gosioux76

If you look carefully at the notches in those "E"s, you'll see a sideways outline of the jet from the '80s Jets logo.

These are all inspired designs. I rarely say this about concepts on here, but with very few exceptions, I'd be elated if these teams adopted similar looks to what you've presented here. I'm a big fan of bringing back the '80s polyester-era aesthetic but in the modern-day button-down style, which you did perfectly here with the Reds and Cubs. And that Astros look is a perfect way to inject some life into that set while keeping it within the boundaries of the team's visual history. If I have any quibbles, they're minor ones: While I generally love the consistent use of red/black/turquoise for the D-Backs, I worry there isn't enough contrast between the off-white home and sand-colored aways. I have to imagine that if the team came to adopt these looks, they'd end up wearing the solid color alternates more often than the actual away jerseys. Someone else said this earlier, but I'm not feeling the serifed fonts you've added to several of these. For most, I can see the logic behind them, particularly the Royals, Reds and ChiSox, but I still prefer a more traditional number font. But seriously, incredible work.

It's really interesting to watch the moment when a player really just hits their potential. As a Timberwolves fan, it's a little heartbreaking, but I'm really happy that Wiggins is living up to his hype. I'm sure it took the right kind of situation for him to unlock that talent. Not having to share top-billing in Golden State probably helped a lot. In Minnesota, it was set up to be the KAT and Wiggins show.

I hate to be the one to point this out, but if you take issue with someone posting information as a leak that you presume to be knowingly false, the only reason that person would do so is to attract attention. And in this case, the attention comes from all of the people who take the bait and point out all the reasons why the information is false, which likely provides even more fuel for this to keep happening again. This public service announcement has been brought to you by "Self-Restraint," the only product known to cure the world from message board trolls.

This is exactly right. The real value of Nike's deals with the NBA, NFL and MLB doesn't come from merchandise sales, but from having its logo featured prominently alongside the biggest professional sports leagues in the world. The company's entire ethos is built around having its brand associated with the best. Doing so in a way that might minimize that relationship, like sticking the swoosh on the back, out of the way, where it can be ignored, wouldn't be worth it to them. So it appears as if they paid enough to earn the right to negotiate terms that, unlike Adidas before them, required their logo be out front. As much as we may not like it, I wouldn't expect that to change anytime soon.

That old Washington Post column suggests the problem is that Gen Z isn't engaging at all, but what you're saying is that they're not ignoring sports, they're just consuming it on their terms and finding ways to not pay for it. If I'm a sports executive, I'd see this as the much bigger problem. Because it suggests that even if they're capturing some of this audience, they have yet to find a way to meet them on their terms in a way that also provides a sustainable stream of revenue.

That's a good point about it not also being on the home and aways. That said, I think it would be smart for the Rangers to add it to the entire mix as an accent color. It would give a much-needed extra dimension to a look that could really use it.

I tend to view these debates from a broader level. Rather than assessing the player's individual skills, I think it's more meaningful to measure them by two factors: Did they change the game and did they make the people around them better. Curry undoubtedly has done all of those things. I view Jordan as the standard-bearer for this equation. And in Curry's case, I view Klay and Draymond as his Pippen and Rodman. Also, like MJ, he's achieved sustained levels of success with a rotating cast of support players (other than Klay and Draymond.) Some of that credit goes to coaching, but that Golden State playbook has and always will revolve around Steph Curry. That's what makes him different in the "pure shooter" category than Allen or Miller and should put him right up there within the top 10 of NBA greats.

They also need to get rid of the unnecessary cat patch on the shoulders. It's almost as small as a manufacturer's logo.

I think the issue is the particular shade of blue they're using. That NHL Network graphic shared above really brightens the hue of the blue. The blue they wear now appears to me as a very muted shade, edging slightly toward slate. Pairing it with another muted tone (burgundy) doesn't give it the contrast it needs. But on that graphic, the color looks far more vibrant - closer to a royal - which sets it apart from the burgundy far more effectively.

The white version from @Conrad. is damn near perfect. The CAVS wordmark holds the space much more prominently than the full CLEVELAND. I still can't get over the stark disparity between the C (sans sword) logo and the CAVS typeface, though.

But haven't they already? I mean, they've got a head-to-toe powder blue alt in their rotation. If anything, it seems that by including it on the trim they were at least acknowledging powder blue has a place within its official color palette. It feels like, more often than not, we criticize teams for making use of a tertiary color that isn't part of normal color scheme. I'm thinking about the age-old (and, frankly, tired) argument against gray facemasks in the NFL. At least in the Rangers case, the older version of those navy uniforms acknowledged the full depth of the club's colors. If there's a criticism I'd make, it's that they should incorporate it more fully rather than removing it altogether.

I had the same thought, but the Wizards/Bullets seem like one of those rare examples of a team with a fairly limited visual history. And presuming they don't want to use the term Bullets, even as a retro, then this original Wizards look is the only one they can call back to with any degree of historical accuracy. And even if they were OK using the Bullets name, there aren't a ton of options in their history outside of the iconic red-white-blue striped sets that inspired the current modernized look. There's a simple orange/navy look from the late '60s, and the overly simple post-pinstripe uniforms of the early '90s. That's about it I can't recall, have they ever gone way back and done a retro as the Chicago Zephyrs? (Wizards jersey timeline.)

I agree with this. Some of this may purely be for nostalgic reasons. They may not have won anything under that name, but those early to mid-'80s Angels had some impressive lineups. The initial shift away from California, I presume, was intended partly to remove some of the vagueness from its brand and apply it to a specific locale. Then the shift to Los Angeles was an attempt to attach itself more directly to the lucrative L.A. market. But it doesn't really seem as if any of those moves led to any meaningful gain, so at this point, why not go back to California?

You don't think it's possible that the people who designed a logo that already doesn't make much sense might not know or care about those details and design it that way anyway?

I agree. I've really enjoyed this new-ish look of theirs, outside the logo. It would've been the perfect opportunity to reapply the '80s wordmark.

I'll second Golden State Invaders. It may not roll off the tongue as easily as other options, but I like the uniformity with the Warriors. Plus, the Warriors at this point would still be in Oakland, so I could see the Warriors and Invaders having a sort of kinship.

Yeah, it's an odd logo for sure. Is it possible the A is meant to be the landing strip on an aircraft carrier? If so, you've really got to work hard to reach that conclusion.

I watched a bit of an Alouettes game last night and got to thinking about CFL helmets. I'm a big fan when teams attempt unique helmet designs, especially when they try to do something immersive that makes use of a significant portion of the helmet surface (Michigan Panthers, Boston Breakers, San Jose Sabrecats) or some other signature element, a la the Rams, Vikings, Eagles, etc. So I applaud what the Elks attempted last year with the elk horns and what the Alouettes had been doing for the past several years by draping their logo across the front of the helmet. But even moreso, I appreciate that both teams appear to have recognized that those looks weren't working as hoped, and shifted to something more traditional, but really exceptional looking. This is my long-winded way of saying, I really like the new Alouettes helmets. Like the Elks helmet, it's simple and traditional, but it's also really attractive.

This one is an odd choice. They took oddest element of last year's City Edition -- the unnecessary, tiny splotch of atop the Irish rainbow pattern -- and decided to make it the focal point of this one.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the suggestion that Boston's City Connect is the one that seems the least connected to the team has nothing to do with the theme or spiritual connection to the city and everything to do with visuals. As many of you has testified, there's indeed a solid link between the marathon, the Red Sox and the city of Boston that these uniforms speak to and apparently resonate with Bostonians. But at a surface level, the Boston uniform is the one out of the bunch that, visually speaking, doesn't immediately register as being representative of that specific team. The Chicago and L.A. looks, the Giants, Astros, Royals, and even the Marlins, at first glance, are immediately recognizable as alternate uniforms of the teams they represent. The designs bear resemblance to the core brand. The Red Sox, and I'd say to a lesser degree the Nationals and D-Backs, can't say the same. That's not to say it's wrong. I presume there's no defined rulebook when it comes to determining the spirit of this program, so teams choose to implement it in their own ways.

Ha! No, I was in college and should’ve known better.

It would also be a waste to toss them all in a dumpster and set it on fire, but I'd be OK with it.

Yeah, they really doubled-down on the strange color pairings, didn't they? The white name tag looks like a mistake. This is gonna sound weird, but it reminded me of an old picture I saw of myself recently where I was wearing a light khaki shirt with white/cream-colored pants. Those two colors looked really wrong alongside each other. Now, enough about my personal fashion choices ...

This is a good point. The drabness of the bone color on its own wasn't the biggest problem. It was pairing it with two excessively vibrant shades of blue and yellow. That jarring contrast is what makes it so visually offensive. I'd think that if it were used with teams that have darker primary colors, as you and others suggest, the complaints wouldn't be so loud or justified. The Bears and Browns would be perfect examples of that.