upperV03

Yeah I don’t care, it’s Messi. 30 was available, it’s the number he wanted, and the league rightfully granted him the exemption.

Mbappe doesn’t wear #10, though… It would take a whole sequence of # changes for that to happen. Also, Neymar offered the 10 to Messi when he arrived but Messi declined and opted to take the #30 that he wore in the early days at Barça. It was Messi’s choice, so I don’t understand the problem with it.

That would be my second guess, and there were quite a few fans thinking the same back in the Spring when Paulson was dropping hints. He has said in the past that the Rose City theme would come back at some point, so a pink Rose City-themed kit wouldn’t shock me. Only reason I’m leaning more towards yellow is that he said it’s a color that hasn’t really been featured as the primary color before, which leads me to believe it’s a color that HAS been used but not in a prominent way. Yellow seems to fit that bill, but again pink wouldn’t shock me at all.

The Timbers are due for a new secondary, and Merritt Paulson has said it’ll be the biggest risk the club has taken. It won’t feature any white, and the base will be a color that “hasn’t really been featured as the primary color before”. Paulson has said before they won’t do a true gold kit, but my guess/hope for this upcoming kit is yellow or athletic gold.

The Lakers’ City warmups are so much better than the actual unis IMO:

Those clubs you mentioned have all been around since the late 1800’s and have worn some version of their primary kits since either the late 1800’s or early 1900’s. They have their signature look and only make small changes from year to year. They’re not gonna abandon their traditional primary kits of 100 years or more just to differentiate themselves from other clubs with similar looks, especially when they can do that with secondary and third kits.

We’re still on the “Rip City” thing? I mainly got worked up yesterday because of it being called stupid and conflated with other city nicknames or abbreviations that don’t have any direct significance to the team or that weren’t conceived organically. I’m fine with people not liking it, and I totally get people just not liking it on the jersey. I think calling it dumb or stupid and conflating it with those other nicknames is a little misguided unless you’re from the area or are a fan of the team and can truly understand what it means and represents to those of us who are. It’s fine that people don’t like it, and like I ended up saying yesterday I don’t think it can be fully understood unless you’re from the area or are a fan of the team.

There actually is grey in the panels on the shorts:

That’s all fine, and I respect that you and some others on here don’t like the Rip City monicker (whether it’s on a jersey or not). I also realize you were commenting on all of this year’s City uniforms and not just the Blazers, and to be fair I wasn’t the original person to single out that part of your comment. My main issue with people not liking the Rip City name, and the thing I do get worked up about, is when it’s conflated with other city nicknames or abbreviations like Buzz City, The Valley, OKC, or even Motor City. To me what sets Rip City apart from all of those is these two things: it came about organically in the organization’s infancy instead of as part of a marketing campaign, and it’s a nickname that is wholly specific to the Blazers instead of being a general nickname or abbreviation for the city/area. I understand people not liking it on a jersey, but for Blazers fans and people in this area it’s a deep and meaningful thing. I do get that people who aren’t from here or who aren’t Blazers fans won’t necessarily understand or appreciate that.

Yep, so long as I’m allowed to have the opinion that your opinion is dumb.

Fair enough. You’re free to think it’s stupid still and us Blazers fans are free to think your opinion is stupid, too. I’m fine that some people don’t like the name, and I’m also fine that some people don’t mind the name but just don’t like it being on the jerseys. What I’m not fine with , however, is people conflating it with other city nicknames or abbreviations that aren’t specific to the team and/or were conceived as part of a marketing campaign instead of coming about organically.

I find it hilarious when people who aren’t from the area and/or don’t know the origin story of “Rip City” call it stupid or conflate it with things like Sactown, The Valley, Buzz City, etc. If you just don’t like the nicknames or abbreviations on jerseys, that’s one thing. But to call “Rip City” stupid in it of itself is, in my opinion, quite ignorant when it’s something that came about organically in the franchise’s very first season in 1971.

Big fan of what my Blazers did: My favorite part has to be the red side panels with the Dr. Jack plaid pattern, but the drop shadow wordmark and numbers are a great callback to the 90’s. The white circle around the pinwheel logo on the shorts is a fantastic little tribute to the old Memorial Coliseum center court logo as well.

1. Yeah, actually, they did have lightning on their uniforms for a few years in the late ‘70’s: They were even worn as throwbacks in the 2000’s: 2. The more I look, the more I actually do think the side panels are in the shape of a lightning bolt. Who knows.

All three Classic Editions this year have shiny satin shorts. The Knicks and Celtics have faux belt loops on theirs, too:

LockerVision is up and running and has also been completely redesigned. All of the City Editions are listed as “Coming Soon”. So far I haven’t seen any accidental leaks. https://lockervision.nba.com

Looks like we’ll see this season’s matchups on October 12th, a week before the start of the regular season. This image is currently all you can see on LockerVision:

Yep, Olympics-only design made by UNIQLO, who’s gone with the neon yellow for pretty much all of Sweden’s Olympic uniforms and gear: About the only piece thing that’s the regular yellow is the swim caps: I’m not a fan of the neon at all, and I can’t imagine the Swedish fans are either. In 2016 H&M made Sweden’s uniforms and gear and the yellow was slightly paler than usual, but still somewhat resembled the normal Swedish yellow:

And it looks absolutely terrible.

Yeah, even though the side panels are a reference to ‘98-00, they’re still the worst part of the shirt and IMO the only thing dragging it down a bit. That said, the full kit looks fantastic with the hooped socks:

Best part of the kit is the awesome hooped socks: The shorts are nice, too, with the red/blue/red Adidas stripes:

Just like in 2016, the USWNT’s Olympic kits will have the “USA” text in place of the federation logo: I personally wish they’d go with the Olympic team logo, or at least add the Olympic rings, as the “USA” text by itself just looks a bit plain.

I’m a sucker for the 2013/14 away kit with the polo collar and hooped socks:

England will be in all-white today: Disappointing, but not surprising, that neither team will be in their classic combo. Will still be a good looking final, but not as good as it could be.