Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by TheOldRoman

  1. I mean, the Chargers could go back to San Diego because nobody wants them in LA. They could also wear good uniforms. Both would be positive changes. But you're right that nobody is going to confuse the two teams.
  2. Sadly, we are a Chiefs offsides away from what would have been the best Super Bowl uniform matchup ever. Rams homes vs Chiefs whites with red pants? That's a dream matchup. However, we really lucked out with the blown call in NO (sorry, Saints fans), since the Patriots against the monochrome Saints in yoga pants would have easily been the worst Super Bowl uniform matchup ever.
  3. They can, they just don't want to. The NFL offered them the chance to switch to the throwbacks on the move to LA. They decided they could sell the fans the StL gear and also throwbacks, all while getting them to buy new stuff a few years down the road with the move to a new stadium. The fans hated the StL crap and pretty much exclusively bought the throwback merch, so the Rams started trying to minimize the Millennium set as much as possible, leading to two entirely different looks on the home and road. Or they could just keep the block font they're using because block fonts are almost always better anyway, and this particular font is now unique to them.
  4. The Atlanta script looks worse than before. The A has an awkward gap before the T, which wasn't on the previous script. Not sure why they made that change. Red jerseys - much better than the last one, but they should have just went back to the original red jersey if they had to have one (which they don't). Navy jerseys - much, much better than the last one, but there's no reason to deviate from the triple piping here. Tomahawk hat - atrocious. Far worse than the tomahawk H cap, which was itself awful. And it gets bonus crap points for being paired with a non-matching batting helmet. The changes could have been far, far worse. So I guess this is about as good as we could have hoped for.
  5. I think a *good* navy alternate would work for the Braves. Literally just flip all the white and navy on the home jersey and you have a great alternate. However, it would just be a nice "change of pace" which was a slight step down from the home and road, and the players would end up wearing it every other game. It's probably for the best they haven't added such a jersey.
  6. Giants - home jersey is in the team's primary color, worn with pants featuring stripes and secondary color of red. Road jersey has sleeve stripes and striped pants featuring primary and secondary team colors. Also, the helmet is the team's primary color. 49ers - home jersey is in team primary color and has sleeve stripes. Worn with pants (which perfectly match the helmets!) featuring team primary and secondary colors. Road jersey - see Giants Jaguars - home jersey is in team's primary color, and the helmet is good. The pants look like the equipment manager shrank all the pants, so he had Eastbay overnight ship blank white pants. The road jersey is completely devoid of the team's primary color other than a tongue. A tongue! Nike can't do anything right unless teams say "this is our design, deal with it." They really have three design techniques: 1. Ridiculous and garish design made to highlight Nike's templates and be dated almost instantly. (Browns, Titans, Bucs) 2. Absurdly minimalist and devoid of design, with the exception of a bad and contrived custom font. (Jaguars) 3. Taking cues from old team looks, but changing a bunch of things (for the worse in each case) and also adding an awful and contrived custom font. (Lions, Vikings) #3 is clearly the most preferable of Nike's outcomes, but it's still grating that Nike misses so many chances when they could make something great. The Vikings pants stripes are bad and the number are awful. The black facemasks are one of the worst design elements in the NFL. And the Lions just need to dress like Barry Sanders was still playing. Awful font, worse helmet/pants stripes, logos and wordmarks covering jersey stripes.
  7. I don't consider light poles to be distinctive in general. But that aside, Jacobs Field was built a few years after New Comiskey.
  8. But on the other hand, and obviously setting aside two titles, has any fanbase other than Montreal been :censored:ed harder than the Marlins' base? Starting out in a crappy stadium in the suburbs, winning a title, then having it burnt to the ground within a year. Five more years of crap, then an improbable title (featuring only half a year of decent baseball). Then immediately burnt to the ground again. Several more years or crap. Then, as the team finally gets its crown jewel ballpark (which is obviously disastrous for the city), they promise a bright future and spend a whole lot in free agency. A year later, burnt to the ground for the third time. A few more years of not trying, then the team was on the brink of contention at the end of 2016. They very likely would have been in strong competition for the playoffs in 2017 had Fernandez not died. But a year later, it is burnt to the ground for a forth time. This time, the new face of the team, who fans had distrust of in general, sent their best player to his former team, paid a bunch of his salary in the process, and got a big pile of crap in return. So, if you overlook the titles, this franchise has intentionally destroyed itself four times in 25 years. Four fire sales! The fans have repeatedly been promised big things and then kicked in the nuts. They were owned by an indifferent boob, then by the sleaziest conman MLB has seen in the last 50 years. Now a perceived out-of-towner who is carrying on the proud tradition of crying poor while turning a huge profit before a single ticket is sold. Why should any Miamian trust this franchise ever again? It might take a decade of contention to wash away the filth of franchise's past. Baseball may or may not have succeeded in south Florida under a different situation, but it has gotten to the point where the team's existence is collecting welfare until an unexpected playoff run, then unloading its top players for more money. The Marlins fans certainly haven't come out as expected, but it's easy to see why. Miami might never be a decent baseball town because of what the Marlins have done. But if Miami ever does become a good baseball town, it will take a lot of heavy lifting.
  9. The navy and gold was bad to begin with (they should be wearing royal blue). And they wear their great throwbacks maybe once a week at home, which makes matters worse by saying "this is how good we could look." But them inexplicably switching one of their many jerseys to navy and yellow, including the BiG logo, and taking the striping off the pants instead of making a second pair is just unfathomably dumb. It's so schizophrenic, even the Padres are looking at them side-eyed. And I just tuned in. They're playing the Cubs, who are in their awful blue alternates. It looks like a bad spring training game. Channel changed.
  10. Considering the Bears changed their avatars for Twitter and Instagram to the striping from the orange jerseys they wore 2005-2011, I'd be shocked if this jersey was any different than that one (other than the numbers being on the shoulders). The only change I could see is if they do something bad like wear orange socks or something awful like wear solid navy socks with them. I really like the look of the orange jersey with the navy socks and helmets, but it's a wrong look for the Chicago Bears. Of the historic pre-Super Bowl teams who try to look like such, the Bears are the only team that wears third-color non-throwback alts. I guess I can live with that, but the only thing I ask is that they stop wearing these against division rivals. Wear them against the freaking Panthers and Seahawks. Wear the regular home jerseys against division rivals and AFC teams who are only in town every 8 years.
  11. Not only is everything you said correct, but the matte batting helmets look awful. They look like they match the lighter navy the Brewers and Padres use. The Mariners need to go back to how they looked in the late '90s, including the teal-billed caps at home (with matching helmets). It's not likely that an expansion team would go with just two colors anymore, but look at the trash that is the Tampa Bay Lightning. They premiered with a relatively unique look, then a few decades later and after a cup win, copied the Maple Leafs. Especially considering Nike's recent push of stripped-down faux-traditionalist stuff (like the Jaguars), I wouldn't be shocked to see Nike come out with a Penn State/Yankees type look for an expansion team.
  12. The M doesn't look right. The top part where the V meets the uprights is too short, Other than that, this would be a fine logo. It's okay for a cap logo to be a different font than the wordmark. The Cubs have never used their cap logo in a Chicago wordmark and the Indians don't use their crappy block C on the road jerseys they never wear. The only issue is with the Red Sox, where the road wordmark is basically the same font as the cap, but different for some unknown reason. That shouldn't happen.
  13. Then you suspend them for the game and they lose a week's salary. The league is allowed to enforce a dress code. The average person can't wear cutoff jeans on a casual Friday. MLB players can't turn their jerseys into tanktops to show of their guns (at least since Ted Kluszewski). They shouldn't dick around and fine players laughable amounts like they used to for sock violations. Tell the players "wear the uniforms as they're given to you or you don't get paid," and you won't have players deviating from it. Why not? Because it would look good and be useful to team branding. First off, see Andrew Harrington's post about it covering up the pads. With armpits exposed, and pads usually sticking out, it gives players easy access to get a hand in and hold the opposing player. And no way in hell would people consider it like the NBA adding sleeves. Football jerseys have sleeves. They always have had sleeves of some sort until maybe a decade ago and the advent of Chris Hovan. And literally every replica jersey worn by fans has sleeves. It would make jerseys consistent across the whole team, allow more opportunities for branding, and do away with the sloppy look of armpits and pads sticking out. I'm not seeing any down side.
  14. I know you're joking, but a more accurate comparison would be if the Jets wore the Namath-era set, which is this with Kelly green and no logo. And just like the Steelers, that would be a fantastic throwback.
  15. That's why they need to attach compression-like sleeves to the jersey. One solid piece for each arm. from the shoulder down to mid-bicep.
  16. Like I said before, nobody thinks Nike will get full control over the design. The much bigger issue is the template. If Nike creates proprietary Nike templates and teams aren't allowed to deviate from them, it will almost certainly be significantly changing the look of some teams. With the NFL switch, at least teams were allowed to keep the old materials and templates as desired. But if the Cowboys and Raiders were forced to wear faded-light-gray-posing-as-silver instead of their shiny silver pants, that would be a huge change to their looks. Nike has already ruined the look of the entire NBA by changing the template. Literally every team was forced to change. The NFL allowed teams to keep old templates, but the NBA didn't. Considering how MLB already caved to New Era and Majestic with allowing the special holiday jerseys and caps to bastardize the league's look for several weekends each year, I'm not confident the league will allow the Yankees to keep doubleknits with woven stripes. And most importantly, Nike doesn't have a contract for the entire NCAA, and NCAA baseball isn't a money maker. Nobody outside of this site and maybe team message boards know when college baseball teams change jerseys. But when MLB changes to Nike? There's going to be a huge press conference, lots of graphic, hashtags, lots of explainers of the different design elements, and coverage from ESPN and major outlets. So this is a huge opportunity for Nike which outfitting college teams doesn't give them. This isn't the '90s anymore. Nike doesn't pay teams or leagues to put the swoosh on jerseys instead of another manufacturer's logo. They pay to advertise new templates which they can then sell to every high school and travel league team in America.
  17. That's exactly what they did in the NBA. They changed the shape of the jersey back to look like a sports bra. Then they removed the cuff striping from the back of all jerseys. They made the NOB smaller. They also changed the triangle cutout on the shorts for no reason, altering the look of the shorts for teams with accents in that area. The Boston Celtics weren't allowed to keep their classic look. Like I said above, the problem isn't that Nike will force teams to wear garish crap. The problem is that Nike might be allowed to significantly change the template and force teams to change even if they don't want to. Look at the awful side panels Majestic has used the last few years. They look terrible when you notice them, but at least they are fairly thin. So maybe Nike puts thicker side panels in a different material with mesh like an old basketball jersey. Maybe Nike puts in a different panel on the back of the knee (like on football pants) which makes all teams wearing pinstripes look like crap. That is them forcing changes on the Yankees without the Yankees being able to tell them to piss off. And this is what Nike has been all about the last decade. Making awful new proprietary templates for the sole purpose of branding. I'm far more worried about Nike messing up all teams in a small way than butchering some teams in a big way.
  18. It wasn't the "Reebok template." It was the "football jersey template." That does sounds good. Or better yet, just go back to the Barry Sanders set and improve over that look in every way.
  19. Yes, this is the biggest issue here. I think the Rams didn't understand how much the fans love royal blue and yellow, as the Rams were doing surveys asking them if they preferred that to blue and white a year ago. But the biggest reason the Rams didn't change to the throwbacks when they moved is that they wanted to maximize their merchandise sales. People bought navy gear, because that was the current stuff. They also bought Mitchell & Ness throwbacks, modern Nike throwback merchandise, and then white/navy jerseys Gurley jerseys along with throwback ones. The Rams wanted to do like the Brewers (fittingly, with the same exact colors on both sets). They wanted people to spend money on two sets of crap. Then they wanted people to have to buy all new stuff in five years with new logos, while also still being able to buy the current throwbacks, which they'll still wear at that time. The only thing that really changed is the Rams finally realized how awful the STL set was with Nike's matte fabrics and then made it worse by changing the helmets and pants. If they would have settled for looking good from day 1, they wouldn't be selling navy crap now or new stuff in a few years.
  20. Here are my thoughts in no particular order, numbered because why not? The 5 year rule isn't a problem. The problem is teams making terrible decisions. The Bills wore their awful mismatched navy crap for a decade. The Bengals have been wearing these awful uniforms for 15 years. Just recently, the Bucs, Browns and Titans made unfathomably awful uniforms. Teams need to stop being dumb. It was dumb for the Rams to pass up the opportunity to switch to the throwbacks with the move. No excusing that. Also, I suspect that was probably the only chance the league would have given them to actually switch back to the throwbacks. I am willing to give the Rams the benefit of the doubt that they didn't know how much LA fans loved the royal and yellow set. But it's REALLY damn troubling to read about them "working with Nike" on the uniforms. The Rams know the fans love the throwbacks. They petitioned to wear the throwbacks more. Yet they're working with Nike on uniforms, instead of just deciding to wear the throwbacks, That's awful. Not sure if that's the Rams' fault or the leagues. I believe the league wouldn't allow them to go back to the throwbacks fulltime if they wanted to. Because fans are still going to love the throwbacks. They'll buy the new jerseys, but also throwbacks for current players. In theory they get to sell twice as many jerseys. I love the Super Bowl set, but I concede that shoulder horns don't make sense (they just look great). So the Rams could go with a "classy update" of the SB set, subtly changing the horns to slashes like the current crappy set. But they won't. They'll wear blue and yellow. But the uniforms will be "Nike Presents the LA Rams." They'll get a horrific custom font, randomly truncated stripes just because, little elements highlighting Nike's newest template, and also probably realistic horns on the helmet. But they'll still wear the throwbacks, so the fans will still clamor for them to wear the throwbacks fulltime. It will be another situation like the 2010 Minnesota Twins.
  21. It's cool except for Guaranteed Rate having dimensions it hasn't had since 2000. The difference is that, other than the turf itself, football is less impacted by the location. It's not like you need to run the ball to win in Seattle because you can't throw the ball as far or something crazy. Baseballs are more drastically impacted by conditions such as high elevation, domes, or even just an unexpected side effect of the stadium design creating a wind tunnel. I appreciate it with baseball.
  22. I agree (mostly) with the first point. All the Jets need to do is go back to Kelly green and also have Nike fix the shoulder loops. But I absolutely loved the Esiason-era set. I thought black looked great in small doses with Kelly green. The stripes were great, especially on the socks. Also, the road set gave the perfect balance that the Bears, Chiefs and Redskins have: colored helmet, white jersey with striped sleeves, pants matching helmet color, white striped socks matching the jersey. Throw in the Champion font and, hot damn, those were some beauties. They looked so damn good. But the Jets are the Jets, so if they do change, they'll make the worst possible choice - keep the forest green but lose the Namath look and basically wear the Giants unis, but in green.
  23. And before the "anything goes" era of the last five years and outside of the '70s which were known for intentionally garish uniforms, how many of those years regularly featured color vs color games? I'm not saying teams shouldn't have colored alternates. But two alternates should never meet on the field, and no teams should wear their alternates more than a quarter of the time, tops.
  24. Yeah, it's supposed to look like a meaningful major league game. Not spring training or beer league softball.
  • Create New...

Important Information

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