Jump to content

CATLogo1

Members
  • Posts

    88
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by CATLogo1

  1. 5 minutes ago, ManillaToad said:

     

    No trade was possible, because the team they played for was no longer in operation. The NFL, Ravens, and former Browns personnel all agreed to assign that personnel to the new Baltimore franchise. Situations like this happened all the time in the early 20th century in American sports. Just because it happened in our lifetimes doesn't mean it's different.

    The Titans legally own the history, branding, and records of the Houston Oilers. The Ravens do not in any way say they were the Browns, and they own nothing in relation to Cleveland.

    Exactly.  Officially speaking, the Baltimore Ravens were founded as an expansion franchise that began play in the 1996 NFL season. Meanwhile. the Cleveland Browns' history was temporarily suspended from 1996 through 1998, with the club rejoining the NFL prior to the start of the 1999 NFL season.  This is all factual information, according to the 2021 Official NFL Record & Fact Book:
    2021_NFL_Record_and_Fact_Book.pdf

    • Like 9
  2. 2 hours ago, Scrumptious Ham said:

    It doesn't matter because it's Commanders, but the 3 stars could fit any name. Its a DC thing. 

    Honestly, it feels like a huge swing and a miss by the Washington NFL team to apparently pick "Commanders" as its new permanent club name. We'll all have to wait until February 2 for the official reveal, as well as the accompanying explanation from Washington as to why they picked the name "Commanders", but it's disappointing that they couldn't resolve enough trademark issues with all relevant teams (such as Arkansas State University) that used the name "Red Wolves". Also, I'm preparing to be disappointed by the logo & uniform design reveal on February 2. I definitely feel like Washington's classic uniform design (the uniforms they wear now) are clean and timeless.

    • Like 3
  3. 19 hours ago, QCS said:

    As a result of the original lawsuit settlement, any NBA team in Seattle has the rights to use the Sonics' name and colors and will "share" the history with the Thunder.

    I know. I'm saying I wish that settlement agreement could be amended so that the history of the Seattle SuperSonics isn't shared with the Oklahoma City Thunder. It should be a situation where not only does Seattle get a new SuperSonics team and its related history and branding back, but that the Oklahoma City Thunder are treated like an expansion team that started in 2008.

    • Like 4
  4. 9 hours ago, gosioux76 said:

     

    I agree. Maybe it's just me, but my brain occasionally wants to separate the words differently. So rather than seeing it as Oklahoma City / Thunder as intendedI find myself seeing it as Oklahoma / City Thunder  (as opposed to the country thunder, I suppose?)  Of course, I'm willing to fully admit that this is a dumb thing that only I do. 

     

    Regardless, the Thunder are probably the easiest case for naming the team after the state than just a city. There are no other pro franchises in Oklahoma, and it's not a Kansas City situation where dropping “city” would be leaving out its primary state.  And they wouldn't really have to drop the OKC acronym since they still play in the city. 

     

    The easiest solution? Move them to Seattle. 

    Actually, wouldn't the easiest solution be to have a Charlotte/New Orleans type situation?  What I mean by that is this: the NBA grants an expansion team to Seattle, names it the Seattle SuperSonics, and then the Professional Basketball Club LLC (the ownership group of the Oklahoma City Thunder) agrees to transfer the franchise history of the original SuperSonics back to the newly granted expansion team in Seattle.

  5. On 2/17/2021 at 2:28 PM, LA Fakers+ LA Snippers said:

    A simple number outline can do wonders for Jacksonville:

    spacer.png

    Is there any way I could see full mockups of the Jacksonville Jaguars' uniforms w/the gold outlined numbers & teal & gold stripes down the side panels of the pants?

    • Like 4
  6. On 10/19/2021 at 8:29 PM, seasaltvanilla said:

    Always thought an easy  improvement to the Jags logo is get rid of the shading and fur detail on the spots. Cleans it up without losing anything,

     

    uBpjrCy.png

     

    The old logo looks...concussed.

    This version of the Jacksonville Jaguars' logo looks so much better without the multiple gold color shading and without the fur detailing on the spots. Someone should petition the Jaguars to make these changes to the logo

    • Like 4
  7. On 11/13/2021 at 7:48 AM, LA Fakers+ LA Snippers said:


    I posted this mock-up in the earlier days of this thread, but it gives you a good idea of what it would look like.

     

    I love this! I still think that the Jacksonville Jaguars should reincorporate gold back into their uniforms, because I think the Jaguars should use teal and gold as their primary club colors, instead of teal and black. The reason why I think the Jaguars should use teal and gold is because gold just provides a better color contrast for teal than black does.

    • Like 2
  8. 7 hours ago, Survival79 said:

     

    UGH! It better NOT be "Redtails"! That's such a garbage name! If that is the name, then I'm going to be rooting for this team to get its ass kicked by its opponent on a weekly basis. Personally, I don't know what's wrong with keeping "Washington Football Team" as the permanent name. However, since that's apparently not an option, I vote for "Redwolves".

    • Like 1
  9. 12 hours ago, BJ Sands said:

    None of this would be necessary if all NFL teams unretired numbers and used rings of honor instead. But that’d make too much sense. 

    The more I think about it, the more I'm against pro sports teams retiring jersey numbers. All that does is in effect make it harder for teams to issue jersey numbers. All pro sports teams should just create a ring of honor. If a team were to retire all their available jersey numbers, then what happens? Total chaos.

    • Like 6
  10. 1 hour ago, Cujo said:

    As it pertains to relaxing one-helmet rule

     

    For each one of these 😍

    134857460.0.jpg

     

    we're gonna get a dozen of these 🚮

    Broncos-throwback.jpg

    espn_throwback-jerseys_16.jpg

    Jaguars-1.png

     

     

    Exactly. I agree. This is why I'm of the opinion that the NFL should not do away with its one helmet shell color rule. Nobody should ever have to see these particularly UGLY uniforms ever again. We don't need to see the Tampa Bay Buccaneers break out the Creamsicle Bucco Bruce uniforms. They weren't particularly easy to look at in the first place, and those uniforms will always be associated with the Buccaneers' early franchise struggles, when they started out 0-26 from 1976-1977.

  11. 17 hours ago, Magic Dynasty said:

    From now on every time that picture of everyone with gray facemasks gets posted I'll just post this new and improved one.

    facemasks.jpg

    Wow, color! Look how much better it is when the facemask actually fits with the rest of the helmet!

     

    *Possible exceptions to the Giants and Steelers, who were the only two teams that I actually hesitated to color and think gray is an equally good option for them. Also I changed the Jets and Vikings masks from black to white/purple because their black masks are stupid.

    This is much better, but part of me wants to know what the Jaguars helmet design would look like with a teal shell color & a gold color face mask.

    • Like 1
  12. On 3/15/2021 at 9:31 PM, Cujo said:

     

    Nor did it vs Dallas.

     

    Nor vs Washington.

     

    Seattle could've been a different story, but then the opening snap happened.

    Look man, I'm sorry if I pissed you off about the whole Denver Broncos orange jersey curse thing. Clearly, and logically speaking, there really isn't such a thing as a jersey color curse. Anyways, I was wondering if you would be so kind as to please create a Denver Broncos uniform concept that merges the cyberhorse with the club's old striping pattern used before 1997, but with white pants, and with navy blue as the predominant color? Please?

  13. 3 hours ago, Cujo said:

     

    I second this, also keeping the cyberhorse, if Denver were to ever attempt a more traditional look

     

    v3xTZ3N.png

    s/o to @colinturner95

    I mean, maybe the whole orange jersey curse thing is overblown. I would support this uniform concept should the Denver Broncos choose to go for a more traditional uniform look, except for the orange pants. I'm not a fan of orange pants.

    • Like 3
  14. Just now, Cujo said:

     

    No. The Broncos would've won that game in a freaking rout. That all-time 49ers team, loaded with a dozen or so hall of famers, would've had no chance vs Elway and his innovative shovel pass that day HAD THEY ONLY CHOSEN TO WEAR WHITE!

    OK OK. I get your point. Again, jersey color did not matter that day for the Broncos against the 49ers in Super Bowl XXIV.

  15. 1 minute ago, Cujo said:

     

    That's exactly it!

     

    So to clarify, had Denver elected to wear white vs that Montana/Rice motherfxcking juggernaut squad, the Broncos would've been the ones winning 55-10. Gotcha. 👍

    OK. I never said that, but I get your point. It honestly did not matter what jersey color the Denver Broncos wore in Super Bowl XXIV against the San Francisco 49ers; they weren't going to win that day.

    • LOL 1
  16. 1 minute ago, PaleVermilion81 said:

     

    And it was that decision that lead to them winning. 

    Exactly! This proves my point: the Broncos chose to wear white in Super Bowl 50 because they knew that their win-loss record in the Super Bowl in orange prior to SB 50 was & still is 0-4. Yes, I'm aware that the Broncos lost in orange to 3 dynasties (the 1977 Dallas Cowboys, the 1987 Washington (Washington Football Team) & 1989 San Francisco 49ers), but they also WON Super Bowl XXXII in NAVY BLUE against the Green Bay Packers, who won Super Bowl XXXI the year before. That's why I'm a firm believer that the Broncos should switch back to NAVY BLUE as their primary home jersey color.

    • LOL 1
  17. 34 minutes ago, Cujo said:

     

    It 100% had to do with the talent on the field. Denver lost 'wearing orange' to some all-time teams:

     

    - Lost XII to Tom Landry's Dallas near-dynasty

     

    - Lost XXII to Joe Gibbs's Washington dynasty

     

    - Lost XXIV to Joe Montana's San Francisco dynasty

     

    - Lost XLVIII to Seattle, should have won back-to-back SBs

    I mean, there's a reason WHY the Denver Broncos chose to wear WHITE jerseys as the designated HOME team in Super Bowl 50:
    The Orange Crush Curse: Why the Broncos Chose to Wear White in Super Bowl 50 | NFL - YouTube

    • Yawn 1
  18. 57 minutes ago, Cujo said:

     

    So those games had NOTHING do to with the talent on the field...

    I mean, part of it was the Broncos' talent on the field, but I think all Broncos fans know that we don't have success in the Super Bowl while wearing orange jerseys. I think it's a mixture of both the lack of talent on the field (and poor play vs. the competition) & also the orange jersey color, because no team has ever won a Super Bowl while wearing orange in the big game (the Broncos are the only team to wear orange on Super Sunday).

  19. 58 minutes ago, Cujo said:

     

    I second this, also keeping the cyberhorse, if Denver were to ever attempt a more traditional look

     

    v3xTZ3N.png

    s/o to @colinturner95

    As a Denver Broncos fan, I support keeping the primary logo & wordmark logo introduced in 1997. However, I also would support a decision by the Broncos to switch their primary home jersey color from orange to navy blue. IMO, orange is a CURSED jersey color, as the Broncos' all-time win-loss record in orange in the Super Bowl is 0-4. In all 4 losses, the Broncos have been cumulatively outscored by a margin of 167-38 (that's a margin of negative-129 points, and no, I'm not making that up). Also, I would not support orange pants. IMO, the Broncos should go back to a navy blue on white look (blue jerseys, white pants).

    • Like 3
  20. On 1/15/2021 at 12:51 PM, pitt6pack said:

    Couldn't help myself from making some concepts.

    I have each team in one concept, and just made these based on seeding.

    I put the AFC in the left endzone, as that's where the AFC has been since Super Bowl LI.

     

    1sMnho0.png

     

    nk7uULV.png

     

    Hk7hkjB.png

     

    gfYsXS1.png

    So we now know that the final 4 teams in contention to play in Super Bowl LV are the following matchups:
    AFC Championship Game:
    Buffalo Bills vs. Kansas City Chiefs
    Tampa Bay Buccaneers vs. Green Bay Packers.
    Hey @pitt6pack, could you please update with possible team matchups? I'm meaning Chiefs vs. Packers, Chiefs vs. Buccaneers, Bills vs. Packers or Bills vs. Buccaneers. Also, I have to mention that if the Tampa Bay Buccaneers advance to Super Bowl LV as NFC champions, it would mark the first time in NFL history that a team played in the Super Bowl in its regular home stadium. 

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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