• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ferrousoxide66

  1. Some guy? More like the entire population of "Red Sox Nation." Who cares about the Sox? It's all about the BRUINS, baby!
  2. This thread fills me with nothing but sadness.
  3. I disagree. I like the wolf logo. It's simple, not overdesigned; it's a nice one-color image of a wolf. It works for me. It's Nike, it includes their swoosh. That's enough for me to despise the piece of affrontery. Besides, the block W with husky-head is so much more classic, collegiate and representative of U-Dub anyway.
  4. The Seahawks got it right. They have the perfect uniform for a team in the PNW. The only thing I'd change is the white pants - it should be blue pants 100% of the time. Every pic I see of the few games where they have gone blue on white and white on blue just confirm this even more for me. IMO, of course. I couldn't agree more. The white pants look terribly out of place. And I, of course, couldn't disagree more. IMO monochrome always looks like small-time high school. It looks slightly better when there's a lighter helmet (like the saints sometimes), but the Seahawks picked a fairly dull color, and then decided to wear it from head to toe... or at least head to knee. Bad. The current home jersey and helmet with white pants? Better. The current home jersey with silver helmet and pants? Much much better. Amd I am in complete agreement with you here. Monochrome football sets = work of the devil.
  5. Thank **** for that. They should have never left the Don James early-90s era togs. And whilst we're at it, dump the stupid swoosh wolf logo.
  6. I would have kicked the mailman if he delivered that monstrosity to my door.
  7. Jays shoulda never got rid of that logo. God, I hate modern sports logos - or at least any of them introduced in the past decade.
  8. I don't mind the home uniform or the new away logotype, but I think the primary logo is already looking a bit tired. The baseball at the bottom makes it very awkward. Versions without the baseball look a whole lot better. That may be the worst primary logo in MLB. Extra points deducted for actually using beveling. Eww.
  9. Grade-school geometrics aside, it looks like crap. That's why.
  10. Contemporize to what? A block letter on the helmet? Some idiotic Nike-themed swooshes and colorblock panels? How about that tired and stretched-taut "bulldog" logo they were trying to shove down everyone's throats a few years back? Come on, man. The NFL is littered with contemporized unis that look dated and hack-jobbed right after they're unveiled. Let's let some classics stay as is. Besides, as an Eagle fan, you should know that the kelly greens are soooo much better than the current black-green eyesores.
  11. Infinitely better than what they have now.
  12. Amen to this. And those classic Jazz warmup jackets? Brutally AWESOME.
  13. Yeah, black in the scorching Arizona desert. Brutally brilliant. ASU grad musta came up with that bit of genius.
  14. Hmm, I don't remember that jersey for some reason. Then again, judging by the years, it was only around for like 3 seasons. |EDIT| Never mind, I do remember that one now. After looking at it again carefully, I suddenly realized it was the "Mookie era" jersey. Ah geez, that was a brain fart. Must be b/c it's really late and I'm a bit sleep-deprived. Those ones will be forever etched in my mind because of the disastrous Nique for Danny Manning trade.
  15. Where's Lisa Olson when you need her? And yes, you have to be an old timer to get that reference. Zeke Mowatt = more hung than Visanthe Shiancoe?
  16. So is the circle logo gone? If so, that's an upgrade. Nothing on the Red Sox site about new uniforms or logos yet. Strongly disagree. The circle w/ socks was much better. Hanging socks? Stanky. Don't mind the new roads, script is now plain and I like it like that. However, is it an upgrade? Hell 2 da naw (paraphrasing my favorite guy from Da "U"). I absolutely detest the sock logo on the hat. That's bush-league, esp. with the "B" such an iconic hat logo anyway. Could you imagine the Yanks taking the NY off their hat, even for an alternate? No effin' way. In summation? A completely stupid, unnecessary, superfluous change that was never needed, nor WANTED, in the first place. Grade: F-
  17. Dare I ask what he does when he's posting? I'm visanthing my shiancoe, of course!
  18. Would that include a pinkslip to Mr. Gillespie? I think so...
  19. Um...not really. While I agree with you that it wouldn't look good there, some teams (Mets, Giants, Mariners, Marlins to name a few) I love the fact that they have them. It's a case by case basis. The Giants's shoulder logo is an eyesore to an otherwise sterling uni. They're just so unnecessary and they detract from the flow of the shirt - and make one sleeve look "heavier" in comparison to the other unadorned one.