Jump to content

burgundy

Members
  • Posts

    3,393
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by burgundy

  1. They went through the charade of asking fans what they wanted when they clearly didn't care. Nobody asked for Commanders. People were asking for variations of Wolves, Hogs, or Redtails. Not being able to use Wolves for legal reasons is perfectly understandable, but why the hell didn't they go with Warthogs or Redtails? Instead they go and fellate the military with a clunky name and ugly, incohesive uniforms that nobody wanted.
  2. I'll withhold my full disgust for the actual reveal. The shirt was a nice distraction from the hideous reality.
  3. It looks like snakeskin. That jersey is suspicious. Why does it have a chest patch scribbled out when we know the home has a wordmark under the collar? Why does it say 2021 on the tag? Why are the perforations on the numbers not diamonds? If the numbers are stenciled, why is the 7 not stenciled on the preview we saw? Either that jersey is fake, or they have 3 completely different jersey styles. Unfortunately, this franchise is stupid enough to do that.
  4. The Bengals letters are noticeably shorter than the NFL shield, while the Commanders wordmark is at least as tall as the shield, mostly thanks to those lines. The condensed nature of the letters makes it appear larger as well, even if the letters themselves aren't that much taller than the Bengals. Hopefully it'll look better when we see the whole thing.
  5. That wordmark looks too big. Not quite collegiate size, but that weird in-between size like the Jets went with. The rest of the home uniform seems nice from what we've seen, but Nike always has to throw in at least one stupid design choice, marring an otherwise good uniform. The Bucs seem to have avoided that, but they clearly told Nike to just go back and not touch a damn thing.
  6. They had three stripes when they introduced their unique blue-grey/blue-silver, and they wore them from 64-66. The star logo didn't have a blue outline yet either.
  7. I've always really liked this look too. I think it works better than the Titans for a few reasons: - The grays aren't competing for attention with another light color like Columbia blue. - It uses the sword bevel within a traditional stripe framework. It's creative without being wacky. The gladius/xiphos shape with beveling just makes it too cartoony for me. Maybe a straighter blade shape would look better, but I'm not sure. On the other end of things, Rutgers has had some nice attempts at using a sword shape without actually being a sword: I prefer when teams take inspiration from an object, but don't cross into straight up imitating it.
  8. That's definitely better than what they have, since it's actually cohesive and has better color balance. I still don't like using the two-tone "realistic" sword though. It's just too busy. Make the sword shapes solid Navy or Columbia, then you're on to something. You get the idea of the sword without being cartoonish and gaudy.
  9. Why The Titans Uniforms Are A Dumpster Fire [Abridged] - Their shoulders are giant swords. - The alternate logo that the shoulder swords are based on is no longer anywhere to be found on the uniforms. - The swords add two shades of gray to an already crowded color palette on the jersey. - There's more gray on the primary jerseys than Columbia blue. - The Columbia blue pit stains look like an afterthought. - The numbers are the bastard lovechild of the Bucs' alarm clock numbers and West Virginia's pickaxe numbers. - The already overly-outlined logo was made worse by putting it on a blue helmet, requiring yet another outline. - The only use of red on the jersey is to highlight the NIKE logo. - Their. - Shoulders. - Are. - Giant. - Swords.
  10. You're thinking of Danny Awful, one of the other members of the quarterback carousel from that season. He actually wore #7 during training camp, but at some point the team decided he couldn't wear Theismann's number, so instead they had him wear Williams' number, as if that was somehow better.
  11. Thanks to Kurt Warner and his puffy silver coat, we have been robbed of this opportunity. Riveting stuff.
  12. If the difference in jerseys was that simple and still cohesive, it would be fine. They made it work in the 60s, the Vikings made it work in the 80s and 90s, and the Giants have made it work. But the white jersey they previewed is so radically different, it makes the whole rebrand hot garbage. They have a classic looking burgundy jersey paired with a heavily modern white jersey that uses a different color scheme. No cohesion whatsoever. Ugh. Although they both played for colleges that have classic uniforms, so maybe that rubbed off on their aesthetic sensibilities. Probably not, but we can hope. If those white jerseys are indeed the regular away uniforms, I honestly don't know if I can continue to be a fan of this team. I've been hanging on by a thread as it is, but ugly jerseys and a clunky name might be the final cut. I have no real connection to the DC area and I despise Dan Snyder, so I've really only been cheering for the colors and jerseys. If I hate the jerseys, what's even the point of enduring this dumb franchise?
  13. The top one definitely looks better, but the stars look like Tennessee stars, not DC stars. They also used an excessive amount of outlines, just like Tennessee.
  14. Gross. There is way too much going on there. I hope that was just a prototype and they refined it. I really hope so. That's going to be a mess at that scale. I wouldn't say I hate Commanders, but I definitely don't like it either. It's clunky and doesn't have a good shortened nickname like "Bucs" for Buccaneers. Are we supposed to call them the "Coms"? No thanks. I'm also not a fan of military fetishization, however, Commanders makes sense for the name Washington. So it's better than Admirals or Armada, but only barely. I really can't see myself calling them "Commanders" every time I talk about them. I've already been calling them just "Washington" for a while now, so I think I'll just stick with that. Although calling them the "32s" could work since it's in one of the apparent logos. And also a fun fact for why 32s works well: George Washington was born in 1732.
  15. I think "We will launch" is being extrapolated to mean more than it does because it's taken out of context. "We will launch" is not the entire sentence; it's followed by a dramatic pause for the date reveal. The entirety of what they're saying is "We will launch... 2/2/22". Sure, it could have a second meaning, but it's likely they're just referring to the launch of the new identity.
  16. There's also the Chicago Wolves of the AHL, and they share a color scheme with Washington Football Team.
  17. I think I know what the diamonds are for: So we have: - Sleeve stripes inspired by the DC flag - Collar stars inspired by the DC flag - Diamond pattern inspired by the original borders of DC - A logo that's a giant W (with possibly the Capitol in the middle?) - "We are an always have been Washington" They're sticking with Washington Football Team as the permanent name.
  18. Watch that part of the video again. The "rough" part of the stripe shifts slightly. There's also a noticeable gold spot on the left side of the stripe at the top of the screen. It's a light reflection.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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