One tradition you NEVER want to change

[Krz]

23 hours ago, Griffinmarlins said:

I don't know why, but I've always wanted to see an OSU player make a block O from their helmet stickers. Think it would look interesting. 

Are they allowed to do that? I always assumed there was some sort of pattern to go by.

[C-Squared]

23 hours ago, leopard88 said:

Does anyone know/remember exactly when they switched the jersey and sock blues to royal blue?

 

In the 80's/early 90's, their navy blue had a tendency to read as black under the lights on SDTV's and in photography... I think the goal was to use royal blue to ultimately look like navy on TV (which explains the black & blue stripes on the white jerseys, which makes the blue pop a bit more)... the camera issue has been a non-factor for at least a decade, but the team is still clinging to the exact same look for some reason... my personal theory is that it gives the team two shades of blue for merchandising purposes.

[DC in Da House w/o a Doubt]

No ads on NFL, MLB, and NHL uniforms.  Also that the 3 leagues don't go down the alternate uniform wormhole like the NBA has.

 

I haven't watched a minute of NBA action yet this year, I'd be lying if I said the uniforms ads wasn't a factor.  But also the millions of wacky alternates, it's just not my cup of tea.  

[leopard88]

21 hours ago, WSU151 said:

 

I think the whites have long been royal blue (even before Aikman's arrival). The shade might have changed just a little bit in the 2000s.

 

The lighting is playing with the color on that Aikman photo above.

 

Would be great if they brought back the double stripes on the socks, too.

 

 

 

So I see.  I guess my memories of that era have been clouded.

That said, the blue used for the number, stripes and socks in this picture seems to be darker and less bold/bright (?) -- and thus not as jarringly mismatched -- as the blue that the Cowboys currently use.

[WavePunter]

13 hours ago, leopard88 said:

 

So I see.  I guess my memories of that era have been clouded.

That said, the blue used for the number, stripes and socks in this picture seems to be darker and less bold/bright (?) -- and thus not as jarringly mismatched -- as the blue that the Cowboys currently use.

The pants also look like Texas Blue rather than metallic silver-green.. so either the colors were more accurate back then, or they correctly adjusted the colors to appear correct in the media of the time..

[IceCap]

People telling infrared he’s wrong in a thread about his own opinions. 

 

Also I never want to see the Leafs drop the “TORONTO MAPS LEAFS” text from their logo.

[Noir]

On 12/19/2018 at 12:21 AM, DriveCode4828384 said:

The manufacturer logo I can deal with as long as it is tastefully done. It needs to be where the current Majestic logo is on current uniforms. That I would have no problem with. As far as the one off jerseys go, they can be thrown in the dumpster. A simple patch on the hat or maybe even the sleeve would suffice to bring attention to a cause. The minute they messed with the pinstripes by turning them different colors was when I lost some respect for them. I wish a purist in the organization would stand up and tell the MLB no dice on these horrible things. The only change that needs to be made to the Yankees uniforms in my opinion is the road jerseys should revert to what they were in the 40's. The navy text on the gray jerseys was simple, yet distinctive. Maybe add a white outline for visibility purposes, but no sleeve stripes. The Yankees hat should always be the same. It works for a reason and is known around the world, even in places that have no idea what a game of baseball looks like. As far as a name on the back, I hope it never comes to pass. If they wanna do those gimmick jerseys, do them in spring training or exhibition games that don't mean anything. The New York Yankees are the definition of a classic uniform that defied the odds and has been pretty much unchanged for the better part of a century. It is the standard that all other uniforms in any sport are held to; the alpha and omega. They should remain as such.

If you want to look at what the Yankees would do. look no further than the Tigers.

[infrared41]

On 12/18/2018 at 7:10 PM, Lafarge said:

The CCSLC hating anything modern... And anything classic... And modern classics... Well, everything apparently.

 

Hating is what we do in these parts. And no one does it better. 

 

 

On 12/19/2018 at 6:43 PM, Ark said:

 

What about classic moderns?

 

 

Nope, we hate classic moderns too.

 

18 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

People telling infrared he’s wrong in a thread about his own opinions. 

 

That's just part of the fun here at SportsColors.net. Don't forget that people also try to convince me that uniforms they themselves admit are ugly still look really good together. 

[WavePunter]

On 12/22/2018 at 5:15 AM, Ice_Cap said:

People telling infrared he’s wrong in a thread about his own opinions. 

 

Also I never want to see the Leafs drop the “TORONTO MAPS LEAFS” text from their logo.

I love the Maps Leafs!

[AstroCree]

The Rangers changed their uniforms once during the 70s and suffered huge criticism for it. Fortunately they quickly changed it back and I hope they never make that same mistake forever. I also like that they’re the only team that puts the Stanley Cup patch and other special event patches on their shoulders as oppose to the chest like every other team. 

[ltravisjr]

No short pants in baseball.

No long pants in hockey.

No sleeves in basketball.

 

[Froob]

On 12/19/2018 at 8:43 AM, Ben in LA said:

I WAS going to say the Lakers should always wear gold at home (except on Sundays), but nah...

Yup...Lakers need to return to tradition. And darken the yellow.

[BigRed618]

You know what I miss? When arenas and stadia had actual names, before they got the idea of selling naming rights for extra cash. Tropicana Field in TB used to be called the Florida Suncoast Dome, and Guaranteed Rate Field in Chicago was once called Comiskey Park. Now which names sound better to you?

[AstroCree]

1 hour ago, BigRed618 said:

You know what I miss? When arenas and stadia had actual names, before they got the idea of selling naming rights for extra cash. Tropicana Field in TB used to be called the Florida Suncoast Dome, and Guaranteed Rate Field in Chicago was once called Comiskey Park. Now which names sound better to you?

and I bet you fans and people in those areas don't even call the stadium by it's corporate name. Citi Field is about to turn 10 and people still say "I'm heading to Shea" and "I'm driving by Shea".

[SilverBullet1929]

I don't truly have a problem with naming rights for stadiums as they are easy income and at the end of the day sports are still a business so there's no stopping the selling of naming rights...

 

But with that said it does give me a twitch in my eye when I hear of naming rights that come from ridiculous company names. Like I can live with American Airlines Arena but Guaranteed Rate Field kills me. 

[Sykotyk]

Kingdome

Candlestick Park

Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum

Jack Murphy Stadium

Mile High Stadium

Sun Devil Stadium

Texas Stadium/Cowboys Stadium

Astrodome

Louisiana Superdome

Arrowhead Stadium

Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome

Lambeau Field

Soldier Field

Pontiac Silverdome

Cleveland Municipal Stadium/Cleveland Browns Stadium

Riverfront Stadium

Three Rivers Stadium

Atlanta-Fulton County Stadium

Tampa Stadium

Joe Robbie Stadium

RFK Stadium

Veterans Stadium

Ralph Wilson Stadium/War Memorial Stadium

Giants Stadium

Shea Stadium

Foxboro Stadium

 

Or....

 

Gillette Stadium

MetLife Stadium

New Era Field

Heinz Field

Lincoln Financial Field

FedEx Field

Ford Field

Lucas Oil Stadium

FirstEnergy Stadium

Bank of America Stadium

Hard Rock Stadium

Raymond James Stadium

TIAA Bank Field

Mercedes-Benz Stadium

Mercedes-Benz Superdome

Nissan Stadium

AT&T Stadium

NRG Stadium

US Bank Stadium

CenturyLink Field

Invesco Field at Mile High

State Farm Stadium

....

 

 

 

A few I had to look up (TIAA) because I didn't realize they changed their name already. Ridiculous.

 

[neo_prankster]

4 hours ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

I don't truly have a problem with naming rights for stadiums as they are easy income and at the end of the day sports are still a business so there's no stopping the selling of naming rights...

 

But with that said it does give me a twitch in my eye when I hear of naming rights that come from ridiculous company names. Like I can live with American Airlines Arena but Guaranteed Rate Field kills me. 

 

Talking Stick Resort Arena?

Jobing.com Arena?

T-Mobile Park?

 

I dunno...maybe some folks will get used to it. Then of course there was 3COM Park, Enron Field and Power Balance Pavilion.

[andrewharrington]

5 hours ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

I don't truly have a problem with naming rights for stadiums as they are easy income and at the end of the day sports are still a business so there's no stopping the selling of naming rights...

 

But with that said it does give me a twitch in my eye when I hear of naming rights that come from ridiculous company names. Like I can live with American Airlines Arena but Guaranteed Rate Field kills me. 

 

If a team owns its own building, I’d have no problem giving it the autonomy to sell naming rights for income, but that’s quite a rare situation. Many stadia, arenas, and ballparks are actually publicly funded and/or owned by their respective cities. In that case, I think the taxpayers should be the ones making naming rights decisions at the ballot box.

[Mingjai]

39 minutes ago, andrewharrington said:

 

If a team owns its own building, I’d have no problem giving it the autonomy to sell naming rights for income, but that’s quite a rare situation. Many stadia, arenas, and ballparks are actually publicly funded and/or owned by their respective cities. In that case, I think the taxpayers should be the ones making naming rights decisions at the ballot box.

 

I guess nothing’s ever a no-brainer these days, but the economist in me says if putting up with a dumb name means lower taxes, I can deal with it. On the other hand, the economist in me is also suspicious of taxpayers funding professional sports venues in the first place, but that’s for a different forum.

[Cosmic]

2 hours ago, andrewharrington said:

 

If a team owns its own building, I’d have no problem giving it the autonomy to sell naming rights for income, but that’s quite a rare situation. Many stadia, arenas, and ballparks are actually publicly funded and/or owned by their respective cities. In that case, I think the taxpayers should be the ones making naming rights decisions at the ballot box.

I was actually just about to post something similar. "Ralph Wilson Stadium", although it sounds good in a context-free zone and it did produce the fine nickname "The Ralph", always rubbed me the wrong way. It was named for the Bills' owner while he was still alive, and the building was/is owned by the county. The Bills or the county couldn't have used the money? Instead that opportunity cost was used to stroke a rich dude's ego? That's the worst kind of naming rights deal.