SFGiants58

Members
  • Content Count

    6,203
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    51

Everything posted by SFGiants58

  1. Ahem? The Seattle Space Needle, the Golden Gate Bridge, Coit Tower (maybe), and the Hollywood Sign would beg to differ.
  2. The Broncos’ look is a modern classic. It looks better than and outlasted all of its imitators, looks amazing in all of its combos (save for navy/navy), and is associated with the team’s three championships. The orange crush look is bland, associated with playoff failure, and outright boring compared to the 1997-present look.
  3. Maybe it’s for the best that it did.
  4. So, what do we think the Jaguars and Titans will do with their uniforms? I'm betting that 50% of us will think the Jags upgraded, 30% will believe they went lateral, 10% will say it was a downgrade, and 10% will just say that they want the 1990s uniforms back. As for the Titans, I'm guessing that 40% will like the look, another 40% will dislike it, and 20% will wish that they were still the Oilers. Sometimes, we're pretty predictable.
  5. I'd rather have the Baltimore Ravens and the Cleveland (insert name here, like "Bulldogs") than the expansion Browns or Baltimore Browns. I've never liked the name, as I can't get over the fact that they're named after a guy who would go on to found a team that became a divisional rival. I could understand "grandfathering" the name in after the AFL-NFL merger, but relocation should have made sure that the Baltimore team had to change its name and that the new Cleveland team couldn't use it either. The Brown family should have made a stink about it. I love the Ravens' identity, and it gave Baltimore a fresher take on football (rather than being curmudgeons in the past, like in Cleveland). This renewal should have happened in Cleveland, with the "Browns" name retired for good.
  6. It's lovely to see people get so up in arms about games that decide which bunch of guys will be giving each other head injuries and early-onset dementia.
  7. It's why I don't mind the modern Browns having a different look from the old Browns, as it makes it clear that this perpetual failure of a franchise is an expansion team that only borrows from the old Browns' visual history without owning any of it. While I admit that I like the name being around, I wouldn't mind if the team started off with a new name (for both the now-Ravens and the 1999 expansion team). The Brown family's ownership of the Bengals should have a made a new name a must-have. No matter the history, it's awkward naming your team after the founder of a divisional rival.
  8. The solids have strange naming traditions. To the larger point of the thread, teams sharing a name in their city isn't a good practice. I do wonder what would have happened had the baseball Giants remained in New York. Would either the baseball or football team have changed their name?
  9. While I don't agree with that sentiment (that the Browns should dump their name), I get the reasoning. The expansion Browns (1999-present) have largely been failures, with only one playoff appearance and only one win in the past two calendar years. It's merely asking for the team to act like the crummy expansion franchise that they are, and not like the continuation of the team that's now the Ravens.
  10. That's too generous. Those weren't coffee grounds, they were used coffee filters! I'm cool with the Sharks wanting to acknowledge the Seals' history, but I'd rather they not go too far with it (e.g., wearing throwbacks and acknowledging the Seals' records). Most Sharks fans either don't care about the Seals or see them as a miserable organization that they don't want connected to their slightly above-average franchise.
  11. MOD EDIT: Immaterial to the discussion.
  12. The Sharks, Canucks, Bruins, maybe? Even the "best" look for the Capitals is way too over-designed. It would also be helpful to note that by the end of that set's life, this had become their main sweater: I could go into all of the perspective, type, and detail problems that the logo had (and how the sweater minimized the blue in favor of black/gold), but other posters have done that. It's a shame that they've never had a good look, despite all of the potential within their logo sets. It's kind of like the team, in a way.
  13. I am SHOCKED AND APPALLED that you even considered using black pants! Having pants that are the same color as the home jersey would lead them into the evils of monochrome. Put white pants on the white jersey, or I'm calling you out for bad taste! Seriously though, I like the satire of this thread. Sometimes we get a little too deep into "echo chamber" territory (i.e., when people dare to criticize the Oilers' look or when somebody resists a MUH NINTIES-gasm), and it's good to poke fun at it.
  14. Sometimes, I wonder if the NL should have just let them move to D.C. in the mid-'70s. At least them wearing navy/red would make sense in that city.
  15. Just change the logo (and nothing else), and you've got a Titans concept! Better yet, just put the Oilers' old logo on it, because the Titans have a garbage identity and we all want the Oilers back! Oilers, Oilers, Oilers!
  16. Well, 2012 me would be complaining about why Longo was needed and that the Giants should still give Gary Brown a shot. As for the trade itself: I guess that acquiring these guys is better than trotting out the Gorkys Hernandez and the gang (i.e., Parker, Williamson, etc.). It's not amazing, but it's a mild upgrade.
  17. Illustrator also existed at the time, albeit with fewer abilities. Envelope distort and "text on path" would have been in a pretty primitive state at the time.
  18. You either go full Fisherman, or you don't bother. The in-between is too awkward to really have that same "so bad, it's good" pull.
  19. Winning a division is no small feat, I'll grant you that. But to go 5/14 in pennants and 1/5 in the World Series is not good (if were talking the playoffs in total, they went 1/14 - or 0/3 and 1/11 if you divide between playoff formats). When you have the best rotation in baseball and amazing players that are in the postseason that often, only one World Series is a disappointment. It's embarrassing that they couldn't win when it mattered the most. I wouldn't call the Dodgers of the 1940s/'50s embarrassing at all, as they played against the best the AL had to offer. Those Braves often fell to less-than-stellar teams in the playoffs (e.g., five consecutive first-round exits from 2000-05), choked (e.g., 2-0 lead in the 1996 World Series, swept in the 1999 World Series, couldn't close it out in 1991), and ran into more potent. They should have dominated the 1990's in the way that the Yankees did, but instead they folded again and again. Maybe their competition was tougher, maybe the NL East (where they played after 1994) was a weak division (Mets being on-again, off-again contenders, Phillies entering a rut, the Expos falling apart, and the Marlins flopping around while somehow winning two World Series), I don't know. The 1991-2005 Braves were a consistently good team, but they weren't good enough when it mattered the most. Think of them as the post-1977 Trail Blazers or the 1970s-90s Flyers, often a great team, but never the best and rarely looked upon without the modifier of "what could have been" or "they should have won more."
  20. ...and won a solitary World Series. Winning the division every year for over a decade and failing to net more than one championship shouldn't be celebrated, it should be considered embarrassing for both the team and their division. It should put them in the same boat as the St. Louis Blues of the '80s-'00s. While there have been visual downgrades (e.g., road hat), it's not like the original was all that untouchable. The Braves looked far better in their late Boston/early Milwaukee days, with contrast-colored tomahawks and the Northwestern stripes on the socks. Put the "A" on the headwear, replace the black tomahawk with a navy one, and add the "Atlanta" script.
  21. This whole deal strikes me as an idea that Mark Davis had while tripping out on an MSG overdose. I don't know if you can OD on the stuff, but Mark would probably be the first guy to do it.
  22. I'd argue that caramelized pineapple in julienned strips might be a good pizza topping, but raw chunks are a nasty mishmash of texture and prevents proper folding. Also, MetroStars was a terrible name. Good red/black kits towards the end, but a stereotypical "x-treme" '90s name.
  23. Sadly, that is all true. The head injury part of the game really limits my ability to engage with the sport.