guest23 Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 Rubbish. No player worth a damn cares about nicknames or uniforms. You also have zero data to support such a claim that a nickname or uniform influences on field success.The Denver Broncos going to the ghost-horse and win their first Super Bowl.The Tampa Buccaneers ditch Bucco Bruce and win the Super Bowl. The Detroit Pistons win championships in red/white/blue, change to teal and lose a lot, go back to red/white/blue and win another championship.Three off the top of my head. Coincidence? I think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buster Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 This guy is always happy, even after Romo chokes another game away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GFB Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 Rubbish. No player worth a damn cares about nicknames or uniforms. You also have zero data to support such a claim that a nickname or uniform influences on field success.The Denver Broncos going to the ghost-horse and win their first Super Bowl.The Tampa Buccaneers ditch Bucco Bruce and win the Super Bowl. The Detroit Pistons win championships in red/white/blue, change to teal and lose a lot, go back to red/white/blue and win another championship.Three off the top of my head. Coincidence? I think so.Hey, you were the one who said there was zero data... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GFB Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 Correlation is not the same thing as causation, there was a multitude of other factors that went into making those teams successful than just the uniforms.Of course it's not the sole reason, that would be stupid. But there is something to be said about expectation and "self-fulfilling prophecy" to an extent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest23 Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 Correlation is not the same thing as causation, there was a multitude of other factors that went into making those teams successful than just the uniforms.Of course it's not the sole reason, that would be stupid. But there is something to be said about expectation and "self-fulfilling prophecy" to an extent. Ok you had me fooled for a second but now I know you're just trolling the thread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jungle Jim Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 I used to think that a change in uniforms had played a part in the turnarounds of certain teams, but people on this site convinced me otherwise a year or two ago. I don't remember the discussion, but the point was made that there are lots of other uniform changes that don't result in championships, but we forget about those when making the counterpoint.That being said, let me add...2008 Tampa Bay Rays1981 Cincinnati Bengals1987 Minnesota Twins2002 Anaheim Angels1993 Philadelphia Philies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandMooreArt Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 an identity for any company or business should evoke a sense of pride and have a "personality" that is appropriate. for a sport like American football played by men who are the size of Volkswagens, the "fierce and intimidating" approach can be a good starting point. especially with names like Buccaneers, Raiders, and Jaguars. the point is not to scare the opponent but to communicate a message about your own team and show everyone what you value and what you're all about.its a bit different for MLB which is so connected to its traditions which includes an early to mid 20th century design language and focuses more on family fun and American traditions rather than epic battles between modern gladiators. for the record, design absolutely can affect the way we feel and think. colors affects our mood and blood pressure, and there might actually be something to "look good, feel good, play good". A team name should have regional significance.While I agree that a team name doesn't have to be intimidating I don't think it *has* to have regional significance. There's nothing regional about the names "Chicago Bears" and "Pittsburgh Pirates" but they work.may be the most overlooked name trivia in sports. the Bears and Bulls both corolate to the Chicago stock market GRAPHIC ARTIST BEHANCE / MEDIUM / DRIBBBLE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy B Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 A team name should have regional significance.While I agree that a team name doesn't have to be intimidating I don't think it *has* to have regional significance. There's nothing regional about the names "Chicago Bears" and "Pittsburgh Pirates" but they work.may be the most overlooked name trivia in sports. the Bears and Bulls both corolate to the Chicago stock marketPretty sure that's just a coincidence. The Bears were named to play off of the Cubs. To tie into this thread, the Bulls were named because it was a strong, intimidating name and tied in with the stockyards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanic Posted August 1, 2014 Author Share Posted August 1, 2014 A team name should have regional significance.While I agree that a team name doesn't have to be intimidating I don't think it *has* to have regional significance. There's nothing regional about the names "Chicago Bears" and "Pittsburgh Pirates" but they work.may be the most overlooked name trivia in sports. the Bears and Bulls both corolate to the Chicago stock marketPretty sure that's just a coincidence. The Bears were named to play off of the Cubs. To tie into this thread, the Bulls were named because it was a strong, intimidating name and tied in with the stockyards. They did it back then? Wow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 I used to think that a change in uniforms had played a part in the turnarounds of certain teams, but people on this site convinced me otherwise a year or two ago. I don't remember the discussion, but the point was made that there are lots of other uniform changes that don't result in championships, but we forget about those when making the counterpoint.That being said, let me add...2008 Tampa Bay Rays1981 Cincinnati Bengals1987 Minnesota Twins2002 Anaheim Angels1993 Philadelphia PhiliesThe Phillies changed in 1992. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mad43dog Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 I'd say not at all, a lot of the best franchises in sports don't have particularly intimidating names- Packers, Yankees, Cardinals, Lakers, Celtics, Spurs, Canadians, Red Wings, Maple Leafs. I personally am more of a fan of teams with names related to location, work, or something else non-generic. Also, a lot of newer teams try using intimidating nicknames to seem legitimate (possibly)- Panthers, Jaguars, Grizzlies, Predators, Hurricanes, etc.Canadians can be intimidating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jungle Jim Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 I used to think that a change in uniforms had played a part in the turnarounds of certain teams, but people on this site convinced me otherwise a year or two ago. I don't remember the discussion, but the point was made that there are lots of other uniform changes that don't result in championships, but we forget about those when making the counterpoint.That being said, let me add...2008 Tampa Bay Rays1981 Cincinnati Bengals1987 Minnesota Twins2002 Anaheim Angels1993 Philadelphia PhiliesThe Phillies changed in 1992.Oops, I stand corrected. I've spent the last twenty years thinking they went to the World Series the first year in these uniforms. I've never been a Phillies fan, per se, and am still holding a small grudge about what they did to the Reds in the 2010 NLDS. But I always loved that '93 Phillies team. It actually upset me when the Blue Jays beat them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaha32 Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 The purpose of mascots and nicknames is to give a face and identity to the team. It gives the fans something to identify with as they cheer on their team. Between the lines, a team's nickname or colors does nothing for their success on the field. Slayer is a great name for a thrash metal band but if they played bubblegum pop, it wouldn't matter. Their fast aggressive music is what makes them tough, the name Slayer just helps convey their identity but it doesn't actually add to the quality of their music. DesignsByHahn.com Behance Dribbble Instragram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanic Posted August 4, 2014 Author Share Posted August 4, 2014 Which is worse;A caricature or a block C? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rays Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 Which is worse;A caricature or a block C?Block C of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 Which is worse;A caricature or a block C?Cute.But racism is always worse by definition. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.