IceCap

Another unpopular opinion (it seems). Unless a team actually played in the ABA NBA teams need to stop with the ABA throwbacks. In fact teams need to stop throwing back to uniforms the organization never actually wore all together.

The New Jersey Devils are the same way. The Devils, though, are completely consistent when it comes to what colours are swapped between sweaters. The Blackhawks have two different striping patterns between their sweaters. Which isn't a bad thing. Despite that they still look like they belong to the same uniform set, which is all that really matters. It's kind of a holdover from an era when making sure each individual sweater looked its best was the goal, rather then obsessing over complete consistency. The Packers had the same kind of thing going on in the 60s. The striping pattern from the green jerseys wasn't carried over and inverted for the white jerseys because the powers that be decided it didn't look as good on the whites as a simpler design did.

That wasn't vintage white on their old thirds/throwbacks. The uniforms they were based on really did use a tan colour.

I don't know why, but the Senators' home and road uniforms went from eyesores to "hey, these are pretty cool" as soon as they switched from the Edge sock pattern to a more traditional sock pattern. In fact I would say the Sens' home/road set works better then the Penguins' home/road set. Maybe it's the dullness of the Penguins' khaki, maybe the template just looks better in red and black. I'm not sure.

I'm the opposite. Lose the diagonal stripe on the front and these are perfect. That front diagonal stripe is the only thing I dislike about this uniform set.

No they aren't. Those sweaters are so bad that they can't even be used in a game, unless every game is a clash, Interesting. Considering they were exclusively worn against a team that also wore red and white, and no one seemed to have a problem telling the teams apart.

Much appreciated As for the IIHF thread, I actually did that a while back during the 2010 games. Though I'd like to revisit a few of those concepts.... You already did it? I'd like to check that out. I'll go looking for it in the concepts section (of course, a link would be nice too...) Here ya go.

Much appreciated As for the IIHF thread, I actually did that a while back during the 2010 games. Though I'd like to revisit a few of those concepts....

I'd like my neighbors to the north to go to that uniform design. It is incredibly nice. I can't really complain about American national team designs. The current Team USA soccer team kits since about 2003 are nice (though the crest could use some work). The Team USA baseball team has an awesome design. USA Hockey and USA Basketball both have crappy logos, but at least those logos have ceased appearing on the uniforms. I personally think that all Team USA teams should use a touched-up and modernized version of this logo: but that's just my (probably unpopular) opinion. I love the idea of an eagle for Team USA. It seems so obvious, yet it's never really been explored all that much. Self-promotion time!

I hate the Hockey Canada logo. It would make for a great CHL logo, but I just can't stand it as the logo of our national hockey teams. For all the problems that the 2010 Olympic logo had, at least it wasn't the Hockey Canada logo. I'd love to see them go back to this logo... ...or hopefully this one:

Not to bad. A clean, yet modern, look.

Morgo is Lights Oot. He's the Canadian Lights Out.

The problem is that the NFL uses helmets as secondary logos (and in the case of the Browns, the primary logo). The NFL wants to maintain brand consistency, so they're going to shoot down alternate helmets outside of the throwback alternate.

Wow Casey, those are unpopular. You picked the right place for them though In fact there are two that I agree with. I'd love to see hockey go with primary/clash sweaters rather then with home/road. That doesn't necessarily mean colour vs colour. The Maple Leafs and Red Wings, for example, would probably use their whites as their primaries and their darks as their clashes, but I agree in principal. There's no reason a Canadiens/Bruins game can't be red vs black. Also, I like the Phoenix Coyotes' uniforms. I prefer the pre-Edge set, but I don't mind the Edge set either. The old Picasso Coyote/southwestern look was unique, yes, but it just didn't work for me. To many colours. Were they a black team? A brick team? A green team? An orange team? It was an experiment worth doing, but ultimately the team made the right choice going traditional. Which they managed to do right, unlike a certain team on the west coast of Florida. The Coyotes went with a very traditional striping pattern, but it was one that, at the time, wasn't in us anywhere else in the league. They also went a simplified two colour scheme, but rather then ape one used elsewhere they used a unique colour that ties into the region. Classic with a modern/regional twist, as it were. If they would just bring back the waist stripes they would look perfect.

Sweet! But can we get them with a receipt?

Eh, I like the Illionois helmets but I really don't like those GIANTS helmets. I really like New York teams using just a variation of the initials NY as their logo.

AW MAN NOT AGAIN YOU GUYS I eagerly await Nordiques nation descending on the Jobberdome.

I think both Kansas City and Houston are terrible ideas, for what it's worth. Someone's still advocating that the Coyotes stay in Glendale?

Houston's a bad idea for a few reasons. Even if they're owned by the same guy who owns the Rockets they're still competing with the Rockets for fans, money, ratings, and corporate dollars. The Rockets have had forty years to establish themselves. It's going to be difficult for a niche sport (which hockey would be in Houston) to overcome that. The Atlanta Spirit Group/Thrashers to Winnipeg situation proved that the "basketball group that uses hockey as a date filler in southern markets" strategy isn't as solid as once thought. Secondly, it's just to much of a risk. The NHL played the "will it/won't it work?" game with non-traditional markets. When it works you get a team that's able to carve out a small but stable niche. When it doesn't you have $1 beer & hotdog night and give away fee snuggies while trying to buy a parking lot from yourself. If any team in a failed southern market is looking to move the smart thing to do is take the guaranteed money in Quebec City. You don't go to Houston which has the potential to fail all over again.

It would be, and the Blues having success (well until their recent ownership/revenue problems) made me think Kansas City would work. Sadly, however, the populous has proven me wrong. The Islanders and Kings couldn't manage more then half the Sprint Centre during an exhibition game, and the Islanders are a team that's always in the relocation discussion. I wouldn't be shocked if Bettman tosses another team with ownership problems to Quebec City while he waits it out in Glendale via taxpayer subsidy for two more years.

I'm with admiral. I don't see how new ownership makes the Leafs' territorial rights less of an issue when it comes to a team in Hamilton or the GTA. Regardless of who owns it, MLSE's not going to give up a monopoly on one of the most hockey crazed regions in the world if they don't have to. From what Seattle-based members have said, the Canucks have little to no presence in the city, and it seems like the NHL wants to be there. The problem with Seattle is that if they do get an arena it'll be to get a NBA team back, first and foremost. A NHL team would only be along for the ride, which isn't ideal. You don't want to go into a market already conceding first place to the other fall/winter league.

Piddling details like this haven't stopped Glendale!

Heh heh heh. Good luck with that. Let me repeat for clarity: the problem will not be solved through legal means. I'm missing the part where that makes it right.

Mario used Kansas City as leverage to get a new arena out of Pittsburgh, and then the league soured on the city as a market when they only filled up half of the Sprint Centre for a game between the Kings and Islanders (the latter of whom are often in the relocation discussion). I don't see Kansas City happening.

Moral of the thread: We are all entitled to own whatever we want and nobody has a right to set the amount you must pay them. Since it's wrong of them to deprive you of things you want, just steal anything you don't feel like paying for. Exactly. A jersey is a luxury item. You're not entitled to one. If you think the prices of the official product is to high don't buy it. If enough people don't buy official jerseys for this reason then the prices will drop. You're capable of effecting the market without supporting illegal activities such as ip theft. Except the thing is, you don't have the authority to tell people what they should and should not buy. Nice try, though. I don't, no. The law, however, does. I don't have the authority to tell people not to rob a bank. Doesn't mean they should.