leopard88

It feels weird to see the Lions in anything other that a silver helmet, but that is a great looking helmet. 

I've always loved that logo (and, like @infrared41, I'm old enough to remember when it was use), so it is good to see it resurrected.

Also, a few people posted they could do without the stripes on the helmet.  In case there is anyone who doesn't know . . . the stripes are part of the logo.

18 hours ago, 4_tattoos said:

I could do without the Bayhawks name being revived honestly. I blindly supported it because I'm a homer when it comes to pro sports, but the name always seemed like a Seattle Seahawks ripoff. Especially when you add the colors to the mix.

 

 

To be fair, I don't dislike that color combo. I'd be on board with the colors being reused with a new name.

I'll second this.

Out of the current PLL names, Waterdogs would work best with Chesapeake or Maryland.  The Chesapeake Bay Retriever presumably counts as a "water dog", so it sort of fits.

That said, I pretty much hate all of the current PLL names except for Archers and Cannons (and maybe Redwoods if I'm feeling generous). The rest sound like something out of MLS circa 1996.

17 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

Because otherwise Chesapeake by itself conjures up a connection to one of the other cities in the Norfolk area of Virginia.

Funny, I always think of the bay whenever I hear Chesapeake, not the city in Virginia.  Must be my Maryland bias showing.

On 6/3/2023 at 6:30 PM, 4_tattoos said:

So these are the cities, states and regions on the PLL's radar (based on their fan vote page) I think I have a solid idea of where the 8 teams will end up being based in 2024. We'll see how it plays out though.

 

1. Albany
2. Atlanta
3. Austin
4. Baltimore
5. Boston
6. California
7. Carolinas
8. Charlotte
9. Chicago
10. Columbus
11. Connecticut
12. Dallas
13. Denver
14. Florida
15. Great Lakes
16. Kansas City
17. Las Vegas
18. Los Angeles
19. Louisville
20. Maryland
21. Midwest
22. Minneapolis
23. Minnesota
24. Nashville
25. New England
26. New York
27. New York City
28. Ohio
29. Pacific Northwest
30. Philadelphia
31. Raleigh
32. Rocky Mountains
33. Salt Lake City
34. San Diego
35. San Francisco
36. Seattle
37. Texas
38. Toronto
39. Washington State
40. Washington D.C.
41. Other

Interesting that Baltimore and Maryland are listed separately.  I assume "Maryland" would be used for a team in Annapolis . . . or maybe "Chesapeake" again.

19 hours ago, 4_tattoos said:

I'm still not sure how they'll manage to tour neutral sites and play in home markets next year. All I know is Paul Rabil's explanation sounds more complicated than it needs to be.

 

I think one of you guys may have actually birthed this idea before in one of the lacrosse threads over the years, but this is how I think a combo of both schedules should be handled. Let me start by saying this is assuming 1) they will remain at 8 teams for a while, 2) there will be an even geographic (ideally east/west) split of the teams in which divisions can be formed, and 3) the PLL maintains a 10 game regular season. 

 

1. Play division opponents twice, with those games being played in the traditional home/away model. (ie, New England @ Long Island,  Texas @ Utah)
2. Play each team from the other division once, with those games played in neutral site double headers (ie New England vs Texas 3:30pm, Long Island vs Utah 6pm in Minnesota)
3. With 8 teams in 2 divisions playing a 10 game schedule that would make 3 home games, 3 away games and 4 neutral site games.

 

 

I think this sounds similar to something I may have concocted once upon a time, but this version sounds better than what I remember.

In particular, it seems especially fair for playoff race purposes -- division games all home-and-away, non-division games all neutral site.

It's about damn time!

I know we've had this discussion before and I've always said the PLL would eventually need home cities even if they used some sort of hybrid home game/touring model.  This is basically that.

It wasn't clear to me whether each team would get one or two home weekends during the season. I think two would be preferable to help build local ties.  However, if my math is correct, they could only have one each in order to still leave dates for neutral site tour stops.

It's certainly a move in a very different direction.

That said, the new set is very well done.  It's definitely an upgrade in quaiity.

However, now that @stumpygremlin has pointed it out, it is hard to get away from (a) the change from a pilot to a plane and (b) the corporate air freight vibe.  Maybe the new logo would work even better for a team called the Jets or the Bombers.

. . . and Nittany Lions.

I'm rooting for this to be the new logo.

In seriousness, the name is more than a little clunky.  I expect to see/hear "Revs" used a lot.

I also expect to see minimal changes to the overall brand package since they're more or less staying in the same realm.

Beyond that, I can picture them making a lot of use of the name on the academic branding side --

"Your Revolutionary Education Starts Here"

"GW Research Leads To Revolutionary Developments"

10 hours ago, tBBP said:

 

With crab meat all over it.

It's 8:41 a.m. and you're making me hungry.

33 minutes ago, AndrewMLind said:

 

This may very well be a case of the fans of the team liking something more than outsiders. The O's hat is fantastic, and most Orioles fans I know agree with that sentiment. 

I think you and I have been polling different Orioles fans.  I know I'm not the only one in my circle that can't stand it.

I am pleasantly surprised that I find these decent.

The socks and cuffs provide a little splash of color and I expect that a lot of players will roll their cuffs to show that off.  I also think a few players who are long pants guys will opt to show the socks with these.

I do wonder how white pants would look.  However, the black pants look better than I expected even though I generally can't stand dark baseball pants.  There is also precedent for all black uniforms in Baltimore baseball history.

The 1901 Orioles, for example --

http://oldtimebaseball.com/wp-content/uploads/1901_baltimore_orioles_nugent07-270x300.jpg

For some reason, I can't post the actual image.

18 hours ago, AndrewMLind said:

 

This post started off with so much promise.

One.  Sentence.  Too.  Many.

I wonder if the Twitter post means they have a cursive B cap.

On 5/13/2023 at 10:14 PM, RyanMcD29 said:

After Virginia and Notre Dame got some ho hum wins, things really went off the rails in the evening slate. Yale-Georgetown was absolutely hammered drunk with the defense and goaltending on both sides being non-existent as the Hoyas survive and advance, and then Army pulls off a huge upset over Maryland in the nightcap despite turning the ball over left and right. This bracket was set up for carnage, but was not expecting the Terps to be first round victims given how they usually avoid all that under Tillman.

Maryland was good this year, but not great . . . and definitely inconsistent.  They just lost too many offensive weapons from last year.  The Army matchup scared me as soon as it was announced . . . and now I'm at least glad and I didn't visit my son in College Park and sit through it (which my wife really wanted to do until the weather forecast stayed rainy).

I was also disappointed that Delaware couldn't hang on against Duke . . . first, because upsets are fun and second because I went to high school with the parents of one of their defensive middies (and my son went to elementary school with him).

1 hour ago, Geoff said:

Just need 8 teams to break the GOR. I think the best bet or smartest move is for Louisville to realize they're better off in the Big XII with old rivals like Cinci, WVU, and maybe even Memphis than whatever the hell the ACC is going to be when the big names leave or an ACC with uneven distribution. Louisville doesn't see itself as a basketball school. It's a basketball and football school. Football just doesn't have the consistency to merit the amount of money in uneven distribution for it to be a basketball and football school. 

Louisville has always been a very odd fit in the ACC to me.  It seemed like a bit of a marriage of convenience.

As you say, many of their old rivals are in the Big XII now, so it would make sense for them to follow.

9 hours ago, tBBP said:

Not for nothing, but I was just in Baltimore over the weekend...got to see the O's get blanked by the dang Pittsburgh Pirates in Camden Yards (that is quite the nice park, by the way). I also saw more Old Bay cans, signs, and seasoning than I've ever seen in my life...I never saw that much the one year I spent living [just south of] there! Anyway, my brain never made the connection between the Old Bay font and the Baltimore [supposed-to-be] City Connect...probably because the CC is a whole bunch of blah-bland nothing. Ironic, because Old Bay is some of the best seasoning in the world.

Old Bay advertising has exploded in recent years.  I have lived in Maryland for 55 years and never saw a lot of Old Bay advertising or merchandise until the last few years.

Also . . . where haven't you lived.  

3 hours ago, Brave-Bird 08 said:

omg it is the Old Bay font. 

 

No freaking way

It's definitely very close.  I really need to see them side by side.

At first glance, the O in the City Connect font doesn't seem to have the slight curve on the sides that the Old Bay font does.  However, that could just be my eyes playing tricks on me since we can only see a very small version of the City Connect font.

Either way, I can't imagine using Old Bay as an inspiration but not including yellow and blue.  Assuming there is a connection, maybe those colors show up elsewhere.

15 minutes ago, eRay said:

Orioles next week:

"Our city connect is inspired by historic Baltimore . We based our new wordmark off the old Inner Harbor Barnes & Noble signage, and the black jersey color comes from the bottom of the Lightship Chesapeake."

Two of the most iconic pieces of Baltimore culture.  It all makes sense now.

On 5/8/2023 at 8:21 AM, Seadragon76 said:

I assume it's six teams, like any other sport.

You assume correctly.  That's why the ACC doesn't get an automatic bid with only five teams. . .  and why the B1G added Johns Hopkins as an associate member to make sure it had enough teams to get one.

Assuming this is legit, I've lived in the Baltimore area for 55 years and I'm having no luck thinking of the likely explanation.  In particular, there is nothing about the wordmark font that reminds me of anything Baltimore related unless I'm just overlooking something.  At least the Nets' minimalist color scheme and font was supposed to mimic New York subway signage (if memory serves me).

As for a slogan, "Ain't The Beer Cold" would have worked just fine . . . and has been dropped a few times on MASN recently by Kevin Brown and Ben McDonald.  For the uninitiated . . . 

If there is any upside based on just this, it isn't some sort of over the top monstrosity.

3 hours ago, TenaciousG said:

It’s CU—LA

Pretty much.

1 hour ago, tBBP said:

 

Time out...what's up with this here? Blue??? What'd I miss?

Before your time, young whippersnapper.  

https://static.cubuffs.com/custompages/football/2017_Info_Guide/569-570_logo_uniform_evolution.pdf

Quote

May 28, 1981—Blue officially adopted as the primary uniform color in place of black after a Board of Regents mandate at its January meeting. Originally suggested to be “the deep blue Colorado of Colorado’s sky at 9,000 feet” by then-Regent Jack Anderson, jerseys were officially an “Air Force Blue” though different than the blue the Air Force Academy’s sports teams wore. Numerals were silver or yellow-gold, depending on the sport, and outlined in white. The football pant remained gold, but with a blue stripe, for both home and road. Football helmets remained gold but with blue logos. Other programs switched to blue, ranging from road basketball jerseys to golf bags. CU’s trademark south end zone is painted blue, the first color change since it was created after the track was removed in 1966.

 

April 24, 1985—“Black is Back” read the release announcing that athletic director Bill Marolt would allow head coaches of all CU sports teams (then 14 in number) the option of returning to black as the primary jersey color. McCartney’s throwback efforts the previous season were the impetus for the change; the football jersey had a blue stripe on the arm for the 1985, 1986 and 1987 seasons before it was dropped altogether in 1988.

I was always of the impression that Chuck Fairbanks demanded the change when he was the football coach at Colorado.  However, multiple articles that I found suggest that he has been unjustly accused.

Just now, gosioux76 said:

In order to wear that number, John Hadl had to agree to give up his hair. 

It was like the Little Mermaid voice-for-legs thing.

11 hours ago, roxfan00 said:

More info coming out of Colorado

 

"Uncle Neely (@theepregameshow) says Coach Prime and Colorado will rival Oregon in terms of uniform combinations #SkoBuffs"

 

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/8BtqYkY4T6o

Really throw a curve ball -- bring back the powder blue!