• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

344 Platoon Sharer

About JTernup

  • Rank
    Buffalo, Boilermaker, GATOR!

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Gainesville, FL

Recent Profile Visitors

9,443 profile views
  1. I really like the cream as well. It almost feels as though they set the cream up to fail though by introducing it alongside the white pinstripes. It seems like pins would be the fan preference given how Brewers fans seem to respond to the classic ball in glove look that the team had previously worn as a throwback.
  2. I don’t hate Kraken as much as many of you or as much as I feel I should. However Sockeyes is so obviously the best choice that it hurts. Sockeyes sounds like it could’ve been an Original 6 name, Kraken sounds like it was the name of a hockey team from a moderately successful Disney movie, not that the NHL would do something so ridiculous.
  3. It was always a house of cards though. The logo is horrible, the designs were boring, they way overextended themselves, their entire demographic was basically 7-15 year old boys and middle aged men, and their star athletes didn’t have personalities that appealed to their weak demos (Curry and Cam were incredibly popular with little kids but never reached LeBron/Kobe/Griffey status of ubiquity)
  4. My problem with white hats is I never think they are the better option. Some look great like the UNC one posted above but I still find myself wanting an appropriately colored non-white hat instead. To me that means they probably shouldn’t be used more than by a few college teams and no MLB teams because there is no reason to Go with an inferior look. That’s to say nothing about all of the terrible white hats.
  5. I think the home hat looks pretty nice, although a burnt orange hat with a white longhorn would be far superior imo. The grey hat is suboptimal for UT and would be terrible for a big league club. That grey crown for UT really makes me wish they used a burnt orange hat, it would be such a great look.
  6. Thanks, I might have to look that up. That's something that I intuitively knew/believed but didn't have any actual evidence of so I'm glad my intuition was correct.
  7. You’re probably right that a big fish like Alabama could force their way in. But... IMO it seems Nike wants Jordan associated with dynamic, hip, and up and coming programs that have had historical success. Alabama fits nicely in the mold Nike wants its premiere programs (steady, timeless/traditional). Its all a balance, Nike doesn’t want all of its good teams going Jordan (neither do the teams, then it’s no longer premium) because they need premier teams under the swoosh brand too.
  8. Agreed, SCAR is definitely not going Jordan, I would bet my life on it. As you mentioned, in football at least the Jordan branding is saved for elite programs and Jordan's alma mater. They have also given out Jordan branding for one of three reasons, Jordan affiliation (UNC), as a reward for long time Nike schools that have had a lot of success (UF, OU), or to sweeten the deal for a blue blood program making the jump to Nike (Michigan). SCAR definitively does not fit into any of those categories. Not only that but it sure seems like Nike and Jordan have decided to use the Jordan branding on one school per conference, I'd bet given how they have handled it that each of the Jordan schools have some language in their contracts that states they will be the only Jordan outfitted school in their respective conferences.
  9. I'm not trying to :censored: on the work that designer did, it is fantastic work but I have a few problems with THAT being universally loved in comparison to what they did. The problem is, when its a concept we have WAAAAY lower standards. For example: - That front facing ram is a mess, the horns don't even read as horns in the full color version. That is not a better logo than either option the rams have. - The secondary is uninspired and there isn't a single example of something that basic being a commonly used secondary. Adds very little to the concept. - The primary is nice but the horns take up way too much space, the balance is off, the color balance is skewed with all the yellow to the left and all the white to the right. The random shapes that make up the face are unsightly and the mouth looks like a stylized d*ck. -There are 8 variants of some letters in the Inglewood font. Can you IMAGINE the crap Nike and the Rams would have received if they tried to pull that crap?! - The jerseys are really nice, but they are way too similar to throwback designs. Like it or not that seldom happens in this modern retail focused era of sports branding. This is a GREAT concept, it takes out a lot of the stupid crap the Rams did and I prefer nearly everything about it to its counterparts (especially with some minor tweaks to logos). But, we are hyper critical of what actually gets released in a way that nobody is for concepts.
  10. This thread is moving quickly so sorry if this has been explained to you but I and JLJ made a comment about the brand Off-White (ironic that the name coincides with the bone idea) who has collaborated with Nike extensively. Their signature is strange stitching, big tags, descriptions of things on themselves (i.e. "shoelace" on a shoelace)and an overall deconstructed look that lines up with this set very nicely. Here is a pair of shoes and a shirt that have some of these elements. That's why I think this was well executed because they accomplished what they wanted. I'm not a fan of a lot of that and it has NO staying power but it did what they wanted to.
  11. The patch with the stitching and pull tab really look Off-White inspired. I'm not a huge fan of what they have done but I think they knocked it out of the park from an execution of the theme standpoint. I think this will look really dated in a handful of years and I wouldn't be surprised to see tweaks to remove some of these superfluous details.
  12. Agreed, it's less of an issue if I were to buy a replica (I don't for MLS because they're boxy and not much cheaper) but if I'm buying an Authentic I want it to be truly authentic. Losing the sponsor takes away from the authentic look of the jersey. I don't care about it on training gear but it doesn't bother me either because it is such a part of the soccer aesthetic. Given the choice I'd have it removed from all teams but if it is there it doesn't bother me that it's on my fan version of apparel.
  13. This, I love these jerseys and think they get overlooked due to how great and beloved the rainbow Nuggets uniform is. I'd replace the old colors for the current ones (royal for navy and this red for the newer darker red). My ideal Nuggets set would have a Gold rainbow skyline, navy pick axe primary road, home white, and alternate road red.
  14. This has been covered before but ICYMI, Nike signed on really late since the UA deal fell through. They couldn’t have developed a new uniform in time for this season. They could have probably rolled out their NCAA template though and it’s unclear why that wasn’t an option.
  15. Fanatics has completely ruined the experience and options for buying team apparel. I live in FL and am a Chiefs and CO sports fan (Broncos excluded obviously) and have no options since the Lids takeover. Their foray in apparel manufacturing has also been terrible. I have waited my whole life to buy Chiefs SB gear and literally can’t find ANYTHING I like! It’s either garbage quality Fanatics gear or $200+ Nike jackets. Ridiculous!