All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Alternates, yes. Except the A’s road caps are awful. OK Well, those early Cleveland logos were never given the presence that Wahoo received, so it’s hardly equivalent. Those logo transitions, while similar, never made their “cartoons” as prominent as either Wahoo. Heck, the original Wahoo looks even worse than the newer one. Unconscious malice is still malice. If it happens to look like an “inferior other” caricature, it is (even unintentionally) an “inferior other caricature. Did you look at that APA study? That’s why you have to keep fighting and apply economic/social pressure to these teams. It took Cleveland getting good, being considered for the All-Star Game, and a new rash of far-more intense complaints to make Wahoo’s departure a good PR move. The tomahawk chop, in the case of the Braves, is special. The player who objected was a Cherokee. The Cherokee lived on the land that is now Georgia before being driven off by settlers and the predatory government. They’ve never gotten tribal approval from the former tribes of Georgia, so they shouldn’t use it. That’s what separates them from the FSU Seminoles (a tribe that largely wasn’t driven off their land). My point is that they’ve never really been marketed as “lovable losers” in the same way as the Cubs or Red Sox from 1986-2004. They’re just a largely irrelevant team that hasn’t won a World Series since 1948. Well, aside from developing many Cooperstown inductees and narrowly missing the playoffs in the two-division format. Also, being the only Canadian team from ‘69-‘76 helped make them more relevant. The 1955-94 Cleveland club was more irrelevant, as were the St. Louis Browns, the post-1931/pre-1970 A’s, and the ‘90s-2013 Royals. That makes sense. That makes sense. It still doesn’t make the Cleveland club “lovable losers” in the same light as the teams I mentioned. But they don’t pressure out the people banging drums, wearing headdresses, or putting on red face. That makes them complicit. Nothing any Yankees fan does is equivalent to the headdresses and facepaint. That’s the difference. I am. One person dressed in a headdress or red facepaint is too much. Fans who still show off Wahoo with pride upon signs is too much. That’s why I’m a hard-liner for changing the name (or enforcing stricter stadium rules when it comes to that crap). Kill the fan impulse to do that stuff and then I won’t consider them the most despicable team in MLB.
  3. A sky judge like the AAF had is a potential solution. Complaining can be cathartic but I think this might be a real solution.
  4. Today
  5. Concept 1 is the best!!! No doubt about it. That looks similar to what UB used from 2001-2005. As for the other two concepts, I would like to be enlightened about the meaning of those non-traditional striping placement.
  6. I'll take those 2014 uni style all day (best wings design on the jerseys and helmets). The second (current ) uni at least has some school color.
  7. Approximately five people on this message board can truly appreciate this and they're not all the respondents in this thread.
  8. Plain white pants with plain white socks and white shoes. I like a good all-white uniform, I think it can be very striking, but the Saints looked like interpretive dancers from the waist down. Like the ancient board meme says, NEEDS STRIPES!
  9. And we blew them out. We never blow them out. In my lifetime, if there was a blowout in a Cowboys-Eagles game, the Cowboys were always the recipient. It’s nice to be on the other side for once. Yesterday’s game also exemplifies why the Cowboys are so maddening. When we are healthy and not committing really stupid, self-inflicted errors, this team is a Super Bowl contender capable of beating anyone. Otherwise we lose to teams like the Jets. P.S. Can we start to talk about how terrible the officiating has been this season? It’s literally ruining the viewing experience.
  10. University at Buffalo Nickname: Bulls Colors: Royal Blue and White Current and past helmets and logos: Concept 1 Note: Altered and stretched the Bull logo across the front and sides of the helmet. Concept 2 Note: Used current Buffalo logos with non-traditional stripe placement.
  11. Which is going to be the basis for my redesign of the Patriots post Bill and Tom.
  12. Presenting now, the Boston Celtics! I feel that the Celtics' home and away jerseys are too iconic to change, so I just recreated the ones they're currently using. I used gold for their alternate jerseys, I didn't like both their black and gray jersey that much. I had fun on their Red Sox inspired jersey. It came into me when I saw an article that the Red Sox held a Celtics Night at Fenway, so I thought what if the Celtics ever held their own Red Sox night. Up next we're going west for the Phoenix Suns!
  13. I've heard it mentioned before that many players don't like the feel of stripes on the pants or socks, and that they also love the monotone and leotard looks. Browns players used to rave how comfortable the brown pants were many years ago because they did not have the stripe stitched in. I think the players have a lot more influence on certain teams then ownership/management, especially when it comes to what is worn below the waist. I wouldn't be surprised if many of the teams let the players choose the pants and socks every week.
  14. Are these proportions better at all? I'm not sure what you mean when you say it's too simplified... In the latest attempt, I tried to make the jet silhouette more realistic and sleek. It's also following the oval curve more. As for doing something like the inaugural logo, I don't know how I could keep the jet big and still have a horizontally balanced logo, since the plane is off to one side. I appreciate your feedback; I'm just having a hard time figuring out how I'd execute it! I don't own any of the NBA games, so I'm not sure that I can... Sorry! Thanks again for the comments.
  15. A lot of them can be considered unnecessary, but it's kind of a boon that teams who are going to introduce these caps because they make money and fans like them but not ruin their home look. The Yankees, Royals, Red Sox, Dodgers, Tigers, Twins, Mets, Giants, Braves, Cubs, Phillies, Pirates, and Cardinals all have home primary caps that have long histories or are updates of looks that have long histories. If more is going to be added, doing it on the road or with alts is preferred. But for times when both looks just look so dang good (Nats, 90's/00's A's, Tigers, 50+ friggin' years of Cardinals) I'm fine with having two. Tigers get extra points for having orange with their road, since their home bears no orange. It was mostly a joke on the mentioned idea of the block M being a better fit because Hank Aaron wore it, given that he also wore something with the features that make people complain about the current Brewers cap logo. (Cutting out the pictures to keep already bloated posts down in size, not in any way to denigrate your point. Unsure if they were reposted rather than referred to due to a worry about that.) I suppose the term "inferior" in the original usage seemed to denote a more conscious thought in design. For instance, the Japanese reference you posted is a clear example of propaganda meant to portray the country as subhuman and evil. The Warner Bros. example comes from a belief of such people as goofy-looking and focused on vices, somewhat from a place of believing them to be weaker of moral strength of mind. The other two were made with a view to making them as offensive as possible to make a point. Whereas the original Cleveland logo that looked like a human appears similar to pictures of leaders meeting with American representatives. The transition to the current look seems more akin to the move to cartoonish from realistic that the A's, Cubs, and Phillies did soon before. In the end, I suppose what I mean is that I don't think it's immediately obvious that the designers of the logo had a negative view of a people. They likely had a mistaken idea about things considering what was commonly known and thought at the time, but that doesn't necessarily mean they felt that they were inferior. Nevertheless, it serves as a reminder that if you're obstinate enough, the gears keep spinning and something else will come up. Or, even if nothing comes up, enough people will shrug it off. How long did it take Wahoo to go away? The Simpsons were making jokes about it in the early 90's. I meant the origins of the term in that context, of course. But I suppose that folds into the greater discussion. And the representatives of the Seminole Tribe seem to have no problem with it. The Spirit Lake Sioux supported the North Dakota team's identity and the Standing Rock Sioux council wouldn't let their people vote on it because they hated it. The term "Eskimo" came from a term referring to wearing snow shoes, but it was misunderstood as an offensive reference to eating raw fish and a number of people called it a slur. They preferred the name Inuit and forced it upon the Yupik, who consider Eskimo to be the much preferable and the Inuit umbrella term not representative of them. Every group referred to by a slur has a strong split between people who find that use of the slur empowers them and those who find that it takes their power away. Thorny. Gray. Hmm... Perhaps most of my life having been post Major League, the status of the team in that light is different. Perhaps they became the lovable loser because of the movie and how good the team was in the 90's after so much losing. Perhaps it's just like how the Curse of the Bambino became a thing in the 90's and was retroactively applied to almost a century of history. Heck, lovable loser status may just be a subjective thing and my love for seeing great stories (if my team isn't in I usually root for whatever team winning would be the best story) and desire of joy for all makes me apply it to more people. I rooted for the Saints to win, who were in much worse shape than the Indians. The Browns are a bad team with a bad history that has tortured an already tortured fanbase who watched their team leave to win two championships elsewhere. If they won, it would be momentous. I guess the question is what decides who's lovable and who isn't. I consider the Mets and Jets to be in the same position and I know people who've dedicated their whole lives to this love that seems at times ridiculously cursed. Washington right now is seeing success after so long, and I'd consider the Expos to be in that same group. They've also been the most irrelevant team in the history of the sport for the most part. I'd put Texas way farther down than Cleveland. Seattle's barely scraped by on a record that ended in tragedy and the careers of three greats of the sport. I actually forgot about Rookie of the Year. Angels in the Outfield came to mind, but I'm finding less and less people today know what that is, whereas Major League seems to have more staying power. Perhaps it's the difference between a children's movie that sticks with the kids who watched it while the adult movie carries on for everyone who comes along. Although I feel like the two children's films have strong focuses on the main characters while Major League is more of an ensemble story with the team kind of being a main character. And the Lethal Weapon films are beloved and that is much more troubling than anything Charlie Sheen has done. As for the fans, I think the amount of block C that shows up despite it being an ugly, boring, drab mark that bleeds into the cap shows that there's more than enough good people. You don't wear a war bonnet. You don't paint your face a different color. The guys in the middle look like the gang from It's Always Sunny. I'm a Yankees fan, and being a part of the internet watching the playoffs together, I had a lot of assumptions made about me, a lot of bad things said about me, a lot of comments disliked while I was making a point or agreeing with others just because of my fandom, had the actions of a few fans hung upon me, and had it hoped that I never see joy because obviously I'm a total jerk. I can't possibly have empathy, wish well for others, care about other's opinions, or reasonably think things out. Those guys are idiots. I'm not going to wish the whole long-suffering fanbase ill. Also, I forgot Cleveland was the team that beat Seattle after they beat us and lost to the Braves. Three pennants, not two.
  16. Both. Monochrome is hated these parts well enough due to pro football's established aesthetics of jersey. contrasting pants and most times contrasting socks. Even if Saints have same-colored striped socks like the Bills, it would a lot better to look at. The lack of stripes make it look like a practice uniform and total blob of black from the neck down. It looks unfinished and uninspiring. A black version of the color rush pants would make a little bit better.
  17. Only things I would want changed are the front font returning to the classic font they used from the 60s-00s, the removal of the silver from the color scheme, and the darkening of the colors to the old colors. A logo change would be more than welcome though. Something like this concept I did a while back would be absolutely perfect in my mind.
  18. That's what most people would call a Freudian slip. In other news, Roger Goodell does his best Baghdad Bob impersonation on the subject of the Chargers.
  19. Well, the Reds, black Mets, Braves, A's all have very unnecessary road caps (the Reds and A's especially, since they don't even use matching batting helmets for road headwear). The Orioles and Nats have unneeded home caps. The Mariners should redesign to make teal far more prominent in their look (i.e., teal lettering with navy outlines). I've always hated the idea that teams have to "darken" their caps and accessories for road uniforms. They should distribute colors on their greys better to give them some "life," you know? Well, that has little bearing on the block "M." Well, since every "Braves" team uses Native American imagery, it's a "Native American-themed" name. It's racist, especially once a Cherokee Nation player complained about it. The sooner the team phases it out, the better. Like I showed in my examples, it is malice. Unconscious malice, but malice nonetheless. It reminds one of the "inferior other" type of illustrations common in pre-Civil Rights cartoons. Wahoo fits well with them and is just as harmful as them. APA study: The Landover, Maryland football team is a special case, thanks to their owner. A less obstinate man would have caved by now. I beg to differ. They weren't so much "lovable losers" as they were "the single-most irrelevant team in MLB for roughly four decades." It was perfect for a movie about a crappy team, since they had been awful for so long. Because they were so irrelevant, they had no "mistique" to screw up, like the Cubs or even the pre-2004 Red Sox. Also, aren't Rookie of the Year and Angels in the Outfield more beloved, especially given how polarizing Charlie Sheen is as a person? Because they're a Cleveland team (read: not a major media market), they're never given the "lovable looser" treatment so much as "oh, they exist and they have that racist logo?" handling. They're more akin to the post-1985, pre-2014 Royals, the pre-1980 Phillies, or the White Sox for most of their existence. They lose, but it's not made marketable like the Cubs made it (the benefit of playing in Wrigley Field and having WGN to broadcast games). There's nothing lovable about this crap: It's people like this who make me hate the Cleveland AL club and wish for the team to never win anything of value ever. I'm a Giants fan and yet I hate the Cleveland AL club more than the Dodgers. They will never be lovable as long as fans do this crap in the stands. The Browns aren't lovable losers, they're just consistent disappointments. The Cavs without Lebron are much the same way. I was trying to demonstrate multiple experiences by citing a guy to offer counter-evidence to another. Do read his post.
  20. Midwest League: No surprise on Beloit (ancient stadium that's been repeatedly been a concern) and Burlington (smallest market in full-season affilated ball, although I enjoyed the doubleheader I took in there a few years back) Bowling Green though? I guess its a small market and kind of on an island.for travel, but that's only a 10-year old stadium, in a place where they might still resort to tar and feathers. Might want to send some MBA you secretly hate in your organization to drop the boom there.
  21. The uniforms aren't the basis for success; they're associated with success. Like, Bill and Tom would've been successful together in New England whether or not the team had updated its look to feature every single early-aughts uniform trend, but now that they've won six Super Bowls in that dated and dull set it's associated with the greatest dynasty in NFL history. Otherwise they would no doubt have changed it (see: 2011 Buffalo Bills).
  22. If Chicago isn't known as the Graveyard of Quarterbacks, it really should be.
  23. The Loons did everything tonight except finish their scoring chances. The ONE THING that had me worried about their playoff prospects, and sure enough, that's what did them in.
  1. Load more activity


  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up