Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Sport

  1. Agreed. They always looked their worst when they played at Detroit or at Carolina. Blue pants against Carolina provides ample contrast. I also always felt a little sheepish that they were essentially using the Rangers uni structure, but with navy blue. If they go to blue pants on the road full time the only team they'll really need to worry about stepping on the toes of is Washington and I think their jerseys and socks are striped differently enough to avoid confusion. 


    The original uniforms had larger red stripes on the hem and socks so the pants didn't feel so out of place. When they went to their current uniforms in 2007 the shoulder patches were a red backgrounded oval and they had a thicker red stripe on the socks so the pants still worked. But when they redesigned the socks to match the sleeves a couple years ago when Adidas took over is when the red pants started to feel incongruent with the rest of the uniform. I like this development, but that was their last road game of the season so we won't know if this is a permanent change until next fall. Remains to be seen if they'll try the blue pants at home with the blue jerseys.


    If you want an aid in imagining what that might look like you can kind of see with the Tri City Americans who use their jersey templates with blue pants. 


  2. 16 hours ago, monkeypower said:

    As much as I like that look with the blue pants and dislike having different equipment colours, I think the red pants would still be needed for the blue jerseys.


    With the lack of hem striping and the arm/sock striping essentially being blue on blue, I think it would it be a lot of blue and end up being the NHL's version of the Saints leotard look.



    I just saw this. They do have hem stripes on the blue jerseys. Am I misunderstanding? 



  3. columbus-blue-jackets-blue-pants-red-pan



    I've wanted the Blue Jackets to wear blue pants on the road for forever and when I saw the reverse retros were going to use blue pants I thought it might be possible. 


    Three things:

    1. I think they look as good, if not better, than I always pictured.

    2. It's going to take some getting used to because the red pants have been with us since day one, but I can't argue the red pants look better.

    3. I wouldn't mind if this was their permanent road look. I think the blue pants with the blue jerseys and socks would be too much blue and too little red and they wouldn't look like the Blue Jackets so I'd rather stick with the red pants at home and use home and road pants like the Hockey Rockies used to. 

  4. 10 hours ago, Crabcake said:

    Joe Burrow is going to die.


    That's easy to say, but they cut the statistically worst guard in the league who caused the injury, Jonah Williams looked good in his first season at left tackle, signed Reilly Reiff, brought back Frank Pollack whose lines and running backs had solid numbers when he was here a couple years ago, and they'll draft oline in the second round of what's supposedly a deep lineman class. Booger McFarland called it "football malpractice" last night. This idea that they did nothing about the offensive line, even held by many Bengals fans, is just not true. Penei Sewell would've helped for sure, but he can't play all five positions and they determined the dropoff between OL Second Round Guy X and Sewell was smaller than the dropoff between WR Second Round Guy X and Chase. 


    There's also the argument that a guy like Chase unlocks the offense's potential and gives them way more options. Last year they didn't have a deep threat with AJ Green being old and John Ross being doggy ass so defenses could stack the box and make them one-dimensional.



    9 hours ago, tBBP said:


    I mean, at some point some Ohio State QB has to accomplish something in the NFL...right???


    (Seriously, someone name me the last Ohio State QB--or the first, for that matter--to accomplish anything of note in the NFL...)


    Shane Falco. 

  5. 1 hour ago, neo_prankster said:



    Rick Nash

    Sergei Bobrovsky

    Seth Jones

    Pierre-Luc Dubois


    I’d only keep Nash and Bobrovsky on the CBJ mt rushmore (Cam Atkinson and Nick Foligno are the two others). Columbus the city’s are Jack Nicklaus, Archie Griffin, Buster Douglas, and Jesse Owens. 

  6. 4 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

    I didn't see a list for Cincinnati but that's somewhat obvious: Johnny Bench, Pete Rose, Joe Morgan and Sparky Anderson. If it's players only, maybe Boomer Esiason or Ken Anderson replaces Sparky. 



    Cincinnati's is easy. It's Oscar Robertson, Johnny Bench, Joe Morgan, Anthony Munoz. Some people will say Pete Rose should be on there and to that I say, who's Pete Rose? I have no idea who you're talking about. 


    Oscar Robertson - was on the NBA's 50 Greatest Players list when the league did it for the 50th anniversary of the NBA. Played for both UC and the Cincinnati Royals.

    Johnny Bench - some say greatest catcher in baseball history.

    Joe Morgan - some say greatest second baseman in baseball history.

    Anthony Munoz - some say greatest offensive lineman in NFL history. Only Bengals player in the Hall of Fame.


  7. 9 hours ago, BBTV said:

    This jerkoff pitcher for the Cardinals drilled Bryce Harper right in the face with a pitch (directly in the face without hitting anything first) and then the pitcher's next pitch drilled Gregorious right in the ribs.  So the umpire warns both benches then throws the Phillies manger out!


    Screw the Cardinals.  Trash-ass team that gets every benefit in the world.  You say anything to them and you're tossed.  Hell with their filthy pig fans too.


    Get this - the exact same thing just happened less than a week ago with the Cardinals. Jonathan India got drilled in the helmet by a different Cardinals pitcher, umpires warned both teams, and David Bell got tossed because he was like "We didn't do anything. They're throwing at our guys' heads. Talk to them!". So that's two of these incidents plus the previously discussed bench clearing brawl that the Cardinals started with the Reds and somehow only Nick Castellanos got suspended. I'll never understand MLB bending over backwards to protect them.


    I've thought for a while that if you hit a guy in the head you should get tossed automatically. If you can't control yourself out there you shouldn't be out there. 





  8. 1 hour ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:


    I'm shocked you already got it!


    I ordered my Robert Woods Rams jersey last June and it didn't come until September 2020.


    I was shocked too because when I put the order in it said I'd get it in sometime in late May. When I ordered my Burrow jersey on draft night last year it took a couple months to receive so I didn't think the May shipping date was unusual with a brand new jersey. When it showed up at my door 5 days later I was pleasantly surprised. 

  9. I don't even know who the hockey equivalent of Charles Barkley would be. NBC thought it might be Jeremy Roenick, but instead of being an affable dumbass who occasionally says smart things in a funny way (Barkley), he was just a dumbass. Anybody in the hockey world who managed to come out of their playing career with a shred of personality left are like the Spittin' Chiclets barstool types and I wouldn't want that on a nightly show. The smarter move than trying to recreate the NBA on TNT studio show thing is find something new that works for its own authentic reasons. 


    edit: and this has nothing to do with anything, but why did NBC always put the guys behind a standing desk? Give them chairs, make them comfortable. 

  10. Not going to tell you how to eat your own hotdogs, but that's like saying you're uncultured swine if you drink white wine with fish. Mustard on hotdogs is standard practice. I've only seen Mustard Only Nazis go after the ketchup people. I've never seen a Ketchup Only Nazi. That's a new one.


    A hot dog is ostensibly sausage. Sausage is served with mustard, like throughout the history of sausage. If you want to condiment your hotdog with ketchup I won't say anything, but you're not uncultured swine for using mustard. The exact opposite, actually. Ketchup is loaded with sugars and the sweetness overpowers the meat, the mustard is complimentary, which is why people use it. Get out of here with that uncultured swine bullshirt. 




  11. Good topic. As a casual observer of the NBA I think their problem is what many of us have always worried about if teams and leagues went to too many alternates - they've diluted their franchises' brand strength in pursuit of short-term one-off jersey sales. I don't know what teams look like anymore. I couldn't describe to you what the Houston Rockets primary brand and uniform is right now. I don't think they know. That's a bad thing. 

    This is going to make me sound like an old grump, but here's what I'd do if I was King of Basketball and the solutions are simple.

    1. They need a 5 year rule like the NFL has that applies to a home, road, and one alternate. That builds some stakes into each uniform decision, makes teams consider their uniform more thoughtfully and invest more into each redesign. As of now if a team comes out with a new look there's no reason to care because they can just redesign in another year or two. It's the college football problem. Even if you like a look you're better not to get too attached to it because it'll be gone soon. It also guarantees recognizability. Also the alternate needs to resemble the home and road in some way so the Raptors black and gold alternates or the Warriors black and yellow alternates wouldn't fly.


    2. Also in pursuit of rock solid recognizability - there's 41 home games and 41 road games. Mandate that the designated home and road uniforms must be worn at least 30 times each. That still leaves 22 games for alternates, throwbacks, and City Edition jerseys, which is more than enough. This means that most of the time people see a team they'll be in a consistent look.


    3. One team needs to be in white (or yellow in the Lakers case). There's too much that can go wrong in color-on-color matchups. Don't leave any room for guess work and just write it into the rules.


    4. Throwback uniforms can be worn a maximum of 4 times. If the uniform's good enough to wear so often then make it your full time primary look. Keep it around for a few fun nights a year, but not so many that it steps on the message you're trying to instill with your primary brand.


    5. "City" Edition uniforms as the fourth jersey are fine, but they really need to rein them in because these are the biggest problem. They're worn too frequently, they're too different from the regular team brands, and they change them before fans and casual watchers can associate them with their respective teams. There needs to be strict protocols about how often they can be worn. I say twice a year. Also there needs to be something that connects each city edition uniform to the pre-existing IP of the team. Example: Portland's this year is brown and says "Oregon" on it. Fine, whatever, but why not take that stripe they have on the side and use it in sash form the way the other Blazers unis look? Connects to the team in an unmistakable way, but you get a fresh look too. Also they need to mandate that the city uniform needs to be around for more than one season. 


    6. NO THROWBACKS, ALTERNATES OR CITY EDITION UNIFORMS IN THE PLAYOFFS. PERIOD. The Cavs and Raptors proved the teams can't be trusted to handle decisions themselves and won championships in STUPID looking alternate uniforms that neither team even wears anymore. Best moments in those franchises' histories and they're forever going to be in those uniforms. You have to put policies in place to protect the teams from making dumb decisions.


  12. 1 minute ago, Claystation360 said:

    Why are the seats in PB stadium teal/green and not orange?


    IDK, the muted dark green's a more neutral color? It's something I've never really cared about one way or the other. I happen to like the green seats. 


    This is what all orange seats in a stadium looks like if you're curious. 



  13. On 4/21/2021 at 10:41 PM, guest23 said:


    They are also notoriously cheap, to the miserly ownership not changing the helmets may have simply been choosing not to open the pocketbook for fancy helmet paint and masks.


    They already paint the helmets so new paint wouldn't be drastically more expensive. If finances are the reason they didn't change the helmets then it might be because they didn't want to replace the thousands of seats in the stadium that have the helmet etched into the plastic seatback. 




    (best picture I could find)

  14. As much as I wish Super Bowl XL didn't happen, Roethlisberger does have two super bowl rings. 


    Again, you have Patriots Brain. You don't seem to grasp how hard it is to get to and win Super Bowls and your standard is stupid high. If a player wins one in their career then mission very accomplished. If they don't win more than that it's not a failure.

  15. 7 hours ago, AustinFromBoston said:

    8-8 isn't good no matter how you spin it. It's hilarious you're using that to defend him when the teams he had were better than that. 

    You're also under this ridiculous mindset that 1 super bowl win over a decade ago excuses coming up short for the rest of his career when he had super bowl caliber teams.

    "A well run organization" doesn't care what you accomplished 10 years ago, they want to know what you accomplished now. Gruden with Tampa is another example. They didn't give a :censored: he won them a Super Bowl nearly a decade ago. After a few bad seasons he was kicked to the curb.   


    3 8-8 seasons & 3 playoff wins since 2010.

    A "well run organization" doesn't keep a guy on after all that if they're expecting to win a Super Bowl. 


    You keep doing this obvious false equivalence thing. Gruden won the Super Bowl and then went 7-9, 5-11, 11-5 (lost WC), 4-12, 9-7 (lost WC), 9-7 missed playoffs. He had a lot of duds and Bucs teams that stopped being competitive. That has not been the case with the Steelers. They're never bad or easy to play, they've never gone 4-12, as much I'd like them to. 


    Again making me say nice things about the Steelers - saying they're not a well run organization is, no fooling, one of the ten dumbest things I've read on this website. They're basically the model NFL franchise and their records back it up. They've been a factor in every season I can remember, they haven't been truly mediocre since the 80's and haven't been terrible since the 60's. There's no franchise, Patriots included, that I'd rather trade the last 50 years with.



  16. The case for Mike Tomlin and I hate saying nice things about the Steelers is that they're never bad. Nobody goes 14 years without a losing season by accident. Jason Garrett and the Cowboys were often bad, Mike McCarthy was carried by one of the best QBs ever. There's seasons where everything goes wrong for the Steelers and at minimum they still find a way to 8-8. If you want to argue that he's the reason they haven't won in the playoffs then you could just as easily argue they wouldn't get that far in many years without him. When you're stable at head coach, especially with a coach who has proven he can win it all no matter what arbitrary timeline you're using to discredit that (which is dumber than s***), you don't throw it away to go looking in the head coach woods for someone who's maybe better, but probably isn't. The Steelers have had 3 head coaches since the dang ass 1960's. I think they know what they're doing. 

  17. 14 hours ago, BBTV said:


    Everyone says this.  Everyone.  "I'd trade 10 years of crap just for one Bowl". 


    Then you get the bowl, and guess what?  You still want to enjoy watching football on Sunday, and after a while, the 'Bowl doesn't matter and what you're watching now does.  


    Take it from an Eagles fan that suffered through 14 years of Andy Reid being very good but not getting it done, then they finally got it done, and now they're horrible again, coach fired, etc. etc. etc.


    He's not very good at making his points, but the dude isn't totally wrong.

    He’s totally wrong. The eagles are a bad example on this subject because I’ve never heard people move on to bitching so quickly so soon after a championship. You’re an outlier. You guys took the attitude of “about time” instead of “thank you” and now it’s like you’re mad they only have one instead of two or three. You might as well have never won it. It’s basically a masterclass in how not to behave after winning a championship. 


    And yeah I would be fine with one championship - Ohio State won a national championship in 2002 and I basically stopped caring about college football as a result. 

  18. 7 minutes ago, AustinFromBoston said:

    All I'm going to say is,  take a team that has had great players with a hall of fame QB, that has never posted a losing season in nearly 15 years, would it not surprise you even a little bit to find out they only won a single Super Bowl in all that time?

    Would not a single part of you think "I'm surprised that's all they won". 

    No because I was not in a coma and I remember the Patriots hogging much of the AFC’s super bowl trips over the last two decades. 


    50 minutes ago, AustinFromBoston said:

    Over a decade ago. He’s had far better teams since and have done nothing with them. 


    Sorry I didn’t realize if you go over ten years in between Super Bowls you lose all rights to the achievement. 




    So it’s completely unreasonable to have expected the Steelers in the past 10 years to have made at least 1 Super Bowl with the teams they’ve had? 

    Yeah it’s unreasonable because I was not in a coma those years and I remember the Patriots hogging much of the AFC’s super bowl trips over the last two decades. 

  19. 11 minutes ago, AustinFromBoston said:

    That’s not what I asked. At all. 
    If my team has been  one of the most consistently good teams for over a decade, why Is it so crazy to expect them to at least make, let alone win 1 Super Bowl? 
    I’m not talking 6, just 1 or 2. And not even winning, just making it there. 

    HE WON A SUPER BOWL! If my team’s coach won a super bowl I wouldn’t care if he took a literal dump at midfield every game for the next 15 years. 

  20. Just now, AustinFromBoston said:


    So just to be clear, you’re saying you would prefer your team not win a Super Bowl, and just be good enough to lose in the playoff year after year? 


    No. I'm saying that I would prefer to have won championships in 2005, 2008, and then the last 13 years of competitive to excellent play than what it is I've experienced with my team. I'm a realist and understand that winning, IDK, 6 Super Bowls in 20 years isn't a reasonable expectation for anyone in a league with 32 teams with rules designed to induce parity. If that's your standard you'll never be happy. You're the only person more spoiled than Steelers fans. 

  21. 1 hour ago, AustinFromBoston said:

    Ask yourself would you want 14 years of “consistency”, only to fall apart in the playoffs year after year?


    Yes. 1000 times yes. 


    1 hour ago, AustinFromBoston said:

    Or would you rather actually make & possibly win a Super Bowl?  


    I'm old enough to remember 2008. (and 2005, which wasn't Tomlin, but it was recent enough for any Steelers fan older than 25 to have enjoyed, which is why they all need to STFU and go away until I say they can return (likely never)). You're the only person more spoiled than Steelers fans. 




  • Create New...

Important Information

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