Dynasty

Never been to a game, but I've been outside of it. It's like a spaceship crashed into the Roman Coliseum. An ugly hybrid of old marble stone and aluminum metal.

I don't know how anyone would think that this was a possibility. Of course it's Greenberg and his Get Up! crew coming up with non-stories just for reactions. God that show is trash.

4 hours ago, PERRIN said:

All this Texans set needs is consistency across the board and a less wonky number font, as demonstrated below. If they could do that, it'd be a damn good uniform set. Maybe not better than the previous set, but definitely more expressive.

 

That red bull stripe on the home adds so much needed red to it. What a difference.

3 hours ago, rfraser85 said:

I think we missed a team that's eligible for new uniforms next year: the Colts. They changed their number font and added black in 2020. I wasn't a fan of the Color Rush uniforms from last year, but maybe they can figure out a better way to add a third color. Or at least they could develop a non-blue jersey. Having three royal blue jerseys doesn't make sense to me.

Or just get rid of black entirely. They don't need a third color.

3 hours ago, Brian in Boston said:

I suppose I should have anticipated this day coming. Recognized that interests wax and wane and - sometimes, for one reason or another - completely peter out. It would appear that my passion for all things sports branding-related has reached that point.

The sheer, unadulterated excess of primary marks, secondary marks, tertiary marks and wordmarks... home uniforms, road uniforms, alternate uniforms, and throwback uniforms... City Connect this, Color Rush that, City Edition the other thing, and Reverse Retro who the f*** gives a s***... they've cumulatively overwhelmed me.

The cycle between the introduction of any new logo, uniform, or other brand identity component by a team and the roll-out of its next new design element seems to have sped up. For example, the Detroit Lions last introduced new uniforms less than a decade ago...  seven years to be specific. It would seem that "timeless" design has given away to "you're on the clock". Combine that with the fact that the introduction of new creative elements by clubs across all leagues is taking place at the same heightened pace and the reveal  of such elements have been stripped of their individual "WOW" factor. The result is that these so-called "events" on the part of teams and leagues have become commonplace to the point of meaninglessness. It has gotten to where I picture the team owner, coach, and players who are involved in these unveilings walking off stage only to be immediately ushered into meeting rooms where brainstorming sessions and focus groups with graphic designers, uniform manufacturers, marketing executives, and fans get underway in order to facilitate the rollout of the inevitable next team brand-related unveiling.

Finally, it doesn't help that the branding elements that are produced by these design initiatives seem increasingly underwhelming. How could they not be?  Creativity is the slave of commodification. Restraint is a rarity, excess the rule of the day. Artistry with the potential to surprise, delight, and inspire has been replaced by dreck.

To much of a good thing can be - indeed, often is - a bad thing.

Poetic, but we all know what it's all about to them: 

These are definitely not as extreme as I feared. The home and road uniforms are pretty solid, though I still don't like how Navy blue-heavy they are, even more-so now. They also need to both be either using the bullhorn striping or the logo patch; I don't like the inconsistency there. The alternate reds are too much for me with all the excessive red. Plus, the horn decal on the helmet is very hard to see without any white included. The H-Town uniform isn't as awful as I would've imagined, but like with their Color Rush's previously, it's just so pointless given that they already have another uniform that is Navy blue.

The Texans new look is overall fine. It's different enough to grab your attention, but I really don't know if I would say they're an upgrade or even a downgrade. Just... a little different. I give them a C.

Extremely happy to see the side panels are officially gone. The jerseys by themselves are pretty solid and I like that the road ones have some more orange included (which the previous ones lacked). The striping is meh on the pants and terrible on the helmet. I'm actually happy to see the limited changes on the number font because I was always a fan of that. How these all look during gameday is going to depend on which combos they decide to use. Unfortunately, I think they'll mostly blow given the old (and current) trend of the leggings look, along with the new trend of universal white socks. The pictures posted by them doesn't aspire confidence.

I was initially shocked at the amount of negative reactions for these Broncos uniforms, but I guess I can understand some of the gripes. It really does feel like there's too much going on with the elements and marketing speak. I think taking away just a few of them could lighten them up a bit there, but as they stand, it's just too much Colorado.

I think these are still an upgrade, not as bad as I thought they would be, but I just can't see them standing the test of time (which is what I was truly looking for with these uniforms). I guess I'd say C+.

28 minutes ago, Raith said:

Shoulder striping is inconsistent. and one of the design elements they said they were going for was interchangeability/options.  Hard to do when the stripes on the pants only match a specific jersey.

That makes little sense to me. Inconsistency in terms of the colors of the stripes? I don't see a huge issue with that. Teams have interchanged with them before (even the Lions themselves), plus the striping is all the same in design. I'll take different colored stripes (if the design is consistent) over no stripes at all.

The striping reference to the Ford Mustang is probably my favorite part of all of this. Brilliant move there.

I don't know what is preventing them from pairing the silver pants with the white jerseys. I also don't know what is preventing them from putting striping on all the pants. It bothered me with the previous set and it will bother me again with this one.

For whatever reason, I just had a huge hunch that this was going to be the route the Lions would go and damn is it the right one. A solid A for me.

19 minutes ago, monkeypower said:

Not to make this thread even hotter with nothing new, what's everyone's thoughts on this logo that came with the new Jets set of logos?

 

 

I want to like it and I think it's clever but it might just be too minimalist?

I guess it's fine as a secondary, but maybe a little unnecessary. The jet works as a nice subtle touch to the primary script logo, but by itself it's too minor and abstract to act as its own logo. I don't know how many people would be able to think and say, "oh, that's totally suppose to be a jet plane."

Lol Washington had no business being in the playoffs. Though if it extends Ovechkin's opportunities at more goals then count me in.

Toronto against Boston might as well be chalk. The Leafs can never beat the Bruins in the playoffs.

The old one had a lot of detail they had to work with in terms of printing and distribution. The new one isn't as good, but I get why they did it.

I've said it before, the previous uniforms were 2015 Browns-esque. I wouldn't have directly went with the 1980's throwback route however, but these don't look bad by any means. Very solid.

The Bucks could've intentionally lost to avoid playing Miami or Philadelphia early. Not that it would do much given they would more than likely play them anyway if they themselves come out of the first round.

It doesn't take away that this season has been a relative disaster for Milwaukee. They've been trying to do everything they can to keep Giannis from bolting on them when he has the chance. It's not going to end well.

Yeah, I thought 1990 UNLV and 2009 North Carolina were great. This team may very well be the greatest ever, or are definitely at least in that discussion.

3 hours ago, OnWis97 said:

She blew her legacy in high school when she wasn’t as good as Paige Bueckers.

Wasn't Bueckers suppose to be the generational all-time great that Clark became? Not trying to downplay how great of a player she is or anything because she's still tremendous and the injuries did knock here down a peg for a season or two. Bueckers still has a chance to do what Clark wasn't able to do next season, but obviously Dawn Staley and that juggernaut of a SC team isn't going anywhere.

2 hours ago, TrueYankee26 said:

South Carolina is the new UCONN.

Not yet. They need to keep it up and win about four more titles minimum to get that label. 

I think it's pretty telling that many people initially (and still did) picked South Carolina over the field. There really wasn't a single school in this tournament that was beating them, as great as Caitlin Clark was. Simply keeping within ten points against the Gamecocks was a daunting task in of itself.

I have to say though, this was probably the greatest coaching performance I've ever seen in college sports. Losing your entire starting lineup to the draft last season and Dawn Staley still delivered. Absolute legend.

I didn't even know they did rings for lesser bowl games.

8 hours ago, Digby said:

The infamous Norby is finally out at ESPN

I just saw that he was there for 40 years(!). We have people getting laid off on more than an occasion but this old guy can remain an executive for up to four decades? And he was also apparently not well-liked at ESPN either, which sounds like an understatement.

The Texans (should) be pretty dangerous next season. Both Nico Collins and Tank Dell are already serious deep threats and although I think Stefon Diggs is somewhat overrated, he can be good with deep passes as well. Amazing to see this team's expectations now compared to just two years ago.

What an absolute failure the Bills have been so far in the Josh Allen era. They've been the greatest underachievers since the Phillip Rivers era Chargers. They technically still have a chance to make a difference because of their quarterback, but trading your top wideout to another AFC team is gonna hurt. And I bet Miami still won't get past them.

15 hours ago, GDAWG said:

So the post game press conference from the LSU Women was interesting.  It was more of how good a person Angel Reese is and all of the off the field criticism she went through.  When LSU won the title last year, Reese pointed to her ring finger, which somehow garnered outrage, but when the recently retired Rams DE Aaron Donald did the same thing after the Rams Super Bowl win, nobody batted an eye.  

 

Angel Reese doesn't deserve the hate.  

It's the unfortunate circumstances of the double standard. When she made that gesture last year, I just knew people were going to find a way to bash her for it. It's worth noting that Clark was doing roughly the same thing in her previous games during that tournament though.

Reese made a comment during her postgame last year about trying to represent all of the girls out there who experience the disparity of racism and stereotyping, and that made me like her even more. I hope she has a great career in the WNBA.

Regardless of how much further they go, I'm happy that Caitlin Clark and Iowa were able to get their revenge against LSU. It would've been so lame to see her end her college career to that team.

I didn't think the removal of white trim would make a difference, but I think the Yankees really are better without it. It's subtle in the eyes of other people, but I immediately noticed it when seeing highlights.

I guess the sport of basketball is just easy for Dan Hurley and co.. I know they were really good last year, but Jesus, this is women's level dominance.

3 hours ago, FrutigerAero said:

The diamondback's black uniform with the teal has looked amazing.

The black alternates are probably the ones I like the most from their update.

Also, man are those hats bright. It's like they're made of a metallic material. It will be different when they play in home games because of their park though.

I think a lot of the black and gold schools, particularly Colorado and Idaho, list gold and silver as their main colors, but use black and gold for the athletic programs.

There is also the case of UCLA, mainly with their shades of gold. According to TruColor, the athletic color (#FSA900) is slightly different from the institution color (#FFD100). However, there is the fact that the football team wears a completely different gold from the rest of the program.

There is talk around Calipari, but what about Izzo? What has Michigan State done in the past several years? They haven't been an elite program for quite a while and just seem to be an easy chalk for early-to-mid tournament exits. Their last title was 2000.