McCall

Actually, there's less space between the top of the C and the place where the top bar and stem of the T meet than there is from the bottom of the C to the bottom of the T. At least according to this image. I actually quite like it. The T and C fit each other much better.

Click on the link in the initial post. You see them on the sides of the site.

Is it wearing a facemask?

They've actually been to Las Vegas, met with representatives there and came away happy with the prospect of moving there if things don't work out in Oakland. It's been pretty clear for awhile now that Vegas is their preferred option after Oakland, for both the A's AND MLB. They, nor anyone else, has met with Portland. Portland has actually tumbled down the list of preferred sites for relocation or expansion. Las Vegas, Nashville and Montreal are the top tier choices. Charlotte, Portland and San Antonio/Austin are more than likely in the second tier.

Isn't Sam Boyd Stadium just sitting vacant?

Not happening. Vegas is way ahead of Portland on the list of desirable locations for relocation or expansion.

Literally the opposite was done with St. Louis.

$$$ If you call a regular season game earlier in the day, no big deal. If the weather is bad, people will just not go. But with a World Series game, if you wait, people come to the stadium, because the tickets are at such a premium and spend money, like you said, on parking, food, team store, etc. It's essentially like a free play in football. You get this opportunity to make some money in addition to the eventual make-up game. Happened twice back in 2006 in St. Louis, once each in the NLCS and the World Series. I was up working at Busch Stadium for it and honestly we were hoping they'd call it earlier in the day, but they waited and waited. It later occurred to me why.

Meant to write "rightly so". And given the context in which I used it, seems like someone of your self-avowed intellectual level, would've gotten that I was intending to mean "it's not wrong to have that opinion" or "it's an appropriate take whether or not someone else agrees". Still doesn't change the fact that you've been very dismissive towards anybody who doesn't agree with your opinion on the topic.

You should've told them that beforehand.

Again, this is a subjective opinion that, for some reason, you seem to believe is factual. There is no "right" alternative. And one could argue that the best teams, regardless of divisions, IS the right way more than the opposite.

I might agree if there were 30+ teams or so instead of only 8. And even then, that point of view is very subjective. A lot of people subscribe, and rightfully so, to the belief that the best teams in the league should be the teams competing for the championship.

I will say, some of the holdover logos (Guardians, BattleHawks, & Vipers to precise) look like someone, who was not involved in the 2020 designs, maybe an intern, was told to recreate them without looking exactly like the old ones. And in a short amount of time.

Joe Bosack did all the logos for the Alliance (of American Football of Anaheim) logos, but I'm not sure he was in on XFL 2020.

And the Angels. And no, they are not shaded differently between different applications for each team. In addition, the average, non-pantone-obsessed fan would never notice the difference between those 4 teams or Boston or Washington or Cleveland.

I can blow past everything else you said as just opiniated ranting, but these two takes...

Actually, I believe San Antonio might be yellow and dark gray.

Yeah. But it seems every team now has a monogram as one of their logos, so I guess that's why they did the STL.

Are they doing away with divisions? Seems like it. Otherwise one of the Texas teams would be in the east. Kinda makes sense. There's only 8 teams.

No. Renegades are still in Dall, I mean, Arlington. GUARDIANS moved to Orlando.

Too make sure everyone knows they're really LAS Vegas and not... Vegas, Puerto Rico, I guess? Or Mr. Vegas?

Renegades should be reversed (same for the location name change). Defenders, like how they kept the shield. Looks better here honestly. I love the Roughnecks identity the more and more I see it, especially with the nice secondary logo. I'm guessing Orlando's is supposed to be an 'OG'? Not sure. A little plain. Seattle's is... meh, I guess. Don't know why it's rotated. Feels like it was done just because. Battlehawks' works as maybe a under the collar logo, but as a secondary, a little too basic. Vipers's LV feels like it doesn't go with the primary at all.

Fully disagree (with quite a bit here, actually). Here's all the logos against a white background. My PERSONAL tidbits: - Arlington Renegades: Clearly looks like it was intended for the name to remain DALLAS. In that case, it would've made a great secondary logo. But doesn't quite work as a primary and is not as good as the original - DC Defenders: Kind of a lateral, yet good, move. A simplification that works. - Houston Roughnecks: Probably my favorite of the holdovers. Simplified (and de-Oilerfied) very well. Clearly still presents as an 'H' and oil derrick while looking less like it's predecessors in H-town. Also less detail helps. - Orlando Guardians: Still don't think this was the best place to send that name. But the logo looks like some internet concept of someone trying to "improve" upon the original. - San Antonio Brahamas: Not a bad take on a bull logo. Colors are a plus. - Seattle Sea Dragons: Improved name by adding "Sea" and I like the idea of a full bodied sea dragon forming an 'S', but it feel like it could've had just a little bit more detail without going overboard. Overall, not bad. - St. Louis Battlehawks: Again, I feel it was a little oversimplified. I understand removing some detail, but the hard corner points make it a little jagged. Still plan on finally attending a game. - Vegas Vipers: IMO, an upgrade over the original, even if a little simple.

The ones kept were a little too over simplified, save for Houston's. That's actually pretty nice. The Vipers, IMO, is an upgrade over the original. San Antonio NOT against a dark gray background.