Jump to content

TheOldRoman

Members
  • Posts

    6,938
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

Everything posted by TheOldRoman

  1. I agree with this, but I'd reverse what I tolerate. I dislike the yellow pants with the white jerseys, but I think they look particularly bad with the red jerseys. Maybe not "bad" as much as "not right." It might be partly because growing up, the Redskins' red jerseys only appeared thrice a year if you were lucky. And it was always a treat when you saw the red jerseys over white pants. I loved when they finally went red at home in the last decade. Even though we see the red jerseys 9-10 times a year now, it's not the same with the yellow. Meanwhile, I was tired of seeing the Redskins in the white jerseys anyway, so it's not like them wearing yellow pants with them ruins what would otherwise be a "rare" great look. That being said, the Redskins looked better in every way ten years ago. The yellow pants suck and the Nike switch really did a disservice to their uniforms.
  2. Take it back a step. Instead of mirroring the white pants, leave purple in the middle and swap the black and white. That would allow the purple to "show" more instead of fading into the black. This is what they wore their second season: But wear them with these socks: Or, better yet, add thin metallic gold striping/piping around the purple stripe on both sets of pants (and the socks) to further distinguish things.
  3. They wore those blue pants on the road as recently as 1986, so they used the spare ones as practice pants into the '90s. If they reversed the red and white, then made the center stripe proportionately thicker to match the sleeve stripes, those pants would have looked great on the road. I always felt the road look of that set was lacking. Too little blue.
  4. Wow. That first picture of Kezar Stadium is incredible. I can't believe the people are sitting on the gabled roof. That's got to be a 45 degree angle.
  5. Actually, excavation would be considerably more expensive than building higher above ground level. Teams have done this primarily because they feel it makes for a more intimate experience at the game. The stadium looks less imposing from the outside, it provides better views of the outside world at the game, and it lets the stadium be better incorporated into the neighborhood without completely dwarfing everything else.
  6. New Comiskey/USCF was originally to be built partially in-ground, but even 4 miles west of the Lake, the water level was still too high in that area. It would have been kinda cool had the field been below ground level - riding the train into town and being able to see the players on the field from that vantage point.
  7. I'd imagine that most of the newer stadiums are partially below ground level. Generally you enter at the top of the lower level and walk down to your seats. With Soldier Field, it's all above ground because that area is landfill and below the water level.
  8. Yeah, the Raiders are their own thing, and they'd succeed in a lot of different places. I'd imagine a large number of the people going to games in Oakland also went to/would go to games in LA. The Raiders were never going to be more than a niche team in LA.
  9. The Rams have been cutting corners, I'm sure, but they at least seem like they're going in the right direction. They have a really good defense, and one of these years they might put something together and make the playoffs. I don't know if they're on the verge of greatness, but they're on the verge of goodness. The Chargers, meanwhile, are a dumpster fire outside of their quarterback, who's pretty old. They are nowhere close to the playoffs. Also, it seems like the Rams were intentionally mismanaged to help relocation. Meanwhile, the Chargers tried their best and are still the same Chargers owned by Spanos. In the last decade they blew the primes of one of the best RB and TE of all time, and that was after the specter of their failure chased off Eli Manning. Spanos ownership is like later Al Davis ownership. If the team is good, it will be purely accidental.
  10. The Chargers are a worse organization than the Rams. And while pretty much any city will support a winner, LA is full or Rams fans who waited to root for the Rams again. Sure, there's a young generation which never actually saw the Rams play in LA. but they'll largely be swept up in the hysteria and nostalgia of everybody else. The absolute only way the Chargers could have succeeded with the Rams in LA was to beat the Rams there by at least a year and have a good season. Get the kids pulling for the Chargers and hope they don't jump ship when the Rams come. But with the Chargers coming after the Rams, their ceiling would be Football Clippers.
  11. I've also been saying this for while. LA wanted the Rams back as much or more than they wanted the NFL. LA doesn't really care about the Chargers. Not only did the Rams get the outpouring of love for returning home, but they beat the Chargers to it (by at least a year). The LA Chargers would be a disaster. Spanos wanted to move to LA and was willing to take the Raiders with him just to block the Rams. But when the owners sided with Kroenke, Spanos's path was set to return to San Diego. He wasn't going to go to LA on anybody else's terms. And as much of an afterthought as the LA Chargers would have been in 2016, they'll be twice as much in 2017. Spanos knows this. He was ready to move to LA with the Raiders immediately, but as soon as he found out he'd have to play in Kroenke's stadium, he suddenly needed more time to give it a college try in San Diego. He'll posture a whole lot, but the SD government is willing, so something will get done and he'll reluctantly take a stadium deal in San Diego.
  12. Yes, but I love the hokey uber-'90s one. It fit the team. Either wordmark is far better than the crap they use now.
  13. Like 95% of the Phoenix area, I haven't paid attention to the Coyotes this year. I have a few questions. 1) Has Scott played well this year? 2) Why would Montreal trade for him just to stick him in the minors? 3) Is he still in the minors? Will he play in the ASG and go back to the minors?
  14. And not just the White Sox, but the Athletics, too. The A's changed almost as much, although they stuck with the same color scheme outside of their Kansas City years, I believe. It's good that both teams found classic looks, but both have been chipping away at them with the A's adding a few alternates, using three different road caps that were worse than the home, and now mismatching their helmets on the road. And of course, the Sox messed up sleeve patch and then the pants stripes on the road. Both teams are almost like alcoholics who have been doing well lately. 25 years sober, but you feel like soon one will fall off the wagon and come out with something Diamondbackian.
  15. I'm not sure that's an unpopular opinion. They gained fame in the last decade when the fad became wearing throwbacks that were ugly or gaudy. My generation loves them because they were born in that era, but outside of a few dopes, Sox fans don't want those back.
  16. I think the bigger hurdle will be that nobody in London outside of American expatriates will GAF about this team. But I feel they'll try their best to shoehorn this in. We saw the 9:30 EST game added this year. Even if that only drew half the fans as the 1:00 game, that's still a whole bunch of more people watching NFL branding and advertising when they would otherwise be eating breakfast, sleeping late or watching a masturbatory 4 hour pregame show on ESPN or NFLN. Maybe they would have 2-3 early starts per year, make them "special" with premier east coast teams and ESPN hyping the living hell out of them, and make it an event people make sure to wake up for. The rest of their home games could be 1 ET starts. There are so many hurdles in terms of a London team not being able to play on Thursdays or any SNF game, but I think they'll just exempt them from that if they want it badly enough. As for the travel taking a toll on the players, the league never cared about player safety before. I don't think they'll start now when there's potentially billions to be made in London.
  17. I think Goth would say, "They still need stadiums for the Raiders and maybe Chargers, so they have to keep the London charade up." However, at this point I don't think it's a charade. I think the owners are dumb and Goddell has such a hard-on over London that he's planning on making this his calling card on the league. I fully believe that Goddell will go to absurd, convoluted means to give London an albatross team that it won't care about.
  18. I'm calling BS on the Raiders moving to San Diego. This isn't a video game. You can't take a team from a city, replace it with its hated rival and expect the fans to suddenly root for the team they've always hated. I'm a Bears fan, and if somehow the Bears moved and the Packers instantly replaced them, I couldn't stop hating them. I'd probably stop following the NFL altogether.
  19. Lolwut? It's a 4-5 month, or literally 16-day commitment. It takes nothing to follow football. They only play 16 regular season games, all but one will be on a Sunday (barring MNF), and you have an entire week in between to pay no attention to it. I mean, sure, for the people who do masturbatory crap like fantasy football, it's a 9-month thing, but there's almost no commitment in watching 15 weekend games. And even if you miss a game, you can read an article about it the next day. You don't need an entire week worth of crap that football writers put out to justify their continued employment. Baseball is hardest to follow because it's nearly every day for six months. Basketball and hockey are considerably easier - 2-3x per week for that same period. Football is easy, and that's a big part of the reason why it's so popular.
  20. Actually, I've never blamed Art Modell for the loss of the Browns - at least not entirely. You'll hear various versions of who is at fault for losing the Browns - some blame Art entirely, others let him entirely off the hook - the truth is there is plenty of blame to go around. The whole thing was a complete cluster- . I don't hate Art Modell, but I was pretty pissed that he acted like a child who didn't get exactly what he wanted for Christmas. I didn't know your position, but I was speaking more generally. Among people your age, I'm sure a huge portion blames Modell and still hates him to this day. But like I said, in 60 or 70 years, the loss of the original Browns will be just a trivia question.You can say now that these Browns are technically not the original Browns, but in time, it won't matter and nobody will actually view it that way. The only pain Browns fans will feel will be of continued failure (if they do keep failing).
  21. You bring up an interesting point. The Vikings dangled LA and got a stadium out of it. The Bills didn't, and last I read, they were working with the city/state to try to get a new stadium. You could say the NFL learned its lesson from the Cleveland debacle and wouldn't let a team with a rich history and strong attendance move, such as the Vikings or Bills, but I'm not sure. Either way, a team in LA would be worth a hell of a lot more than a team in Buffalo, and yet there was nothing about the Bills heading west. I'm not saying St. Louis would ever be a great football market, but if Khan owned the Rams and felt he could financially competitive there, I don't think he would have moved them.
  22. I was worried of facing that Ravens team in the playoffs. I half expected the Chargers to fall apart again (of course they did), but I didn't think we'd have too much of a problem beating them if we faced them in the SB. But the Ravens had a good defense and, with McNair seemingly having a good year, I knew they'd be tough. Looking at the stats now, McNair wasn't really all that good in 2006, but whatever. I'm sure the feeling you had after that game was about what we felt after the Packers won the 2011 NFC championship in Chicago. At least there weren't a bunch of Indy :censored:s living in Baltimore and rubbing your faces in it. Anyway, thanks for the response. Of course, the interview I mentioned in 2007 came prior to the Ravens' second title, but going off of that, I imagine that radio host would have gladly traded the successful Ravens for the whatever Colts. The love of the Colts will die off over time, as generations are raised Raven fans and the Ravens continue being a model franchise. And in time, Cleveland generations will forget or ignore that the "original Browns" left, and Art Modell will become just a footnote in history. Infrared or fans prior to 1995 might hate Modell when they're 105 years old, but by then there will be 80 year-olds who only know of the current franchise.
  23. As Browns fans, our thought at the time was "how can Baltimore fans root for this team after what happened with the Colts?" That being said, of all the cities that got jerked around in the expansion process back then, Baltimore was the one that got jerked around the most. So I guess I sort of get it. With regard to the replacement Browns - yes, it was definitely easier once Browns fans knew they were getting a new Browns team. My guess is it's mostly older fans like me that have never been able to look at the new Browns as the "real" Browns - and I'm pretty sure there aren't that many of us. Point being, it all worked out in the end. The new Browns are the only Browns team a lot of fans have ever known. To them, the old Browns are probably a lot like the old Cleveland Rams are to me - a team that was in Cleveland before they were even born. Not for nothing, but if I had a choice of all the options available - replacement expansion team, relocated team, or the Rams option; coming back after 20 years - I'd prefer the Rams option. But that's easy to say when I'm sitting here at the end of the 20 year wait. Here's a story from February 2007 when Chicago was in a state of euphoria in the two weeks before Super Bowl 41. I remember listening to sports radio when all the blowhards and sniveling pieces of crap who sneer at your favorite teams were rewarded for such actions with a ten-day trip to Miami free of charge to cover the game. Anyway, the Chicago hosts ran into some radio guy from Baltimore, so they had a half-hour or so discussion with him on air. This guys said that he was basically doing everything up to praying for the Bears to win, and that the entire town was pulling for the Bears to beat the Colts. He gave a long, impassioned speech (in which he got choked up) talking about his former love of the Colts, going to games with his dad and grandfather, and how evil the Irsays were for taking the team from the city which loved it. He said that everybody loved the Ravens, but the pain of losing the Colts was something he would take to his grave. It was probably made worse for him because the hated Colts had just eliminated the Ravens in Baltimore two weeks prior. He said how important it was that the Bears win and that Irsay go to his grave without a title. It was moving to hear how much he still cared about the Colts and how much them losing meant to him. I got the feeling that a lot of Baltimore fans treated the Ravens like a second wife. They were older and lonely, so their expectations were lower. The Ravens were cute, they had the same interests, and could tolerate living with each other, so they got married. However, Baltimore fans still hate their ex with a passion because they still secretly love her and wished things could go back the way they were. Leopard - if you were given the option of casting the Ravens off to Godknowswhere and moving the Colts back to Baltimore, would you do it? I imagine that a good portion of older Ravens fans would because the Colts were all they wanted to begin with. Anyway, to sum up that story for those who don't remember, the Bears failed, giving Irsay his only championship to date and, more embarrassingly, becoming a trivia question about the only season in which Peyton Manning didn't go down in humiliating flames in the playoffs.
  24. I've never been there personally. Just going off of what I've read online that it's a :censored:hole. And also my friends from LA who instructed me to only go to that neighborhood if I wanted to die. Regardless, it would obviously take probably half a billion dollars to get it up to what the NFL considers acceptable as a longterm stadium, and that wouldn't happen even if the Rams didn't have land and intent to build in Inglewood.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.