TheOldRoman

Members
  • Content count

    6,883
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

TheOldRoman last won the day on January 27 2016

TheOldRoman had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,099 Excellent

About TheOldRoman

  • Rank
    #Grateful

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

21,395 profile views
  1. Cleveland Browns re-do in the works for 2020?

    Guys, stop. The B football is one of the worst logos in pro sports. It looks like a half-assed logo Nike designed 15 years ago for Nike-exclusive hats, using parts of the team's identity in a unique but uninspiring way. Like the NE logo with the logo stripes coming off it. Among the reasons it's terrible: It's a B, and it their logo should be a C; The stripes don't extend behind the B (as seen in the loops), but they fill in the triangle on the right side; The football lines curve slightly from the corners, where as the striped lines are a sharp angle. This is inexcusable with these being so close to one another. The stripes should truncate at the same angle as the football. It always drove me nuts; There is much more white space between the football and stripe corners than there is outlining the B. The spacing of white should be the same in both spots; The stripes are of no significance to the Browns. Yes, the current awful uniforms use brown-orange-brown stripes on the pants, and they wore those stripes when they originally messed up the uniforms circa 2003. But that's not the Browns. Their stripes should always be orange-brown-orange. Alternatively, an orange football with B-W-B stripes would have made sense; Seriously, stripes inside a football? It's terrible. A "B" looked bad inside a football surrounded by dead white space, so they crudely threw in the stripes. They're saying "we have to put something in this spot to make this logo interesting. The other oval logos in football fill up the space with letters. But they just had a B, so they had to throw in random crap. A single letter can't fill up a football. It's just bad design. A dog, an elf, or an entirely new logo that isn't a bad attempt at an olde tyme-y football logo would be fine. Just not leave it off the helmets.
  2. MLB Changes 2017

    Yellow touching white, even-numbered piping, city name at home for a team that isn't the Yankees or Tigers I don't have a problem with yellow touching white, but the rest of it applies. Also: Not brown and yellow; Introduced yet another color scheme for a schizophrenic franchise; Copied a DEEPLY UNPOPULAR color scheme from the local football team which symbolized the indifference that team's ownership had for the fans (and that team has since moved). This would be like if the Cleveland Cavaliers switched to purple and black. No swinging Friar patch; Cap logos on jerseys are largely lazy and awful. The Yankees and Tigers are grandfathered (even though both use different logos from the caps). White Sox, too. The cap is a small space that requires 1-2 letters to effectively use the space. The chest, however, is a much larger space that allows the team to expand its identity, especially including the team name. There's no excuse for introducing a reductionist home jersey 50 years after the franchise started and when the team doesn't have an awful name that looks bad spelled out (like Diamondbacks).
  3. MLB Changes 2017

    I agree that this jersey is worlds better than the current awful home set. This is a great look, though the wordmark could stand to be a slight bit bolder, IMO. However, it still uses the same awful number font. The font worked (but wasn't great) with the bevels, but it looks so terrible in two-color form. It's especially awful when the home jersey has a very thin logo on one side being completely overshadowed by the thick, almost square numbers on the opposite side.
  4. Detroit Tigers alternate jersey

    I don't hold the Tigers (or Yankees) set in high regard. I think both homes are classics that I would never touch if I got the title of uniform czar. However, both are just "meh" in my opinion (especially the Tigers). I really like the Tigers' script jersey they wore for one year in the '50s. Throw an orange outline around the navy and that is a great jersey; much superior to their current homes. But like I said, I'd never change them at this point. However, I do really like both teams' road sets. I agree that the Tigers' roads would look better without the white outline. However, they still look good with the white. Also, I love the white outlines on the Yankees roads. Since they've been wearing it for close to 50 years (and 7 titles), I think it's passed the point of being inappropriate for a storied franchise, and also passed the point of being dated with the 70's cuffs. Also, I feel the white outlines and stripes add a tiny bit of life to an otherwise boring look with no names on the back. Also, no, the Yankees shouldn't add names to their jerseys (but the Red Sox should add names at home).
  5. Dallas Cowboys going dark at home?

    Are you in your early 20's? I rarely ever saw the Cardinals on national TV growing up (because they were terrible), but I seem to remember them wearing white a lot at home in the '90s. Regardless, I'm glad that the franchise left that nonsense in the past. It's stupid in general, but particularly egregious for teams which don't have a long history of doing it (Texans) and play in climate-controlled domes to negate the dark color boogieman (also Texans).
  6. Dallas Cowboys going dark at home?

    I disagree, and I'm someone who generally likes outlines on numbers 9 times out of 10. That set never looked right to me. It looked wrong with the red socks, and the change to the blue socks in its last season made the numbers look like even more of a sore thumb. The blue outlines made the numbers look a little pinkish. The numbers on the current road set look great. They are a bright red, and they only work because they're offset by the sparkling, bright blue helmets. If they changed to a normal blue helmet or, even worse, satin blue, the look would be downgraded greatly.
  7. Dallas Cowboys going dark at home?

    That is correct, but it seemed to me like the Cowboys completely replaced royal blue with navy in all merchandise sometime in the late '90s. Being a kid in the early '90s when the Cowboys were dominant, there were a lot of bandwagon fans wearing Cowboys gear in school, and I remember a lot of royal blue back then.
  8. Dallas Cowboys going dark at home?

    I'd flip the last two (I'm a '90s kid), but I'd throw about five more greater-thans between the first and second pics. The shade of blue, the striping, the matching silver - that Staubach set is perfect. Rather than wearing the crappy navy jerseys and deviating from their traditional, iconic look, they should bring back the dark royal blue jersey which matches their whites and then pick a (bluish) silver, too. It's not just that the navy jersey is bad on its own (and it sure is), but the Dallas Cowboys have always worn royal blue, other than 1-2 times per year on the road the last 35 years. It's stupid that they think they need to go dark and sell navy crap, much less wear navy jerseys. It's not 2000 anymore, and teams are showing that people are not resistant to wearing vibrant colors.
  9. Lions New Logo and Uniforms 2017

    I'm fine either way. The new logo is good, but I thought the old one was perfectly effective as just a silhouette, like the Texas Longhorns logo.
  10. Lions New Logo and Uniforms 2017

    The logo should have one white outline. And the helmet stripes should also have white. The facemask should be blue. Basically, the Sanders era helmet is superior in every way. As is everything else from that set.
  11. MLB Changes 2017

    The low profile hats have been around longer than that. I bought one from New Era's website in 2004. They have been available to players since the late '90s, I believe.
  12. Lions New Logo and Uniforms 2017

    Striped brown pants would have looked good, provided they were only worn with the white jerseys and striped white socks. However, it wasn't right for the Browns. But yes, I didn't want them touching the helmet (other than going back to the superior white facemask). Just come up with anything that's not a helmet or a B inside a football.
  13. Lions New Logo and Uniforms 2017

    The Browns' previous set was almost identical, yes. They could have improved the look by lightening the brown, thinning out the stripes on the white pants, eliminating the brown pants, and wearing only striped socks. However, their look was certainly passable. The only thing they really needed to do with come up with an actual primary logo. Of course, they messed literally everything up, but still failed to make a primary logo. But I agree. They'll probably come closest of any Nike team to going back completely to the classic look. But there will, of course, be a handful of Nike flourishes.
  14. Toronto Blue Jays white front panel caps question

    l like the solid blue hats are the better look. However, I like the look of the white-paneled hat. If they're going to wear it, they should wear it for every home game. Oh, and only wear the blue jerseys once a week. Also, mad props to the Jays for making batting helmets to match the hats. They did the right thing in a world where we have dumbass teams refusing to make helmets matching road hats they wear 81 times a year. If I was the commissioner, first thing I'd do is require teams to make a set of batting helmets matching each hat in their normal rotation. Second thing is remove the New Era logo from the hats. #OldRoman4Commish
  15. Lions New Logo and Uniforms 2017

    The Vikings, Dolphins, Browns and Lions all had classic sets they could have gone back to. The Vikings and Lions sets are decent-to-pretty-good, but worse than the old sets. The Dolphins set is bland crap. The Browns are horrendous. Even in the sets that tried to look old (MIN and DET), Nike had to change just enough to let us know that these were Nike presents "NFC North," a Nike production. Directed by Nike and starring Nike. So, the next Bengals set will be better (it would seemingly be impossible to stay as bad). And it very well might be modeled after the Super Bowl set. But it will have an awful font with sublimated stripes, fierce teeth outlining the face on the helmet, and various other head-shakers that do just enough to leave you disappointed.