gosioux76

The fleur works nicely for St. Louis. The weird geometric bird comet, however, does not.

St. Louis City SC will unveil its inaugural kit on Wednesday, Nov. 16, the same day it will host the first game in its new stadium, a friendly between City2 and Bayer Leverkusen.

Translation: After 20 years of wearing the same thing, football team discovers fans like new, bright, shiny objects, even if they're terrible. So their solution is to keep chasing that dragon.

I recall the intellectual property dispute over the Roughnecks' logo looking too derivative to the Oilers oil derrick logo, but I don't recall there ever being an issue with the Astros and the XFL.

It won't be a big issue with Seattle if they give them a similar helmet treatment that they did with the 2020 version, in which the dragon flowed up from the bottom of the helmet. If that's the case, you wouldn't see the "S" shape.

The group that's been lobbying for MLB in Portland the last five years has been little more than a loose-knit group of former local executives who've only identified vanity investors, like Russell Wilson, that don't have the sort of scratch to make it a viable enterprise. They've claimed to have big-money backers, but have never disclosed them. At this point, all that effort has to show for it is a few wildly speculative stadium renderings and some revenue from hat sales.

I'm pleased to see the cap logo changes are subtle. I'll admit, until I saw them side by side, the only real difference I could detect were the more muted serifs on the T. Assuming this is the new primary cap, this could end up being one of those changes where a majority of the fanbase won't even know the difference.

This also makes me think of this early-80s Sports Illustrated cover of LT and Mark Gastineau, whose shoulders were practically billboards.

Well, looks like we found the one person.

You've got great eyes. Superhuman, even.

Ok, I'll play along with this argument. So you're suggesting that someone sitting up in the highest row of SoFi Stadium would somehow be assisted in identifying the players because they would have the tiniest of numbers on their shoulders? Let me check ...

Are you watching a lot of games from the sky? Just hovering there above the players, maybe attached to one of those camera rigs? Literally nobody, in today's high-definition world, needs to reference tiny shoulder numbers to identify a player. Broadcasters aren't suddenly scrambling for help to identify players on the Chargers because the team decided not to shoehorn a needless element onto the shoulders. And listen, could they fit on some uniforms? Sure, in the tiniest form, perhaps. You could also probably rest a bowl of soup on their shoulders, or a small dog, but you don't because doing so wouldn't make any sense. Just like forcing TV numbers on there.

What purpose do they serve? Next question: Can they serve whatever that purpose is while occupying increasingly smaller spaces on ever-shrinking jerseys? No matter what you suggest their purpose is, the answer is going to be "no."

I'll say it again: Why do they need to keep all 3? What function do the TV numbers serve anymore, other than to clutter ever-shrinking sleeves? I genuinely don't understand the desire to salvage a uniform element whose function has been eclipsed by both technology and fashion.

C'mon man, you can't really consider the Padres switching to brown as some wholesale introduction of a new color scheme. The fanbase had been clamoring for a return to the franchise's original colors after decades of their brand being adrift. That's hardly the same as suggesting the Twins just suddenly become a green team out of some need to be different. The Twins aren't the 2008 Rays, which had barely registered on the baseball world when they switched to a whole different branding and color scheme. This a team that's been in Minnesota as a red-white-blue team for more than 60 years, with two titles to it's name. That's brand equity. Losing that just to stand out from the pack would be a terrible decision. I realize you're not necessarily advocating for that. You're only suggesting that if they do some sort of wholesale change, that they should do it all the way. And I think that's a fair suggestion for someone who isn't personally invested in the franchise. Change is exciting. But if you're a Twins fan, they wouldn't be the Twins if they were in other colors. At that point, why stop at the colors? If you're going to go all the way, you may as well rebrand the franchise.

Bold move by Lawrence to get his vaccine right on the bicep of his throwing arm.

I suppose it's hard to say whether landing a MLS franchise would improve the sustainability of fan interest. Part of me wonders whether getting this far in the USL Championship playoffs every year starts to feel redundant after a while. Louisville's played in three of the last four finals and won two of them. Still not a good look for the local fanbase, but it would speak to the limits of the USL as a whole. If you've already won it multiple times, what more is there?

This is 100% correct. As much as we discuss the Big Four (NBA, NHL, MLB, NFL) today, back then it was really only the Big Two (MLB and NFL), and even at that, the NFL was still just on its ascent. The NBA did not become a serious phenomenon until the '70s or, it could be argued, the '80s. Long story short: Such things like branding strategy weren't likely as big of a priority.

You're 100% right. I think it'll come down to how the former NY Guardians logo is applied and how the colors are deployed. The logo on the NY helmet was large and immersive, which worked really well. If they do the same, but find a way to emphasize the brighter color, I think a lot of minds could be changed on that choice, mine included.

I agree with you, yet one city that didn't show up on your list was Las Vegas, which seems more likely than most of those cities to get a franchise. Question about Louisville, for those of you who may know it better than I. I've always liked the idea of MLS moving into cities where it can be among the biggest games in town, and Louisville would fit that bill. Yet I watched Louisville City's semifinal match against Pittsburgh on TV this weekend and the place looked barely half full. I'd like to think that, rain or shine, the place would be packed for a game of that level of importance.

I'm a little surprised by the harshness of the criticism over these. If anything, I think this new XFL did a poor job of trying to update the prior XFL logos, but otherwise aren't these exactly what was expected? Did anybody think they were going to roll out entirely new brands when they had already bought the barely-used intellectual property of the 2020 XFL? I can see being underwhelmed by some of the choices. Moving the Gotham-esque Guardians to sunny Orlando is a strange move, as are some of the inconsistencies and applications of the secondary logos, for sure. Not saying any of this is great. It's just not surprising.

I posted this in another thread, but it bears repeating here. SOURCE: Twins excited for 'cleaner' refresh of uniforms, more

Hilarious quote from the press release:

They did indeed. UPDATE: @McCallbeat me to it.

I was thinking the same thing. That mark clearly makes a D and an R. I wouldn't be surprised if their intent was to keep the Dallas name — why wouldn't they? — and their landlord later in negotiations stipulated a requirement that they go by Arlington. Probably for sweeter lease terms. I was glad to see they retained the original mark as a secondary, but they should definitely be swapped. At least make the original Renegades logo the helmet mark. I'm pretty indifferent to the changes on the logo, but the updated wordmark is unnecessary and the STL secondary is really uninspired. Other than that, I, too, am looking forward to finally attending a game.