• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by SFGiants58

  1. I just want to see an anthropomorphized version of bacterium Neisseria gonorrhoeae. Brandiose, don’t let me down! Go-Go Las Vegas Clappers! Hey, promoting safe sex is always a good idea.
  2. I like a good counter-factual history, provided that it’s done within the bounds of the real world and takes into account the different biases and personalities of the historical actors. Alternate history fiction goes into zany-land far too often. The whole discussion of the “Brooklyn” label got me wondering about what would have happened if the Dodgers had not run into the Robert Moses problem when building a stadium on the future Barclays Center site (unlikely, given his power) and if Horace Stoneham had built on the west side of Manhattan (private-funded, of course) or left for Minnesota.
  3. It’s an all around improvement. The new shade of orange looks fantastic with the aqua and I don’t think any of us will miss the navy outlines. Also, having two-color numbers makes the numeral font’s problems less obvious, which is good.
  4. The Jaguars’ new uniforms are the sports fashion equivalent of an early-2000s Kia Spectra. Safe, boring, and easily ignorable. The number font is OK, as is the lack of “obscene” details, but it’s still an overcorrection. Maybe expanding into Jacksonville in a vain attempt to recreate Green Bay was a mistake. Would the St. Louis Stallions have made better aesthetic decisions? Edit: I still like them a bit, if only because their austerity is appealing after the wildness of their previous set. I’m not thrilled by them, but they’re still good. Hey, an early-2000s Kia Spectra is an attractive prospect when your used BMW craps out after the warranty is up.
  5. Yeah, I’d agree there. At most, all that’d change would be a new road uniform wordmark. The A’s have the most transportable identity in the majors. The cap logo reflects the team name, they rarely use local iconography, etc. This could all have been avoided if Connie Mack swallowed his pride in the 1930s and sold the team, instead of running it into the ground with his senility and family squabbles. Selling to local investors instead of the Yankee toadie would have also been preferable. Obligatory article link to SABR piece on the A’s final years in Philly.
  6. I’m curious, what team do you mean by “our?” What are your favorite teams, and what factors drove you to those alleigences? I'm not trying to be rude, but rather I’m inquiring about your motivations.
  7. If they come back, could they please not resurrect this boring AF logo: I'd much prefer an update of this (as it ties in with the nickname):
  8. Yeah, it’s a bit of an overcorrection. Still, it’s a good uniform set, just not amazing. It’s also fantastic evidence for clients having more power in uniform decisions.
  9. The original deal was for 2020, with a rush for 2019. This is just restoring the old plan.
  10. Into the flood again, same old trip it was back then. I'm pretty sure the Sharks are closing this one out, but I can never be too sure.
  11. It's a decent enough special events cap (the Orioles seem to like doing non-standard event caps and uniforms), but this image is a bit of a revelation for me. Does anybody else think that black/kelly green would be an excellent color scheme for a Rays redesign? I can see that, in a "ray of sunlight reflecting on the Bay" kind of way. I've always thought it was a stylized "front tail," like the Coca-Cola script.
  12. That’s one good Giants concept! I like that you’ve used the ‘94-‘99 wordmark for the mains. My only issue with it is the cream/white outline on the black jersey when it should be only one-color. I really like the second version of the vintage alternate, as it ties in well with the team’s font. All in all, this was a fantastic series. You’ve got a nice mix of vintage and modern here, and I’m glad to see that you’ve grown as a concept artist. I look forward to seeing more of your work!
  13. Warriors' games were the epicenter of the NBA's cocaine period in the '80s. Whoops. Good points, but there are complications to them. The Niners had arguably the most significant pre-Brady Patriots dynasty in the NFL through the 1980s-mid 1990s, while the Giants had the good fortune of being successful when they moved to SF and having the best outfielder of the 1990s-early '00s play for them. Let's not forget that the Giants nearly moved to Toronto, San Jose (A's fans will never not bring that up), and Tampa Bay while playing at Candlestick. Bonds, the Magowan and post-Magowan ownership, and Willie Mays Park saved the team from obscurity and restored them to a national presence in the "sports media boom." The big reason why they're not in the "upper echelon" is that they spent about forty years being mediocre to terrible. Even in a "good" market, on-field failure will lower your prestige. Look at Red Wings during the "Dead Wings" period or the Phillies through most of their existence. Wilt barely played in the Bay Area, and Warriors fans are more likely to remember Rick Barry, Al Attles, or Run-TMC. While I'm one of the most pro-NY baseball Giants fans in the SF Giants community (i.e., I believe the Giants should have built a John McGraw statue long before a Gaylord Perry one), I can understand the relocation divide. Heck, how many Laker fans have any idea who George Mikan was? "Second Fiddle" teams may have prestige, but let's remember that it was the "Anaheim" Angels that did this (shudder): You can't take that away from them and that city name. Likewise, "Los Angeles Ducks" wouldn't fly. Local fans prefer the "Anaheim" name (from what I've gathered), as do Dodger fans. The "Orange Curtain" is far stronger power than many give it credit for, one that almost necessitates the "Anaheim" name for teams in the region. The ideological difference between LA and "the OC" is comparable to the Manhattan/Brooklyn divide. Read Lisa McGirr's Suburban Warriors: The Origins of the New American Right to see it action. I was once pro-"Los Angeles Angels," but time and experience with their fans has shown me the errors of my ways. I know I'll get a lot of flak for this paragraph, but I'm glad I put it out there.
  14. Of all of the potential new names for the Cleveland Indians that get thrown around on social media and on these boards, "Naps"/"Napoleons" is my least favorite. While "Spiders" has the stigma of "worst team ever" (counterbalanced by "Cy Young played for them, and the 'worst team ever' was because their owners owned another NL team) and "Blues" sounds too much like Blue Jays, "Naps" is just a bad name all around. Allow me to explain: 1. The name was an homage to Nap Lajoie, one of the best deadball-era players and a player-manager. However, he has descended into relative obscurity compared to similarly-abled deadball players (e.g., Ty Cobb) and Cleveland baseball players (correct me if I'm wrong, but there are no dedications to him at Progressive Field or in the city at large). I guess the name could be an educational opportunity for some fans, but his overall significance to the franchise has lessened over time. Names like the "Cleveland Fellers" or the "Cleveland Dobys" would be more appropriate. 2. They could always shift the name to a certain French general/monarch. However, that produces problems. There is a standard anglophonic antipathy towards Napoleon Bonaparte, hence the historically-inaccurate idea of the "Napoleon Complex" for short guys and unsympathetic depiction in historical media. Just look at Goya's "The Third of May, 1808" and see why it's a bad idea to name a team after the guy. 3. "Naps" sounds too much like a certain WWII-era slur for the Japanese. When getting away from a "racial" name, don't switch to something that's one vowel away from a racial slur. Names like "Spiders," "Blues (guitar-themed, to not infringe on the St. Louis NHL team)," "Guardians (for those cool statues right by Progressive Field)," and even "Fellers/Dobys" are all better choices than "Naps"/"Napoleons." I'd rather they keep the "Indians" name over bringing back "Naps" or some "Cleveland Baseball Club" moniker.
  15. That’s only unpopular here, where a bunch of people ignore that the team won three Stanley Cups in red/black and that fans prefer it. Heck, you’ve got people saying that red/green are their “true colors” despite all of their success coming in red/black. These people also do the same for the royal/yellow Mariners, which I find silly (but slightly more understandable, given the M’s problems).
  16. I get where you’re coming from on that, but it’s just weird to me. Had the team changed their naming from Paul Brown to Jim Brown (inarguably the best player in team history), that might have resolved the issue. Of course, Jim Brown has had some hefty legal accusations thrown his way over the years, so I doubt that’d fly. To me, that’s like having the Washington Landrys or the Green Bay Hallases. Naming a team after their founder/long-time leader just comes off poorly as time goes on. The key example of this would be the Charlotte Bobcats. While I’m a fan of several teams that did just that and generally support that idea, I still think the Browns should have left their old identity behind when moving. The relocation process was so wrought with pain and was such a PR disaster that the name should have changed. While the Giants/Dodgers relocations may have been just as painful, this was before a modern focus on branding. My best guess is that it took the Colts and North Stars moving for the “change the name” approach to really take off in Big Four sports. It’s not that much more of a chore. All it’d take in today’s world is a quick google search or a glance in a records book. It’s no different from Sen(ational)ors to Twins or Expos to Nationals. That’s the ideal course for any “pained” relocation of a historically-significant team. I’m pretty sure no hockey fans in Atlanta want the Trashers’ franchise history, and I believe I speak for many Sharks fan when I say that we don’t want the Seals’ crummy records/history (“unmerger” notwithstanding).
  17. Here’s a “garbage” post that’ll get me a lot of flak: I’d love it if the Browns changed their name to something like “Bulldogs.” They aren’t the same team as the old Browns (no matter how much the NFL tries to pretend otherwise), and they’ve sullied the legacy of their namesake team by being mediocre to horrendous for their entire existence (e.g., only one playoff appearance in their history). It’s time to acknowledge the truth about the team, give the records back to the Ravens, and build a new team identity (albeit one with the old Browns’ colors, can’t go too far). Also, the Brown family founded the Bengals and play at Paul Brown Stadium. I don’t like that they’re named after a guy who wound up founding a division rival. I know now that I’ll get heat for that opinion, but I’ve long felt this way. The “Browns” name should rest in the same grave as the Oilers’ identity. Also, Baltimore Ravens > Baltimore Browns. When a local name is that good, you can’t pass it up.
  18. They've also got a more accurate cap logo, which is nice. However, that script still isn't chain-stitched like the original (a one-year deal for the A's - zoom in and you'll see): All things considered, that's a minor nitpick. I wouldn't mind a two-layer version of that script coming back on an alternate, or using the Old English "O" on an alternate cap.
  19. It should be just the pillbox cap as an alternate cap, not the whole mess of a uniform. If they need a retro alternate for full-time use, the 1971 uniforms or the 1960s vests would be fantastic options.
  20. 1. That’s OK, I guess. I’m sure we’d love to have CBJ’s Boomer rep a baseball team. 2. That’s decent, as I can see both a gambling and an aviation theme emerge from that name. It presents a lot of options for a neo-retro or modern identity. 3. Too close to Pirates. I get the tie -in with the Bucs/USFL Bandits, but it’s too close to Pittsburgh’s name to work. 4. I like this one, but it’d have to be a medieval/Renaissance Europe theme. You can’t do something like the old Albuquerque Dukes these days, because of all the negativity around the Spanish Conquistadores. 5. I’m not sure where to go with this one. Does the name mean “pinstripes” (with the Yankees in the division, no thanks) or “trim stripes?” The first would be derivative, while the latter could get messy. 6. That’s just really hard to pull off in a sensible manner. I guess saying somebody was “a Nine” is better than saying they were “a Wild” or “a Thunder,” but then that rubs up on the term “niner.” A super-retro identity could work with that name, but it’s ill-fitting for the Trop or any of the stadium designs proposed in Tampa. Just adding a “Sting” to the Rays name would have been enough. You can say insert player name here was “a Freezer.” That’s kind of funny.
  21. That was also a potential (and my preferred) name for the Expos, along with "Royals" ("Royaux" after Bill 101) and "Nationals." I'm not making that last one up. Per Jonah Keri: 1Jonah Keri, Up, Up, and Away: The Kid, the Hawk, Rock, Vladi, Pedro, Le Grand Orange, Youppi!, the Crazy Business of Baseball, and the Ill-Fated but Unforgettable Montreal Expos (Toronto: Vintage Canada, 2015), 14-15.
  22. This may be a product of me only being a casual hockey fan, but I had no idea it was that bad for you guys. You poor bastards. At what point do you want to tear down all of those worthless President’s Trophy banners and turn them into toilet paper?
  23. That’d be good, but maybe something a bit more “royal” would be better. How about the Dodgers/Rangers’ 294 C?
  24. I’m not posting the 2013-2014 jersey switchover, because the 2009-13 road uniforms at least used the correct Red Sox lettering and number fonts.
  25. This set's successor was a legitimately good uniform (save for Friz Quadrata numbers), but this one was just nasty. Still, I can't dislike the "Basketball Sentai Warrioranger" set. It's got that goofy charm to it, what with its lightning bolts on the wordmark and one jersey side. Gotta love the windowpane! I'd love it if the Giants and/or Mets based an alt around it.