SilverNRed

Members
  • Content Count

    469
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SilverNRed

  1. How many times does it have to be said? It's not the 1960s any more. You can watch your team in the road wherever they're playing on High Definition television these days. You can watch any game in the league on any given night with the right cable package. The "we need to wear white at home to keep things visually interesting for the fans" argument has no merit in the year 2011. I don't go to many hockey games, but I go to / work at every Eagles game. There's something cool about being there live and seeing the "enemy" come in showing their "battle" colors. In the NFL, you get them all in their colored gear on the sideline even if they're wearing their white uniforms (especially in the winter when they all have on their parkas) but in the NHL, going to game after game of black vs white (back when the Flyers wore black and when I went to more games) really sucked. I get your point, but you're discounting the live experience too much. Exactly. I think the point is not about being able to see your team in whatever colors, but rather the people in attendance at the games. It can get old only ever seeing your team's color or alternate color against white every game. That's two or three colors all year, with one being white. Edit: just to clarify, I am speaking from the perspective of a ticketholder, someone who is in attendence for the games. I'm exactly with BBTV and BMac on why I want white sweaters at home for the NHL. It's just much cooler when you're there. And it really has nothing to do with being able to see every jersey for every team on TV if you have Center Ice. Moving on, the new Winnipeg jerseys look great (if that's what they'll really look like). Do we know what color their hockey pants will be? (Sorry if I missed it up-thread.)
  2. I fail to see the "problem" in your sentence. The problem is that every game looks exactly the same. I'd much rather have the home team wear white and play against a different colored team each night. Variety is the spice of life. When I was a kid it was fun to think about each game looking different -- white v.s. blue, white v.s. black, white v.s. red, etc. -- when we bought tickets at the beginning of the season. That was probably the start of my interest in logos and uniforms. That's a terrible idea. People are used to it now, but when the NHL first made the switch to darks at home it confused more then a few people. Your idea would make that confusion annual. Fans need to be able to associate with home and road games with one type of sweater, so they can know who the home team is the moment they tune in. Alternate sweaters are not going away, and most of them are dark. Teams like to wear their alternates in front of their home crowd to increase sweater sales. So darks at home just makes the most sense. The road team doesn't have to worry about bringing two uniform sets on a road trip. They can just pack their whites. Is it really that difficult to figure out who the home and road teams are when you tune in? The road team is listed above (or to the left) of the home team in the graphics. That's the first place I look. In the era of HDTV, you can also spot the home team's sweaters and colors in the crowd almost instantly. I don't think a switch from home whites to home darks in the middle of the season would confuse anyone. If you're a hockey fan, you'd be aware of it. And if you're a casual fan, you're probably already confused based on how every sport does home/road uniforms differently anyway.
  3. The problem with dark sweaters at home is that if you have season tickets, or just attend a lot of games, every game looks exactly the same -- your team in their dark sweater against a white team. Here's what I would do: Have teams wear white at home from the start of the season through New Years, then switch to dark jerseys at home from Jan. 1 through the end of the regular season. For the playoffs we can let home teams decide what they wear or go back to white at home or whatever. The big benefit this way is that fans will get to see all of their teams jerseys (white, dark, alternate) during the season, and light/dark jerseys from around the league as well.
  4. I think they would have sold $200,000 worth of merchandise with any logo that wasn't a complete debacle (which this isn't). Pretty sure the thinking is "We just got an NHL team! Woo!" As a non-Winnipeg fan, I like the new logo....enough. Some of the fan mock-ups (especially the one that won Paul Lukas' web poll) were way cooler. I wonder if people in Winnipeg were hoping for something cooler. Their primary looks more like a shoulder logo. It's so simple that I don't know how great it's going to look as a giant crest sewn onto a hockey sweater. Hockey logos are different from logos in football or baseball in that they're very large on the uniform and can be complicated (e.g. Blackhawks).
  5. I don't doubt that they would give a reason that lame, but it makes absolutely no sense that they couldn't produce CoolBase jerseys in tan.
  6. I absolutely hated this idea when I first read about it (here) but I'm watching the Angels game now and the stars on the back of Kendrick's jersey actually look pretty cool. It's a pretty subtle change. The hat is another story; it just looks too busy with two big stars jammed back there. It's a cool concept. Fix it next year by just leaving the stars on the back of the jersey.
  7. Sabres-Flyers always looks good.
  8. Is it me or does it seem like the socks with the white at the top were clearly meant to go with blue pants? They seem completely unnecessary otherwise.
  9. Yes. Those are outstanding. I'd also like to see them mix the plaid-brimmed hats as permanent alternates. Being unique is a good thing. And Florida teams should not have dark/bland uniforms.
  10. Angels with a gold halo just looks like the Angels. It really looked awesome today. I never thought I'd want any changes since they won the World Series with a silver halo but I may have to rethink that.
  11. Maybe I missed it in the first 23 pages, but do we have an unveiling date for these yet? You'd think it'd be before, or at, the draft but I'm wondering how the labor negotiations might be affecting all that.
  12. Most hockey fans i've ever spoken with say that the original Sabres logo is a great hockey crest, and is indeed a classic. These aren't Sabres fans. Is the logo filled with shadows, seven colors, 3-d effects, gradients? No, but that is what makes it a good logo. It gets the message across. "Buffalo" and "Sabres". Simple, and yes, classic. Like the Devils "NJ" with the horns and tail. Not flashy, but simple. Classic. Does it's job, is pleasing to look at, and INSTANTLY recognizable. Seriously. Every hockey fan I've ever met has said they've liked (or loved) the original Sabres logo when talking about classic uniforms. Not to mention that every "away" broadcast I've seen on Centre Ice this year has praised the team going to an updated version of their original. Literally the only people I've ever seen who hate the original logo are here on this message board, where you can find people capable of saying they love or hate ANY logo in ANY sport just to make a point. Oh boy.
  13. That was fun while it lasted. That was horrifying while it lasted. Thank God that's over.
  14. No, it doesn't. Yes, it does. I'd love to see that take the field when they come to Yankee Stadium. Yikes. That "LA" logo combining the current Angels logo and the Dodgers/Old PCL Angels interlocking "LA" is way too big and busy. Plus the L and A look like they're different font sizes. The arched "Los Angeles" could work though.
  15. I agree. Any team with the balls to play in those radioactive-green traffic cop uniforms, I could totally see them going all out crazy with Nike stuff. The only team in the NFL with uglier uniforms than Seattle is the Buffalo Bills. If any good comes of this, maybe Nike can keep Ralph awake long enough to fix our uniforms back to something resembling an NFL team. Red, white, and blue -- how hard is that? Of course, knowing how tasteless Nike is and how stupid the Bills are, I'm sure they'd just add black to the (already muddled) color scheme and call it a day.
  16. If batters complain about the tattoos on pitchers' arms, there's no way they'd be cool with a pitcher wearing something like this. It's a little much anyway. The plaid is perfect for the brim, and even then it should probably be kept as a home cap or home alternate cap.
  17. My least favorite still goes to when Pizza Hut changed, but this is terrible too. The new logo looks like it was created in PowerPoint by someone who only had 45 seconds to come up with something. I can't believe someone was paid to come up with this and that it was the winning choice when all was said and done.
  18. Totally, dude. Star Wars was so "not cool" when it came out that it was the highest grossing movie of all time. And how much money did that Star Trek movie make last summer? Look, if you're on a special message board to talk about sports uniforms and logos, you might as well just admit that you're a nerd and embrace it.
  19. Anything other than Admiral Akbar is a giant disappointment. "It's a trap!!" And "Hotty Toddy"? Did they seriously try to come up with the worst mascot idea they possibly could? If so, mission accomplished.
  20. Pretty sure it wasn't the people who liked the plaid hats who dragged the Yankees into the conversation.