guest23

25 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

The team that has won the Big ten East most of the last decade? Hahahahaha!!!!!! The only suspect year they were able to get  in was 2020, because they didn't "play enough" games and they would have if Michigan didn't have an outbreak. Even if they'd have lost they were still East champs. 

 

With the SEC going to 16 teams, this helps them with scheduling because the other option was one East vs West matchup with an 8 game league schedule. The ACC are considering 3 permanent opponents and 4 opponents one year, and the other 4 the next. So if a player stays all 4 years they'll have played at every school home and away. The Group of 5 schools are the ones that make out the best in this scenario if they have two top 10-15 teams playing for a league championship. Even if they can't make the playoffs they'll get better, higher paying bowls to go to. 

I'm guessing this will allow the schools to fill the balance of their schedule with D3 opponents.

2 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

A player can still wear an "illegal" number, though, right? He just has to report in to the ref every down.  This is how William Perry could line up at running back while wearing number 72.

The coaches have to give the ref the heads up before the game and the player has to report. I am not going to dig through the rules but I am not sure if they can report on consecutive plays, or potentially every play in a game which would be pretty tedious for the ref to manage. There has to be some threshold.

12 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

And Otto Graham

For some context, gardner was allowed to do the homage to tom harman because 90's are eligible numbers in college, while atypical it's 100% compliant. Graham had to switch to an eligible number when the browns joined the shield.

11 hours ago, MNtwins3 said:

When it comes to numbers, other than having set numbers for O-Linemen for easy identification for illegal man downfield, I really do not care what number anybody wears. QB wants to wear 99? Sure, why not

Why bother? Pro football existed before numbering conventions I'm sure the refs can figure it out and players need freedom to express themselves on field.

41 minutes ago, ltjets21 said:

Apparently Kayvon Thibodeaux is wearing 5 with the Giants. When the number rules were changed it stated .

Defensive Linemen: No change. May wear numbers 50 to 79 and 90 to 99.

I suppose because he is an edge he will be listed as an outside linebacker then? Even though he plays pretty much a regular DE position.

I say we turn it all the way back a century and eliminate in/eligible numbers as well.

1 hour ago, GhostOfNormMacdonald said:

Good thing I'm leaving this state after graduation (fingers crossed), hopefully for a market that gives a about sports all the time, not just when their teams are in the finals. My freshman year at ASU I saw maybe a handful of people wearing Suns gear, now I see people wearing Suns stuff and hyping up the team constantly. Growing up I saw people wearing Vikings and Twins stuff even when we were dog :censored:. Worst fairweather fans I've ever seen. You could take all 4 teams away from the valley and barely anyone would blink. Keep the Suns and Cards, ship the Dbacks and Coyotes away. It's what needs to happen /endrant

 

 

EDIT: In all fairness I am a transplant. But of the native Arizonans I have as friends: over half don't give a about sports at all (like, more than just the average amount of people not being into sports). The ones that do care are split between other teams and AZ teams. Not a good sign for half of the Arizonans aged 18-22 I know to not care about home teams

If you want to live in a town that's passionate about sports go somewhere COLD. It's no coincidence that sports towns with reputations of having the most fair-weather fanbases have the best year-round climates in the country. It's literally in the name.

17 hours ago, FiddySicks said:

Probably the first honest assessment of the AZ market that I’ve ever heard. People down there really want to see things through rose colored glasses, but my goodness is the entire scene just straight up bleak. They have teams in all four of the big sports and their games almost always feel like going to a wake. I don’t know if it’s the heat making everyone lethargic (it’s not because ASU football pulls it off just fine. Albeit, with mostly out of towners. And they’re the only ones who actually play outside!), but AZ sports fans “getting hyped” is a sad, straight up cringeworthy experience. It’s frustrating having a town that big with that much to do and NOBODY ever gives a single :censored:. 
 

Oh, and if the D Backs ever move to Vegas (which seems increasingly likely, weirdly enough), Phoenix is never getting a team again. Why bother when it’s the spring training home to half of the league? Maybe the A’s would work, but again that’s just capitalizing on the former Bay Area residents, which is still a lot weaker than So Cal, so it’s not gonna drown out any Dodgers love. 

The problem with the pro sport sun belt expansion that began in the 90's is that a significant portion of those media markets are populated by transplants that brought their allegiance from elsewhere. Additionally the local natives that grew up in the tv generation were able to either pick any team to follow from national broadcasts or they adopted the closest franchise that had access to the local tv market despite being hundreds of miles away.  With a few exceptions, most of these franchises have be novelties or a means to bring in more popular franchises into town (ie modern barnstorming). Once generational habits take hold they often don't change quickly or change at all. If these franchises are to take hold with a new organic fan base, the youth support would be taking hold by now and I don't have the data to determine that. I am not very optimistic as I think the demographic changes and technology embedded in younger generations would make sports fandom tied to geography much less likely.

1 hour ago, Anubis2051 said:

Armed forces day caps are up:

 

https://www.mlbshop.com/armed-forces-day/c-2346026371+z-929949-2387404665?ab={wt-static_graphic1}{pt-Home}{al-ASpot}{ct-ArmedForces}

 

Still using a fashion camo pattern, rather than anything issued by any branch.

 

Fashion hat uses fashion camo. Makes perfect sense. Marketers call this synergy.

1 minute ago, MJWalker45 said:

Especially when chess sets are sold with him as  . . . the King.

Obligatory:

1 hour ago, IceCap said:

Listen TheSoundOfThrowingPennies, do you have nothing better to do then come here every other NFL off-season and spread a bunch of fake "leaks"? 

 

Still waiting on your claims about the Broncos going to orange and grey and that chrome Cowboys helmet! 

The cowboys chrome has been by far my all time favorite  BS leak that was dropped in the history of these boards. Just the sheer audacity of the whopper of a  claim and the vigorous defence of it was admirable and entertaining. Well it was not all for naught and it was definitely a premonition of the cowboys doing such drastic and trendy things in the coming years like adopting an old alternate uniform from '94 as their color rush and adjusting the hue of their primary pants to be more blue and less green.

There needs to be a perma pinned thread of all time greatest (ie preposterous) uniform leaks for the long time readers to wax nostalgic on during the slow news cycles.

1 minute ago, willforgetmylogin said:

 

The NFL is allowing for a quick turnover because

 

1. Its been five years

 

2. Since the switch to orange the march has been nearly 50/50 in sales orange and blue

 

3. The uniform they are switching to is already in the style guide so there is no issue with manufacturing or merchandising at retail locations.

 Per my statement points 1 and 3 are irrelevant to point 2 which I would love to know where you are getting your sales data from. Additionally we are just getting into jersey buying season as the draft has just completed so my point still stands about lead times not aligning with the wilson trade.

6 minutes ago, willforgetmylogin said:

Broncos are moving to monochrome blue full time this season. Don't ask how I know, I won't tell you. Orange color rush remains and orange alts as well. They are getting a throwback next year. The move was spearheaded by Russell Wilson. 

 

If you don't believe me just look what color pants the team is wearing in practice.

 

 

I'll probably be banned for posting without proof so when the official announcement comes down I'll see you on the other side.

I don't have the time to do the research but I'd like to know the timing other teams that have switched back and forth between primary and alt because the timing of the wilson trade seems like too short of a lead time to be a valid reason for the switch. Obviously there's no 5 year rule to make the change but such a change would definitely impact your demand for retail product shifting orange to navy. It would not make sense to make a change if you could not capitalize on it.

18 hours ago, FiddySicks said:

Not at all a fan. For some reason it feels like the Chiefs and Packers had a baby and this is what came out. 

 

The Niners really don’t need gold on the jerseys, but if they were to insist, something closer to the last iteration (white number, gold outline, black drop shadow) would be much much better. 

Problem with all of these tweaks to quirky uniforms with decades of familiarity and a tradition of winning is that fans will inevitably clamor for a return to the old set because that's what they are accustomed to. 

1 hour ago, MCM0313 said:

Even back in the day, OSU, Southern Cal, LSU, Georgia, Miami, and some of the other big programs had pant stripes. Now the socks, on the other hand...yeah. 

I did not say college did not have striped pants, I said pro pants all had stripes from the mid 20th century until the rams came out with their stripeless gold pants in '99.

2 hours ago, Germanshepherd said:

I mean half the league now prefers high white socks regardless of uniform, so classy socks just ain’t cool no more

One of my favorite things that differentiated the pros from the student-atheletes for several decades was pros had pant stripes and did not wear solid white tube socks. Those days are long gone.

31 minutes ago, DCarp1231 said:

3 minutes ago, DCarp1231 said:

Imagine if they said “we listened to the fans…” and brought this beauty back

I'm confused with this statement because they brought this logo to the fans and they rejected it swiftly and loudly hence the moniker "the one-day logo". Also from what I remember it was unveiled with a red mask at the press conference.

56 minutes ago, Volt said:

So simple, so easy, so good. 

 

It's amazing that they can create this, yet we just got what we got with the Washington Commanders.  

 

Anyway, great job 49ers.

I've never seen so much praise for doing so little but I guess that is the state of affairs these days.

7 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Were you old enough to see this, or are you just projecting? I'm old enough to have seen these in real time (I was 11 when the Seahawks debuted in the AFC), and no way in hell did I ever confuse the two. It's so not close that I'm stunned you could try to defend this take.

 Been watching the league since the early 80's before score bugs on 19" teevees.  If you actually go back to that time color schemes were so static that silver/blue/silver worn  by two franchises gave the impression that seattle did not have a unique set (yes there was a hint of kelly green). I think my position would be analogous to carolina's silver/black/silver evoking the raiders and an even worse offense of them and the lions doing the silver/blue/silver with black trim.  Let's be clear here I am not talking about nuance, I am talking first glance impressions of teams that don't have unique color combinations. In modern times this position no longer applies because everything is a hot mess now.

I still stand by my position that silver/royal seattle was super bland and forgettable from the 70's-90's. Only events of note were boz getting bowled over by bo and dave kreig setting the all time record for fumbles. Good times to throw back to.

Last point: Now get off my lawn 

3 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

No chance these were ever confused with Detroit. Honolulu blue looked nothing like this.

Before HD they were the afc detroit. Yes the shades are not identical but to the casual viewer there was not much difference.

11 minutes ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

 

Unpopular opinion: the royal and silver hawks uniforms were originally tosu recolors and their final iteration made them look like a copy of the lions on standard def tv. While the logo was always great the original color scheme was pretty forgettable . The missed opportunity was the seahawk blue era and not pairing that unique color with  good looking uniforms.

I for one am shocked that a college team with traditional uniforms is moving from a custom nike branded font after a handful of years and reverting to  a stock block font that they used consistently for decades. Nobody saw this coming.

15 hours ago, TenaciousG said:

“Is there a way we can make a jersey an NFT?” -Some college marketing person somewhere

Of course just stitch it together with blockchain.

25 minutes ago, kb105 said:

Only time I’d be okay with Florida football wearing black is against Georgia on Halloween. Only on that day versus that team would it be okay, although I’d wish they just didn’t do it at all. It will be very difficult to pull of a black uniform without matching black pants and helmet and the last thing they need is another helmet to wear when the gator script Orange is probably one of the most recognizable helmets in all of college football and is associated with all of the success that fans and the new staff want to emulate. The white helmet is a nice change of pace for a game or two that allows for some creativity (circle f, American flag script, slanted f, etc.) and build upon the established brand. There have been some examples in the past, the pro combat uniforms, reintroduction of the orange jerseys and pants (stripe issue notwithstanding), throwing back to Spurrier days, and the aforementioned white helmets. Adding black does nothing to that and I’d rather it be eliminated from all of the uniforms as Orange and Blue is such a nice color scheme. And to those who say black uniforms helps in recruiting, I’d say your wrong. Players care more about the swag bags and the apparel they wear everyday rather than a uniform they wear for a few hours on Saturday, at least when if comes to clothing. Most guys decision come down to one of two things: winning championships and making it to the next level or receiving a quality education for free. Florida needs to worry about meeting both those aspects before worrying about adding a black uniform.

Yeah one only needs to look at boise state as a proxy for what an all black look would do for the gators. This is disappointing since they held out from embracing this played out trend for so long I thought they were above the fray. If they needed an alt color mono uniform any other non-team trendy color would be better than boring old black.

17 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Regarding the bolded part:

Whiskey

Tango

Foxtrot?

 

If a valuable brand like the Raiders, Cowboys, or Packers has existed with the standard block font like they have for so long, doesn't that shoot your theory down?

My point is that number fonts are not related to anti-counterfeit measures because the teams that consistently have the strongest brands, largest fan bases, and sell the most merchandise over time have easy to replicate jerseys and don't have proprietary fonts. Your choice to bold my acknowledgement of outliers rather than examine the totality of my statement misses the point completely.

Allow me to rephrase: If the league and its flagship franchises felt that counterfeiting could be thwarted by switch to proprietary fonts, they would have made the change long ago. The lack of action of the parties mentioned suggests that making such a move is not worthwhile.