• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

481 Excellent

About ColeJ

  • Rank
    Mario Lemieuxterus
  • Birthday 03/25/1984

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Waxahachie, Texas

Recent Profile Visitors

13,834 profile views
  1. all of these "needs outlines" comments are just confusing to me... reminds me of the old joke in the concept forum "needs stripes." the point of an outline is to improve legibility. the stars white on green and green on white numbers are completely legible. why complicate them with outline, simply because we have other colors available in our palette? one of the strongest points of the new stars uniforms is the fact that they kept the green and the black from touching each other, which kept the colors from bleeding together or playing off one another. adding a black outline around the numbers would just muddy things up. yeah, they look simplistic... but they're numbers. they're clean. they're legible. they're simple. they fit the aesthetic. they fit the rules of the color scheme... it's just silly that all these years later we're still complaining about the lack of outlines. when the uniforms were first unveiled, i thought they needed an outline too... but the more i've seen them, the more i'm convinced the stars made the right call.
  2. Stars current uniforms are in no need of any tweaks or redesigns. A throwback to 93-94 would be a cool alternate. That's about all.
  3. I'd swap the grey and black. Make the main body grey, giving the side gussets a more natural darker shade that will help blend into the pants better. Also, the primary mark being on a grey background helps keep the shield behind the helmet from disappearing into the blackness.
  4. Auburn's pants stripe infuriates me every other Iron Bowl. Roll Tide.
  5. Are there even such things as "southern fans" that want more southern teams and don't care about more Canadian ones? I'm in Texas. From Alabama. I cheer for Dallas, but would love to see Quebec, Atlanta, and Houston get teams for various reasons. I also want a second team in the GTA. Expanding, moving Arizona, Carolina, and Florida... Maybe Vegas eventually... I'm fine with those moves to make it happen. My biggest gripe is the merry go round of identity. The Jets are currently in Arizona. The Whalers are in Carolina. Making either the Whalers or Jets become the Nordiques is a headache to me. Especially when the Nordiques are in Denver and the Jets 2.0 are in Winnipeg, via Georgia. Not much we can do to fix all that though, short of a time machine.
  6. hashtags are ridiculous. #VegasIsHockey? No... Vegas isn't hockey. Vegas is one of the cities least associated with the sport on the planet. This is coming from a Stars fan. We've had a team for almost a quarter of a century, won a Stanley Cup, and have a pretty solid following... but even saying #DallasIsHockey would be absolutely ridiculous. Hershey, PA is more "hockey" than Vegas. Everyone starts somewhere, but your city shouldn't claim to "be" a sport before they even play a game. Rant over.
  7. so they're going to announce that the senators have moved to las vegas? i like it a lot more as navy than i do as black... we already have a black, red, and gold team that uses an ancient warrior helmet in this league.
  8. Las Vegas Magnetos If the Raptors won't use this scheme, someone should.
  9. the part i'm most excited about is the navy and gold color scheme. (assuming that is navy, and not just funky lighting on black) i heard a lot of people around the stars re-design tell me that one of the schemes that gained a lot of traction for dallas was navy and gold, with some red detailing (similar to the titans level of red detailing, with the two-tone blue). i wasn't a huge fan of the idea, obviously, because i wanted green... but there were times in the bargaining stages of grief that i thought "actually, navy and gold, with a little bit of red could look pretty damn sexy." if that's what's going on here, i'll be pleased. still, while i really like this logo so far, i don't think it would be strong enough as a primary mark on the front of the sweaters. it's missing something, and seems too tall to work as a primary crest. regardless, they've got my attention finally, in a positive manner.
  10. I think you're over thinking this... If it's Las Vegas, they'll be LV. If they're Vegas, it'll be VEG. The team name wont play into it, just like TB.
  11. That "Coyotes unretire 9 for Bobby's son" story would be way cooler if they hadn't given Mike Ricci a #9 jersey at his introductory press conference too. The Coyotes didn't really consider 9 retired until they needed a good headline for Brett's signing. Only reason Ricci never wore 9 in a game is because he changed his mind and decided to honor Pat Tillman instead.
  12. i know you're not supposed to eat the yellow snow... is there's some equivalent reference for yellow ice? that template is cute though.
  13. Every time I say "Desert Knights" in my head, I think of Aladdin and that "Arabian Nights" song.
  14. Tribe names as intellectual property is still just hard to wrap my mind around. I'm not disagreeing with it or arguing against it. It just feels so counterintuitive to my brain as a holder of a history degree and fan of geology. Dallas Stars are an intellectual property. A business. No one is born into Dallas Stars. Seminole isn't the same. If I got tired of being a Dallas Stars fan, I could become a Toronto Maple Leafs fan. If someone got tired of being Seminole, they couldn't suddenly become Chippewa. So specific ethnic groups as intellectual property in general does seem very odd. I still take the very selfish and entitled stance of "case by case basis based on my own discretion." lol. Redskins name, racist. Redskins logo, perfectly fine and quite nice. Indians name, feels inaccurate and weird but supposedly natives embrace the term so fine I guess. Indians logo, inappropriate. Blackhawks everything, no issues. Chiefs, Seminoles, Sioux, Braves, no issues. Vikings and Fighting Irish (my two biggest ancestoral groups), awesome identities for teams I don't care about. Is it white privilege to pick and choose what personally offends me? Or is it only white privilege when I care more about what offends me than what offends everyone else?
  15. Just playing devil's advocate here, but where do names like Vikings and Fighting Irish fall? If Fighting Irish is acceptable (which I believe it is, as an Irish American) then Blackhawks and Sioux and Seminoles and the non Redskinsy options are acceptable as well. If it's not, then does Vikings still have another level all together as it doesn't represent an entire ethnicity, but rather just a specific job or role of that ethnic history? Like Braves or Chiefs or Scouts? Again, as a devils advocate here, the Minnesota Vikings use a logo that depicts inaccurate stereotypes of Scandinavian history. What IS acceptable and at what point does it get "weird?" Technically even Canadiens and Canucks fall loosely into this category as well.