Sign in to follow this  
infrared41

infrared41's Best and Worst - NFL 2018 Week 9

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, infrared41 said:

 

If it were up to me, the Pats would be wearing the CR jersey, matching white pants, and the white Pat Patriot helmet. If executed correctly, it could be a top five look. I'd also like to see a version where silver is added to the jersey striping and numbers, silver pants, and the current helmet. Again, a top five look if done correctly. Finally, what do you think of going back to the Pat Patriot logo and helmet stripes on the silver helmet? I'm not sure if that would work or not, but I'd still like to see it. 

 

Assuming we're adding silver to the CR jerseys: for the road uniforms, you could go all white, white over blue, and white over silver.

 

I haven't seen a version of Pat that I think works in today's era.  I don't think going back to the old one is a good idea, but I just haven't yet seen one that's designed in a more contemporary style, and could work in all the various applications that are in use today that weren't back in the day (avatars, social media, more embroidery, etc.)  Logos weren't plastered on every item imaginable back then - mostly t-shirts and print - and I'm not sure Pat is good enough for 2018.

 

Also, Pat represents losers, and as fun as it is, off the top of my head I can't think of a team that went back to a logo (or a modernized version of a logo) from an era where they were pretty much a joke.  It'd be like the Bucs bringing back Bruce.

 

That being said, I don't think Elvis works in many applications either - it's shape works really well on a helmet and shirts, but nowhere else because of how it has to be shrunk due to his length.

 

Just put Brady's face on the helmet and call it a day.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Elmos World 17 said:

But you love the mismatched cowboys? Interesting...

 

I "love the mismatched Cowboys?" When did I say that? What I've said over the years is that, under the right circumstances - like a match up with another good uniform - I'm willing to overlook all the problems with the Cowboys home uniform, I've never once said I "love" it or even that it is one of my favorites. 

 

That aside, how does any of that relate to the fact that I find the Dolphins uniforms boring? Your post would have made just as much sense if you'd said "but you like grilled chicken. Interesting..." One has nothing to do with the other. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Red Wolf said:

No, no, no. The Panthers wearing blue in place of either of the black pieces would have been scientifically wrong. Saying otherwise is like saying that gravity doesn't exist.

 

How did I get dragged into this? Better yet, why did I get dragged into this. All I said was "to each his own, I guess" which most people take to mean "I don't agree, but you are entitled to your opinion." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

Also, Pat represents losers,

 

Pat also made the Super Bowl and five playoff appearances from the mid 70's to mid 80's. Nothing like the current playoff run (then again, what is?), but the team wasn't awful for the entirety of Pat's time on the helmet. Not to mention, I don't buy into the whole "this uniform represents winning/losing blah blah blah..." You could make the argument that the G on the Packers helmet represents losers, but you can also make the argument that it represents a dynasty. Do the current Red Sox uniforms represent losers or the team that has dominated the 21st century? Where are we with the star on the Cowboys helmet? And so on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

 

I "love the mismatched Cowboys?" When did I say that? What I've said over the years is that, under the right circumstances - like a match up with another good uniform - I'm willing to overlook all the problems with the Cowboys home uniform, I've never once said I "love" it or even that it is one of my favorites. 

 

That aside, how does any of that relate to the fact that I find the Dolphins uniforms boring? Your post would have made just as much sense if you'd said "but you like grilled chicken. Interesting..." One has nothing to do with the other. 

Well you say that you don’t like the jets-dolphins matchup because the dolphins uniforms are boring but if the jets were playing the cowboys it seems as though you would excuse their uniform flaws. Not trying to stir anything, your opinion is yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Chawls said:

I’m not gonna lie @infrared41, I’m surprised you like seeing the italic numbers for the Steelers too.

 

I'm surprised too. Until I saw them in action against the Browns a couple weeks ago, I thought the block numbers were the better choice for the Steelers. Watching the game, I thought the block numbers looked weird. I had to admit that the italic numbers look better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9735729712_d64638dd13_o.png

ya8qoagwzweacwl1431mhfsef.gif

 

I’m a firm Flying Elvis supporter (people who like Patriot Pat and think the team should bring him back are objectively wrong), but both of these rejected options are nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Elmos World 17 said:

Well you say that you don’t like the jets-dolphins matchup because the dolphins uniforms are boring but if the jets were playing the cowboys it seems as though you would excuse their uniform flaws. Not trying to stir anything, your opinion is yours.

 

I would excuse the flaws because at it's core, the Cowboys uniform is a good uniform. Its only problem is the mismatched colors. I love how people try to apply rules to something that is entirely subjective. "How can infrared like the Cowboys uniforms and not like the Dolphins? That doesn't fit my opinion so he has to be wrong, stupid, or both. Look at him "excusing" such obvious flaws. The guy clearly has no idea what he's talking about." There. Now you don't have to try to find a nice way to say it. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

9735729712_d64638dd13_o.png

ya8qoagwzweacwl1431mhfsef.gif

 

I’m a firm Flying Elvis supporter (people who like Patriot Pat and think the team should bring him back are objectively wrong), but both of these rejected options are nice.

 

Since we've thrown opinion out the window, the rejected options are God-awful. Those things would look beyond ridiculous on a helmet. The team clearly made the right choice. People who think those rejected options work at any level are objectively wrong. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

 

Since we've thrown opinion out the window, the rejected options are God-awful. Those things would look beyond ridiculous on a helmet. The team clearly made the right choice. People who think those rejected options work at any level are objectively wrong. B)

 

I’m just making a half-hearted attempt to incite @the admiral‘s frequent defense of those logos. I’m a Flying Elvis-first kind of guy, but I’ll take the “nondescript bank logos” over Patriot “symbol of failure, near-relocation, and overall ugly design” Pat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, infrared41 said:

 

Pat also made the Super Bowl and five playoff appearances from the mid 70's to mid 80's. Nothing like the current playoff run (then again, what is?), but the team wasn't awful for the entirety of Pat's time on the helmet. Not to mention, I don't buy into the whole "this uniform represents winning/losing blah blah blah..." You could make the argument that the G on the Packers helmet represents losers, but you can also make the argument that it represents a dynasty. Do the current Red Sox uniforms represent losers or the team that has dominated the 21st century? Where are we with the star on the Cowboys helmet? And so on...

 

The difference is that neither the Packers nor Red Sox ever really changed their logos up, so they never reverted back to ones they wore when they were losers.  The first SB I ever saw was Pats/Bears where the Pats got slaughtered.  Little Vet didn't realize at the time how hard it was to get to the SB, so the Pats seemed like a joke to me.  Then there were at least one but maybe more 1-15 years, where they were mentioned a few times in SI (remember running to the mailbox to get that every week?) called them the worst franchise in sports.  I'm not young, but too young to remember any of their pre-Bledsoe success.  Aesthetically, I don't buy the "this represents winning, this represents losing, we won in this so it's now untouchable, etc" stuff, but sports are also emotional, and for fans of a certain age, even a well-designed older logo can evoke feelings from that time, which might not be positive, and have a subliminal effect on how it's received.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, infrared41 said:

 

 

 

Your post would have made just as much sense if you'd said "but you like grilled chicken. Interesting..." One has nothing to do with the other. 

Wait... You dislike monochrome uniforms, but still claim to like grilled chicken?

 

You've lost all credibility, my friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1979 rejected logos are the best logos the Pats ever had. Flying Elvis isn't perfect, but I'll take him over Pat the Patriot. Pat's just too dated. I think the dated aspect works for Miami, who both had their best years in the 70s look and can count on the look to evoke some Florida kitsch that's regionally appropriate.

With New England though? The dated aspect just doesn't work for me.

 

I wouldn't mind Pat if he were updated, but I've yet to see an update that really works. Not saying it can't be done, just that I haven't seen it yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, oldschoolvikings said:

Wait... You dislike monochrome uniforms, but still claim to like grilled chicken?

 

You've lost all credibility, my friend.

 

Ha. Nicely done. FTR, I used grilled chicken as an example. I didn't say whether or not I actually like it. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ice_Cap said:

The 1979 rejected logos are the best logos the Pats ever had. Flying Elvis isn't perfect, but I'll take him over Pat the Patriot. Pat's just too dated. I think the dated aspect works for Miami, who both had their best years in the 70s look and can count on the look to evoke some Florida kitsch that's regionally appropriate.

With New England though? The dated aspect just doesn't work for me.

 

I wouldn't mind Pat if he were updated, but I've yet to see an update that really works. Not saying it can't be done, just that I haven't seen it yet.

 

Speaking of being objectively wrong....B) 

 

Seriously though, I don't mind flying Elvis at all, it's just that I like Pat a little better. I've never understood why so many people are down on that logo. To me, at least, Pat has a bit more of a "timeless" quality than Elvis does. Also, I like helmet stripes and I don't think the Pat era helmet stripes would work with flying Elvis. He needs to be the only thing on the helmet - which, I suppose, was the point. Anyway, I'm not knocking Flyin' Elvis, I'd just like to see a blue and silver based version of the Pat Patriot uniforms. That's all. The Pat Patriot haters can put away the pitchforks. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have a little bit of a thing about logos that depict humans of a specific skin color.  I can't think of any logo that contains a human where the skin color is natural and isn't white*.  Elvis being silver is kinda white, but it's ambiguous enough to be OK.  Unless the team is named for a very specific person/thing (like the Blackhawks**) it should be neutral.  Just my opinion.

 

 

*Cleveland Indians and Chicago Blackhawks being exceptions.  Won't get in to Cleveland here.

**Yes I know they're not directly named after a person, but ultimately it ties back to a Native American.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

I also have a little bit of a thing about logos that depict humans of a specific skin color.  I can't think of any logo that contains a human where the skin color is natural and isn't white*.  Elvis being silver is kinda white, but it's ambiguous enough to be OK.  Unless the team is named for a very specific person/thing (like the Blackhawks**) it should be neutral.  Just my opinion.

 

 

*Cleveland Indians and Chicago Blackhawks being exceptions.  Won't get in to Cleveland here.

**Yes I know they're not directly named after a person, but ultimately it ties back to a Native American.

 

Never thought about that, but it's a good point. I agree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, infrared41 said:

 

I would excuse the flaws because at it's core, the Cowboys uniform is a good uniform. Its only problem is the mismatched colors. I love how people try to apply rules to something that is entirely subjective. "How can infrared like the Cowboys uniforms and not like the Dolphins? That doesn't fit my opinion so he has to be wrong, stupid, or both. Look at him "excusing" such obvious flaws. The guy clearly has no idea what he's talking about." There. Now you don't have to try to find a nice way to say it. B)

A uniform is supposed to be “uniform”, but I guess you’re allowed to excuse the cowboys because it’s a good uniform at its “core” ? idk you do you man 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Elmos World 17 said:

A uniform is supposed to be “uniform”, but I guess you’re allowed to excuse the cowboys because it’s a good uniform at its “core” ? idk you do you man 

 

What about this is this so tough for you to grasp? Other than you just want to argue with me, I mean. You say I’m “allowed” to excuse the Cowboys like there is some rule I’m breaking by doing it. Care to cite that rule?

 

 I’m hardly the only person here who overlooks the issues with the cowboys home uniforms. While we’re at it, how about you define uniform and then explain to me where the cowboys fall short in that definition. Oh, and do it in a way that doesn’t impose rules where none exist. For example, there is no rule that states all colors must perfectly match (*one of the  U.S. Army dress uniforms says hello) for something to be considered a uniform. 

 

Go ahead, I’ll wait.  

 

DressBluesM.jpg

 

Geez, and we thought Dallas was bad. So, my question is this - is this soldier wearing a uniform?  

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, infrared41 said:

 

What about this is this so tough for you to grasp? Other than you just want to argue with me, I mean. You say I’m “allowed” to excuse the Cowboys like there is some rule I’m breaking by doing it. Care to cite that rule?

 

 I’m hardly the only person here who overlooks the issues with the cowboys home uniforms. While we’re at it, how about you define uniform and then explain to me where the cowboys fall short in that definition. Oh, and do it in a way that doesn’t impose rules where none exist. For example, there is no rule that states all colors must perfectly match (*one of the  U.S. Army dress uniforms says hello) for something to be considered a uniform. 

 

Go ahead, I’ll wait.  

 

DressBluesM.jpg

 

Geez, and we thought Dallas was bad. So, my question is this - is this soldier wearing a uniform?  

 

 

 

 

I wasn’t really trying to start an argument so I’ll just stop it here. Didn’t mean to disrespect you or anything. Btw I look forward to your best and worst uniforms picks every week so keep up the good work ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this