Jump to content

Sport

Members
  • Posts

    27,225
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    131

Everything posted by Sport

  1. This and the famous Bill-Jets colorblind game is why I prefer the leagues designating home and road jerseys and find the increase in color-on-color matchups troubling. I know soccer does it, but they have a clash system in place and somebody has to decide ahead of time if the uniforms are too similar. And they still run into occasional problems. The NBA doesn't seem to have any rules in place, teams seem to wear a different uniform every night, and many of the color-color matchups look awful.
  2. Add a sixth "String" to this and it'd be ideal for Nashville. Not a fan for Atlanta, though. Nashville's badge still sucks, BTW. Sometimes these things grow on me over time, but their logo and Chicago's aren't getting better.
  3. I disagree that it looks good on paper, first, but I think it's bad for the same reason I think the Capitals new navy blue thirds look bad - it's some generic looking nothing not associated with the team other than matching colors. It feels like the third jersey the New Jersey Devils would've worn in the early 2000's if Lou Lamoriello didn't hate alternate jerseys. If a hockey uniform could exist without making a single statement, those two are it. It's the hockey equivalent of the 2017 San Diego Padres.
  4. That uniform is the best the Washington Capitals have ever looked and should be their full-time uniform. That look is a piece of art. Is this a hot take?
  5. You see it all the time because the default stroke option in Photoshop is rounded corners, for some reason. This person typed out their digits, stroked them, then called it done. There's other, better ways to do it in photoshop, but noobs don't know. I find the easiest way is just to make my numbers in illustrator and then copy them into photoshop as their own image. And you're right, those Vikings numbers were so annoying the entire time they wore them. It's a small thing, but made the uniform look super amateurish, on top of everything else that was so "Pop Warner All Star Team" about those uniforms.
  6. Yeah no thanks to that. That's worse than what they've been wearing. Every concept I've seen is trying too hard and looks worse than what they should do, which is a Chargers-like modern revival of their classic uniforms.
  7. I cannot wait to take this place in.
  8. That doesn't make sense. If they're the same color they'd photograph the same regardless of angle. I think the shirt's a lighter blue than the shorts. Looks like the front is close to what the Charlotte Bobcats used to use. I really really like these.
  9. I would prefer he stay in the NFC if I had my druthers. The AFC is a QB gauntlet that is going to add Trevor Lawrence, and maybe Justin Fields/Zach Wilson.
  10. What's going on in this photo? The shorts look dark navy, the shirt looks significantly brighter. I like how the uni in the picture looks, but I thought the jersey was navy blue as well.
  11. I so recognized that template that it always just felt like they were wearing a template. I like it a hell of of a lot more than this though.
  12. That was my first thought as well, but I liked those Man City uniforms so I'm on board.
  13. I agree. I hated last year's at first, but eventually grew fond of them when I saw how they looked in action and I purchased one when they were discounted at Dick's. My biggest issue was the massive Adidas stripe on the shoulder. These are super sharp. I love how royal, navy, and orange look together and hope the team keeps using those three colors together for years to come.
  14. yeah it's really misaligned, but I still prefer the original. Maybe it's mid bite and it's about to chomp on some prey? It doesn't bother me. The original logo toes the line nicely between detailed and simple. It's also got some good action and movement where the new one is stagnant. It's perfect as a sports logo whereas the current logo is perfect for the wall of a high school gymnasium. It's an overly detailed illustration that you might find on a stock logo website. It's awful and I'm amazed it was approved with all that detail. A lot of people have tried to combine the two, but I think the best course of action is fix the lower mandible on the original and call it done. two things can be true at the same time. But why do you think they should lose the patches? Especially the Jaguars and it being the one element of gold on the entire jersey? Football jersey patches is one area that people seem hot about that's just never concerned me one way or the other.
  15. I'm aware it wasn't always there. I'm telling you the reason they decided to put it on the jersey.
  16. I think all 3 of those patches are necessary. - The Chiefs is for Lamar Hunt. I like the homage and that it's a unique quirk. - The Steelers need something there so when you're looking at the player from the left there's at least one logo present. Why not just put a logo on the blank side of the helmet? Sure, if I could time travel to Pittsburgh in the 1960's and slap stickers on the left side of their helmets to calm my OCD I would, but at this point you can't mess with the helmet. - The Jaguars uniforms are so basic that need something so as not to be completely mistaken for practice unis. Why not put the full body jaguar on the sleeves? IDK.
  17. Using a B gives you more surface area to work with than a C does. I've yet to see a concept with a tiger striped C that looks better than the B. I've tried to create many myself and I'm a world class logo and graphic designer If I, a genius, can't crack the code then the code is uncrackable. My issue with that logo isn't that it's a B. My issue with it is that it's bland and they have better logos locked away in a vault. (see: my avatar*) *I think I'll explain the joke of my avatar here: In my early days on the boards people would critique that logo with, "the head's too small". I see now that they're not wrong, but I was a dumb brat 15 year old teaching myself illustrator and I took criticisms of my favorite team's logo personally so I made the head bigger. Way too big. That's the entire joke.
  18. In actual Bengals news they published an article on their website and this quote filled me with some hope. "First, in case you have not heard, we are getting new uniforms. I know many of you have asked for these for quite some time. It's a long process working with NIKE and the NFL and, like I said above, we have high standards. We want this next iteration of our jersey to become as beloved, iconic and timeless as our helmet. We'll be publishing a LOT of great content around the launch of our new uniforms later this spring. I will leave you with this tease to say that I hope you're excited for a clean look." Going for "timeless" and "clean" is a good goal to shoot for in a uniform design in my opinion. Who the heck knows what she means by "clean" or "timeless", but I doubt their redesign in 2004 focused on cleanliness or timelessness. They look like they strove to make them as busy and dated as they could. If all they do is remove the white side panel then it'll be an improvement.
  19. Yes. By definition rebrand means changing the entire package. Rebrand has to do with both the uniforms and logo. Overhaul can specifically address the uniforms while maintaining the larger brand elements. Overhaul can also address the logo in small ways, but keep the uniforms the same and maintain the same brand. Example: the Baltimore Ravens were forced to change their logo, but their uniforms remained largely the same. The new logo took inspiration from their original logos and secondary logos and maintained the same ideas, feelings, colors associated with their original logo. The "brand" remained even though the logo changed. Around the same time the Tampa Bay Buccaneers changed everything. Everything they wanted people to feel when they looked at the new red and pewter look was completely new from the feelings people associated with the creamsicle uniforms and logos. The brand changed. This is a special circumstance that is still in the middle of the rebrand process. Usually we don't see the changes made incrementally across a few seasons, but it's kind of the exception that proves the rule. They could very well decide to keep their uniforms the same to reference the team's past while calling themselves the Washington BLANK. They might decide that they need a clean break and go with something entirely new in 2022. But we can circle back if and when that happens.
  20. Hated it, still hate it, have never understood the praise for it. Had the unintended effect of catching the sun and appearing dark blue or dark green in certain lighting. In this photo Blaine Gabbert's helmet does not match the rest of his uniform. That's dumb. I also blame the teal flake helmet for being the gateway drug to this abomination
  21. That was a rebrand. All rebrands are major overhauls, not all major overhauls are rebrands. It's a square/rectangle situation. What the Bengals did to their uniforms in 2004 was absolutely a major overhaul. Same goes for the 2005 Cardinals and 2006 Vikings.
  22. "small differences". Are you sure you're on the correct message board? I'll cry if they go back to the old uniforms and fix those "small" differences.
  23. Pro Football Talk published an article about the news that the helmet would not be changing and said something like "the Bengals have not had a major overhaul of their uniforms since the debut of the tiger stripes in 1981". I shook my head until it fell off. SInce then they've had a minor overhaul of their uniforms and a major overhaul. 2003 2004 yeah totally not a major overhaul.
  24. I like the Blue Jackets defense and goaltending that were supposed to be strengths finally showing up.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.