Lights Out

From the neck down, it's not bad at all. It's just the awful helmet that sticks out like a sore thumb.

Purple and black is fine for TCU, just like how it works fine for the Ravens. It also represents their entire modern history as a successful football program. Why would they switch back to purple and white - to remind people of when they were in the basement of the SWC for 36 years?

The change they should actually make is to lean into the "bloodshot eyes" thing and add some subtle red trim to the color scheme.

For the record, Arkansas is not a great counterexample at the moment. They're never going to be Oklahoma or Alabama no matter how many times they try to dress up like them.

19 hours ago, aawagner011 said:

A&M looks great but I’ll miss the double stripe. That had definitely become their thing. A cleaner version of that uniform would have been a great update. They could even use their new uniforms as the base and add the double stripes to the shoulders.

Can't say I agree that they look great. These new uniforms are dreadfully boring. And between them, Alabama, and Arkansas, that's three teams in the SEC with similar color schemes and similarly plain uniforms. At least Mississippi State and South Carolina have extra trim colors and sleeve stripes to differentiate themselves.

The number font, which is the clear focal point of their new uniforms (since it's not like there's any actual design elements to compete with it), is a downgrade. The old font was identifiable and matched the wordmark. The new one looks like an amateurish free font.

The cherry on top is that - like always - Adidas' TechFit template makes every uniform look worse by stretching and warping everything.

People complained about how college football uniforms were becoming overdesigned in the early-mid 2010s, but honestly, that wasn't any worse than the current era of manufacturers mailing it in with the laziest possible uniforms. Texas A&M is the poster child for this trend. They already had a great classic look, and they threw it away to chase the new fad of making your uniforms look like practice gear.

38 minutes ago, Krz said:

This is the equivalent of the kids who comment “we did it guys we solved racism” when ESPN posts something about civil rights. It’s not funny.

Sure, but it doesn't change the fact that this is an entirely performative gesture on Wisconsin's part and does nothing.

This is a major downgrade. Not sure what they were thinking with the lopsided C, and the even more lopsided "CLT" mark is even worse.

22 hours ago, pianoknight said:

Making your own logo is such a basketball thing.

Not really.

The new logos are okay, but the new font reminds me way too much of Virginia Tech.

I'm surprised UVA didn't notice this and tell Nike to go back to the drawing board.

I'm glad people are finally starting to agree with me that pewter and orange should be the focus of the Bucs' identity. I think this concept would be improved by using some red as a minor trim color, though.

The new scorebug is a huge upgrade, but I can't help but think it should be moved to one of the corners of the screen next season. It's not wide enough to look good centered at the bottom. Even they must have realized that, which is why they wasted more space by keeping the quarterbacks' stats on the screen all game.

I also thought those were nice except for the helmets. Even the black numbers looked good.

Only major issue I see is that some teams' jerseys have side panels that don't flow into the pants stripes. I don't understand why the Vipers' or Dragons' jerseys have side panels at all.

The Defenders, Roughnecks and Guardians look nice, and the Wildcats are a real logo away from looking good too.

On 10/13/2019 at 2:08 PM, BellaSpurs said:

The Ravens are one of the few teams that don’t need to change their identity ever. It looks beautiful.

I would argue that they're a couple tweaks away from the perfect look.

First and foremost, the white and purple pants have to go. The Ravens have never looked right with anything other than black pants. Their black/purple/black combo is one of the best looks in the league. However, the pants should have purple stripes to match the helmets. They also need contrasting socks to avoid the "yoga pants" look.

Secondly, the helmets would really benefit from a purple glimmer effect, similar to the teal glimmer effect on the Jaguars' 2009-2012 helmets.

On 6/1/2016 at 1:35 AM, Lights Out said:

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-AUTHENTIC-2008-SACRAMENTO-KINGS-NBA-ADIDAS-SAMPLE-JERSEY-48-0-SEWN-NWT-/291746084639?hash=item43ed6bf71f%3Ag%3AIEsAAOSwa-dWpykz&nma=true&si=OS9Q%252FJRktLie%252FzipTLqzf7tef%252BU%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

It looks like the home equivalent has shown up on eBay now:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Sacramento-Kings-Adidas-Prototype-Sample-Authentic-Jersey-48-Rare-NWOT/303314702952?hash=item469ef71268:g:vX8AAOSws6JdnU2J

The Texans have always looked incredibly dull, like a generic team from a movie. Even the much-beloved road uniforms with red socks still look forgettable.

That Tampa concept looks more appropriate for Virginia Tech than the Bucs (aside from the throwback, of course).

14 hours ago, Delicate Genius said:

They changed the down/distance colours at halftime tonight:

Guess someone must have clued them in that the original version made it look like there was a flag on every play.

On 8/18/2019 at 6:33 PM, Davidellias said:

Does anyone like the mid00s Mets uniforms?

I wasn't a huge fan, but the BFBS did look pretty good in some contexts:

They really just screwed up by forcing the black drop-shadows into the normal home and road instead of leaving it for the alternates.

They're all nice except for the Vipers and Wildcats. They really mailed it in with those.

On 4/11/2019 at 12:20 PM, DNAsports said:

Salt Lake Bees with City Edition uniforms:

 

You know, the Astros would look really good in a jersey like this.

8 hours ago, Quillz said:

It's one of those "looks fine in a vacuum" logos. But I get the original is a classic. But I mean if the school did go ahead and replace it, I think eventually it would have been accepted.

I personally think it looks better than the original and I always use it when I make Iowa concepts. It's more dynamic without being too much of a departure from the classic logo.

That's not a bad look at all. It definitely would have paired better with their road uniforms than the ones they ended up going with.

Nice work. I don't like their current font, but I'd be satisfied with your updates to it.

The color balance absolutely was not better in the past. There was no pewter at all on the jerseys in the '90s set. Pewter was and is their unique color, yet they managed to leave it off the jerseys entirely in favor of generic red and black. Their current uniforms are a big improvement in that regard.

1 hour ago, Ice_Cap said:

 

 

One reason people (myself included) like the old Dolphins logo is because it looks dated and kitschy- it looks very "of the time and place" the team was created. Like...there's just something so perfectly late 60s/early 70s South Florida about it. Like you'd see it on a sign for some roadside attraction that littered the state at the time.

 

Another reason, which is really tied in with the above one, is that it's whimsical. It's a dolphin wearing a football helmet. It's the sort of design you don't see anymore, where everything has to be a perfectly rendered cartoon snarling animal. Here? It's just a drawing of a dolphin wearing a football helmet. It's reflective of a sort of "lost attitude" when it comes to sports logo design.

 

The final reason? A lot of people just don't care for the new logo. It's so wispy and bland. I've heard it described as a cruise ship logo, a travel agency logo, and a retirement home logo. It has a very corporate feel to it that just doesn't seem "right" for a football team. Maybe that's by design, it doesn't change things much. Either way? The poor reception it's gotten makes even imperfect previous logos seem palatable by comparison.

I can see your perspective. I don't tend to think that "dated and kitschy" is the right tone for a sports brand, but to each their own.

I like the Dolphins' current logo. To me, it looks classy, professional and dignified, whereas the old logos just looked like cartoons (especially the late-'90s/2000s version).

Those uniforms could have worked with the navy trim if the orange outlines on the numbers/stripes were thicker. As it stands, though, the orange trim disappeared because it was too thin to really contrast enough with the navy outlines. Given how simple and minimal those uniforms were, they couldn't afford to screw up the color distribution to the degree they did. The new update is a big improvement just because they finally fixed that issue.

I do agree with you about the vintage logo. I'll never understand why people like it so much. To me, the dolphin looks old and wrinkly.