gosioux76

I hope you're right. I love the updated throwback look this year. It also appears that they have sold out of those uniforms, or at least I assume they have, since I can't seem to find them for sale anywhere. Watching the playoff game on TV Saturday night, the original '89 logo seemed to be everywhere in the crowd. I would love for this to be a New York Jets situation and have them introduce the blue version of that as part of full-time changeover next year.

I'd be confused. I'd also wonder why, of all uses for a time machine, this is what we've chosen.

Just change the M to a U and see if Craig T. Nelson is available to coach.

This looks good, but I guess I don't understand why you'd go with the horn-striping for the white and red jerseys, but not the home navy. That would have kept these jerseys relatively simple but without the repetition of reusing the helmet logo on the sleeves.

Or they'll be the Oklahoma City Thunder of the NHL and be stuck with whatever they pick for the next 20 years.

This could just be speculators filing trademarks in hopes of a payday in the event one of these names is eventually chosen. The trademark applications are registered to a company called Uyte LLC, which only registered as a company in Deleware on April 2, 2024. The address and phone number listed on the application belong to the law firm, and attorney, that filed the application. Smells like opportunists.

The only instance when that color looks good is when it's slathered on a hot dog.

His own child had to modify his name just to avoid the embarrassment.

Some might say the fumble-prone Brownie is perfect symbol. Ernest Byner might take umbrage, though.

Yes! And in a style that makes him look like he's an adjunct member of the Burger King Kids' Club! Or just bring back this guy ...

The only thing wrong with the Browns logo is that it uses a facemask style from the late '80s that was never attractive to begin with. This was discussed about a dozen pages ago in this thread, but the Browns need to go with a classically retro helmet style — two-bar facemask is my preference — positioned in a more two-dimensional side view than what is shown here. A logo like that will stand the test of time.

"We not only want your hockey team, but we also insist on taking the name of your biggest city."

While these are a little better than the versions in the Nike-cut jerseys, this still looks like a 1960s-era uniform squeezed into a modern template. It's fixable, but it still doesn't look quite right. The biggest issue is that inner green stripe, which was originally a hoop that continued under the armpit.

I'd love to see what this incredible, ahead-of-its-time WHL logo would look like if turned into a "U" for the Utah Stingers. Not saying it would be good, but I love this old logo so much that I'm curious to see if it could be brought back to life in some form.

That's a fair take and I agree with all of it. I think most of the "they should go back to this" posts are built on the premise that the current uniforms are awful. I read yours the same way, rather than the more nuanced take that it was.