-Akronite-

CMU: Really like the concept of using the motion stripes. Only things I'm not convinced by are the helmet stripes. Maybe it'd be dumb but perhaps the logo stripes should connect in the back? FAU: Think the owl makes a better helmet logo but can't really complain overall. Penn State: Perfection. They could stick with what they have forever and I'd be fine but tweaking toward the throwback full time would absolutely elevate the look to the highest plane of football aesthetics.

I vehemently disagree with your second take, which is par for the course in this thread, as their original look is so boring in comparison and I don't need uniforms to be "adult." I will say I think they need to ditch orange altogether for the white look to really work. Doesn't make sense to have an orange accent and/or logo on the Siberian tiger. But on the Bears, I agree. Didn't want to come late to the party in the NFL thread but it's funny & typical to see the site explode because of a couple swapped colors. The amount of BFBS helmets coming are far more tiresome & annoying than a team highlighting another team color. I can see why people would be against it for the Bears in particular, as a very traditionally dressed franchise, but they went the least offensive route with it.

The BFBS ones have been meh so far but otherwise I've liked the alt helmets. Panthers should consider dropping silver altogether and just going black & blue IMO.

I'll try to be a little more constructive. Appreciate you taking a stab because a lot of people are not thrilled with the update. I think the front office cares more about going in a new direction as opposed to using our past looks to build a timeless set. PROS: I LOVE the candy-cane stripes and feel they should be part of the primary identity like you've used here. The basketball on the CAVS wordmark looks good with the stripes. The 03 color scheme works well for the Cavs and you balance them well (aside from maybe the white on the gold jersey). I like the return of the waistband and throwing the C on the buckle. CONS: The sword on the side feels pretty minor league. Might be better to just incorporate the sword back into the logos and let the stripes do their thing. I don't think a metallic gold jersey would translate well to the court. Don't love using the Cleveland sign/tourism wordmark, but that's not a big deal on it's own. Maybe use a different number font on the city set to avoid the incongruence between the words/numbers. The white outlines used on the wine jersey stick out IMO, could just match the wordmark & numbers like the others. I personally prefer an ABC striping pattern to an ABAC, but it's interesting way to use all the colors. I don't think white works as a shadow on the shield logo.

Plain bright red pants rarely work, and I'm not sure why Nebraska ever went away from their stripes. The adjustment for Colorado is smart as well.

I just want to note that single color trim also sucks. When Nike made this move with the Pelicans and the '17 Cavs, it looks amateur and crappy to me. The jump to going without a trim color is even less exciting but single color trim already looked like unprofessional trash to me.

In 2010 I remember seeing the new jerseys and feeling disappointed. But I felt that it was a good starting point for what could become a great uniform with some tweaks. Kinda funny that they took that uniform and made it look even simpler with this rebrand. If the new gold pops in person, this could be alright. Still already prefer it to the muddled navy & generic elements of the last set. But yeah, I would've preferred the 03 side panels and/or some candy-cane trim.

I think the overly-negative reaction is a bit much, especially since it was already teased that this was exactly the direction they were going. Yes, it's really stripped down, especially from a distance, but I don't think it's comparable to Utah because: 1) They are using team colors that make sense. 2) They have a font that at least have some excitement to it. They kept the in-line numbers/letters and the uniforms are focused on highlighting the colors & logos. Also while it may be fair to discount sublimation, there is quite a bit going on there. I really like the choice to sublimate the classic trim pattern throughout. I would've preferred a return to an 03-inspired look with side panels, but I think this is an upgrade regardless. The previous set had no personality anyway and they've eliminated the navy problem.

There is something that is so gaudy about the way Kentucky uses their checkerboard. Making it subliminal kinda saves it, cause as a concept it's a good element (although it looks even better in Tennessee orange).

No, that's his character on Curb.

Big Ten 2025 matchup preview? I gotta say, on the field the numbers probably don't work but the color combo looks great in the promo shots.

I think the modern head works pretty well in that update, though I agree that logo doesn't work for scalability reasons.

The classic look is the path of least resistance for Miami. I think their identity as a school/team would makes more experimental, modern looks work as well, but no complaints here. My one sticking point for the Canes is they NEED to stay with the white helmet to maximize the bi-color logo, so I love that here.

My only concern would be that this gives them slightly less distinction from Nebraska than their current look, but they don't have much to begin with. I like the leap you took and can't say the motion W does anything for me either.

I've always liked the bumblebee outfits so I'm glad you took that swing. That said, makes more sense as a throwback in real life but I love seeing these home/aways here. I'm also in the camp with the old stripers BUT I think this is a nice fix to the current modern look. Also, please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the current Buckeye leaf stickers green? Even so, going with a brighter green that sticks out more would be great; using a dark green is fairly pointless as it blends with the black on the uniform.

Don't love the new bear, but the last bear was sad so upgrade. Simplifying the wordmark is smart as well.

I guess Alabama makes a great case for building a dynasty while not being all that consistent against their rival in Auburn. Unfortunately, Michigan has reclaimed their status in the Big Ten as Ohio State's greatest threat for the conference and, thusly, a shot at the playoff (in the majority of cases). For Bama, Auburn is rarely that team. Lots of fans degraded The Game over the last decade of dominance, but we saw what it cost us to lose. Even if we won a nattie after going 1-loss against UM, it just wouldn't feel right. But things could get really weird once playoff expansion comes. Anyway, THE trademark is stupid but a perfect thing to fuel friendly trash talk.

I don't give a :censored: about copper, but purple and light blue is a great idea: Mountainy colors, which is great for Utah Both have been used by the team previously Keeps the purple tying to the franchise's beginnings without relying on mardi gras colors which NOLA owns Unique combo The concepts that turn the red rocks aesthetic into a purple mountain set kick ass, it's still wild that billionaire dollar companies flail like this so often. I love that the NBA has/had so many purple teams and other than maybe Milwaukee (red should be their secondary color IMO) I love them all.

Made missing The Game in 2020 even worse, especially with the streak we had going, cause we would've stomped their :censored: in. They'll need a prayer in Columbus this year, looking forward to it (and the blue chip WRs that continue to pour in). As for THE trademark, I'm shocked it went through but I don't really understand what it entails legally. There have been "THE" shirts sold around campus for years.

Gonna bring it back to the "what is the Jazz rebranded" discussion and suggest the Utah Hive. It implies the bees while explicitly referencing the state's nickname. Plus, like Jazz, you'd still be in the "not plural" club. After all these years it'd be silly to give in on the stupidity that is calling a team in Utah the Jazz though.

Los Angeles, California I would guess. I imagine lots of sports fans minds go immediately to the Clippers, given they've centered their brand on the LAC acronym.

I honestly don't think this is a problem. Even outside of basketball there are lots of teams with iconic logos that say nothing about the mascot. That said, like you I would've preferred if they kept the sword in some capacity, but I don't really miss the ones they had for a couple reasons: Not sure if the new, flatter look works with it (and I personally think the flatter C logo is much better). The C-sword doesn't work as a primary mark because the extra height of the sword doesn't scale well next to other NBA logos. The shield is better (still not good) without the sword because it awkwardly stops and starts for a crappy wordmark. To me, the 03 primary logo made sense as a primary logo. You got the basketball, the sword, the wordmark, it says everything. But I think sports branding in general is more focused on simpler, more singular marks, which I get. I've seen basketball sword logo concepts that could be a great addition to this package, though. This would be 1000x worse. Lose any individual identity to ape off the more popular product in town and slap on a generic looking 2K logo. I personally have no affinity for the aesthetic of a "cavalier guy" (our original logo, Sir CC, etc. do nothing for me). What I would change in this rebrand: Keep the previous gold. We know this switch isn't meant to last, but sell merch. We're gonna say THIS is the "real" gold? Not the original gold? Not the gold we've had the longest? Not the gold we won a championship in? Sure, Jan. Ditch the wordmarks and shield. The C works as a primary and an update to the 03 font is my preference, matching the logo again. Base the CaVs logo on the original cursive wordmark and use it for the gold alt. I'll never get my perfect Cavs brand because, as many have noted, the team doesn't like settling on a lasting brand in favor of following trends and mixtaping their previous misadventures. That said, I think the new brand has great potential. The new gold still works well with the wine to me. Dropping navy is a big plus as it's held the look back for over a decade. The new C is so much better than the overly-accented-wait-which-is-our-third-color logos we had before. And I have high hopes for the uniforms which couldn't possibly make me miss the current primaries (knocks on hardwood).

It's fascinating to see how people react differently to designs, and it's completely valid. I think the colors work but the Warriors just don't need black jerseys. I have always liked the bridge cables because they're a unique, modern nod to the team's past. And on that same note, the lightning bolts are the only saving grace, the one interesting thing going on that makes it seem worth making in the first place. I like their fauxbacks as an alt but if they based their whole identity around it I'd be really disappointed. It's very classic, but that's not really the team's brand, IMO.

Dubs should drop that black IMO. In any case I've penciled them in as the champions since early in the season, and Boston is basically the only matchup where I'd want to see them win.

The Cavs should stick with the original gold, IMO, but I like the logo update a lot and I think the new identity will be an upgrade. The extra accents of navy and black have muddied the look for years and the simplified logo will be a superior mark. The team has been using the single outline black & white logo for a while and I saw that C logo on the NBA Live mobile game weeks ago, glad to see it's official.