kroywen

Members
  • Content count

    1,004
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

kroywen last won the day on March 12

kroywen had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,332 Excellent

About kroywen

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    New York
  • Favourite Teams
    Yankees, Manchester United, Jets, Rangers, USMNT, NYCFC

Recent Profile Visitors

1,439 profile views
  1. Boston: Ted Williams, Larry Bird, Bobby Orr, Tom Brady (probably the most balanced Mount Rushmore across the 4 major sports that you'll see) Chicago: Michael Jordan, Ernie Banks, Bobby Hull, Walter Payton New Jersey: Martin Brodeur, Jason Kidd, Scott Niedermayer, Ken Daneyko St. Louis: Stan Musial, Bob Gibson, Albert Pujols, Brett Hull (honorable mention to Kurt Warner, Ozzie Smith, Red Schoendiest, and Tony La Russa) Los Angeles: Magic Johnson, Kobe Bryant, Sandy Koufax, Eric Dickerson Baltimore: Cal Ripken, Jr., Johnny Unitas, Jim Palmer, Frank Robinson (sorry Ray Lewis )
  2. New York is a brutally tough one, because of having multiple teams in each sport. There's no singular sports figures who 'unite' the entire city as a result. But taking a hack at it: Babe Ruth, Jackie Robinson, Lou Gehrig, Willis Reed The four biggest sports stars in New York history? I wouldn't say so. Ruth and Robinson are the only ones that absolutely have to be on there, IMO. Willis Reed was a tough call - I wanted to include a basketball player since New York is such a great basketball town. I'd put Willis Reed and Patrick Ewing as the best two players in Knicks history, personally, and Reed gets the nod since he won two championships, and later became a Knicks head coach (and worked in the Nets' FO as well). But that's a really tough one - a New York Mount Rushmore would not be complete without a basketball player, but I can't say there is one player that towers over the rest. Wish I could pick a homegrown New York star since NYC is so well renowned for producing great basketball talent, but there really isn't a standout homegrown star who made his name with the Knicks (Melo can be just as identified with the Nuggets as the Knicks, IMO). You can make a good argument for Dr. J, though he's probably more identified with the Sixers than the Nets in the public eye. Lou Gehrig got a spot over Tom Seaver, Mickey Mantle, Joe DiMaggio, Willie Mays, Jeter, etc. I put Gehrig over them, since he was born and raised in New York City, and has obtained mythic status due to his consecutive games streak and tragic disease and death. Gehrig over Mantle was a close call since Mickey Mantle has become the symbol of boomers' childhood (and nostalgia for 50's America in general), but I think Gehrig is more intrinsically "New York." Likewise, Mays played half his career in San Francisco, and the Giants weren't really the 'toast of the town' here in New York by start of his career. I debated whether to have three ballplayers and no football or hockey players, but there realistically aren't any football or hockey players in New York that are anywhere close to being iconic and universally admired as those four. Phil Simms, Y.A. Tittle, LT, Joe Namath, aren't anywhere close to being in that stratosphere. Nor are Messier, Potvin, Leetch, etc. (pains me to say it, but I'd bet tons of New Yorkers wouldn't even recognize those guys), while Gretzky only played a few years here. Realistically, guys like Mantle, Mays, Seaver, Jeter, etc., are more 'iconic' than Willis Reed in the public eye. But I couldn't justify to myself having a Mount Rushmore with four baseball players (especially if three were from the Yankees), and excluding basketball entirely.
  3. And both were in the Jets' division, FWIW.
  4. I think it had more to do with wanting to return to the old 1960s uniforms, which used white helmets. White helmets probably wouldn't help all that much in terms of QBs spotting their targets better anyway, considering two of the Jets' three divisional opponents also wear white helmets (granted, the Bills didn't back when the Jets made the switch to white helmets), and the Pats also wear a light-colored helmet.
  5. The Jets tend to do it for their first two home games. It's obviously to gain an advantage by wearing lighter color jerseys, though I hate the visual inconsistency of wearing white at home part of the year, and green at home the rest of the year. Unless you're the Dallas Cowboys, stick to wearing dark colors at home. It looks so much better, and more visually consistent too.
  6. Might be one of my least favorite gray uniforms ever. I'm not a fan of road pinstripes (glad the Rockies and Twins ditched them), not a fan of chest logos on a road uniform, and can't say I was ever a fan of the brown and orange color scheme for the Padres (I much prefer brown and gold). The brown and orange also don't mesh well with the gray backdrop, IMO. Also, is it me, or are those pinstripes spaced very widely? It's probably the same spacing as the Cubs' pinstripes, but they look very spaced out to me.
  7. I don't know if this is an unpopular opinion, but I'm generally not a fan of chest logos on road uniforms. It looked pretty good on the Padres' one-off road uniform for last year's ASG, but I can't think of one instance of a chest logo on a road uniform that I liked more than a traditional wordmark. The Padres are the closest it's ever come. The Giants' "San Francisco" road wordmark is one of the more underrated in all of baseball. It's very attractive in its simplicity and balance.
  8. I much prefer it with a consistent orange outline, and without the blue outline (given the cap color).
  9. I am all-in-favor of the Marlins using the blue as their primary color, with orange and black (in that order) as secondary colors. You could substitute out black in favor of gray and it might work as well. I made a quick MS Paint mockup of what the current Marlins logo could look like on a blue cap, using the blue/orange/black color scheme. I'd prefer a modified logo without the fish, or perhaps a better defined fish, but I think this would be a significant upgrade over what they currently wear:
  10. I couldn't agree more. In general, I hate black and blue as a color scheme. The two colors are too dark to work together, and wind up competing with one another. When right next to each other, they blend in together, sometimes to the point of creating a hazy purple effect where they meet. It's utterly pointless to have two dark colors that don't play well off one another in your color scheme. The black-and-blue trend (mainly by blue teams that added BFBS) seems to have mercifully died out, and I don't want to see it revived by the Lightning. The Lightning's current set is by far the best in their history. It's a low bar (I strongly dislike all of their previous jerseys), but better to rip off the Maple Leafs and Red Wings rather than continue the "are we a black team, a blue team, or both?" identity crisis they had before. At least now they're taking their cues from the right places, rather than from the BFBS trend. My preferred Lightning identity would probably add in a dash of silver on their jerseys, keeping the logo as-is. Some silver striping and detailing would help set them apart from the Wings and Leafs design-wise. But no need to return to what were honestly ugly jerseys and a hideous logo.
  11. I actually prefer the manufacturer's logo on the sleeve, rather than on the front. I do find it less intrusive, and the manufacturer's logo seems like a simple adornment on top of the striping pattern or TV number. It sticks out way less there. And I loathe those captain's patches. They're terribly ugly, in addition to being way too big and totally unnecessary. Honestly, I hate any sort of captain's patch or identifier outside of the "C" in hockey and the armband in soccer. Totally unnecessary on a baseball, football, or basketball uniform.
  12. My ideal Phillies look would be their 1950s script (and cap) in maroon. I could go for powder blue stars on the wordmark as well (I love powder blue and maroon together - there's a reason the closely-related claret and blue is such a popular color combination over in England). I can't say I've ever been a fan of the lowercase P used by the Phils in the 70s, nor the racing stripe. But the maroon color itself? It's perfect for the Phils. Wish they'd bring it back.
  13. Yeah. that'd be way more visible than the sleeve logo is. Betting Majestic wasn't willing to pay for that real estate, though.
  14. I'm very surprised by that, given how much Under Armour is presumably paying to have their logo on the front of MLB uniforms. I'd think that a logo on the front would be more visible than one on each sleeve. Case in point: at the college level, where these things are much less tightly regulated by the NCAA at the macro level, and teams are free to make their own apparel deals, most manufacturers choose to put the logo on the front.
  15. I think they were available up until the early 2000s here in the US. They were definitely still quite popular during the Attitude Era, as that's when I was growing up - I remember getting Rock, Austin, HHH, Taker, Kane, etc. Guessing their sales plummeted after the WCW merger (with the corresponding drop in wrestling's popularity), and they ceased to be profitable enough for Good Humor to carry. I don't think they were available up in Canada, at least not in the late 90s. Not sure they were available anywhere outside of the US by that point (if ever). Crazy thing is, I don't think Good Humor has ever used the same recipe for another line of ice cream bars. A shame, considering so many people absolutely loved those bars, and not just for the WWF branding.