JTernup

55 minutes ago, spartacat_12 said:

 

I think those must be counterfeit. I got gifted a Raptors jersey from my dad that he got from a random site online that is clearly a fake (at least clearly to me). It has a Sun Life patch on it, which my dad thought made it seem authentic.

I'm sure some/a lot of the patched jerseys flyersfan is seeing are bootleg. But it doesn't seem crazy to think that a pretty high percentage of real jerseys purchased in Philly would be from the official team store. Now that number may be quite a bit lower in Pittsburgh or State College but seems plausible in Philly.

4 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

 

Right, that all makes sense, but it doesn't explain why some form of Washington Football Club -- whether it be Washington DC Football Club, just Football Club or some other iteration -- seems to appear on every ballot. To me, that suggests that they're stacking the deck. 

Like I said I have no idea what their motivations are, maybe they just want to find a well liked team name and maybe they're stacking the deck.

 

But... usually adding several similar options does exactly the opposite of what you're suggesting (if names are randomly assigned). You would be splitting the vote of WFT people by having WFT, WFC, DCFC, etc. If the lists aren't random, then you're probably right and they want those names to be selected so the best shot is to include a lot of them. Or, it could all be legit and they just wanted to include all possible names. Unfortunately, without knowing more about their process it's impossible to say. 

3 hours ago, andrewharrington said:

I’m no information expert, but it seems like giving different people different lists would skew the data, no?

 

Or does each person go through all the lists? In that case, it does seem like they’re trying to capture data that reinforces their preferences.

 

52 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

 

From what I can tell, each of these lists has one thing in common: They all include some form of Washington Football Team. 

 

I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but if that trends hold, it certainly seems like WFT would have the highest chance of getting the most votes if it's the only one that appears on every ballot. 

 

Typically these kinds of surveys include x amount of names and each list is randomly generated for each respondent. In theory, with enough respondents you will get a sense of what options are the most favored out of the group and can assess how they are rated. Each name will be placed in a list with every other name and the cream will rise to the top by being repeatedly selected. That's part of the reason you would allow people to choose two names because you don't care that some random guy likes a disliked name. You care that the most liked names by the most people are found. 

 

You would only do this type of survey at this stage when you have too many names to just let people vote. Nobody is going to take a survey where they have to choose their 5 favorite out of 50 names but people will do this 5 times on lists of 10.

 

This is how this should be conducted... but this is Washington and Dan Scneider we're talking about so it could be a conspiracy to popularize their pre-selected favorites. 

 

1 hour ago, Webfooter said:

At least one team knew to wear their school colors.

Of all of the schools to be a fan of and say that... remember when y’all wore silver and volt in the biggest game in program history?

22 hours ago, Mingjai said:

 

Of course, if you're going global recognition, Stanford and Berkeley are easily the biggest brands in the Pac 12. And Northwestern and Duke are without question the biggest brands in the B1G and ACC. These schools struggle to compete with schools Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia, UChicago, and NYU for global brand recognition. That's primarily because very few outside of the US except US expats care about college athletics. And I doubt international merchandise sales drive much value.

 

Based on my experience in Asia (China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Korea), I wouldn't characterize UCLA's recognition as huge. It's a known school, but just within the Pac 12, UCLA is definitely behind Stanford and Berkeley, and probably behind USC as well. Heck, in Chinese, UCLA's name is "California University, Los Angeles Branch," making the school seem like some branch school, inferior or subordinate in some way. (For the record, in Chinese just as in English, Berkeley is usually known as Berkeley. Or sometimes you here people call it "California University," the equivalent of Cal I suppose.)

I don’t think what you’re saying is wrong. But, when it comes to athletic suppliers “brands” are slightly different IMO. Northwestern is a great example because it is a huge globally recognized university but does that translate to sales of Under Armour gear with the purple N? I highly doubt that Northwestern is outselling Ohio State and Michigan, and I would also imagine that the maize M is globally far more recognized than the purple N.

 

Cal is another interesting one because I think they’re branding is really disjointed compared to a UCLA or USC. The academic Berkeley brand is huge, probably one of the largest in the world but is that pushing people to buy Cal gear? Idk, maybe. 
 

I'm certainly not an expert in this and a lot of what I’m saying is based off of my own perceptions and biases. However, I am considering what Jordan, Nike, UA are doing and what brands they seem to value most in forming these opinions.

1 hour ago, dannykraft said:

I would argue none of those teams are the biggest brand in their respective conference.

I’m not trying to make the definitive list of the top brands in CFB, I’m just trying to understand what seems to be driving this Jordan school selection. I definitely disagree with your assessment, especially in the case of Michigan (still a bigger brand than OSU across academics and sports, with nobody else particularly close) but the fact of the matter is that each of those schools is arguably the biggest brand. To my original point UA doesn’t come close to being the biggest Pac 12 brand.

1 hour ago, MJWalker45 said:

I think the Trojans would not want Jordan Brand, only because they are a blue blood in football. I'm actually surprised Arizona didn't get picked up by Jordan already. 

It seems pretty clear to me that Jordan has acquired the biggest ‘brand’ in each conference (with Texas being the notable exception). Say what you will about any individual program at the Jordan schools but the brand of each school is huge, with massive fan bases and alumni bases, globally recognized logos, top 2-3 academic universities within their conference, and championship pedigree in either football or basketball. A school like Arizona just really does not match up with the likes of UM, UNC, UF, OU, and UCLA in those categories. 

1 hour ago, Kramerica Industries said:

What apparent need would there to have been to bring the orange helmets to Knoxville when the Gators were wearing blue helmets? If there was some kind of problem which would necessitate an in-game switch or something? I dunno, it just seemed unusual.

It doesn’t make a lot of sense to me but here is what Gators Equipment had to say about it on Twitter... https://twitter.com/gatorsequipment/status/1335632667073626112?s=21

1 hour ago, aawagner011 said:

They previously had the non-matching tapered stripe on the white lid, have rotated between “F” and “Gators” decals on each side, “Gators” on both sides, updated the striping, and still have orange jerseys and pants with non-matching stripes.

You're totally right, I guess my point was that they've fixed nearly all of that this year (hopefully we'll get an orange pants and jersey update ). Because of that I don't see this blue helmet as a sign that they're going down a bad path. To me it really seems opportunistic, they had them from the throwback, the players like them and the team thought why not wear them for a second time. 

 

It will be interesting to see if the blue helmets stick around and if so how they are used. I'm incredibly biased, I think the orange helmet may be the best in the sport not named ND, OSU, UMich, but I give them a pass on the blue. It looks nice and is still pretty darn faithful to the brand. 

1 hour ago, Ark said:

I wish Florida would wear orange pants at home more often

 

There is an old saying down here in Gainesville about this set. “Look like Illinois, play like Illinois” 

 

I feel like I should like it but I absolutely hate it.

5 hours ago, aawagner011 said:

It doesn’t look like Florida in the slightest. They already have alternate lids with the regular white helmet as well as the throwback. Florida is going down a bad path with ever changing stripes, helmet decals, etc. Stick to the basics and throw in the white lid for a couple games per year as well as the throwback. Done.

I don’t understand where you’re coming from here. The stripes and helmet decals have been unified this year, all three helmets have color appropriate versions of the same decal set.

 

Personally I think the Gators should only wear the orange helmet and once a year throwbacks (blue or orange). But if you’re going to wear three shell colors UF is doing so in the most brand consistent manner.

15 minutes ago, Red Wolf said:

 

A lot of us get obsessed with every uniform element being matchy-match, but it's not necessary. Sometimes things work that defy logic. Why is it that the old-school Rams uniforms work despite having white on the pants, but no white on the jersey or helmet? How can Ole Miss look its best with the light blue helmets, red jerseys (with no blue anywhere) and gray pants (the ones with a navy stripe)? Life is just mysterious.

Something good could still be improved. In life perfect can be the enemy of good, but in uniform design we shouldn't settle for good when perfect is attainable. I think the above mockup is just an objectively better and more cohesive uniform than what Ole Miss took the field in yesterday.

11 hours ago, BRice16 said:

 

If you take a look at the fine print of the Florida and Oklahoma contracts (you may have to do a little digging but both are public record and online), it's written in there that each will be the only school in the SEC and Big12 respectively to wear the Jordan brand during the duration of the contracts. Other schools are permitted to order Jordan apparel for postseason gift packages and a coach wearing Jordan shoes and apparel does not put them in violation of a Nike contract, but no other school in each of those conferences will have Jordan as their primary provider.  

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.

On 5/18/2020 at 11:55 AM, BVZ said:

Agreed. Although there is no way Jordan would allow schools to have an exclusive over the entire conference. If Alabama wanted to go with Jordan, they would find a way to make it happen.

 

Far more likely that Jordan is just protecting their brand, as they always have. South Carolina wouldn’t make sense, but USC west coast would. Curious to see who the next school will be to jump on board.

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.

On 5/16/2020 at 2:53 PM, aawagner011 said:

I don’t see it for a few reasons. Jordan wouldn’t position themselves against the primary rival of Michael Jordan’s own school. South Carolina is already one of UA’s more prominent schools and if they can hang on to them, they should. Also, Jordan tends to go after some of the biggest and most successful teams (UNC, Michigan, Florida, Oklahoma) and I just don’t see SC in that category- they’re definitely more middle of the pack.

 

———

 

Edit- pardon my total whiff on NC and SC being main rivals. D’oh!

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. 

I like the athletics logo but the academics looks far too much like the Democratic party logo.

12 hours ago, Zeus89725 said:

 

There are two of those literally right next to each other where I live and I’m kicking myself for not posting that.

Yes, I have always noticed that and thought it was funny! (Also from Longmont)

NBA divisions have the least importance of all sports IMO. My proposal is to end divisions making conference standings 1-15 for East and West with the top 8 teams still advancing to the playoffs based on record. Make the first round a 3 game series, this will really test teams and end the boring first round much quicker, also placing higher importance on seeding (home court advantage). This will free up 2-5 games per playoff team. I would also make balanced conference schedules. This would mean each team would play at home and away against the opposite conference (15 x 2= 30). Against your own conference you would play each team 4 times, 2 at home and 2 away (14 x 4= 56). This would expand the regular season to 86 games and make the conference schedules completely balanced which would be more fair for eventual playoff seeding.

I actually rally like the Herd, I think when he goes off on his 'real life' rants he is actually usually really spot on. There have been many times I have found his opinion to be both insightful and valuable (When he talks about parenting, mental health, etc). Lately (I don't watch the show that often, maybe a couple times a month) I have noticed that he has been drifting to the 'hot takes' #EmbraceDebate model when it comes to sports which is unfortunate. I do love Kristine Leahy though, she really needs her own show. 

Pabig, it looks like it is probably a legit replica (game) jersey. The game jersey is Nike's lowest level jersey and retails for $100. Without better pictures I cannot give you a definitive answer but it looks good.

 

I also wanted to share this picture my friend showed me. Jimmy Butler posted this to his instagram. It is clearly a fake, you can see how horrible the numbers look. What makes this funny is that he is sponsored by Nike (Jordan) and the guy just signed a $95M contract. He could've easily gotten a free jersey I would assume and if not $300 isn't going to put a dent in that contract!

 

For any team that I support that does not live in the locale; here's why:

Man City: Used to like Utd (lolwut). Found out City was rising up with the $$$, I jumped bandwagons from that point on.

WVU: No idea. It started with the monogram logo. Then the 70-33. Then the obnoxious shirts.

Bosnia-Herzegovina: The names. Dzeko, Pjanic, Begovic, Ibisevic and many others.

Funny how there isn't any Oregon coverage (even Washington for that matter) on any of the TSN feeds.

I knew there was something fishy about you, just stay away from blue moon if I could pick you out as a "rag" they would tear you apart.

Wow that jays jersey might be one of the worst I have ever seen thanks for the laughs! Don't get hit by a bus

There are several of us to write articles. You can see the author's name at the beginning of the article, and their brief profile at the end.

What do you mean "just post the news?"

What I meant is why does the site need to have an SL.net News* why couldn't Chris or another mod have posted this thread? I really don't care and have NO problem with the SL.net News posting I was just curious.

* Just to be clear I'm not talking about the actual site sportslogos.net/news I'm strictly talking about this poster SL.net News, especially when Chris and other Mods are active on the forums anyway.

Just out of curiosity, does Chris run this sportslogos.ne news or is it another board member? Not that it matters I was just curious. If it is Chris or another board member then why don't they just post the "News"?

It looks pretty awful to me, I wouldn't wear that. I unknowingly got 2 NFL knockoffs and one looks amazing IMO and the other is ok with the major flaw being the wavy numbers.