• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by JESSEDIEBOLT

  1. 2 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:


     the apparel co doesn't always make the uniforms. Up until a couple of years ago (and still for a few teams) the uniforms are made by Ripon and reebok just had them see their logo on the sleeve. 


    Look ok at the business world - how silly would it look if there was a logo on my dress shirt?  


    When something represents one brand, there's no room for another brand's mark, and the inclusion of such mark is an advertisement - plain and simple, no debate.  




    People wear logos on dress shirts every day? The Ralph Lauren logo is seen all over the world on people's chests.


    We voluntarily wear shirts with huge logos on them all the time.

  2. 27 minutes ago, The Wolf Within said:

    I'm seriously hoping that the owners realize that relatively small amount of money (to them) isn't worth pissing of their fans and decide to stop it once the three years are up.



    I have a terrible feeling that these aren't the only ads they'll push for though. I can see somebody trying to get an ad put below the numbers like many international basketball teams have. You have to let them know this isn't acceptable before it gets to that level. Soccer leagues justify their ads by keeping commercials out of matches or saying they keep ticket prices low. The NBA hasn't even pretended the ads will benefit its fans in any way. It's pure greed.




    It's not really fair to call it "greed". These teams are businesses first and foremost and have to do whats best for the state of the company.

  3. 47 minutes ago, joey joe joe jr. shabadoo said:


    The apparel manufacturer makes the jersey, that's totally apples and oranges and that's a reach rebuttel.


    I'm drawing a line in the sand. I gather you're ok as it devolves into what euro sports has which is a total joke and clown show. If you're indifferent to it, as some are, then fine. Then you wont care if others go to war over the issue.


    Sixers fans on facebook are livid fwiw. And it is a good sign. Burn, boycott, attack, and make sure this disgusting attempt is shamed and destroyed and never sees the light of day.


    Bottom line is there needs to be pushback in regards to advertising in sports. Hockey may be the next domino to fall. Intermissions were extended during the previous lockout in order to cram in more commercials. Now we have floating digital ads on the boards. They need an earful as well and if they see the NBA torn apart in the media they may get the message



    You gotta relax man. Sports are a business and a small ad doesn't effect your life. Get over it. Uniforms aren't sacred space. You're acting like a fool for suggesting people should attempt to burn jerseys, tarnish the Stubhub brand, organize rallies, etc. That's way over the top. The last thing we need in todays world is any of that happening because of advertising. 


    And people on Facebook are "livid" 24/7 about everything. They'll get over it.

  4. 1 hour ago, McCarthy said:

    I'm gonna push back on this (recent) notion that logos can't have detail. Many successful logos in pro sports right now have more detail than that. When did detail become a bad thing? 


    Yes, too much detail isn't good, but I don't think this has too much detail. If I have a criticism for this logo it's that it's sort of aping the Arizona Coyotes logo, but is even more poorly drawn. The neck/chest area feels like it doesn't line up with the head of the wolf, and the mouth has some perspective issues, and the two trees on the left don't feel necessary. But let's not handcuff ourselves into thinking that simplicity is the only way to create a good logo these days. There are bad simple logos out there just as there are good detailed logos. 


    I agree. This logo isn't any more detailed than the Hornets logo(s). 


    Is it my favorite concept? No. But it's not bad. 

  5. 34 minutes ago, keynote said:

    Well, wait a minute.  Sure, hornets imagery ties into the city's history -- and the team's name pays homage to that.  But that doesn't make "Buzz City" a thing. The latter is a corporate creation.  The Carolina Panthers may decide to dub Charlotte "the Panther's Den" (based on the notion that panthers once used to be native to the region), but that wouldn't make it a legit city nickname, either.  Do a Google News search for "Buzz City"; you won't find any references to the city of Charlotte before 2013 (when the rebrand was announced). 


    Re: "Queen City":  I do agree that too many cities claim ownership of the moniker "Queen City" for it to be a distinctive city nickname on an NBA jersey.

    According to Wikipedia, Buffalo, Toronto, Denver, Cincinnati, and Seattle -- all cities with NBA history -- apparently lay claim to the nickname "Queen City." 



    I don't think anyone assumes Buzz City has a long history in Charlotte. It does, however, have connections with the Bring Back The Buzz/We Beelieve movements that helped bring the name home. Of course, "Buzz City" was coined by the team and OBVIOUSLY they want to use it for selling merchandise....but it does in fact have connections with the fans and holds a presence in the city because of the last few years. 


    Nicknames have to start somewhere. If people don't feel attached to it, it'll disappear. But for now it's sticking around.

  6. 1 hour ago, BlackBolt3 said:

    For something Adidas put on the team since they changed their name, the black hasn't been terrible. This is kind of short minded, but to the "average" fan, it connects the Hornets and the Panthers, which isn't the worst idea in the world. And besides the playoffs, I can only recall 3 other instances of them wearing the black alternates, compared to about 15 times in the teal. And "Buzz City" is waaaaayyyyy better on the chest than a large logo.


    But it's gone after next season, so why worry?


    I definitely think the Buzz City jerseys will be back when Nike takes over....probably minus the sleeves.

  7. 46 minutes ago, FinsUp1214 said:


    There's nothing wrong with trying new things and having fun - I myself like to branch out a little with my designs - but in a professional setting, I believe there needs to be boundaries. You can try different color schemes or try wacky logos or do something interesting with your court or whatever - to be frank, there's a few 90's products in NBA uniform history that I really love - but is it really too much to ask to keep some level of professionalism and wear your city/state or official nickname on the jersey? That's never made any game that I know of less fun. Every 90's experiment still did that, and the 90's were loads of fun.


    And I know at least in Portland's and Houston's case, they've had their "city" nicknames for years, and that's fine as far as fan lore is concerned. But I still see their jerseys and instantly think of the minor league likes of "Hardware City", "Music City", "Holy City", etc. In my personal opinion, that fits the minor league mold and fan shirts but shouldn't ever be seen on an NBA court. Let your fans own whatever "city" you are, that's totally cool. But it hurts absolutely nothing to still professionally be "Charlotte", "Portland", or "Houston".


    I get your point but I think it's silly to act like there should be a level of professionalism associated with any major sports franchise. A lot of fans, especially here in Charlotte, come off day jobs where they wear suits and ties behind a desk at a bank...I don't think they want their favorite NBA team to be ultra conservative to the point where "Buzz City" is kitsch. There are some snobby people in Charlotte but very few have a problem with "Buzz City" representing their team. At the end of the day, an NBA team is a group of men that play basketball for money. It should be a safe place to experiment and market teams as you wish.


    Some teams like the Yankees or Celtics have this idea of tradition behind their brand. Others teams like the Hawks and Hornets have room to experiment with nicknames and abbreviations. I think it really depends on the market.

  8. Just now, Cujo said:


    The Buzz City thing is pretty bad, but that's a much better identity brand than "CLT".


    CLT is just an abbreviation for the city of Charlotte. And Buzz City definitely isn't bad. The city has embraced it and it's been a success. 

  9. I actually think their main Home/Away uniforms are WAY better than any alts they have. The dark blue are one of my least fav uniforms in the league and the orange are a huge swing and a miss. They look like generic Russell brand 001.

  10. 1 minute ago, AAO said:


    Their argument is because the Lakers and Kings are in the same state. But definitely right. No one's confusing the Lakers for another team any time soon.


    Yeah I get that. Kind of a weird situation tho, since Cali has so many teams. I don't think it'll be a big deal if they go the gold route.

  11. 12 minutes ago, MCM0313 said:

    Hmmm...the Lakers would still probably cry foul. I didn't think of that, them being in the same division and all.


    I don't view it as an issue honestly. There's like 20 teams that use red white and blue and no one has an issue with it. And those teams are alot closer in look than the gold/purple Kings are to the gold(yellow)/purple Lakers.

  12. 23 hours ago, arcane said:


    Soccer uniforms looks terrible I'd prefer seeing a team logo and wordmark so I can identify with the team instead of some company logo that is an eye sore polluting my eyes I'm there to support the team not the 3rd wheel company who has no real interest in the team.


    Next phase will be sports betting ads we get enough of them here in Australia about half a dozen or so every ad break and during broadcasts of the games when they cut to halftime betting odd changes as the results of the games hav progressed and changed its annoying as hell not to mention a real social problem.


    I see plenty of people wearing soccer jerseys tho. You can still support the team despite there being an advertisement on the jersey. Have you not noticed the ads on the courts, sidelines, scoreboards, and practically everywhere else in the arena? 

  13. 7 hours ago, jp1409 said:


    I can't believe I've just read this...


    6 hours ago, joshey said:


    Probably works at adidas...


    1 hour ago, Thomas said:

    Dear forum admin, can we please get a dislike button ?




    lol. I just don't think the Warriors primary uniforms are all that great. Not bad but not great either.

  14. 1 hour ago, SCalderwood said:

    So I've been so busy with work and life in general during this NBA season that I haven't even gotten a chance to watch a Warriors game.  Not that I am a Warriors fan, but this is a historic season for them, so I want to catch at least one of their games, to see this amazing team play.


    I finally have a free night to myself at home tonight, I found out earlier today that the Warriors are playing on ESPN tonight.  Great!  Now I have a chance to watch them work towards making history.  As a plus, I get to see them play in those gorgeous blue and gold road jerseys...right?


    As soon as I turn to ESPN, I see Steph Curry take off his warmup shirt and I see that hideous, depressing, black sleeved alternate with white trim.  Yuck!  I guess I'll still watch the game, but what a ugly/depressing looking matchup, with these ugly black sleeved things against the Grizzlies in their boring navy and white scheme with barely noticeable light blue and yellow.  Such a letdown.  


    Jerseys shouldn't affect enjoyment of a game that much, but when they're that ugly, they do.


    I like the Warriors black sleeved unis best out of all their sets. The Chinese New Year set is one of my favs in the league. 

  15. Not bad, although I'd like to see it reduced some. Maybe find a way to not have a border around the teeth and maybe make it 2/3 colors as opposed to 5. I think the general form is nice and it has cool character but it's not as refined as the Panthers logo, for example. 


    Definitely a nice start but keep working on it because I think you have something cool here!

  16. 37 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

    I believe the Hornets said at the time that they were not allowed to adopt their old logos outright. But I don't have a source on that. 


    And be in any case, that doesn't have anything to do with the NFL. 


    Yeah they claimed that but I'm not sure I believe it. The Hawks brought back the Pac Man logo. 

  17. This is how you sell branding though. If a company is looking to secure a finalize a project with a franchise, they have to come in a SELL it. Whoever sold the Clippers organization on the branding obviously did a great job. They didn't sell the aesthetics they sold the story behind it (unfortunately it still looks bad imo but the designers sold the design, so props to them).