Ted Cunningham

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

52 Excellent

About Ted Cunningham

  • Rank
    Let's go Bucs.
  • Birthday 04/11/1985

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    CFPB's Southeast Region

Contact Methods

Recent Profile Visitors

7,060 profile views
  1. I'd wear it. Nicely done!
  2. The perspective on the knight's hand is so weird. Is the sword bendy or what?
  3. Wait. That happened in Vegas. Was I not supposed to mention that?
  4. I have stayed there before! $46/night is about right considering the accommodations. Haha.
  5. I just enjoy the kid yelling "roll it please!" "can we please roll it?" into the nothingness before the video failed again. At least he's polite.
  6. Certainly far better than what they have now.
  7. OK, so I took that 8 and made the rest of the set just to see what it looks like. I figured I'd post it. Ha.
  8. Interesting. I would think it would be more aesthetically pleasing to just mirror the angles from the opposite sides and have symmetry (excuse the rough trace): Two things with that though: 1) I guess it comes down to taste, and I personally prefer symmetry along the vertical axis when comes to numbers like 8. 2) Technically, those angles wouldn't be 18 and 34 degrees, respectively, if the 8 (and other numbers) had the notches where they currently simply have 90 degree corners. They'd be 162 degrees and 146 degrees, respectively.
  9. While I agree that there are strong similarities, I don't think the designers at Nike would just open an .ai file of Oregon State's numbers and change the angles of the notches to the certain degree values and call it complete. While I think they make some questionable choices on how the final numbers look, I do appreciate the thought behind the designs. I would presume each set is built from scratch. After looking at several of these number sets, what I want to know is what Nike's obsession with not "notching" the upper right and lower left corners of numbers like 8 or 2 is.
  10. @DC in Da House w/o a Doubt @JosiahWVU You guys going to be there? It's a True Blue game, so wear blue if you are! I don't understand Nike's obsession with making oddly modified sets of numbers. Some really work with the theme (like the Vikings' numbers), and then others are just flat-out well-designed (like North Carolina's current set). But why do Wake Forest's look the way they do (the 8s are asymmetrical vertically, but are rotationally symmetric; why)? Why do OU's have all those little points? I presume there's a design-related reason for all of them (like WVU's numbers meant to resemble pick axes). Or is it just to reduce IP duplication/theft by counterfeiters? It seems like Nike gets a good idea for what they want a set of numbers to look like, then they push them just over the line into "Hey, I'm just going to add some random shapes to these numbers to make them look extra cool!" territory. Maybe that's just gripe-y on my part, and it comes down to taste. But so much of the customer numbers they do just make me ask "why?"
  11. I don't mean to sound rude, but why is this thread in the sports logos section and not the concepts section?
  12. May be one of the greatest posts I've read on here. It's easy to mimic the way that Tony Soprano talks, but to put the full stops in the middle of everything Paulie says is brilliant. I could hear this conversation in my head as it I was reading it. Very well done.
  13. These projects are quite a bit of fun. I like seeing all the caps/helmets, etc. from a particular year lined up like this. It reminds me of the various mid-century Cubs programs that would show all the caps from the NL. One thing: is there a reason why the Pirates' cap is navy instead of black?
  14. If they have to wear something other than blue over blue over gold, then I really like this white over gold over white. It feels far more balanced than wearing blue over gold over blue (which seems more balanced like an alternate away uniform moreso than a home uniform; the lightest element is the jersey) or one of the other many combinations used since the new uniforms came out. I'm a traditionalist in many ways when it comes to my own personal taste in sports uniforms. But that doesn't mean I want all throwbacks all the time. I'd much prefer to have game to game uniform consistency throughout a single season, even if the uniform is modern. And I think that kind of consistency is most lacking in modern college football among all other sports, what with most schools now carrying three or four options for each of the three main elements of the uniform. Since 1980, WVU has been blue over blue over gold at home up until the last few years (with some very rare white pants-exceptions, like 2001 vs. VaTech). When looking at just that combination, the uniform really hasn't changed a lot since the Nehlen-era started. I think the newest WVU uniforms get a lot of flack and some of it is deserved. (The numbers could be fixed to look a little more like numbers, though I like Nike's explanation for them and they're far easier to read from the stands than the previous two iterations.) But it's not awful, especially when the team wears a well-balanced combination. I know that for the time being, it's not realistic to expect consistent uniforms across college football. But it'd be nice to have that game-to-game consistency. It would help make the transition between different uniform eras more palatable or seem more logical:
  15. That look kind of reminds me of the way the Eagles' numbers look on their practice jerseys: overly thick with no stroke. Like Gothamite said, it makes them less legible.