kroywen

Members
  • Content count

    967
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

kroywen last won the day on March 12

kroywen had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,288 Excellent

About kroywen

Profile Information

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

Recent Profile Visitors

1,343 profile views
  1. Jumping in (a little late) to say that I love both those Yankees concepts. It's rare that I see a modified/consolidated version of the interlocking NY that I like across all applications, but that one works perfectly. It fits both on the hat and the chest. Love the "dash of red" concept as well. It's a nice bit of alternate history, and completely plausible if the Yankees went a slightly different path with their uniforms in the mid-30s. Great work!
  2. A lot of it really does depend on the sport, and how design trends at the time lent themselves to the traditional aesthetic of the sport. For instance, I think the 1980s were an incredible time for hockey and football uniforms, given the bright colors and bold striping that were en vogue at the time. Meanwhile, it was an absolutely terrible era for baseball uniforms, what with pullovers, sansabelts, bold striping, way-too-high stirrups, and garish color uniforms that just did not look good on a ballfield. Brightly colored uniforms with big stripes are great in hockey and football; they're not so great in baseball. The 1990s provide a stark contrast - it was a terrible era for uniforms in most sports, with garish, outlandish designs and logos, BFBS, and darkening of colors. But I think it was a great decade for baseball uniforms, since there was a trend within baseball toward 'retro' uniforms to match the 'retro' ballpark trend. Pullovers and sansabelts became things of the past, while traditional piping was restored to many uniforms. Every single team returned to traditional white and gray uniforms as their primaries. The trend toward darkening of colors actually helped in baseball, since the traditional baseball palette was based on darker colors like navy and black, and teams weren't going to wear those colors head-to-toe (unlike, say, red or orange). By sport, I'd rank the decades as follows: Baseball: 1960s, followed by 1950s, then 1990s Football: 1960s, followed by 1980s, then 1970s Hockey: 1980s, followed by 1960s, then 1970s Basketball: 1960s, followed by 1970s (related note: the ABA had some great uniforms) Soccer: 1950s-60s (little change in uniform design over that period, followed by 1970s. BTW, I grew up in the 90s and 2000s, and largely hate the design trends of that era. The garish, cartoonish logos of the 90s, BFBS, out-of-place piping (Bills, Falcons, Bettman stripes, etc.), and super baggy uniforms were all awful trends. You'll notice that the only time I even mentioned the 90's was in baseball, and it still paled in comparison to the 60's and 50's. And the saving grace for baseball in the 90s was a trend toward a retro aesthetic, calling back to... the 50s and 60s!
  3. I'd go with the 60's as a whole. All four major sports looked great in the 60's, and you started to get a wider array of colors in baseball and hockey.
  4. I'd be interested in how a cream helmet would look in practice, though I agree that it'd be tough to match the shade of the jersey. I can't decide how I feel about the requirement for contrasting helmets. I remember not having any trouble telling the Rangers and Flyers apart in the 2012 Winter Classic, despite very close helmet colors: (BTW, that Rangers jersey is evidence of how great a cream Wild jersey would look if it could be paired with a green helmet. But given the contrasting helmet rule, probably best to stick with white.)
  5. Yeah, that's less than ideal, admittedly. It's too bad the NHL wouldn't allow them to wear green helmets both home and road, since that would pair wonderfully with cream jerseys.
  6. The home uniform should be based off of this design. Cream striping and numbers, with red outlines on the numbers (both back and arm). This is far superior to their home uniform. That said, I wish the Wild would go with cream away uniforms that would be more consistent with the rest of their identity, and would also be very unique. I wonder if the NHL would even permit that...
  7. I like @infrared41's grading scale, rather than just upgrade/downgrade, so here's my thoughts and grades: Anaheim Ducks: C. They didn't screw anything up further, but I was really hoping for the addition of hem stripes rather than side panels. That's a uniform begging for hem stripes. Well, I'd argue every hockey uniform does, but this uniform looks particularly incomplete without the sleeve stripes continuing onto the hem. Also missed a chance to get rid of that awful phantom yoke on the homes, Boston Bruins: C. I actually like the new numbers sans double outlines - I'm not a fan of double outlines at all. But changing to black socks at home is a terrible idea that drags down the set so much. Buffalo Sabres: C+. It's a very minor upgrade, which isn't saying much. I want a return to royal blue, and for them to ditch the unnecessary silver, but even without those changes, the insistence on keeping the unnecessary front numbers drag these down quite a bit. Calgary Flames: C-. As with Buffalo, a minor upgrade where a major overhaul was needed. Losing the piping is a positive. Keeping the black C, the ugly side panels, the lack of proper hem stripes, and the out-of-place blue Alberta patch? Awful ideas all around. They need a rebrand (or better yet, a return to their original Calgary duds) stat. Carolina Hurricanes: B+. A massive upgrade, but they missed on one significant element. This would be a solid A if they just made the warning flags black. Colorado Avalanche: A-. Finally, a return to the mountain hem stripes! the only thing I would've preferred would be if the divider between the burgundy and blue were black/white stripes, like on the original. I'm not a fan of how the dull grey looks in that context. Otherwise, a home run. Columbus Blue Jackets: D. It's not 2007. Get rid of the Edge template. Edmonton Oilers: D+. A big downgrade on the stripes and a disappointing return to navy. And frankly, i wish they stuck with royal blue jerseys. Los Angeles Kings: C-. How do you look at that jersey and not a.) get rid of the out-of-place piping, and b.) match the striping between the home and road jerseys (using the thinner arm stripes and the hem stripes of the road, of course)? And I would much prefer the crown logo to be placed on the chest, rather than the home plate logo that manages to be both bland and visually busy all at once. At least it's not a return to the muddled black and purple color scheme? Minnesota Wild: C+. Again, so close, yet so far. This would look perfect with a hem stripe matching the arm stripes. I hate how the chest stripe doesn't match the arm stripes, via the lack of a red stripe. If the designers were concerned that a red stripe on the chest would muddle the chest logo, then they should've went with a different stripe design (perhaps cream Northwestern stripes). The bottom of the jersey also looks blank.The only saving grace here is that the Wild's incredible logo is back in its rightful place on the front of their home uniform. Nashville Predators: C. A slight upgrade, and yet a missed opportunity. Getting rid of the piping alone makes it an upgrade. But why did they remove the upper blue stripe? The white stripe does not look good directly against the yellow background. This is also begging for a blue yoke. New Jersey Devils: F. What more can I say that hasn't already been said? They ditched the ultimate modern classic in the NHL for an unbalanced, ugly jersey. New York Islanders: B. Adding back the blue outline around the chest logo on the roads makes it an upgrade. Keeping the clunky and cluttered chest logo that is out of date and doesn't even depict their current home on the map? I know they aren't ditching that logo (outside shot they do it when they relocate from Barclays to wherever), but I'd much prefer the "NY" on the chest. A white NY outlined in orange on the blue, and a blue NY outlined in orange on the whites. So much cleaner and more accurate than the current chest logo. Maps don't belong on logos, generally speaking. Ottawa Senators: D-. So many different concepts that would've been both historically relevant and aesthetically pleasing. Instead they decide to keep one of the absolute worst of the Edge jerseys. San Jose Sharks: C-. No real changes, and for that reason, they get a bad grade. Their hem stripes managed to survive the initial Edge rollout, were then removed for literally the dumbest reason possible, and still are missing even after the NHL moved to a new template. This is the blandest jersey possible. No, it isn't clean, it isn't crisp, it isn't traditional. It's just downright boring. St. Louis Blues: B+. I still can't decide whether I prefer the yellow numbers of old, or the new white numbers. Don't think I have a preference - they both look good and both work in the context of the rest of the jersey. I might wind up liking the white more if I see it in action and like it. Short of going back to the amazing early-mid 70s blue-and-gold design (their best uniform ever), they weren't going to improve on their current look in the context of their current color scheme). Vancouver Canucks: B. Shared my thoughts a couple pages ago, but I like the harmonized striping patterns across both the home and away uniforms. The chest logo and wordmark are still a huge negative that drags down the rest of the uniform: of all the various logos in their identity - Johnny Canuck over the V, skating Johnny Canuck, stick-in-rink, and the orca - they've managed to place the worst one on their chest. But the rest of the uniform looks good, and the striping is a minor but definite improvement. Vegas Golden Knights: C. I thought I was going to loathe these uniforms. I'm not a fan of their color scheme and not terribly fond of their logo. But given what they had to work with, the jersey turned out alright. They're not bad, which is as good as you were going to get with that muddled color scheme and weak logo. Could've used more red, but it seems that will wind up being just a minor trim color for them. The gold pops a lot more than I ever thought it would, at least in pictures. Washington Capitals: D-. This is like the awful backwash lying at the bottom of the bottle, after everything else has been drunk. The worst of the Edge holdovers. Overall? Adizero gets a C in my book. Some minor upgrades, a few minor downgrades, one dumpster fire (Devils), and loads of missed opportunities, both in what was changed and what wasn't. One home run (Avalanche) and one that comes close (Hurricanes). This is better than Edge by a country mile, but still rife with disappointments.
  8. 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?)
  9. I think it's the difference between having a diagonal script versus an arched script. The diagonal script takes up the full chest, just like a chest logo. For instance, looks more professional than Though I will also say, the diagonal script is so identified with the Rangers that most other teams look like they're playing Rangers dress-up in it. Aesthetically, the "Pittsburgh" jerseys looked fine, but it always looked kike they were aping the Rangers. Like if a team wore a white/blue/white chest stripe, or red sleeves on a white uniform.
  10. Those would be perfectly fine college uniforms. Emphasis on college. Arched wordmarks over numbers (or logos, in this case) don't work at the professional level, especially not in the NHL. It's just not part of the aesthetic of professional hockey, and looks amateurish (much like a big wordmark on the front of a football uniforms does). Both the orca and the wordmark are weak. I love the rest of the Canucks' uniform, but really wish they'd have this logo on the front: Failing that, the skating Johnny Canuck would be an upgrade over the orca as well (always thought that logo would be perfect on the front of a third jersey).
  11. I actually am okay with the Giants' road uniforms as they are, though my favorite Giants' road uniforms ever are the ones that @Ferdinand Cesarano posted - I'd prefer those to the current white-and-red ones. I'd actually love for the Giants to recolor their existing road uniforms, with blue replacing red. The design itself is great, it just doesn't make sense for 'Big Blue' as-is. Swapping out the red for blue would solve that issue, while still echoing the historic 50s-60s/00s-10s road uniform design that has seen some of the Giants' most successful years. White jerseys with blue numbers and Northwestern stripes, paired with white pants and blue socks, would be perfect for the Giants.
  12. This seems to be an unpopular opinion, but I actually much prefer the Rangers' simple red collars with the lace-up to their old 90's collars. I love lace-ups in general, but they look especially great on the Rangers (and the simple red collar doesn't compete for attention with the lace-up or the striping on the Rangers' unis).
  13. Indeed they did. I can only hope Boston makes a late change to their socks (I think I actually prefer their new numbers, though - not a fan of double outlines, in general). It might be too late to change the jersey itself, given that they've started to sell them and would probably need a few months to update inventory (which no team wants to do at the start of the season), but the socks? Those can be changed in a heartbeat without worrying about merchandising concerns one bit. Question is, when can the Devils switch back to their old jerseys? I would guess they'd be allowed to next season, though I can easily see them wearing the new duds for 5 years or so, and then rolling out the old uniforms on the new template, with some cheesy "return to tradition" slogan. They'll need to wait a few years to change back if they want the "new" old uniforms to sell well.
  14. Surprised at all the love that Tal's Hill and the overhang/stacked decks in Arlington are getting. Tal's Hill seemed to be the butt of jokes across baseball ever since that ballpark opened, and it seemed that the overwhelming majority of fans were happy to see it go. (I know I was.) It was both contrived and a danger to outfielders. As for Arlington, I actually like how the stacked decks look myself, but I never thought that was a 'beloved,' or even well-liked feature. I certainly know that Arlington is definitively not one of the more well-liked parks in the majors, both because of its overreliance on retro ballpark tropes (it's like a grab bag of 90's ballpark design quirks), and because of its lack of a roof. Maybe that one aspect of it is more broadly liked, though. Frankly, I like the stacked decks in isolation, but they never seemed to go with the rest of the park, given its sterile nature and lack of any overhangs. I will say that all of these 'ideal' MLB outfields suffer from the same problem that Arlington has - they're grab bags of disparate quirks and features that would not go together at all. For instance, in the picture that @dsaline97 posted, the sleek modernist look of taper upper decks would clash terribly with the old-fashioned brick Western Metal Supply Co. building, or with the jagged outfield angles of 'Triples Alley.' Having two high walls (the Green Monster and the Coors out-of-town scoreboard) would clash, as would the existence of a high wall right next to Pesky's Pole. I'm glad baseball features all of these unique elements, but they're not meant to be clumped together into one single ballpark design. My 'ideal' outfield? Perhaps it exists already: Asymmetry, a delightful out of town scoreboard and high fence, an attractive but not distracting batters' eye design, and an incredible backdrop? And they all mesh together perfectly? What more could you want?
  15. Colorado is the big winner here (finally back to the mountain hem stripe!). I do think Carolina and St. Louis are significant upgrades as well. I'd personally put Nashville is the strange category of being an upgrade, but still being a big disappointment. Getting rid of the Edge piping make it an upgrade, if nothing else. But the striping is significantly downgraded - I don't like the look of the white stripe directly up against the gold background at all. It's also bland up top - a navy yoke would do wonders for this jersey. Minnesota? So close, yet so, so far. The chest stripe looks pretty bad, and adds little to the jersey. Replicating the sleeve stripes on the hem would've been much preferable. I hate how the red stripe doesn't continue onto the chest (though that may have muddled the beautiful logo. Ottawa, Columbus, San Jose, Los Angeles, and Washington all missed a golden opportunity to move away from their awful Edge uniforms. A disappointment for all five of those. I was hoping to eradicate Edge once and for all. I don't mind Boston's revised numbers, but I hate the black socks. I have a feeling those will almost as unpopular with New Englanders as the Red Sox's ill-fated blue-socks-on-road experiment back in 2009. (The only reason they wouldn't rise to the level of the Red Sox's blue socks is that the Bruins aren't named after their yellow socks.) I can only hope the Bruins' black socks are even more short lived. New Jersey? Dumpster fire. The hideously large arm stripes, the lack of hem stripes... this is the most unnecessary downgrade in quite some time. They ditched a modern classic for unnecessary tweaks.