whateverman42

Members
  • Content Count

    59
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Prospect

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  1. I don't really like it unfortunately, and while I don't think it's a terrible logo, I always looked at the Stars as having one of the coolest identities in the league, which is now lost. That STARS over the italic star I always loved, for some reason to me it was a modern classic. Very simple but it was exactly perfect. What I like about this change is the idea of incorporating silver to match with other Dallas teams, while keeping green to acknowledge their own past. I just think it would be better if it was an expansion team, I'd have no issues with it then. Gold, green and black was beautiful, silver replacing gold makes it seem much emptier and not as complete. I think I'm extra disappointed because it doesn't remind me of stars or the night sky, to me it sorta looks like some kind of western boot spur, and reminiscent of cowboys. I'd love a set reminiscent of the night sky, it's one of the most beautiful things to get inspiration from. And ironically, the Minnesota Wild have a set that reminds me more of it than the Stars do, due to their gorgeous logo. And I do know the Stars did try that with the Mooterus to disastrous results, but it doesn't mean they shouldn't try again. Even a change back to the late 90's jerseys, or even the early 90's jerseys would have been welcome, as both were miles better than this. Lol, anyways, I suppose I'm not into western stuff so it doesn't appeal to me, but I understand others might feel the opposite.
  2. I think the Raptors need something... but purple is desperately needed if they're going to stay with this look. Why would you go from looking unique to doing red and black for goodness sakes. It's like the Wizards being in correct wizarding colours with a colour combo no-one else has to doing red-white-blue which it seems half of professional sports teams use. It's such obvious regression and waters down identities. I think their wizard logo in red-white-blue looks sooo bad, it's awful. Either stay with those colours or change the name. Anyways, for the Raptors they should get rid of the roundel around the claw and go back to just the claw (as a secondary) and bring back purple and start using their main dribbling raptor logo more often, mainly on center court. I think the purple uniforms from the Carter era were perfect, with only red they seem a bit off and in need of something. They are unique unis though, still pretty good, just seem a bit peaky without purple. I was also wondering why when they were naming the expansion team they didn't choose Huskies. I read it was because they thought any logo would look like the Timberwolves, but that seems a flimsy reason. Baseball has three bird teams, and the Orioles, Cards and Jays still have very distinct identities. And actually the other recent Toronto expansion franchise chose the Blue Jays name despite the other two bird teams, so not choosing Huskies only because of one other dog team is iffy. And the blue and white Huskies would tie in with the colours of Toronto's other major sports teams so well. However the name raptors is actually very good, no-one else is using dinosaurs and the raptors is the best team name to choose from. I just think it would be better for a city more known for paleontology, like Calgary or a place in the southwest.
  3. It sucks living in the unincorporated territories. I don't mind it--you can pick your team (as long as you stay with your selection). That said, when I lived in the Salt Lake area, I didn't know many Rockies fans. In fact having lived in two states in unincorporated territories--Idaho and Utah, there were more Braves or Cubs fans because we could get TBS and WGN, so we if we wanted to see baseball, those were the teams we watched. BTW, the posts so far in this thread have been killer for those of us who are too lazy to click on links--this is the only one I've clicked so far, so I'll make it an inline image. I'm curious to know if all of Canada is behind the Blue Jays, especially once the Expos left. No, the Blue Jays most definitely aren't supported by all of Canada. In the Maritimes, there are a lot of Red Sox fans, the Twins are very popular in Manitoba, and BC mainly supports Seattle, and even in Southwestern Ontario, the Tigers have a large fanbase. I think in general they are. Yes there are fans for northern US teams who are close by the border of their area, for example I bet Vancouver has more Mariners fans than Jays fans. But national media like TSN focuses heavily on the Jays when reporting on baseball, then all other teams are an afterthought. Unless something big happened the day before like someone pitched a no-hitter, any Jays news leads the baseball coverage. And I bet this gets people behind them. Plus Canadians seem to love when anything from their country makes it big time in the US, so I think nationalistic tendencies trumps regionally-closer teams, but again this is in general. I imagine each province besides Ontario is half Jays fans half a mix of other teams.
  4. I like this idea too, though it can be limiting. Maybe the best option in terms of grouping together a city's teams in some form would be to have the same colour scheme. Pittsburgh has this, I'm not sure if it's intentional or not, but the Penguins, Pirates, and Steelers are all mainly yellow and black. And they have room for some differentiation as the Penguins sneak a bit of blue in there sometimes, the Pirates incorporate some red, and the Steelers have the red and blue in their logo. Toronto is pretty much the blue city, and I wouldn't mind if TFC and the Raptors changed their scheme from red to blue to fit in. Even further the Raptors should change their name to the Huskies when adopting blue. I actually like the name of the Raptors, but it doesn't fit Toronto at all, maybe if Calgary ever got a team they can use a dino name.
  5. You sound like an owner yourself, not a fan. Of course a fanbase does not own a brand name, but they can vote with their dollars. If they are not emotionally invested in a product why would they provide support? Which is why owners would change names in the first place. There's more money to be taken out of Charlotte sports fans pockets with a team named the Hornets than with the Bobcats. And if the Bobcats were more successful the fans would have become more loyal to the name, but the name still sucks. And as things played out, they were one of the worst teams ever, which is probably exacerbating the need to go back to the Hornets, root of the disagreement aside. Every situation is different, and with Charlotte everything is making sense for a change: 1) Hornets name no longer in use by someone else 2) Bobcats is a horrible name 3) Bobcats has no current staying power due to consistently bad teams. With the three examples you gave to support your argument in the Ravens, Texans, and Wild, two of them do not even have the option to use their old name, and I guarantee they would have if the Indianapolis Colts and Dallas Stars weren't using them.
  6. Fans don't care about money-making organizations, executives, and millionaire athletes anymore, for what reason have they been given to be loyal in that regard? They only really care about the logo and colours of their team and how those represent their locality on a national stage, and give Charlotte back their name and jerseys and it's the same as if the old franchise was actually returned in full. I'm a fan of the Blue Jays still, despite the fact that in one year half their roster is different players. And they wouldn't become some phony version of the Jays if the ownership or general manager changed. Essentially if a team takes hold in their community, their identity belongs to that community. You saw that with the Jets; Winnipeg was not interested in getting just any name, it had to be the Jets. As long as they have an NHL team named the Jets it doesn't matter the old franchise is now in Phoenix and they took over an expansion franchise from Atlanta, it's technical jumbo to passionate fans. And I don't know why New Orleans was allowed to take the Hornets name in the first place. Wouldn't they want a new identity to fit with their city? And if there was a chance of Charlotte getting another team why wouldn't they retain the name like Seattle did with the Sonics? I hope all the big leagues learn from this, as the result is a waste of 10 years for New Orleans to have established a tradition and identity as they now start from scratch, and Charlotte wasting 8 years they could have been building on top of the prior Hornets history, on one of the most uninspired expansion sets ever to boot.
  7. Interesting news clip about the possible identities for CFL's new Ottawa franchise: http://www.cbc.ca/sp...d-proposed.html
  8. I think Pet Shop Boys have maintained the best aesthetic of album covers throughout their career.
  9. And that's precisely why the Mariners should drop the custom font from their alts and wear the same beautiful block found on all their other jerseys. Nope, it's precisely why they should sign a player named Cockburn. At 6:55 in is a funny Cockburn sketch:
  10. Yeah you're completely right, I forgot about that! When I think of the Warriors I still think of that blue Warrior guy. WTH does a bridge have to do with Warriors? The Warriors and Cavaliers have totally awful identity packages to go with awesome names.
  11. Interesting, thanks guys! Just my perspective I guess, I don't think mixing transportation into a sports identity works, the same way a team shouldn't base itself around say a restaurant, even if the restaurant is steeped in the city's history. These types of things are, what's the best word, mundane? Its bit too ordinary for a team named the Nets dressed up as subway maps to exist in a league that contains Warriors, Raptors, and Cavaliers.
  12. The Nets concept is definitely nice, very well done. But what does a subway have to do with Nets? And why would any sports team want to be associated with a dirty subway? In my mind subways are just a way to get from point A to point B, nothing to do with local pride. Even further, subway maps and fonts are primarily utilitarian, designed for easy understanding, and shouldn't be the basis of a sports team with entertainment being the goal. Some people will be getting off the subway to see the basketball game only to be confronted with the same imagery? They were forced to take the subway to see the basketball game, not the other way around.
  13. The only reason it doesn't look good is because they still have the number on the front every time they attempt to stick the logo in, making it look busy. Why is the number on front so sacrosanct in basketball? They do without front numbers just fine in hockey, and the announcers can still tell the differences between the players. In fact it would be even easier to tell the difference between players in basketball as they don't have all that heavy equipment on. And if one number just on the back isn't enough they could easily stick them on the shorts too. Logos instead of numbers and a wordmark on basketball jersey fronts would look much better and more interesting.
  14. So is it just me or does the bottom of the head pointing straight down not bother anyone? Do you think making it go to the right ala the original improves it (despite the shoddy paint job)? IMO its much more balanced and flows better.
  15. The thing that bugs me about the logo is the blue swipe at the bottom. On the old logo it curved well right and it gave it a balanced look, but the new one is pointy and goes almost straight south, actually a tinge left. IMO it ruins the logo and gives the picture on the caps and front of the uni a strange 'scooped' look. Could someone do a quick and dirty concept making the dark blue triangle at the bottom curve right ala the original logo? Going right, which makes sense because the bird is facing left: Going down and left: Unis are perfect though, I can't remember last time I was so excited about an unveiling.