gosioux76

5 hours ago, BBTV said:

 

and I think this is not a good way to gauge interest.  I wouldn't go out of my way to go to a minor-league stadium to watch a team that wasn't mine, just to "prove that I'd go to a MLB game".  It's phrased as if it's their "job" to "prove" themselves by supporting some dreck.  

 

I think a market (not SLC, but some other one) might thrive as a Major League market without caring one bit about some temporarily-transported dumpster fire of a team.  

But it certainly wouldn't hurt if SLC residents were to adopt a temporarily nomadic A's franchise as their own for a couple seasons, not to prove a point but just because they happened to enjoy the experience.  

I seriously doubt the people of OKC showed up to support the Hornets to carry out some organized regional strategy to prove they were a major-league market. And they probably didn't need the experience of hosting the Hornets to show they had a good fan base.  But it sure seemed to help the cause.  

On 1/20/2024 at 8:05 PM, DustDevil61 said:

Of course, I can see a (not very likely) situation where funding for the Vegas stadium is delayed or falls through and Fisher is forced to sell the A’s to the Big League Utah group (while being granted a Las Vegas franchise), who in turn would build their planned Power District stadium west of downtown Salt Lake.

Could this be the first example of a team using another city as leverage over the new city it used as leverage over its current city? 

As much as I'd hate to see the Athletics name go away, there's a certain symmetry to the idea of them going from the A's to the Bees.  

I watched some NBA analysis on ESPN in which Kendrick Perkins seemed to be openly pushing for the network to get more Timberwolves games on national TV, since Anthony Edwards has become a nightly highlight reel.

I'm a T-Wolves fans since the day they got the franchise, but outside of the best KG years in the early 2000s, I never really expected — as someone who hasn't lived in Minnesota for 25 years — to see much of them on national TV. (And until this year, they haven't been good enough to consider the expense of League Pass.) 

I've always been a bit frustrated by the national TV schedule, which makes a 30-team league seem like it only has a dozen teams. I understand why these schedules have to be made in advance, and that they're done so largely on speculation, market size and relative popularity, but it's still frustrating to see a national TV rotation littered with one of Boston/Philly/Denver/Brooklyn/New York/Dallas/Miami/Phoenix/LAC/LAL/Milwaukee/San Antonio when the T-Wolves might be the league's most fascinating and entertaining story of the year. 

33 minutes ago, GDAWG said:

 

he said in the video that initially the league will own the teams but eventually they will have team owners.  

That would suggest that the league has investors underwriting the operation to the tune of tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars. Until they disclose who's paying the bills, then it's just like @Sec19Row53 said: it's fantasy sports. 

15 hours ago, upperV03 said:

The purported leak of the Timbers’ new secondary kit has been making the rounds again the last few days, so I decided to try and recreate it and see what it would look like with their new sponsor logo:

 

In general, I hate having the manufacturer's mark, crest and sponsor logo stacked, but this is a design that actually makes it work. 

28 minutes ago, BBTV said:

Can we please have a ban on Reddit rumors and especially Reddit copy/pastes?  Whether it's true or not, it just causes swirl and unnecessary worry.

This isn't necessary. I think by now, most of us know that Reddit rumors are just that — rumors to be taken with a grain of salt. In most cases, they're posted just to stir discussion, which is the point of this forum. This Seahawks rumor has been treated with skepticism from the start, as have the subsequent comments and mockups. All it does is fuel "what-if" discussion. If that's not allowed, then I don't know why this forum even exists.

If someone doesn't like a Reddit post, keep scrolling. 

14 hours ago, GDAWG said:

Apparently there's going to be a league called Major League Football (not the one that made it to camp in 2022 and failed to kick off that stranded players in Mobile) that plans on playing in the fall.....directly against the NFL, but in cities that are not in the NFL:

 

 

I couldn't sit through the whole 1 hour update, so maybe someone who did can help me out. Are all the players going to be hot, single moms? 

2 hours ago, McCall said:

Again, using fancy words doesn't make your preferred playoff structure any better. The choice is either the best teams make the playoffs or the best teams in a division. It's an 8-team league in year 1/2/3, not a 30+ team league in year 103. Having under .500 teams in the playoffs OVER above .500 teams could be far more detrimental than the false sense of tradition you're trying to perpetuate.

 

And yes, your creepy mancrush on Luis Perez is an obvious bias, to whatever team he's on, which is currently Arlington.

Counterpoint: I didn't see any fancy words in his post. 

10 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

These boards are also littered with Pollyanna discussions that teams should consider what their opponent is going to wear prior to determining what they wear. You don't get to pick and choose to only see the ideas that you don't disagree with, unless the mods say otherwise.

I agree that if you are one of the posters who only craps on the idea of spring football you ought to go somewhere else (much like those who feel the need to point out that wrestling is fake). A statement of the belief that spring football won't survive isn't really different than the speculation about which teams would survive the merger or might come out of mothballs next year.

You're right. People can say what they want. Nobody's arguing otherwise. Just like I enjoy pointing out that repetitively taking this one, particular position on this one, particular topic is lazy and counterproductive. 

7 minutes ago, GDAWG said:

 

This is an interesting development. 

If MLS is serious about expansion into Vegas, I'd be surprised if Bautista has the kind of scratch to eat a $500M+ expansion fee, at least without diluting his position as the controlling shareholder.  And if MLS enters the market under a different name, Bautista might be looking for a new city for his club. 

2 hours ago, Red Comet said:

I get that people like that are addicted to being right more than having any actually coherent viewpoint but why be a killjoy to others? Is that dopamine hit worth that much? 

Well said. 

These threads are littered with the "I'll be surprised if this league makes it a year" posts, as if the only reason they're paying attention is to enjoy its pending demise and gloat about it. 

The struggle to build a league like this is part of what makes the whole thing intriguing. Predicting its demise is not only lazy, it completely misses the point of what makes watching the story unfold so appealing  in the first place. 

9 hours ago, GDAWG said:

 

Mike Kafka?  Did they not see the Giants offense?  

Maybe they think it's another Kafka and he'll knock out a few existentialist novels rooted in absurdity and hopelessness. 

57 minutes ago, upperV03 said:

I would be extremely surprised if the new ownership changes the badge. If they did, it wouldn’t be for another year or two but I think there’s too strong of a bond between the fanbase and the current badge for them to even consider changing it. I would definitely be on board with them returning to the full-color logo full time, though. As for red primary kits… I’ve heard that they’re supposed to return to them this year.

I'd like to see a simplification of the badge. Remove the outer circle and the words and use the thorns and soccer ball on their own. It isn't the kind of wholesale change that would upset a fanbase, but it can still symbolize the switch to a new era. 

12 minutes ago, LogoFan said:

Based on the popularity and the recentness of the 2.0 version, I would've expected them to have kept the close to the originals for at least brand recognition's sake.

Everything  they touched was a downgrade IMHO.

 

I don't disagree that it was a downgrade, but I don't think anything they did in any way hurt brand recognition. The 2023 XFL uniforms were clearly a derivation of the 2020 XFL. They just weren't as good, in almost every case. 

This is perhaps lost to history, but the Portland Trail Blazers changed to their iconic black-and-red sash uniforms after winning the NBA title in 1977. 

1976-77:

1977-78:

The Surf. By a wide margin. 

2 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

That Cleveland jersey was the mesh batting practice jersey, so that probably affects how that logo looks as well. 

I'm not sure I understand why that would make a difference. Whether it's mesh or polyester or game vs. BP jersey, it's still intentionally placing a logo off center. 

I wouldn't advocate for centering that logo, either. Wordmarks are the way to go on pullovers.

It seems less weird in soccer, where (I believe) the idea was to put the club crest at or near the heart. A symbolic gesture. It's also significantly smaller than what's been used on baseball pullovers and, though larger, not too dissimilar from manufacturers logos seen on polo shirts back in the day. (The Lacoste crocodile, for example. )

20 hours ago, BBTV said:

Also, (this is a minority opinion) traditional left-chest logos and lower-left numbers look odd on pullovers.  I know it's a normal thing in soccer and even in baseball, but it looks odd to me.  The Toronto pullovers made sense.

I couldn't agree more with this point. The left-chest logos on pullovers always looked like a mistake to me. With button downs, they don't seem as intentionally unbalanced as they do on pullovers. These Cubs and Indians uniforms in particular always struck me as odd. It's as if someone was applying the logo patch blindfolded and just ended up on the left breast. 

2 minutes ago, GDAWG said:

 

I am curious as to why they didn't keep the 2020 looks for the Renegades, Battlehawks, Dragons, Guardians and Roughnecks, or at least the color scheme of the 2020 Roughnecks. 

The league was under new ownership that also brought on a new apparel partner.  They were never going to just roll out the looks from a prior regime. 

8 hours ago, MJD7 said:

The Cardinals article did say that Bill DeWitt III had to fight hard to keep the chain-stitching. Who knows if the Phillies fought as hard.

 

That Phillies jersey is almost certainly a replica though, so it doesn’t say anything definitively of how the authentics will look.

Bill DeWitt III is the closest thing we'll get within MLB ownership ranks to a uniform purist. Based on my experience, he gets it. 

2 hours ago, heavybass said:

Dwanye the Rock Johnson would probably kick my ass in a wrestling ring however design wise I can kick his ass... and most of us design wise too especially

I hope you're not suggesting that The Rock personally designed the XFL uniforms.

21 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

So according to this video, Royal Retros will be coming up with merchandise for all of the current UFL teams. 

 

I'm not sure that's a total surprise. Royal Retros created merch for the new USFL the last few years, too. 

https://www.royalretros.com/products/pittsburgh-maulers-usfl-remix-jersey

35 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

 These leagues aren't expecting packed stadiums quite yet. But they are hoping for 20,000+. With commercials already hitting the air, they need to keep this up with local advertising too, not just expecting to snag eyes on Fox and ESPN sports broadcasts. 

Really great analysis. On the point above, it's worth noting that the St. Louis Battlehawks have for the first time offered season tickets in the 400-level at the Dome at America's Center, which I'm sure they'll have no problem selling. 

46 minutes ago, Ridleylash said:

Put another way; the Kraken's jersey are far closer in design to the Sens' old black O third jersey than they are a 1-1 Metropolitans jersey.

But how many people in the Seattle metropolitan area would know this vs how many would look at it and make the obvious correlation to the Metropolitans jersey? 

That's why this guy, opportunist or otherwise, filed a lawsuit. Even if he doesn't stand a chance, what's the point of owning that intellectual property if you're not going to attempt to protect it? 

14 hours ago, pepis21 said:

 

Old players yes, but most of current gen players have no experience with sleeves jerseys yet plenty of them wearing sleeves undershirt which is kinda interesting and nike should start to make those undershirt in accessories colors.

I don't think the players' issue was with sleeves in general, but more specifically with the sleeves as Adidas made them. Those shirts were form-fitting and I think the complaint was that they were too restrictive. It's easy to see why just by looking at them.