Silent Wind of Doom

Members
  • Content count

    1,188
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Silent Wind of Doom last won the day on September 8 2016

Silent Wind of Doom had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

538 Excellent

1 Follower

About Silent Wind of Doom

  • Rank
    Sports Pope Farewell Year

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    The Great State of New York

Recent Profile Visitors

10,148 profile views
  1. It sounds terrible, but it's an honest truth. The best part was the end. He'd become too ill to deal with day-to-day and interfere, selling out the youth for old broken down stars, but he was still around so the team would do things "to respect the boss's wishes". Kinda the best of both worlds. Woof. The Celtics? I mean, the Sixers and Pelicans is one thing, but... At least it's the best way you could do it. It's a simple logo that's done in the team's colors. No. The world is a garbage fire, there's hate everywhere, and there are starving kids in Africa. We have to finish our meals and stop all this silly sports logos talk. Shut it all down, and let's go focus on what's important. Save the whales. Also, Communism is just a red herring. Now looking closer, egad. They not only made the caps these colors, but made those colors (and black/white) the only available pallet. So we're not getting a D'Backs throwback, per se, because the snake head is the color of the blue caps. I'm not sure how accurate these are, but they really miss the mark. Earlier there was discussion about white on yellow/yellow on white. I think the Padres/A's work so well because they're putting gold on white as opposed to yellow. Athletic gold is a darker tone, so it stands out well enough, as opposed to a lighter, more pastel yellow. The shade in these caps, though, are just straight up yellow. Looking at the Brewers' cap, I don't know how good that's gonna come out looking. The A's cap looks really weird, but I think that's just an error in the drawing of it. It's one of the things that makes me... unsure that this is anywhere near accurate. Do we have images of the LLWS uniforms for this year?
  2. Just noticed another cool custom work. The AL manager has a star with no number in it, since he's a fill-in for Francona. Or is this a thing for all the coaches? It seems a cool touch if it's just because he's the Gerald Ford of the All-Star Game.
  3. Wow... You have the best pitcher in the sport right now starting for the team. Then the network takes up time in between innings doing interviews and he only gets one inning of work before going cold. Incredible. Unless this is Maddon trying to strategize. It's crazy, though, that Scherzer didn't get at least once around the order.
  4. The All-Star caps are extremely stupid and shouldn't exist. That being said, dangit if they don't look really sharp matched with the gold patch on the unis. There are a few exceptions, notably the multi-tone teams like Houston, but they really do look good. So, I thought the AL and NL would each be wearing a sock color. Each side is wearing both?! Except for the Red Sox who seem to have just said "Screw you, we're wearing red socks."
  5. From what I've heard in the past, the reason was because in ye olden days a wife would dress her husband, readying him for the day out. This way, the buttons would be a mirror image of her own, so that she would have no trouble buttoning them, using the same hands she uses to button her own buttons.
  6. I didn't notice until seeing this picture, but I wasn't really paying attention. Looking at it now, the most prominent clue to me is the... ample extra space upstairs that looks filled due to the slimmer waist constricting, which gives him a... not flattering shape for a guy. They were discussing this on the Dan Le Batard Show this morning, and one guy brought up that since the more slim jersey fit the look he was going for more, he likely requested a tighter jersey after trying on the men's, not caring if it was a women's and possibly thinking no one would notice. Is this image working for anyone else? I just see what is essentially an image hosting 404. That's the point of throwing sixteen versions up. See what sticks and what people like best. I agree with you that the M on its own is appealing and unique. It feels a little naked on its own, but I think that's just the history of the Marlins clouding my mind. They've always had a fish and always had a taller logo on their caps because of it.
  7. And not a moment too soon.
  8. Totally. I really dig that wordmark overall. I'd mentioned earlier that I don't like the M at all in that Marlins concept. It looks good as part of a wordmark, but with the Marlin, and especially on the cap, it has way too much negative space in the middle. Their recoloring of the old marlin is beautiful, though, so I decided to take a look at how it would look with the current M. Couldn't decide whether the head or the tail looked better in the front, so I made both. I think it looks rather stunning. So, I did kinda dig the tail out version a bit more, and mocked up a bunch of different possibilities for this logo on a cap, including the old color combination, teal and orange, and teal and blue and orange. EDIT: Just wanted to make sure I noted that the gray used here is lighter than the style guide's silver, but I went lighter to emulate how their silver stitching looks under light, as it has a sheen that's not represented by the incredibly dark gray.
  9. With the sock starting at the top black and striping down to white in a pattern similarly to the 70's Red Sox sock, it could work. I don't think the transition from white pant to white sock looks as good. Looks like a printing error. What tweaks are you referring to with the Yankees home? Save for the change to the current uniform NY and the all navy pinstripes, I'm not sure what changes have been made that haven't been league-wide. I think it's pretty certain that they need to just go ahead with the current alt. No uniform that takes any influence from any previous unis is going to have full support. People are entrenched in each differet identity. At least with brown and yellow, you can get the most people on board, with the brown/yellow/orange people standing it, although the navy and orange crowd will be upset. "Dated" may be a term that is overused and incorrectly used to the point that it feels like it doesn't have a real meaning, but it is certainly a valid criticism, specifically, if it's used to refer to something that doesn't hold up. Old sword and sandals pics or epic westerns are of their era, but they're still masterful. The Las Vegas sign and most of Tomorrowland evoke a certain time period, but they still look good. These are timeless. Meanwhile, 75% of the fashions of the 80's are just dated. Red on blue without a lighter in between is dated. Incredibly baggy uniforms and I can't say those uniforms aren't beautiful, but I've always found that P logo to be horribly dated. The incredible thickness that varies throughout, the abstract lineweight to create the ball, it's all incredibly 70's-80's. It's like the cartoonish logos of the 60's football teams. I equate it with these logos. Son of a... This is what I get for falling asleep halfway through writing this post. Beat me to it. The Giants look their best now. In imagining the team's best look years ago, when it came to thinking of a primary logo, the best from the stuff they've ever had is this roundel. Yes, we have too many roundels, but it looks better than any primary they've ever used. Their primary game has always just been... bleh. It's the opposite of the Indians cap. The two lighter colors need a dark color in between. Otherwise, you end up with a washed out pastel.
  10. That's really not bad. Not bad at all. If we're not going back to teal, we need more of this blue. The wordmark is really nice and the new colors on the fish look great, although I don't dig the M as much. It's soo much negative space in the middle. I think this can work fine with the current shape M, although perhaps a little more vertical like this. As for the others in that article, the Rangers' look is beautiful, but a little too of its time. I mentioned the Twins evoking the aesthetic of the time, and this does too, but it's a little too of its time. Too dated. Specifically that T with its varying widths looks like the logo for a 60's animation company. I'd prefer the current T in outline on the cap, but this shows how well the wordmark looks today. Bring back the Rangers name. This would look great in white at home, but I do think the team can get away with powder blues on the road, even through they're not one of the teams I think of immediately when I think powder blue aways. The Padres uniform is a perfect mixture of uniforms people argue about. It's an easy fix to make, but I've never seen this combination before. Bring it immediately. I love the White Sox current look, but that looks just as good, and is a cruelly underutilized color combination. I'd be fine with them changing to this tomorrow. The color combination is really nice, although I wish they'd given us homes instead of just giving us colored alts for the most part. That wordmark is entirely too rediculous, and the copper colored alt combined with this makes it look more like what I'd expect a college team to look like. And the A has been one consistent part of the team's history. No need to change it, especially given that A's unbalanced look that weakens it when it stands on its own. That being said, the home may look spectacular. They used to wear the M's with their navy alts at home and on the road. They could easily rock both looks.
  11. Hmm... I suppose that understandable to some, although I greatly more agree with Daveindc's appraisal. Then again, I'm one of the people who prefers cities bring back identities that have been abandoned. Yeah. Screw those guys. Baseball is back in the capital. In the end, though, I know it's a touchy subject, especially since the Nationals have two (Side note, when I called the curly W "consistent", I was referring to a stark contrast of the wildly varying and splotchy thicknesses of that Twins logo on the wall.) I do agree that DC is a good mark and fits in the vein of the Twins' TC. I'd be all for the team having a different logo and cap insignia. In fact, I've been greatly disappointed by this sport going towards the NFL practice of having them be the same. What if this were their identity? Primary:Cap:
  12. So do the uniform have different values than the ColorWerx values? I'd checked with a graphic I made from the ColorWerx values to compare the reds. As for the Nats and Twins discussion, I do like those old monument uniforms, but I also love the current look. I'd be okay with a few tweaks, a script wordmark here or there a DC logo here and there, but I think they look good. I agree with someone earlier in confusion over the sudden dogpile on the W. It's unique, timeless, balanced, and consistent. Besides the similarity to a grocery chain's logo, what's the problem with it? As for the Twins, I think a lot of different teams have different looks that evoke different times. I feel that the Twins' TC evokes the 60's so perfectly, which is an aesthetic that I think really fits the team, especially with a new ballpark that has a lot of elements that evoke that same time period: the birth of Minnesota Baseball. P.S. Glad that halfway through everyone finally realized that that prototype cap does have incredibly clear serifs and stopped referring to it as the sans-serif W.
  13. Their shade of red is different from every other red in the league. It is lighter than a lot of the darker reds used in places such as Minnesota and Atlanta, but it's darker than the truly bright reds of Toronto and Los Angeles. It's in a middle groove, a deep scarlet. It's not bright enough to contrast well directly with the navy. Sure, in that picture the cap logo looks fairly bright, but in that same image you can see the muddiness of the lettering outline that doesn't even look like the same color anymore as the cap. This is clear in many different pictures. In the slightest bit of shadow, it gets worse. Note it seemingly shrinking in this shot. But all these are zoomed in, so let's actually look at what it looks like from any manner of distance... And that right there is what the Cleveland Indians look like. Heck, you can't even see the serif in half of those shots, the blending shaving it off as it starts to look more like the old Chicago White Sox logo. In the end, the argument of it being their unique thing doesn't hold up. It's done by other teams because it just looks good. Every team that had pants piping had it going all the way up the leg, and the Diamondbacks decided to be unique. Every team that had numbering shadows had the shadow underneath the number, and the Marlins decided to be unique. Sometimes, things are done a certain way so widely because they're being done the correct way. Design evolves over time and we learn that some things work. On the subject of design marching on, the people who point to old pictures of the team or say that this look has precedent are missing the fact that there's a major difference between old and classic. Some older things just don't look good. While there were a number of good designs from the 70's and 80's, I don't know if there's anyone around here who wants those looks returning who want to see them on a pullover. I can't remember anyone ever asking for pullovers to return. No one has worn red on blue without a third, lighter color in the mix since the 40's.
  14. Yeah. Was going to edit my post, but decided to let conversation continue first and see what the response was. Most people I've noticed decrying the block C admit that it does look a hundred times more attractive with an outline.
  15. The Cubs have a white outline and the Reds have a white logo. Both provide adequate contrast. This does not. Those are also more visually distinct and interesting designs. Those don't look like they could be a part of a standard Word font set. This does.