• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

74 Excellent

About O.C.D

  • Birthday 10/29/1986

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Contact Methods

Recent Profile Visitors

3,239 profile views
  1. NBA Changes 2017-18

    Overall, I agree. These are not put together well. The OKC word mark is better than solid, and I dig the idea of the side stripes on the torso. They shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater with these.
  2. Time to rebrand the Panthers?

    I think a metallic blue helmet could look super bad ass. I've seen some concepts with a black helmet that look really good too. Totally open to a redesign, as long as the core identity of the team remains the same. Black, electric blue, white (silver can stay or go) and a Panther logo. Hopefully they don't screw with the numbers too much if they change.
  3. Time to rebrand the Panthers?

    You can smell my bias through your screen? What bias would that be? This isn't an issue of objectivity, our opinions are all subjective. The brand has always been top tier for me, I really like it. The franchise has been to two super bowls, and 3 NFC championship games. The 1st super bowl was way before Newton and the first NFC championship was in the 90's. That's a lot more value than a lot of other NFL teams. We both seem to like the electric blue.The bold and underlined part is your subjective opinion, there isn't anything objective about it. As far as the statue goes, I don't think what he did is enough to take down the statue, but I understand why you would think the stature has to come down.
  4. NBA Changes 2017-18

    I don't hate the idea of having the middle chest arched multi-colored stripes. It's almost like Portland, but different. I like that design element. Everything else kind of suck big time though.
  5. Time to rebrand the Panthers?

    I disagree with almost every point you've made. The brand has more value than one that doesn't exist yet, they've been to the super bowl twice. The logo is iconic. The color scheme is beautiful and unique. If they can manage not to make them worse, a uni change might not be bad. They should leave the statue. The guy is the reason that state has a team. He didn't kill anyone. He didn't beat anyone. He didn't rape anyone. He spoke inappropriately with some women, touched one inappropriately, and used a racial slur against a former scout. He shouldn't have his connection to the team he founded erased.
  6. Players in the "wrong" uniforms

    I got to see him when he was on the Twins vs the Angels. He was David Ortiz by that time though. I wonder how many guys in the MLB aren't really named what they're called.
  7. NBA Changes 2017-18

    I'm kind of surprised another team hasn't picked up the red-black-gold- color scheme since the Sixers dropped it.
  8. NBA Changes 2017-18

    it's all about $$$
  9. College Football Uniforms - 2017 Season

    I feel you on everything but those sleeves.
  10. MLB Changes 2017

    1st paragraph- this idea is factually wrong. Not everything that a for profit entity does is solely about money. 2nd paragraph -not necessarily. Philanthropy exists in media production, as well as people making something for the love of the message or the art. 3rd paragraph- Agreed.
  11. Indiana Pacers New Uniforms, Alternate Logos

    These look so bad. Everything about these uniforms are a downgrade from what they had. This is the worst set in team history, easily
  12. Indiana Pacers New Uniforms, Alternate Logos

    Wow, that's bad. The uniforms I mean.
  13. [Insert player name here] joins the Lakers!

    Fair enough :-)
  14. [Insert player name here] joins the Lakers!

    Jordan is an entity in and of himself. Absolutely no other person or team can compete with Jordan as far as historical ratings or international appeal. He transcended the sport. But he's also not in the league as a player anymore so his presence doesn't effect the ratings. My statement was in reference to the Lakers, compared to other teams, being the biggest brand in the NBA. Me saying the Lakers are the biggest brand in the NBA was me responding to the question of by what measurable metric do the Lakers being good make the NBA better.
  15. [Insert player name here] joins the Lakers!

    I took your advice, and here's what I found: Purple=Lakers, Red=Jordan, Green= Super team Era. The ratings have trended downward since Jordan stopped going to the finals. Jordan's popularity transcended the NBA. He was a world-wide cultural phenomenon and I don't think it's fair to compare any other NBA player or team to Jordan in terms of ratings and media attention to the NBA. That being said, the Lakers (and Celtics) drew the highest ratings ever (pre-Jordan) and set the table for what Jordan was able to do going forward. The Lakers were a very large part of the NBA's high ratings and overall jump in popularity. You could debate how important the Lakers being involved was, but I don't think it should be understated. Post Jordan, the ratings fell below what they were before the Lakers-Celtics era. The lock-out contributed, as well the Jordan bubble burst (no Jordan = a large amount of fans not watching anymore). As soon as the Lakers come back into the championship picture, the ratings go up two consecutive years. 2002 went down (maybe people were bored with the Lakers winning, maybe they didn't think it would be a competitive series with the Nets, or maybe complacent Lakers fans thought winning was an after thought and didn't watch) Post Lakers 3-peat, the rating hit an all time low. The ratings shot right back up with the Lakers in the finals the next year (Malone, Payton, Kobe, Shaq proto-super team). The next 3 years, the ratings fell below what they had been with the Lakers recent involvement. The 3 years after that, involving the Lakers, saw an increase in ratings, with a slight dip in the middle. Enter, the super team era. Lebron goes to Miami. The ratings dip, but only slightly. Then, the last 3 season with Golden State. 1st two seasons drew slightly worse rating than the 1st two seasons of the Shaq-Kobe 3 peat. Average viewership was higher for Golden State's 3 year run. From what I can see, when the Lakers are good the ratings go up. I am legitimately perplexed how you could say "But they're a long way from being the "biggest brand in the NBA'". A long way? You think there are multiple teams in the NBA that are a bigger world-wide brand than the Lakers? IMO, I think you might be letting your personal feelings about the Lakers cloud your judgement in regards to where you place them as far as brand power in the NBA. The Celtics are a big brand, but I wouldn't even say they're the biggest brand in the Eastern Conference. The Lakers are hands down the biggest brand in the Western Conference, and I don't think any other team in the east comes close. The Celtics had Larry, the Lakers have had Kobe, Shaq, Magic and Kareem. The fact that the Lakers have had so many all time greats, basically 4 of the top 20 best NBA players of all time, fairly recent, puts them at another level of recognition as a brand. As far as the Knicks go, I completely agree. The NBA would be better if the Knicks could get it together and be good. If the Knicks and the Lakers are good at the same time, the NBA is much better. If you're saying that the Knicks being good would make a bigger separate impact on the NBA than the Lakers being good, I think that's debatable but worth the conversation.