Ferdinand Cesarano

Members
  • Content count

    1,498
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Ferdinand Cesarano last won the day on November 29 2015

Ferdinand Cesarano had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,480 Excellent

1 Follower

About Ferdinand Cesarano

  • Birthday 10/10/1965

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    New York
  • Interests
    Esperanto, communism, bicycling

Contact Methods

Recent Profile Visitors

7,088 profile views
  1. This is indeed a great shot for so many reasons, especially the uniforms. But what is weird is that the gold in the Saints' numbers seems to disappear at a distance. The players on the sidelines all appear to have solid white numbers.
  2. I just want to mention that the XFL's broadcasts dropped the cheesiness after the first couple of weeks, and became very professional. Here's a good mid-season example. Anyway, the tendency of fans to dismiss a new league is unfortunate. Some fans start to think that the dominant league is the sport, so any rival league is by definition fake. This attitude has to be seen as another symptom of the ignorance of history, considering that the dominant football, basketball, and hockey leagues attained their current shapes by incorporating (at least parts of) newer rival leagues that had gained legitimacy. And we should recognise that this dismissive attitude towards new leagues has nothing in common with the ill will that was expressed on this board for the new NHL team in Las Vegas. The NHL expansion team drew jeers for specific valid reasons, such as its location in Las Vegas (rule of thumb: if a place does not get snow, there should be no NHL team there) instead of an appropriate Northern or Canadian city, and its name which doesn't even contain the city's full name. Whereas, a new league will be denounced not on its merits but mindlessly and reflexively, simply on account of its being new.
  3. I am a person of the 1970s. I am a big fan of almost everything about the 1970s (the music, the television, the hair); and I would say that football and basketball uniforms were at their heights at that point. But, unfortunately, baseball uniforms in general hit bottom in that decade. The pullover/beltless trend was a disaster, taking down with it venerable franchises such as the Cardinals, Cubs, Reds, and Red Sox (the first two of which also employed the dreaded powder blue in place of grey on the road). Nevertheless, there were a couple of teams who shone in that period. The A's uniforms are one of my favourites of all time, despite the fact that they break so many of my "rules": pullover; beltless; coloured shirts; white pants on the road; and the Pirates never looked better than in their round-collared pullovers. Conversely, in the 1990s, the uniforms of football and basketball were bottoming out, with football introducing all kinds silly striping and panels, following the bad example of the Broncos, and basketball uniforms becoming enamoured with blocky faux-3D graphics. But baseball uniforms soared to their heights. Buttons and belts came back; and even teams whose looks had been developed with pullovers enjoyed a brief flourish in the style of an actual baseball uniform. The cleanness that is shown in those 1960s pictures returned, as the White Sox and Giants adopted sharp looks, joining the Braves, Phillies, and Reds in looks that would have been appropriate for any period since the 1940s. Even teams that had long looked pretty damn goofy, the Indians and Rangers, were things of beauty in the 1990s. And most guys still knew how to wear their pants and socks, letting at least some of the stirrup show. There were a few missteps in the 1990s. Some teams went a little too far in cleaning up their uniforms: the A's current uniforms, introduced in 1987, are respectable and are not unattractive; but they don't really reflect the charm of a team that had had so many good looks. The A's went through a look in the early 1980s that would have stood the test of time and really should have been the last word: And some teams unwisely abandoned signature looks, as the Padres and Expos became unrecognisable. Still, all things considered, the baseball universe never looked better than it did in the 1990s.
  4. On the ESPN site, Paul Lukas has a piece about the league's uniforms. There are plenty of quotes from Todd Radom and Ice Cube.
  5. Yeah, if for no other reason than that, it'll be a very long time until the Giants change road uniforms. The top two moments in their franchise history happened in those uniforms. They'll always be associated with the two Super Bowl victories over the Pats. It will probably be many years until the Giants even think about changing those road uniforms. Then again, I said the same thing about the Red Sox's road uniforms after the 2004 and 2007 World Series victories, and they promptly went and changed them in 2009, so who knows, I could be totally wrong again. (Though the Sox eventually switched back, so maybe I wasn't totally wrong there?) Winning the Super Bowl didn't save the Rams' classic uniforms, nor did winning the National League pennant save the Padres' classic uniforms. Granted, both those changes had already been decided. But nothing had been leaked, so surely the teams could have pulled back the changes and could have kept in place the uniforms that now had such great associations attached to them. Speaking of the Red Sox: I wonder, in 1978, if the Universe hadn't righted itself by having the Yankees overcome the forces of evil, and if the Red Sox had held onto their big lead and had gone on to win the World Series, would they still have switched away from the pullovers the very next year?
  6. The CBS Sports site published a story on fans' negative reaction to the temporary uniform.
  7. If @Ferdinand Cesarano needs to correct people who use the phrase "begs the question", he'd have a field day with this post! Arg! Cannot... unsee... OK, I have plucked my eyes out. That's better.
  8. I would like to see the Giants use of this kind of white uniform. One-colour blue numbers instead of one-colour red ones.
  9. The complaining is justified. The team has in its uniform arsenal the classic-coloured throwback that matches the fans' clear preference. The team could therefore opt to wear those throwbacks full-time. This would defy the NFL's rules; and so the team would be fined for every game in which it did this. Solution: pay the damn fine...and look like the L.A. Rams are supposed to look. The amount of goodwill that this act would have earned amongst fans is enormous. Instead, the (temporary?) move to white horns on the helmet creates confusion by casting doubt on whether the ultimate result will indeed be the uniforms represented by the throwbacks. This is an insult to a fanbase which identifies strongly with blue and yellow. And the use of the white-horned helmets with jerseys that retain gold highlights creates an aesthetic mish-mosh that muddles the brand. To make matters worse, the opening of the new stadium (and, therefore, the debut of whatever the permanent new uniforms will be) has been put back another year. So fans will have to put up with the eyesore of this ridiculous hybrid kit for even longer, instead of seeing the real L.A. Rams uniforms that everyone wants. So it is fair to say that the team has completely botched this.
  10. Good news on the uniform; bad news on the helmet. The regular helmet would go just fine with that uniform. The "Giants" wordmark sits awkwardly on the helmet because it is too long; whereas, the classic/current logo fits perfectly. What's more, while the classic/current logo is a triumph of design, the wordmark has nothing going for it creatively or aesthetically. (By contrast, the Jets' 1980s wordmark is short enough to fit well on the helmet; and it has good design features that the classic/current helmet logo lacks.)
  11. Note: it raises the question. "Begging the question" refers to something else entirely. See here for more. (I bet that they'll wear white pants.)
  12. It's cool that the Giants are reestablishing the policy of wearing white at home against the Cowboys! I used to love those games. That is a sharp look for the Giants. I used to wish they could look like that all the time. And it illustrates the point that the team in white always looks better. Of course, the Giants' current white uniforms are not those, but the ones with the red numbers. While I used to be a backer of that style, I now wish that they'd wear blue numbers on the white uniform, as in the early 1970s.
  13. It may be the best flag in the country. The Maryland flag is probably the most recognisable state flag in the U.S., perhaps alongside that of Texas; but it's hardly the best. Aesthetically it's a mess.
  14. If you look at the earliest colour footage of NFL or AFL games, such as on this YouTube channel, there are many teams whose looks just jump right out at you: Cowboys, Chiefs, Raiders, Cardinals, Cowboys, Vikings, Bears, Packers, Browns, Colts, and more. Some teams didn't get to their most identifiable looks until a little later (Rams, Eagles). Some did some variation, and then returned to a more recognisable state (Giants, Jets, Redskins). Some had powerful looks which they inexplicably abandoned for inferior ones (Broncos, Falcons, Chargers, Bucs). But, by the mid 1970s, the visual landscape of football was more-or-less set; someone with no knowledge of that period looking at a film from back then would be able to identify the vast majority of the teams at a glance. So, I'd say that there are plenty of NFL looks that qualify as iconic.
  15. My guess is that the ex-NBA players will not struggle. Where a player in his 40s typically cannot keep up with a guy in his 20s is in running the court. But this half-court set-up mitigates that factor, and rewards the things that you don't lose as quickly with age: shooting touch, positioning, strength. I'd say that the more recognisable names in the league, the better. Even if the entire league is 40+, it will still be a great show. To dismiss recently-retired players as "has-beens" is nonsensical. Let's not forget how elevated the NBA level of play is. Even players who are a little short of NBA calibre are still more than good enough to engage in entertaining high-level competition against each other.