Jump to content

gosioux76

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,913

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

 Content Type 

Everything posted by gosioux76

  1. gosioux76
    You're sort of making the point, though. I presume you're not a Wolves fan, so you haven't had to endure nearly two decades of (mostly) futility. So, using this analogy, the Wolves ,to you, are just any amusement park. You have no local attachment to it, so you can look at this trade, like most sports fans with no skin in it, as an armchair GM and assess winners and losers. That's fair, and it's part of the game. I just find it unproductive. As a Wolves fan, I just see a team taking a big swing. I don't give a damn what they gave up. They're just ensuring me that i'm likely to enjoy this next season more than I enjoyed the last one. Those future picks are just faceless commodities. And if it turns out to be a mistake, big deal. I'm used to them losing. At least we're enjoying the moment. Another point on this: Not all trades among all markets can be judged equally. Some teams, like the Wolves, aren't going to land any big-name free agents. It's just not going to happen, whether it be the quality of the squad or the location of the team. So they have to give away more to get players of a certain caliber. It's an unfortunate quirk of NBA economics you don't hear as much about in other sports. Location matters, and L.A. and South Beach sound a helluva lot more appealing to a 20-something athlete in the winter than the Twin Cities.
  2. gosioux76
    I get it. You're not wrong, but I always try to look at this as the GM and owners' problems. It's not like they're mortgaging my future. As a sports fan, if this makes them better now and makes the team more fun to watch, what do I care? It's like going to an amusement park to ride the new rollercoaster, but then criticizing it because they paid too much to build it.
  3. gosioux76
    It's as many five first round picks, per the Athletic: Unprotected first rounders in 2023, 2025 and 2027, a pick swap in 2026 and a top-five protected pick in 2029. I can understand all the heartburn over giving up so many picks. But as a T-Wolves fan from Day 1, I'd rather see them take some big swings now rather than banking on the unforeseen future. If they suck five years from now because of this, it’ll be no different from where they were five years ago, but they’re a lot better right now.
  4. gosioux76
    Woj is reporting that the T-Wolves just got Rudy Gobert. This is a holy **** deal for the Wolves. I hate they gave up so much, but I love what it means for the team's potential.
  5. gosioux76
    You don't think that changes if Billy Beane does one of his semi-miraculous turnarounds where he finds 9 guys you've never heard of and turns them into contenders? I'm a purist when it comes to the "winning cures everything" theory, but I certainly believes it carries some curative properties. The A's, if anything, have proven to be resilient over the years when it comes to competing.
  6. gosioux76
    You're absolutely right on this point. But it's also worth noting that, for the most part, all of those looks are substantially different from one another. There's no continual thread between them. With maybe one exception, they could be looks for completely different teams. The Hawks have had some really appealing themes over the years, too. But most of them appear built off the same foundation. That's where the Jazz differ.
  7. gosioux76
    But isn't the argument for every public stadium deal that building it will become a catalyst for future development? So all we need to do is build a stadium on the moon to provoke development of a moon mass transit system! I mean, how can it go wrong? Now for team names: I'm all in on Moon Walkers.
  8. gosioux76
    Playing Devil's Advocate here, but if the underlying brand was strong enough to begin with, there wouldn't have been a need to continually tweak the team's look. As much as I disagree with the direction of this re-brand, I don't think the intent was misguided. You ask five people on this board which look works best for the Jazz, you'll probably get five different opinions. The new owners were taking a swing at addressing they. They just missed — badly.
  9. gosioux76
    I agree that those were very nice, but I don't know if I'd describe them as underrated, because I feel as if most people thought they looked great at the time. The problem was that the look just belonged in a different city.
  10. gosioux76
    That's a great question. I'd imagine some of this would have to do with having 8 teams working in individual markets each selling local sponsorship deals, bringing in independent revenue streams. Yet even with new revenue related to being in-market, these teams would still likely be no more valuable than a CFL team at best. The real qualifier in that line in the Post, however, is "a few years down the road." I'd guess the logic here assumes a long-term growth strategy that's built upon the other really interesting piece of that story: the surprisingly strong TV ratings. Assuming those numbers are accurate, this is the fuel the league intends to use to drive its growth going forward.
  11. gosioux76
    I'll be curious to see if the continue to limit themselves to the original USFL brands. I love it for nostalgia reasons, but it really lost some of its impact when, likely for legal reasons, they decided against referencing the original league during broadcasts. It stripped all of the historical relevance away from those brands. I assume part of this strategy was predicated on nostalgia, and perhaps some cost reductions when it comes to securing trademark and copyright designations for new brands. They could always reapply the existing USFL brands to new cities, but doing so would also require them to reapply for copyright/trademark protections, I presume.
  12. gosioux76
    In the 10 years I lived there, the only substantive interest in this topic, that I could see, came from the small number of people pushing stadium plans and sportswriters who seem to refuse to accept that soccer is a real sport. There are surprisingly few large corporations in Oregon, let alone Portland. Unless Phil Knight were to buy the team (as he's reportedly attempting to do with the Blazers), I have doubts whether there's enough corporate support to prop up another team without siphoning from the Blazers and Timbers. The now four-year-old campaign to bring a baseball team to Portland — the Portland Diamond Project — appears to be little more than a collection of stadium renderings, promises of future land acquisitions, and no acknowledged financial backers outside of small-scale vanity plays, like Russell Wilson and Ciara. It's essentially an apparel brand that sells baseball hats with a P on them. In order for the A's to land there, the current ownership would have to buy into Portland as the most viable option for them to invest in a stadium that they, in all likelihood, would have to finance privately. There's ZERO appetite there for publicly subsidizing a big-league ballpark. So, once again, any mention of Portland as a likely landing spot is nothing more than base level speculation. There's a lot more to it than looking at a map and seeing which big cities don't have a major league team. I love Portland, so I hope I'm proven wrong about this. But I just don't see it happening.
  13. gosioux76
    Not to defend the guy, but isn't plausible that he's just doing a photo op here to mimic the goofy cake topper on the wedding cake? It's not like the guy was standing at the altar in a Dolphins helmet. I'm pretty sure there's some strange pictures of me at my wedding, too.
  14. gosioux76
    I'll be interested to hear more details about the year-two physical expansion. The Sports Business Journal report indicates the league will retain Birmingham as its base of operations, but will play game "out of between two and four markets next season, meaning each market will house multiple teams." I'm trying to imagine what this looks like. I assume it means, in a four-market setup, that each of the four cities would host two teams: the one assigned to them, plus another, and the entire league would revolve around travel to those four cities. If that's true, it would mean four teams would remain full-time road clubs, at least based upon their franchise brands. In a two-market scenario, I could see Birmingham continuing to be host to the southern teams: Stallions, Gamblers, Bandits and Breakers. That would leave Michigan, Philly, N.J. and Pittsburgh to coalesce within a northern market. The other notable detail in the report is that the league's plans stretch beyond 2023, with all teams in their home markets, and expansion of some sort in 2024.
  15. gosioux76
    From what we've heard so far, the team owner's initial instinct was to go all-in on black and white until the NBA reportedly stepped in and said "no," right? Assuming that's accurate, it suggests to me that the league has some sort of regulatory authority over these matters. But what's interesting to me is that the system doesn't appear to go far enough to prevent teams from situations like this, where the team may no longer run afoul of whatever restrictions the league imposes, but still manages to land on a tone-deaf rebrand they instantly regret. I mean, those of us on this board may have a heightened degree of awareness to sports aesthetics, but I'd still consider us normal consumers. And as normal consumers, I don't find it a stretch to call this look "objectively unappealing." So you have to think that, somewhere during the creative process, there had to be someone (whether from the league, Nike, etc.) who saw the same thing, no? From a creative services perspective, isn't there a point where the people servicing the client should speak up? Or is this just treated like, "this is what the client wants." Also, on a similar vein, do they ever conduct focus groups for these sorts of things? It just seems unfathomable to me, in this day and age, that such a high-profile consumer-facing brand could flub something like this so badly.
  16. gosioux76
    Nothing you've said on the topic of Pat Patriot is incorrect. I can't argue with a lick of it. Yet, I still love the damn thing on a helmet. It's confounding. There's so much wrong with it, yet it still works for me in ways I can't explain.
  17. gosioux76
    This argument about redundancy is sort of silly, but I guess that’s why we’re here. The point is pretty clear: it would be ideal to have a jersey design that neither shoehorns unnecessary TV numbers onto sleeves or shoulder caps and also avoids repeating a team’s helmet logo just to save space. The point about needing logos on a jersey to make them recognable on streetwear is valid. I just think there are more attractive workarounds. This is why uniforms need either distinctive sleeve striping and/or really strong secondary logos, which not enough teams have. I also think the word marks under the collar have some utility in this circumstance.
  18. gosioux76
    Maybe it was one of those double-blind studies, as in everybody involved was blind in both eyes.
  19. gosioux76
    Yes, I get that. But the question is why does it say LAC on a hat with the Rams logo.
  20. gosioux76
    Question for those Jazz fans or anyone else more in the know: Are those purple mountain throwbacks super popular? I mean, I'm glad they went with some sort of throwback, but I'm a little disappointed it isn't the more simple Maravich/early Karl Malone/Frank Layden-era Jazz unis, which I prefer.
  21. gosioux76
    I'm assuming you posted this as some indication of the Rams going with a black uni, But I'm trying to figure out why the cap has LAC on it. Am I missing something?
  22. gosioux76
    I can't say for sure, but if the answer was that they had a plan, nobody liked it, and they had to "remix it," I'd believe it.
  23. gosioux76
    I found the whole "purple forever" promise to be silly and, frankly, a pledge they can't fulfill. Unless, of course, Ryan Smith can commit to owning the franchise for the rest of his life and never intends to sell it.
  24. gosioux76
    That video presentation makes it seem as if the new yellow set -- "Dark Mode" as they call it -- is just a series of alternates, with the purple look being primaries. Whether that's the case or not, that's clearly how they're positioning it. Also, that video showed another purple throwback that I don't see presented among those graphics.
  25. gosioux76
    You could've told me this was the Nashville SC team store and I'd have believed you.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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

  I accept