 16.9% of residents correctly identified the “Block F” logo as Fordham’s. Importantly, Fordham’s leadership states that the traditional seal will still be used in institutional and ceremonial settings, even if it’s no longer part of the everyday identity.

What Sparked Criticism

Despite the planning and rationale, reaction among the Fordham community has been sharply divided. 

Some students expressed ambivalence or mild acceptance: “Honestly, don’t really mind it,” one incoming freshman said. “I guess I don’t really have an attachment to the old ones.” 

But other students felt much more strongly: “It’s not my favorite, I’m not gonna lie,” one junior said. “I like that the university and athletics are coming together, but the F with the ram head is my favorite logo.”

One student has even authored a petition calling for a return to the former logo. It gained almost 1,900 signatures.

On Reddit and other forums, reactions ranged from sarcastic to scolding. Critiques often pointed to perceived disrespect for tradition, concerns over cost, and the sense that the new identity felt more “corporate” and less “authentic.” Complaints included:

• The new design diminishes or sidelines the beloved seal
• Why invest in branding when campus infrastructure or student services may need attention
• The new logo feels too modern or generic, lacking character tied to the institution
• A perception that Fordham is “selling out” its heritage for marketing gain

What Fordham Did Well and What Others Can Learn

A couple of key points that Fordham got right:

• They anchored design in campus architecture and visual heritage, rather than adopting something purely trendy. 
• They retained the old seal for ceremonial use, preserving continuity in formal settings. 
• They engaged a broad set of stakeholders: faculty, staff, alumni, students, and external branding partners. 
• The rollout is phased: athletics integration is slated for spring 2026, and merchandise with the old logo remains in circulation while supplies last. 

What others should heed from the Fordham case study:

• No rebrand is safe from emotional backlash; even with a strong process, negative reactions are often part of the journey.
• Critics frequently focus less on design execution than on process integrity: “Did you respect us? Were we heard?”
• Even well‐intentioned design choices (for legibility, digital responsiveness, market reach) can feel to veterans like an abandonment of legacy unless carefully contextualized.
• It’s wise to anticipate resistance and normalize it. Providing education, behind-the-scenes access, and narrative scaffolding helps.

In short, the Fordham rebrand offers a valuable case study in how complex and delicate reimagining identity can be for a legacy institution.

‍

The Purpose Behind Rebranding

A university rebrand is rarely about “fixing what’s broken.” It’s about evolving purposefully. Some of the key motivations include:

• Strategic repositioning or renewal. As mission, program mix, or institutional priorities shift, brand identity may need to realign.
• Modernization for digital environments. Many legacy visual systems were built before responsive web, mobile displays, social media avatars, or global scaling.
• Brand awareness and market competitiveness. Especially for institutions seeking national or international appeal, clarity and distinctiveness carry real value.
• Unified coherence. Over time, different schools, campuses, or athletic identities within a university can drift apart; rebranding can help bring all arms under a more cohesive umbrella.
• Perception correction. If a university is fighting outdated or incorrect associations (e.g., being seen as regional, niche, or dated), a rebrand can signal transformation.
• Cultural rejuvenation. A fresh identity can help reenergize internal stakeholders around a renewed sense of purpose.

A rebrand should not aim to erase history. Rather, it should deliberately use the legacy as foundational layers in the new story, not obstacles to it.

‍

Making Change Work: Keys to a Strategic Rebrand

Below are a few guiding principles for legacy universities to execute rebranding without alienating their communities. 

1. Involve Stakeholders Early and Often (Even Symbolically)

Bring representative voices in from day one as partners in framing constraints, values, and paths. Focus groups, co-design sessions, surveys, faculty/staff convenings, and advisory councils all help. Fordham, for example, invited feedback across its community, used a Brand Council, and surveyed alumni and students.

Even if ultimate decisions land with leadership or branding teams, the process of listening and authentically integrating feedback helps build psychological ownership and reduce backlash.

2. Preserve Legacy Elements That Still Resonate

Identify the symbols, color palettes, or design motifs that hold deep meaning and explicitly restore or reinterpret them in new forms. Where possible, maintain continuity with campus architecture, seals, mottos, or historical artifacts.

One of Fordham’s design strategies was to derive the new Gothic “F” from its Gothic Revival architecture and to use the shield from its seal to preserve legacy ties.

3. Communicate the “Why” Behind Decisions

Stakeholders often object not to the change itself but to not understanding the reason: Why now? Why this direction? Why this price tag? Explaining the constraints, data insights, design trade-offs, and future vision fosters empathy.

Use multi-channel storytelling: town halls, internal newsletters, video walkthroughs, FAQs, microsites. Be honest about trade-offs and uncertainties as well as aspirations.

4. Phase the Rollout and Allow Time for Adaptation

Don’t switch everything at once. Gradual rollouts allow community acclimation. Reserve legacy assets for ceremonial or limited use to minimize jarring contrast.

Fordham, for instance, is planning athletics implementation for spring 2026 and continuing to sell merchandise with the old logo while supplies last.

5. Support Culture Change, Not Just Visuals

A rebrand should be tied to institutional behavior, programming, and mission. Without alignment in culture and action, a new logo feels superficial. Invest in training, internal buy-in, brand ambassadors, and alignment among admissions, alumni relations, facilities, and academic departments.

6. Monitor, Listen, and Refine

Track reception, sentiment, critique, and adoption over time. Be prepared to adapt or clarify certain elements. A rebrand may evolve post-launch in light of real feedback because culture is dynamic.

‍

Looking Ahead: Evolution Over Abrupt Change

A rebrand is rarely fully “accepted” on day one. For a legacy institution, the transition is more marathon than sprint. Over months and years, the new identity may become familiar and meaningful. When done with strategic care, it can strengthen both pride in the past and optimism about the future.

Consider these long-term mindset shifts:

• Embrace patience. Some alumni will always prefer the old. The goal is not zero complaints but gradual cultural integration.
• Tell stories of continuity. Use storytelling to link new visuals to heritage, showing how the institution evolves.
• Celebrate touchpoint wins. As new signage, websites, merchandise, or spaces go live, highlight how they reflect institutional values. Let adopters share their experience.
• Audit for “leaks.” Inconsistent old logos, mixed design, or half-applied branding create dissonance. Gradually phase out outdated visual references.
• Embed flexibility. The brand system should allow for sub-brands, co-brands, and future innovation without fracturing the whole identity.

Over time, a well-executed rebrand can become part of the institution’s next chapter, an asset rather than a flashpoint.

‍

Planning for the Future with Respect and Vision

Rebranding a longstanding university is a deeply human and symbolic undertaking. For those institutions rooted in legacy, the tensions are real: anchors of history vs. the needs of a changing future; emotional attachment vs. strategic necessity.

But with transparency, empathy, and rigorous planning, rebranding is possible. The goal isn’t to overwrite memory, but rather to carry the flame forward so that the stories of students past, present, and future can connect, evolve, and thrive under a refreshed, meaningful identity.

If your university is considering such a journey, you don’t have to navigate it in the dark. Learn from peers, engage deeply with your community, and design with humility as much as ambition.

‍