SuperNerdToTheRescue

Members
  • Content Count

    149
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

56 Prospect

Recent Profile Visitors

1,585 profile views
  1. I'm surprised to see them offer a version of last year's Finals logo without the YouTube TV logo underneath. I can't imagine the NBA choosing to ditch something that's been making them money, especially when they're hurting for cash.
  2. So the Lakers will mostly be wearing their traditional gold home and Sunday white home uniforms at away games and their traditional purple away and classic blue away jerseys at home games. The same franchise that puts out a "Lore Series" City Edition uniform every season turns around and waters down their customs like this. And for what? Where is the level of care for their own brand and history?
  3. The Cavs can't stay out of their own way when it comes to having a brand that could easily be good. I know you're talking about their court but their uniform situation is an even bigger downgrade compared to what it used to be. IMO, their only jerseys from 2003-2016 (including all the alternates and throwbacks) that didn't look clean were the ones that Richard Jefferson and Iman Shumpert are modeling in the attached picture, and Shumpert's jersey is at least non-sleeved and in gold, wine, and white so I'll give it a pass. Of course, they won Game 7 of the 2016 Finals in that sleeved ugliness so there may be some attachment inside the organization to using black and having obnoxious stuff on their jerseys.
  4. I'm a Galaxy fan and I had the opposite reaction to this news, haha. With the Galaxy not looking like they'll be contenders again any time soon, my fear is that casual fans and people who are new to following MLS will see the Galaxy as having only won a single championship due to their lone gold star. (I can already envision LAFC fans making this mistake in the near future .) Maybe I'm just being insecure but I've noticed a pattern of newer fans not seeming to respect the history of the MLS 1.0 and 2.0 periods. These new rules about MLS Cup stars would only serve to aesthetically downplay the accomplishments of those eras should DC or any of the other "old" clubs also reach five championships in the next few season, IMO.
  5. Saw this apparent leak of the Galaxy's new primary kit making the rounds on Reddit: Per the comments section, sounds like the typical blue sash has been swapped out for a silver one to commemorate the Galaxy's 25th season, and the three short stripes to the left of the collar are part of a new, league-wide motif that references an early '90s Adidas template. I doubt the Galaxy could have refused the stripes if they're something that Adidas has imposed onto all MLS kits debuting this upcoming season, but I don't understand why the team would agree to muddy up their established brand with a silver sash that won't be removed until 2022. Emphasizing silver to this degree in observance of a "silver anniversary" is a bit extra, and it might even be reckless for the Galaxy to put out this bland primary kit that lacks any blue or gold outside of the Adidas, Galaxy and Herbalife logos considering the splash that LAFC's streetwear-friendly brand has made in LA in just the past few years. Also, the Adidas stripes look especially weird in this leak since silver isn't a primary team color and the secondary kit from last season doesn't have them. Things might look disjointed next season too unless kits that debut in 2021 also have the shoulder stripes.
  6. Spotted this on Twitter. Does this suggest an Elgin Baylor-era throwback for next season? Edit: The image comes from this video that the Lakers tweeted out: https://twitter.com/Lakers/status/1186405674223202304
  7. Not sure if this has been posted anywhere, but it seems like teams might just wear their City uniforms on Christmas. Kind of strange that Nike would add superfluous sets like the "Earned" uniforms but then get rid of the Christmas jerseys. I guess they're trying to force new corporate traditions while eschewing cultural ones?
  8. What's that? Did you say you wanted a second bastardized version of the old purple uniform?
  9. From the Lakers subreddit. I prefer the LeBron photoshop that removed the "Los Angeles" wordmark.
  10. This 2017 ESPN feature on last year's Kobe-inspired jerseys implied that Nike was just going to get Kobe's final approval on a jersey that had nothing to do with his career until he asserted himself into the process.
  11. That was just in 2013, and I don't really count that one since Adidas just slapped the entire logo onto that jersey.
  12. Um, is this just an inaccurate rendering or is there no "Los Angeles" wordmark on that jersey?
  13. It's nice to see the long history of knockoff Lakers gear being honored with this set. Also, is this the first Lakers uniform since the Elgin Baylor days to have the city name on the jersey? They've reinstated it with such class.
  14. I don't get why Nike has to be so obtuse about the Lakers' Statement Edition situation. Nike doesn't have to treat the purples like some kind of bold, fashion-type uniform just because they have become the de-facto alternates as a result of the Sunday whites moving to Association status. Exceptions, such as grandfathering in the gold home jerseys, have been made for the Lakers in the past to protect one of the most storied brands in all of sports. There's no reason to treat the Lakers like they're OKC, and have the Statement uniform be trendy (if it were the '90s) and expendable. Oh well, now I can't wait for the next Statement Edition jersey to be unveiled in two years, so I guess Nike's system of planned obsolescence is already working on me. I just can't believe they imposed it upon the Lakers, of all teams.