TheOldRoman

Members
  • Content count

    6,875
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

TheOldRoman last won the day on January 27 2016

TheOldRoman had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,089 Excellent

About TheOldRoman

  • Rank
    #Grateful

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

21,177 profile views
  1. 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).
  2. 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).
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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
  12. 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.
  13. 1) I disagree with you. The lighter shade of navy is bad. Also, as far as I know, the teams wearing the lighter navy hats still use the same dark navy on the jerseys. If anything, they should lighten up the teal a hair. 2) This picture show how crappy the matte helmets are. They're two weeks into the season and the helmets are already scuffed up with glossy marks on them. Shiny helmets masked scuffs much better.
  14. These are unoffensively mediocre. Far from great, but not terrible. Here are the rankings for the home and road, since that throwback is long-covered and I think all of us born in the 20th century will agree that the dark gray alternates are hot garbage. Helmet - C The striping pattern is dumb, and it omitting white is awful. They should have used the same B-W-B stripes they used in the Barry Sanders era. Also, the logo was messed up by putting the offset blue outline. I don't care if it matches the crappy stripes. It would have been better to just have a single white outline, like the Sanders era. Silver facemask? Meh. The best look is blue, once again, like Barry wore. It could be worse. Wordmark - C- Unoffensively awful. It's bad an uninspiring, but not so much that you'll remember how bad it is. Numbers - C+ The font is really bad; matching the wordmark. I disliked the previous font, but this actually makes me miss it. That was at least more thought-out. These are just thin, italicized crap with random points in the corners. The only saving grace, and it's a big one, is that they outlined the numbers in silver on the home and road. I don't care if the silver doesn't always show up against the white from a distance. It is a great detail and it looks better than single color. Jerseys (stripes mostly) - C The striping pattern appears for a third time. A bit of overkill, and the set would have improve from having different stripes somewhere (like on the helmets and pants). Still, it's a classic striping pattern. It's hurt by the lack of white on the homes, silver on the road, as those colors outlined the stripes on the classic Sanders-era set. Could be worse. Sleeve wordmark/designs - F The wordmark on the stripes is garbage. Really bad. It's a throwback to the awful '80s designs of slapping a logo on top of stripes. (And no, the Cowboys navy jerseys don't look good. They suck on their own and are a departure from the classic look the team should be wearing. The 49ers of the TO era also looked worse for doing it. Don't @ me.) So, this is a dated, crap practice, brought back because Nike gonna Nike. This is obviously something they want to push, as they put the Buccaneers' wordmark on one sleeve. It looks bad. The WCF logo is awful. If they want to memorialize him, go nuts. Do it in a classy way like the Bears did. However, this logo is the opposite of classy. It's too big, too busy, and messes things up by including white (which they excluded from the stripes and the other sleeve). The only positives of these elements are that throwing this crap on the sleeves clears up the front of the jerseys. Under collar wordmarks are bad, and adding a big permanent logo on the chest is awful (hi, Chiefs). Gray (silver?) pants - B The stripes match the helmet, which is standard practice for teams that aren't morons (hi, Saints). However, the stripes are bad for the helmet, and that goes for the pants, as well. However, it looks like these pants are actually metallic silver, rather than the washed out, see-through faint gray pants they wore in recent years. That is enough to move the pants up. Blue pants - D The stripes decent (previously discussed). However, these are awful for a few reasons. First off, they aren't paired with white or gray socks, they will always look like tights. Even worse, this is going to lead to these being worn with the blue jerseys, which is horrendous. Worse still, they'll probably wear solid blue at home and only wear silver pants on the road. A potentially decent element, but awful in this era. So, these "look like the Lions," but so did the last set. The colors are great. The fonts are awful. There are a few Nike elements that have no place. These aren't terrible, but they could be a lot better. I'd give them an edge over the previous set, but only because of them eliminating black. They would have been much better served to just go fully back to the Sanders set, but they they'd be admitting they made a mistake changing to begin with. And they wouldn't be able to see more jerseys and helmets in a few years when they make another change.
  15. The White Sox used Velcro on their jerseys as far back as around '95. You'd see a slight outline of single-row stitching for a small rectangle of Velcro. I only ever noticed it on the black jerseys because the white had the pinstripes and the gray had the script covering that area. Eventually (I think in 2000) they moved to evenly spaced-out buttons on the white and black, since they didn't need the empty space for script in the middle. I'm not sure if they still use Velcro on the grays or not.