Jump to content

jch

Members
  • Posts

    216
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by jch

  1. 7 minutes ago, aawagner011 said:

    I've been a big fan of that Colorado helmet. It has a bit of a satin sheen to it. Reminds me of this Ohio State helmet.

    IMG_6918.JPG

    If the Lions were to adopt something like this with a slightly darker gray pants like Colorado (considering their current pants aren't silver, they are a very light gray), I think that could be an awesome look.

    Except with the NFL's one helmet rule, if they went with the dark gray uniforms they would either have to go with dark gray helmets all the time or mismatched uniforms and helmet.

  2. 2 hours ago, Bmac said:

    Much to my surprise, the new jerseys are actually navy:

    20170215_103315.png

     

    (Ignore the hat, it has nothing to do with the WBC.)

     

    I would love to see MLB teams incorporate a look like this.  Back in the early 1900s a lot of teams had all navy or all black or all charcoal gray uniforms as their road uniforms.  This might be better for an occasional road alt, but I think it could work.  

     

    Some examples:

     

    1900 Cincinnati Reds

     

    Click for larger image

     

    1901 Baltimore Orioles

    Click for larger image

     

    1901 Chicago White Sox

     

    Click for larger image

  3. 8 hours ago, Ray Lankford said:

    I actually think the opposite works. Dump the black but keep the unique font. It seems like baseball in general has left the non-descript font to the Yankees road uniform and I think it's  better that way.

     

    When the Reds introduced the new font/number as part of their identity package they made a big point that this was a custom font designed exclusively for them and they pretty much switched all of their identity over to this font.  So most likely if they were to drop the black they would keep the font and just go with 2 colors. 

  4. 1 hour ago, Gothamite said:

     

    Sorry, I didn't make myself clear.  The original memorial stripe was black.  But when the Reds added permanent details to their uniforms, even though they were perhaps inspired by the stripe, those details were blue.

     

    Black as a team color and a permanent uniform element for the Reds originates from the 1990s. 

     

    Exactly.  I didn't do a good job of clarifying this either.  Up until the 90s, whenever the Reds had a third color (other than red or white) as an accent color is was always navy blue.  But the tribute armband on which the 90s vest look was based was in fact black.  Also, the tribute armband was for the 1961 season.  Armbands were added to both sets of vested uniforms for the 1962-1966 seasons.   

  5. 6 minutes ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

    Trying to search if the black Reds every took on the black Blue Jays and I found this other monstrosity that did happen... Apparently one St Patrick's Day the Toronto Black Blue Jays became the Toronto Green Black Blue Jays of Dunedin, Florida...

    Image result for blue jays reds 2006

    Image result for blue jays reds 2006

    Good Lord my eyes.

    I'm kinda surprised the Blue Jays were the team in green in that one since the Reds have a St. Patrick's Day tradition...

     

    5) The Cincinnati Reds debuted the first St. Pat's Day uniforms in front of a pissed-off George M. Steinbrenner in 1978.

    This New York Times article says it all.

     

     

    The Reds gave birth to tradition on March 17, 1978 when they trotted out wearing green-clad uniforms for their exhibition game against the New York Yankees in Tampa.

     

     

    George M. Steinbrenner III is quoted as saying "I think the green uniforms matched my complexion after seeing the inadequacies of the team that is supposed to be world champion."

     

    1978_REDS

     

    That note and article is courtesy of Todd Radom.  Wanted to give proper credit. 

  6. 52 minutes ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

    Ohh wow didn't know that, didn't even realize there was a black band there.

    I just looked back at the articles around the time these uniforms were introduced and it looks like the red and black undershirts were options for both home and away but that the red ones were meant to be worn at home.  So maybe it was intended for the black ones to be worn on the road.  I remember the replica jerseys from that set had black sleeves on the home faux vests and red ones on the roads.  When the road uniforms were paired with the red undershirts, the black arm band became more noticeable and served as a nice throwback to the 50s.  

     

    Image result for frank robinson redsImage result for 1999 cincinnati reds road jersey

  7. 9 minutes ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

    I actually remember liking the current Reds uniforms when they came out because they got them away from the "black-first" look that they had pre-2007. The current uniforms at least brought red and white back to the forefront. DIdn't realize then as much as I do now that the black and the drop shadows especially still need to go. I guess they were a step in the right direction though.

     

    I mean I think it's pretty much consensus that these are the worst the Reds have ever looked...

    Image result for 2005 reds road uniforms

     

    Did the Black Reds ever play the Black Blue Jays? hmmmm....

    When those particular road unis were introduced they were supposed to be paired with red undershirts.  The black band around the arm opening was a throwback to the Frank Robinson-era vest uniforms.  Unfortunately, they decided to wear the black undershirts almost full-time even with the home whites and it ruined the look. 

  8. 14 minutes ago, McCarthy said:

     

    I've said this dozens of times on this website, but yes absolutely. If they'd never changed to the pullover uniforms and even if they'd just gone back to those button ups in the late 80's/early 90's when everyone else was moving away from pullovers then they'd be regarded on the same level as the Cardinals/Dodgers/A's/Yankees etc. The pinstriped vests/hats took us down a direction that's led us through the uniform woods and right now I find our uniforms, which are ten years old (HARD TO BELIEVE) really stale and dated. 

     

    It's also never too late to just correct course and go back to those pictured red and white button ups. Nobody would hold it against us. 

     

    The irony is that the pinstripe vest was their uniform in one form or another from 1958-1966.  So it was part of their historical identity and not some random choice.  

  9. Just now, McCarthy said:

     

    True, but I vastly prefer the second generation of those uniforms

     

    eric-davis-of-the-cincinnati-reds-runnin

     

    It cleaned up all the inconsistencies and the extra trimmings make it feel less..."Chico's Bailbonds Little League". It's always felt more major league to me. 

     

    I have mixed emotions on this.  The 2nd generation definitely cleaned up the inconsistencies but I'm still partial to the old non-outlined look.  I actually think the pre-Big Red Machine version was the best.  

     

    Click for larger image

     

    I would love to see them go back to just red and white though.  That color scheme would be unique to them and would establish their identity better than the superfluous black does. 

  10. 1 hour ago, SFGiants58 said:

    The Reds can use white more than other teams (i.e. white outlines on their road greys), therefore elevating it to secondary color status. Besides, not all teams need secondary colors.

    Although the most memorable set of uniforms (i.e. the Big Red Machine era) had road grays with no white outline around the lettering or the numbers

     

    Image result for 1976 reds

  11. 5 minutes ago, PaleVermilion81 said:

     

    Interesting find on the Chargers. This may be nothing, may be something. But when I clicked on the Chargers link almost all of the images were the powder blue.

     

     

    Screen Shot 2017-02-02 at 12.06.43 PM.png

    So the LA Chargers are going to look like UCLA.  Works for me.

  12. 15 hours ago, jrodsep said:

     

    Mine too.

     

    *** unpopular opinion alert ***

     

    But I wished some teams had "color rush" type uniforms once in a while. Like full black for the White Sox (with white socks), full yellow the A's, full tomato for the Indians, etc.

     

    *** bracing for full on hate in 3, 2, 1 ***

    Back in the early 20th Century there were teams with all lack road uniforms, or all navy.  I would love to see the White Sox with an all-black or black with white pinstripes even.  I like that a darker gray is now being used on some road unis too.  

     

    Here's an example from 1917 from the White Sox

     

    Click to go back

  13. On another note, I know the Panthers just changed their helmet logo but I think the funky stripes on their helmets are dated. The rest of the uniform set are fine although I do wish they'd make up their mind about whether they want to incorporate silver or not.  I've always liked the look of silver helmets/pants or gold helmets/pants and the NFC South already has a black helmet team with the Falcons, but I've seen this car sticker around Charlotte a lot and I thought it would look good on a helmet

     

    Carolina Panthers cat car window sticker decal in blue

  14. On 11/16/2016 at 11:16 AM, CS85 said:

    I think the Bengals helmets just need a bit of extra flavor.  Have some white in there, a bit of texture maybe.  Define the helmet as a tiger's fur.  Hell, take the Jags idea, just execute it better.

     

    Matte black rear 1/3 of the helmet fades into matte orange with matte black stripes with white accents.  Could look cool.

     

    Simplify the uniforms by going to a borderless, marginally stylized block numeral.  Retain wordmark.  

     

    Something like this could work, too.  I think somebody around here made it.

     

    Bengals%20Speedflex%206%20view_zpsfaf27h

    I'm a Bengals' fan and I've always liked their current helmets.  I wish they'd simplify their uniforms and de-emphasize the stripes on the jerseys and pants (maybe go with something like Memphis has).  But I actually really like this design.  You'd have to go with really conservative uniforms though or else it would be overkill.  But this would allow something like the color rush uniform to make more sense.  

  15. 17 hours ago, oldschoolvikings said:

     

    BBTV is absolutely right. All people are doing is dredging up some strange uniform they remembered from their childhood (and probably hated at the time) and allowing nostalgia to make them get all giddy about it now.

     

    So let me join in!!

     

    5750b85daf858a669407a563025259b8.jpg

     

    BAM!

    You mentioned this one jokingly, but a lot of college teams have incorporated this look or the White Sox beach blanket look that someone posted earlier.  So they have been rehabilitated and brought back to some extent.

  16. On 11/13/2016 at 8:02 PM, 14er said:

    Another reason to dislike this new Nike cut. When players wear sleeveless undershirts, the undershirts leak out of the jersey on all sides. Looks tacky. And when they wear sleeved undershirts, the tail of the Nike swoosh on the undershirt leaks out. 

     

    Gee Nike would never do something like that intentionally

  17. I'm struggling to find names for Newark and Philadelphia without going for the cliche Revolution theme. Anyone have any ideas?

    Well there was a Negro League team named the Newark Eagles so that could always work as a historical callback. As for Philly you could always go back to their early NHL days of the Philadelphia Quakers.

  18. ^ Actually, "Pioneers" was really good, as that region right through there along I-91 from about Hartford on up to and through Springfield is also referred to as "Pioneer Valley".

    Cincinnati doesn't have any particularly distinct characteristics to give it an obvious team name.

    There's quite a few if you know where to look. It's along the Ohio River, it's also known as the "City of Seven Hills"...and the part very few know is that the city got its name from the Society of the Cincinnati--one of its members I believe originally settled in the area that became Cincinnati. The word "Cincinnati" itself comes from the Roman statesman Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus, for whom said society named itself. Good luck finding more than a handful of people who know that, though. :P So the next time you wanna connect Roman history to the city of Cincinnati, now you have a good reason.

    The member that named the city after the Society was Arthur St. Clair who was a major general in the revolution under Washington. After the war he settled in what is now Cincinnati before becoming the governor of the Northwest Territory and later Ohio. So there are definitely American Revolution ties to the city. If you want to continue the Society of Cincinnati theme the logo for the society is an Eagle known as the Cincinnati Eagle.

    There is also a big Native American history to Cincinnati and the surrounding area. Several Indian tribes were from that region - the Miami and the Shawnee being the most prominent. President William Henry Harrison also settled there after the War of 1812.

  19. Hey guys, I've always been interested in doing concepts for fictional sports leagues and I have noticed that there are definitely some cities for which assigning a name can be exceedingly difficult.

    Like I'm sure many of you do, I try to give my team names some sort of connection with the city (historical, economical, whatever) but for some cities I have major problems.

    So my question for discussion is, what cities give you the most trouble when doing a fictional league? I know for me my top three are usually LA, Charlotte, and Toronto.

    Would love to hear what everyone else thinks on the subject!

    There are actually a lot of historic nicknames available for Charlotte. One of the origins of the name Hornets comes from the American Revolution and Charlotte being called a "Hornet's nest" the British. The local soccer team just took the name the Independence. So there is more fertile ground there than probably known outside of the region.

    I did a mock MLB expansion set a few years back (before I moved to Charlotte) and the Charlotte team was the Hornets. This was before the basketball team got the name back. I tend to look back at team names from history to come up with inspiration. So for me, the hardest cities are ones without a lot of team histories.

  20. 3. I loved the Reds in this set

    010399uniformsall_511x500.jpg

    I liked that set as well when worn as shown. The problem with that set was that they had a winning streak while wearing the black underneath the home set and started wearing it all the time. The black under the home was a bad look. Actually that set was best with the red sleeves under both.

  21. I'm probably the only one that likes the Bruins' current numbers more than the old ones. White and yellow look bad next to each other. Adding the white outline to the yellow numbers made it look too thick because you couldn't differentiate between the two colors. Adding black in between does wonders.

    But that's just my opinion.

    I'm with you on that.

    I also agree and want to add that I always preferred the double outline look for the Saints' jerseys.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.