DustDevil61

By Brandiose... It's nice. And no wheat-stock-swinging, armor-clad crow (or some other animal) in sight.

OKC's not "folding" per se...they're moving to Bakersfield. Yea, bad parsing of wordage there. "Ceasing operations" is not the same as moving teams. Granted, the Barons are ceasing operations in OKC, but the franchise itself won't be going away. But that's another debate that's IIRC been discussed in another thread. So nothing else is new? Just the 5 California teams (San Diego, Bakersfield, Stockton, Ontario, and Sharks Jr.)? Terrible move by the Sharks BTW...

Condors' Twitter account mentions hockey in Bakersfield "for years to come" With what we know, the Bakersfield-Norfolk-San Diego-OKC shuffle looks like this right now: Step 1: Move Norfolk (AHL) to San Diego Step 2: Move Bakersfield (ECHL) to Norfolk Step 3: Fold OKC Step 4: ???? Step 5: Team in Bakersfield!! When should we be expecting this AHL news conference again? And of course, there's the question of the remaining western ECHL teams. Do Alaska, Idaho, Utah, Colorado and Rapid City get realigned into the same division next year (assuming that none of those become AHL markets at least for another year)? I can see Colorado, Utah, and maybe Idaho becoming AHL teams in the years to come (assuming that AHL West works out). The Colorado Eagles could stay as the Avalanche's ECHL team (with a AHL team elsewhere in the state) or could be moved ala Bakersfield to make room for an AHL team (where it comes from, I don't know, with Lake Erie going nowhere). I know one of the main reasons the Utah Grizzlies dropped* to the ECHL is because there were more local rivals (mainly in Las Vegas and California along with Idaho) at the time. With pretty much all of those Califorinia teams likely gone next year, how long to the Grizzlies stick it out in a worst-case scenario (no Las Vegas or Reno) with just Idaho, Colorado, and Rapid City (and Alaska, but not exactly local)? I don't see Utah in the ECHL for long unless Las Vegas comes back and a Reno team is actually established. Maybe if the NHL expands they become the affiliate of Las Vegas or Seattle in a couple years, or possibly Arizona (though the last go-around with the Coyotes didn't exactly end too well). Idaho has an outside shot at the AHL, but with a Canucks affiliate likely going to Abbotsford and with the Flames likely going to Stockton and Oilers to Bakersfield it's unlikely they become a local AHL affiliate. But if Seattle gets an NHL team or the Flames move their Stockton squad on a whim... *You know, not unlike what's going to happen to Norfolk after this season.

#Glendaling #BecauseSports

It would be weird having a 5-team pseudo-league; is there any chance there are some games played against central teams (Iowa, Texas, Milwaukee, etc.)--or less likely--are there going to be more than 5 teams on the West Coast?

I'm not too high on the logos and set, but I actually don't mind when minor-league teams take their parent clubs' names...as long as they're close to their parent clubs. It gives an opportunity for the minor-league team to take the name in another direction creatively. Of course, the downside is that if and when an affiliate change comes, the team's pretty much bound to another overhaul. This doesn't really work because Okahoma City and Los Angeles are half a continent away from one another and the Red Hawks set didn't need to go.

Agreed. Several college teams (my alma mater Utah State being one of them) have worn their gray uniforms about the same (maybe a little more) as their white uniforms since the 2012 Nike rebrand: Obviously, college alt. rules are far more lenient than the NFL's (too much so if you ask me, though USU's not case of that), but given that the Seahawks' Wolf Gray™ is closer to white than just about any other NFL team's colored uniforms, I can see them pulling it off. And it would make perfect sense for a team from Seattle to forego white as their regular road uniform for a gray one. Also, I wouldn't mind seeing an end to the monochrome-at-home and the navy helmets. I'd replace the navy helmets with gray helmets (not unlike McCarthy's concept). Since we're on the Seahawks, I've got another unpopular opinion: They should stick with their Navy/Lime Green/Gray scheme and not go back to the Royal/Kelly/Silver. I normally long for the days when blue NFL teams wore lighter colors, but I love the Navy/Lime Green color scheme, and as I said before, their shade of gray supports that surprisingly well. YOU SHUT YOUR WHORE MOUTH!!!! (Ahem... I think kelly green is the most underrated color in sports and isn't used nearly enough.) I like kelly green and I don't think it's a bad color. I agree that it isn't used enough in sports (green in general isn't really used enough). However, it depends what other colors it goes with because there are some colors kelly green does not look good with. Black is one of those colors, IMO, which is why I hate most of the Eagles "concepts" on here that are simply fill-tool replacements of midnight green with kelly. Silver? Cool. Gold? Cool. Yellow? Cool. White? Cool. Blue? Eh... cool I guess. Black? Makes it look dreary, which is fine if that's the look you're going for, but that's generally not what you want with Kelly. I think the mid-late 80s Eagles actually did want to make their look darker or "less bright", so their use of black worked for what I think they wanted to accomplish (Buddy Ryan was one of the first to wear black eagles caps and other merch, they wore black shoes, and I think they genearally wanted a more modern / intimidating look but were still bound by the conventions of NFL uniforms at the time. I think they could do much better with the color if they ever went back to it, which they have no plans to now or in the future. I don't exactly agree with the "kelly green sucks" crowd, but Kelly Green can look a bit washed out. I prefer a shade of green 1, maybe 2 shades darker (maybe more saturated...the Dallas Stars seem to have the shade I'm talking about), but there is a lack of non-forest green in the college and professional sports ranks (Seahawks' lime green included--they need more of that). And while I'm on that subject, black doesn't look good with every color...and for some reason, kelly green isn't one of them (apple green isn't, either). Well, at least heavy doses of black (i.e. kelly/apple green jerseys with black helmets/pants). Maybe it looks too dreary; I'm not sure. That said, moving on to another related subject, while I normally despise BFBS uniforms, etc., black as a trim color (read: in small doses) can look excellent. A simple [insert Color Here]/White/Black scheme looks wonderful. I'm thinking Marshall (before this year), South Carolina, and so forth. Staying on that subject, I'd love to see a pro team or two go with a Maroon (or Brick Red)/Black/White or Creamsicle/Black (or Dark Gray)/White scheme. While I didn't like Tennessee's BFBS uniforms, it's undeniable that the scheme has a lot of potential elsewhere:

Here is one, I don't care! Seriously, I hate that the Wildcats are preseason #1 as that is a lot of pressure for our young team. I believe this thread may be more fitting for a conversation like this.

And more people would show up, too.

How dare you get my hopes up with a title like that! But yea, things were close and yet the Coyotes manage to remain. I'm sure the day will come when they finally move, but I'm not sure if we'll be alive by then.

The Bucs got close, if they went for a look similar to the Rutgers one I posted, more rustic and weathered, then I think their idea would have worked. The problem with their identity is they overdesigned it, like a Volkswagen, it's too clean and doesn't have enough soul. If the Bucs' new uniforms are any kind of car, they're a Powell Homer. Somewhere I imagine someone at Nike had a line along the thinking of "Powerful like a gorilla" in the Bucs' uniform design process...and the same reasoning Homer had for the antenna ball, else where do we get reflective trim on the numbers?

Next two years are definitely going to get interesting in the lower levels of hockey. Just hope San Diego ends up with a team in the end. The Gulls have been gone for too long. I'm just hoping there's a team playing in Salt Lake after all is said and done. IIRC the reason the Grizzlies "moved down"* from the AHL to the ECHL was the lack of local/regional rivalries (they were the westernmost team in the league at the time). Also, there was a big falling out with the last affiliation the AAA Grizzlies had--Phoenix--that led owner David Elmore to be wary of such close-knit affiliations.** With losing Ontario, Bakersfield, Colorado, and Las Vegas (whether the Wranglers "move up" to the AHL, relocate, or fold) should the rumors be true, the only local rival the Grizzlies will have is Idaho. So far, I haven't heard anything on the local front about the Grizzlies or their future. *By "moved down" I mean suspending then selling the original AAA franchise to Dan Gilbert (the original Grizz are now the Lake Eire Monsters) and obtaining the rights to the EHCL Lexington Men O' War franchise and moving it to Utah. **Which may also be why the Grizzlies seem to bounce around (if being any affiliate at all) affiliates so much--the AA team has been Independent, an Islanders, Flames, and Ducks affiliate since beginning play as a AA team in 2005-06.

Fixed. Those 1990s Rockets jerseys have a special place in uniform hell for me, but I never got the hate for the neon green Seahawks jerseys. Not a big fan of the abstract marlin in the current logo, but swap out the light blue with the original teal and minimize/remove the yellow and the Marlins would have perhaps one of my favorite color schemes in general (though less black, please). And yes, the M has a lot more character than the F ever did.

I agree. While I don't mind them in purple (and TBH, who else in the NHL should wear purple?), they've always seemed right in black and silver from the Gretzky era. The Bucs look good...from the neck up. Their logo (even the new one) is a great fit to be oversized on a helmet, and the helmet gives a great metallic feel. But I'll disagree and say that they needed to keep thing pretty much the same aside from the helmet. Or, with the new set, at least tone down (read: round) the numbers and break up all the red main jersey and pewter shoulders with some orange and white. (On the whites, replace white with red). The Jags look all right...from the neck down, as long as they don't go monochrome. And I'd prefer them to wear their teal uniforms as their primaries. I'd elongate the pants rectangle, but everything else should just about the same. While I'm on the subject, I've come around on the Seahawks uniforms. They're certainly not perfect, but they're a few tweaks (mostly color consistency and maybe a little more green) from being an outstanding modern set. The Navy/Lime Green/Gray color scheme is outstanding, especially for a team from Seattle. I'd even go a step further and suggest they either drop white from their color scheme entirely or make their white uniforms an alternate. Also, from the NBA and my home state, the Utah Jazz's current set may be top 2 material (besides the 1980s-1996 set). While I agree that tweaking their colors (navy to purple/royal/indigo or forest to kelly) would be ideal (or using a color scheme from the past), they can seriously keep the uniform template, update the J-note logo/script font (I do not recognize MountainBall as their logo) to something more "western" (something like SFGiants58's concept with a new mountainball on the J-note), and I'd be content with their uniforms into perpetuity. Fitting some subtle mountains may add some spice to their look, but that's about it.

I have a feeling that the Panthers will inexplicably find a way to stay in Florida, if for no other reason than for our entertainment.

But this could be an eBay hoax, but glad they didn't. They look way too much like the Ravens, sans purple.

Funny. I'm beginning to have the same opinion. The "New Storm" uniforms are a downgrade from the original (or even the Edge tweak), yes, but they really aren't terrible. I see the road uniforms and recognize the Carolina Hurricanes as the Carolina Hurricanes. The thing that bugs me the most about them is the mismatching home and road templates. Make the home match the road (add some black and maybe even return the flag pattern to the hem stripes) with perhaps e a thinner version of the previous number font and they could rival the original look. Of course, I would have loved them to try dark gray in place of black or replace silver with light blue. Silver makes the look. I think it muddies up the design. If it were Black/Panther Blue/White it would be a lot cleaner of a look, and the colours would pop a lot more. I can live with the Panthers' silver, but it really is extraneous. Removing the silver and making the helmet white would go a long way in making the Carolina Blue and Black pop. I agree. Maybe doing this can return purple (or indigo) as a color of the Utah Jazz. And, please Jazz, if you do bring purple back, emphasize the team as a Purple/Green team, not Purple/Yellow. I can't number how many times I've mistaken pre-1996 merchandise as Lakers merch. (That's also my opinion as to why the Jazz stuck with navy when going to a more classic look). While I'm at it, one thing that bugs me about this set is the absence of "Utah" on the logo. I know that everyone involved with/following today's NBA knows that the Jazz are from Utah, but it feel that the team should show on their chests like they did from the 1980s to 1996. Why not show both the team's locale and name on all your uniforms if it can be done this easily? Plus, no more "Utah" tramp stamp--maybe use that font in the new look, as well. I really, really like the colors used in that set, but the actual jersey design is completely outdated, too 90's (gosh it pains me to say that ). If they could make a jersey similar to the simplistic Boozer/Deron-era set, but use the 90's colors (and keep the mountain on the shorts in some form), it'd be the perfect Utah Jazz jersey for me. I don't know if it'd be the perfect Utah Jazz jersey (maybe some form of a J-note/mountain ball lovechild), but that would've been a great idea. Of course, a simpler set based on the 1999-2004 Black/Copper/Purple alts. and using those colors (maybe light blue somewhere, too) would've been a good move. But honestly, I really don't mind if the Jazz keep their current pattern in perpetuity--it goes great with just about any color scheme used in team history (Purple/Green/Yellow, Purple/Dual Blue*, Purple/Black/Copper, etc.) and even a new ones or two (Green/Purple/Copper, Black/Light Blue/Copper). Maybe one can add some mountain outlines/silhouettes on the pants on the current set.

Time will tell whether the Brooklyn Nets' Black/White becomes his "right" uniform, but here's Deron Williams in the Jazz's current uniform set for what was less than one season: And if anyone asks me, his "right" uniform is still the Utah double-blue.

Since it's topical... I'd love to see the Tampa Bay Buccaneers pair pewter with orange, although admittedly in just an alternate.* If the pewter really is darker (read: less goldish) and the orange really is creamsicle, as evidenced here (post here): ...it could turn out to look quite nice while complimenting the red well. Of course, as surprisingly good as they could look with Pewter/Pewter/White (again, should it not look so olive/brownish), that wouldn't be such a bad route for them to go, either. Just a couple examples. *Mainly because we don't know what the uniforms are like, nor the pants colors. I'm now REALLY hoping that the uniform changes are indeed subtle (pewter and maybe white pants, overall conservative design, etc.).

They are an option until Bettman finds out that Seattle isn't in Mississippi. Ha! I'll be waiting for the NHL to announce this expansion plan. Maybe Bettman throws the Panthers to Seattle...OK, I kid, I kid.

As a Panther fan myself, I've given this some thought and actually agree. The silver really is extraneous. A simple Black/Carolina Blue/White color scheme would freshen (and clean) up Carolina's look while not being that big of a departure from their look. Don't get me wrong, I like how the Panthers have kept their uniforms virtually unchanged from their inception, but with the new logo and wordmark, they need to tweak their look. Make the number font a little more if not exactly like the wordmark (with outlines), replace any silver with white, and you should be good. If the NFL ever lightens up on its alternate helmet rule (though I can see why they may not), I'd love to see a regular white helmet with pretty much the design of the current silver helmets and an alternate black helmet with a slightly oversized logo.

Here we go again?

I don't think that you can say that the US Highway shields are trademarked. Wouldn't it be public domain?

Big downgrade from their old duds and their actual highway themed look. Honestly, I think the new package does the Route 66 theme better than the old one. There's plenty of roadside attractions with that style of artwork along what used to be the original Route 66. I love the color scheme (Dark Gray/Orange/Light Blue is a color scheme I've been wating to see happen) and the 1950s-style cartoon mechanic. That said, the "swinging mascot" trend needs to end (Immediately, Brandiose!), I'd dump the engine logo for a highway shield logo, and I'd at least tweak perhaps the hood-ornament logo. I might also consider changing the font for something actually used on highway shileds (or something very familar, spoilered for size):