5ss22

Another one of these where I just cannot see the vision. These are not going to work in the stale setting that the Trop provides.

A lot of the hate for the new M logo is due to the fact that a lot of online fans wanted the old M logo back, even though it wouldn't fit with the rest of the brand. This is because a large percentage of online fans were born in the 90s and are therefore obsessed with everything looking like it did in the 90s.

15 minutes ago, bowld said:

Vikings likely white to wear at their whiteout game

This would be the worst helmet in NFL history just based on pure unnecessity.

4 hours ago, Chewbacca said:

I think the best way forward for the Wild is to switch to forest green and gold.

Do you mean Packers colors or more like USF colors? Because the former wouldn't fly with a lot of people.

Quick thoughts on all of them (I know they are pretty much all unnecessary):

Good:

Milwaukee, Utah, Dallas, San Antonio

Almost Good (I like the idea/design/colors but there are things I would change):

Minnesota, Charlotte, New Orleans, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Washington

Boring:

Detroit, Atlanta, Houston, Orlando

Redundant (Not really boring or bad, but repeats of what we've seen already):

Cleveland, Boston, Toronto, New York, Sacramento, Portland

Bad (Essentially ugly but kind of interesting):

Brooklyn, Indiana, LA Lakers

Irredeemable:

Chicago, Denver, Golden State, LA Clippers, Miami, Oklahoma City, Memphis

2 hours ago, Pyromania1983 said:

Apparently based off of the famous Reading Terminal market. Very cool local ties.

Definitely looks nicer in this picture, but it would still be better if it just said Philadelphia or really anything besides city of BROTHERLY love.

The Rays should stop wearing the throwbacks because it's their worst look.

The green looks kind of bright, but there's a massive difference between this bright studio and the Target Center in the early 90s.

I think it would be cool if hockey teams could paint the center and "blue" lines in team colors. I have also never played competitively so I don't know how much players rely on the colors to tell where they are.

I don't necessarily think the uniforms were executed well, but the reason the lake inspiration was inevitable for the Timberwolves is that - as far as I know - Minneapolis is unique in how many lakes are in the city limits and how relevant they are for daily life here.

1 hour ago, kimball said:

Are we sure they're getting one?

I don't love them but I'm excited to see the alternate court.

I am a Vikings fan and I do not like the throwbacks. The boards seem pretty split on whether they should be primaries or are merely a serviceable alternate, but I would actually rather they don't wear them at all.

I think they look like some strange unlicensed jersey. Their current uniforms have character while these look like any other team from the 60s.

So excited for the Vikings to look like every other team from the 60s. These were better when the alternative was the ugly 2006-2012 design

Please tell me the pants have stripes.

If you're going to have a script, it should be diagonal. Otherwise there's too much empty space that a logo would normally fill.

The black uniform just feels unnecessary to me. They aren't even really treating it as a team color. I assume that the rule where the alt color has to match something on the main set is still a rule, so they're doing exactly what the Commies did with their black stripe, except they made it a word.

The Timberwolves' remix jerseys from last season just got it right (in my opinion). The best color scheme they've ever used, the best wordmark they've ever used, and their most iconic element, the trees.

9 minutes ago, Silent Wind of Doom said:

 

Then that sounds like the rendition is lacking.  I looked at it and the discussion and was like "Yeah, they're going for a more retro look, so things are going to be less detailed", but Minnie and Paul are retro.  It's more a clipart approach to modernity.  Compare with the Brewers' Wisconsin patch that has some kind of detail.  While a lot of his criticism is over-the-top, I can't say I disagree with the "blue blob" terminology.  Yes, it's shaped like Minnesota.  Yes, the red dot is a tiny star.  Doesn't mean those descriptors aren't what anyone sees from more than six inches/six feet away.

I feel bad being so off topic with the Rangers drop, so this is probably my last comment.

I believe that from the start the redesign was billed as retro-inspired, but looking towards the future. I think we can see that with the clear inspirations from the Twins' past while the overall design feels pretty clean and refreshed. And I'll ask you this; was the Minnie and Paul patch that much easier to see from six feet away?

59 minutes ago, Silent Wind of Doom said:

Do people really not think that sleeve patch objectively sucks?  I thought when this set was released everyone agreed on that.  Just a solid dark shape of the state with a small dot in it?  When the Minnie and Paul logo was already Minnesota-shaped, making the difference look even more lacking?  I'm just surprised by the push back at the suggestion that it's bleh when I thought that was the common consensus.

As @SCL said, Minnie and Paul are too detailed/complex for this rendition of the Twins' uniforms. They still have them above center field, so it's not like they're completely gone.

The "small dot" is representing the North Star, as in North Star State, as well as the location of the team within the state.

8 hours ago, BuckDancer said:

Was it? I don't remember them using the gold/yellow as their third color. Pretty sure it was the wheat since the beginning right? 

Never on the jerseys, but I remember having some merch back in the 2000s where the outlines were more gold/yellow rather than wheat.

9 hours ago, CDCLT said:

As much as I do appreciate limiting the amount of jerseys a team can have, the 4+1 rule seems to be causing more trouble than it's really worth.

I'd prefer if they went with 4+1+1. Home, road, 2 alts, throwback, city connect.

8 hours ago, DTConcepts said:

I hope the rumor mill is right and the Wild are dredging up the North Stars' brand, because this jersey is just not good. Except for the captain patch.

Is there any rumor other than they're just keeping the latest reverse retros in the rotation? I believe that is already confirmed.

10 hours ago, floydnimrod said:

There's been a call for them for the past 5-10 years to change it, because it was introduced after 2000 and every uniform released after that date (no matter how "mild" compared to its counterparts of the same era) must be changed. If the Colts had introduced what they currently wear in 2001, people would hate it by now, but because it's old as hell it's grandfathered in. I must say that I do enjoy the Colts uniforms, there's just a ridiculous double standard.

If you ask some people on this board, there are three options for uniform designs.

1. How the team looked when they first started.

2. The most boring possible "classic" design (AKA what every team looked like in the 60s).

3. What the team looked like when said person started watching (the 90s).

15 minutes ago, MJD7 said:

I guess I didn't consider the possibility that President St. Peter would outright lie (or, more charitably to him, simply doesn't have quite the eye for this kind of stuff that we do). 

My assumption is that he meant Minnie & Paul will remain above center field.