Jump to content

gosioux76

Members
  • Posts

    4,565
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by gosioux76

  1. I actually don't mind the general concept of these mixtape looks because — at least in spirit — the designs are built off prior looks rather than further diluting these brands further by dressing them up in themed clown suits. But the other side of that is it can also highlight the lack of branding consistency from some teams. The ridiculous ransom note Miami jersey is a great example of that. And I don't know about you guys, but I don't need a reminder that Detroit had a teal era. I'd rather forget it.
  2. I actually agree with this. I've always thought the webbed-D logo was a pretty clever design that says Ducks without having to resort to a cartoon. My only issue with it is its shape. It's angled sort of upward as if it's ascending, just like the wordmark from which it's based. Because of that, it feels unbalanced to me and isn't as commanding of a presence as a jersey crest the way it might were it straightened and made more symmetrical. I don't mind the Mighty Ducks logo, but I agree that it's very much a product of its time. Then again, I thought the same about the Coyotes' Kachina design, and here we are.
  3. I think this is what I was thinking of when I suggested the current shade was brighter. I recognize now that it's not necessarily brighter, but to me it at least seems more vibrant. It could be that the addition of orange just makes it seem that way. I just always thought the original teal/gray set was bland.
  4. An interesting point about this: A St. Louis-based company will be sponsoring the Charlotte expansion franchise rather than the one in its own city. It's not surprising: Centene is investing around a $1 billion in a new Charlotte campus, so there's more motivation to build their brand in that market.
  5. So is the general consensus that the orange is unnecessary to the Sharks look? I actually think the color looks great next to the teal. It's just that, in the current set, it's so underplayed that it seems extraneous. I can see making the case for dropping it altogether. But If I'm being honest, I wouldn't mind seeing what it looks like if orange became a bigger part of the brand. My biggest issue with the Sharks' original color scheme is that, despite teal being a new-at-the-time trend color for the league, the whole thing felt drab. The brighter teal they're using now certainly helps, but using black or gray as secondary colors just brings it down a notch for me.
  6. The Jazz are becoming one of those franchises where, by having so many variations on its brand, determining the "right" one will depend on when you grew up. For example, as an NBA fan who came of age in the '80s, I'll always think of the Jazz as a purple/yellow/green franchise first. I never cared for the mountain jerseys — it was the start of their trend-chasing present.
  7. I agree with this assessment. B- is a good score. Not as terrible as they're made out to be, but far from elite. A few edits and this set would be vastly improved. I don't dislike what the Jags wear now, either. But for as much as I'd have preferred they simplified the prior set, I think they maybe oversimplifed the current one. All of this, of course, should be taken in the context that agrees the Brunell-era uniforms are their best and should never have changed.
  8. I agree. I may be in that minority that didn't mind the Jags' prior sets. A little too busy, and the half black/half gold helmets were ridiculous, but there was a lot to like in there.
  9. That Blitz logo has always bothered me. It's fine as a wordmark, but just feels lifeless as a helmet logo. Perhaps if you choose to evolve the brand, one idea would be to introduce a secondary logo from the lightning bolt on the 'Z.' In my mind, I'd turn it horizontal and use it as the helmet logo. It could even connect at the front of the helmet and spread toward the back, similar to XFL Birmingham bolts, only without the bolts going in all directions. Just spitballin' here.
  10. I have similar thoughts. I think the yellow is getting a bit undersold in this equation. A tertiary color is more likely to stand out as a primary if the base colors are black and white. That on its own will keep the Jazz from looking like a Nets ripoff. Not saying I like it, but I'm guessing the team will come off more as a black-and-yellow brand than a black-and-white one, which on its own would set it apart in the NBA. Saying that, I still think it's silly. And be prepared for some Nike-speak about Utah being the "beehive state" when explaining the switch to black/white/yellow.
  11. I came to this point in life after watching the Vikings lose an NFC title game for the fifth time in my lifetime. After that loss to your beloved Eagles a few years back, I told myself I will keep the Vikings at arm's length, and allow myself to jump on the bandwagon at my own will. Seriously, it did wonders for my mental health.
  12. I relate to this. I grew up in Minnesota, but I haven't lived there for more than 20 years. I think that, had I stayed in Minnesota, I wouldn't be nearly as drawn to the local teams as I am now. When you live in a market with other teams, that attachment to Minnesota becomes part of my identity and helps me retain some of those Minnesota ties I may have lost by moving away. It's also a great way of more easily identifying shared connections. Living in Portland and St. Louis as I have the past dozen or so years, my Twins/Vikings/U of North Dakota gear is like a signal flare for the few people in those areas who may share my allegiances.
  13. I've learned as I've gotten older that it's a waste of energy and precious time to adhere to some phantom populace's notion of what fandom should be. You owe nothing to these teams, so give them the time and energy you can afford, pick and choose the teams you follow by your own standards, and let nobody judge you but yourself. I'm the world's biggest Twins fan when they're winning. When they're disappointing, I change the channel. Lots of good stuff on TV that doesn't make me feel miserable. I'm not less of a fan for approaching it on my own terms. Thanks for coming to my TED talk.
  14. I agree on the Chargers. They looked fantastic. But I really dislike that Raiders jersey. I realize it's a throwback, but the too-large nameplates and TV numbers really ruined it for me. The Chargers redesign really set in my mind just how unnecessary TV numbers are in general. This matchup made the point even clearer.
  15. That's true, but don't let that overshadow @Bmac's bigger point, which is a great one. This entire situation is maddening to any city coveting its own franchise, or to those fans who'll do whatever it takes to support their team. There's no discounting the fact that a terrible stadium in an even worse location is a major factor in this situation. But it's really hard for outsiders to avoid reaching the conclusion that there's plenty of apathy at play here, too. I guess before this debate, I never really looked much at MLB attendance figures. But I can easily see where you can get the idea of Florida being a terrible market for a full-time MLB club. Tampa was in the bottom three for MLB attendance in 17 of the past 20 seasons (excluding 2020), including seven seasons in which it was dead last. Its only outliers came in the years following its 2008 World Series appearance (2008-2010), and even then they never reached above No. 22 out of 30 teams. During that same time, Florida/Miami was in the bottom three 16 out of 20 seasons — six of those seasons at No. 30, including the last three. The organization was No. 26, in 2004, the year after they won the World Series. Of the four years they weren't in the bottom three, they reached higher than No. 26 only once, in 2012, reaching No. 18 the year their new stadium opened. The numbers might have been worse during parts of that stretch had Montreal not had a lock on that bottom spot for several years.
  16. Or, more likely, some inventive helmet manufacturers or sporting goods brand will see the challenge and come up with an answer. Most innovations are borne from a problem in need of a solution. Call me an optimist.
  17. It does, however, seem to track with the trend at the time of Nike putting team wordmarks in unusual places. 2012 was the start of the Nike/NFL contract and the year of the Seahawks redesign, which also featured the wordmark forced onto the left shoulder. The since-replaced Browns redesign carried on with that trend, with the wordmark along the pants. Not saying that is evidence of this being more or less legit, of course. Just noting the pattern.
  18. Even though the "U" looks like a "J," I like the bottom left one, but only because it introduces the spear iconography. Could've done a lot with that. The rest of you are right, though. UH made the right choice.
  19. I've gotta say, I'm surprised by how much people like the Bengals' orange jerseys. I think they suffer from a similar problem to the white set: the color balance is way off. The white set is too white, the orange set is too orange. The black jerseys/white pants standard is really the perfect set for the Bengals. I just found that look last night to be a bit garish, which is hard to say considering that it's still a notable improvement from how they looked a year ago.
  20. You're not wrong, but having lived there at the time, I don't look at it that cynically. During its first few years, Timbers tickets were not easy to get. Every game was a sellout and it was even difficult to find tickets on the aftermarket. It wasn't impossible; it just required some work and a willingness to pay. In times like that, most professional sports team owners would look to upgrade their venue so that supply can meet demand. But there was no way Merritt Paulson was going to leave one of best gameday experiences in American soccer for a characterless suburban location. The only option was to build up from what they already had. I don't really see how the expansion is much of an eyesore. Besides, it's not like the atmosphere within Providence Park was predicated on having obstructed views of downtown -- it's about what's going on inside the stadium rather than outside of it. I'd rather see bigger crowds than the distraction of the MAX train rolling by every few minutes. And to @tBBP's question about what came first, the stadium or the neighborhood, I can't say for sure, because I wasn't around in 1893 when it was built ( ), but from what I know, that area was largely a produce farm prior to its construction. So I'd guess the stadium came before the neighborhood.
  21. Maybe it’s just me, but the helmet appears to be a shade darker than the jerseys. It’s a distraction that makes me like these far less than the black jerseys.
  22. I'm with you, for sure. These are a really great take on that era's unis using the far superior colors from their inaugural set, and adapting the overlong "Timberwolves" wordmark into the shortened "Wolves" is really smart. (I could do without the supplemental texturing on the sides and back; adds unnecessary noise.) That said, I'm still among the minority that thinks the Wolves inaugural set represent the best they've ever looked. I'd like to see a retro-inspired set that takes inspiration from the simplicity of that original look. This new alt, I'll concede, is at least a step in the right direction.
  23. This is really the heart of the conundrum for the Rays. They exist in metro area that, from the outset, faced questions over whether it would be a viable baseball market. And because they play in a terrible stadium in an even worse location, there's the theory that they never really got to test the market's viability. So if that you were your money, would you bet hundreds of millions on a new stadium in an attempt to prove the market works? That was meant as rhetorical, and not directed at anyone in particular. I'm also not suggesting that escaping to Montreal is the panacea to this situation, only that relocating elsewhere in Tampa carries its own degree of uncertainty.
  24. None of what you said is wrong, but I also think it's possible to be nostalgic for something just because it's gone. I have a soft spot for the Hartford Whalers, too, but I wouldn't make a case for bringing them back.
  25. And that's not even accounting for the political capital required to enable development of two stadiums. Already, mayoral candidates in Montreal are weighing in, with all three saying no to using public money, and one opposing the use of the federally owned site identified as a possible ballpark site. https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/mayoral-candidates-would-love-for-baseball-to-return-so-long-as-montreal-doesnt-pay-for-it I do, too. But I haven't seen anything to suggest they'd be playing in Montreal as the Expos. I mean, it's one thing to split your time between two cities, but would they also split into two different identities? I'm not sure I've seen them address that question.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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