FinsUp1214

Members
  • Content Count

    2,838
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by FinsUp1214

  1. This logo reads more like “LIV” than LIV actually did, and that’s bugging the crap out of me. The trophy reads like an “I” when it’s placed within the text like it has been, and I honestly have no idea how the NFL’s branding team hasn’t figured that out yet.
  2. I agree, when you look across the globe at all the different national teams - storied or not - most have an “essential” look, and I feel the USMNT doesn’t have that at all. They had something with the Waldo kit; it looked good, was distinctive, and tied well to the flag. My hopes are that they give that idea another chance someday and stick with it, then have a good navy set for a clash. Come to think of it, navy tops with red shorts and navy socks could look interesting. The Blue Jackets look good (as well as “American”, if you will) with that color distribution in my opinion.
  3. Yeah, I thought that was a bit corny. Also wasn’t good when a player they didn’t have an illustration for scored a touchdown; I forget who off the top of my head (Williams and Juszyzck, I think), but a couple of players didn’t have one and looked very inconsistent when they scored as opposed to those who did. As for the score bug itself, I think it looked just okay but not spectacular. It had a tiny bit of an early 2000’s FOX look to it as far as the logo graphics, and I liked that, but I thought the whole bug and package could’ve been a little cleaner; It didn’t need the extra border around the logo spots and something looked off with the colors behind the logos. It may have been a slight depth gradient, but they looked a little too dark and probably would’ve been better as just the flat primary helmet color*. It wasn’t terrible though, and I like little things like “+1”, “+3”, or “+6” rising up from the bug for scores. *EDIT: Just occurred to me that the darker colors may have been to help the score be more visible against a lighter team color, especially in the case of the 49ers part of the bug (white against gold). Well...still didn’t need the extra border on the logo graphics!
  4. I dig the USA white kit, and I love the throwback Nike logo on both kits. I’m not sure what’s going on with the navy kit, though; the pattern neither looks camo nor topographic, to be honest I wonder if it’s really anything. The only other thing I can think of is that it kind of looks like a zoomed-in coastline with islands? But I have no idea, it doesn’t look like anything (or anywhere) I recognize. Very weird and pointless if it can’t be made out. If all it is is just an abstract pattern, I’d have preferred something more geometric so it could be more clearly read as “abstract pattern”.
  5. Indeed I did, haha! I apologize for the length of it, it did come out a little long. I just felt it was important with the good discussion regarding importance of communication to make sure I explained where I was coming from as best as I could, and make the best argument I could regarding my opinions to foster that discussion. I tend to try too hard in that regard and can easily get long-winded! But I do hope, as was my intention, that it was a good contribution at least to the discussion of both craft and the Falcons.
  6. I guess something I’m wondering is, what if a logo is well crafted (in terms of lines connecting, no sloppiness in construction, no random notches, etc), but is poor in execution? If the argument against it has nothing to do with its craft but how well it executes the concept, subject, theme, etc, then that’s still a valid argument right? Or no? Because I see a lot going on about craft here, and yes, craft is absolutely essential. But in my opinion, a well-crafted logo still doesn’t automatically make it good on its own; there’s more that needs to be executed than just the construction. I haven’t seen any diagrams magnifying and dissecting the Falcons logo’s craft, so assuming Brandon is a fan of it I’ll take that as validity that it is indeed well-crafted. That’s fine. Problem is I don’t think it’s executed very well, despite that. The wings have always looked a bit too short and squat to me, and I feel like with that we lose a little bit of the “scope” the original had. The original, deeply flawed in craft as it was, at least gave you the impression of this large, imposing falcon. The current one in question seems a bit smaller—not quite angry songbird, but close—and that’s bugged me from day one. Second, the foot looks much too swollen (which may be lending to a potential illusion of the wings being too short in my eyes), I’ve never seen a falcon with that fat of a foot. It looks terribly unnatural to me and I find my eye going there often, which shouldn’t happen. Lastly, it’s been said that the logo was design to evoke speed and “sleek”, and while the more slanted, swooping look of the logo does lend a little to that, I don’t think the logos overall construction conveys that completely. The red detail of the wings, tail, and head distract me from seeing that because they appear to be more static detail than impressions of speed, given that it looks like it’s part of the body and supposed to be there and not anything speed related (even if tapered). I don’t quite know how else to explain it, but the gist is that the details of the bird can get so distracting that it can make the falcon appear more static because you have take so much in; if something’s really fast, you shouldn’t be able to make out that much. Had the red details not been there or been minimized substantially, then to me I think it’d be a little less distracting and communicated speed and sleekness a bit better. So in wrapping up, I truly don’t mean this to be a smart-@$$ question but mean it genuinely and seriously; if my (or anyone else’s) argument has nothing to do with straight up craft but about how a logo’s executed, is that still valid or does the craft of it outweigh perceptions of execution or lack there of? Because again, I feel pretty strongly you can get the craft of something technically perfect but still totally miss on other important aspects, and thus it is only part of the pie and not the whole thing. And I don’t feel that’s negating Vignelli (who is also one of my favorites) or any other design legend at all; they too understood the importance of execution and executed well, in conjunction with much of their principles centering on strong craft.
  7. Although I love the use of the helmet for the 49ers, I think the Chiefs have the best endzone any team’s had since the current endzone system was adopted simply because of how well their logo and wordmark fills the space. It looks a whole lot less empty than others have. Plus, yellow to contrast against what will likely be red for the 49ers is the right move. All that said, the conference logos do need to return. The endzones always look their best, in my opinion, when the wordmark is centered and bookended with logos of some kind.
  8. Yeah, the Falcons did something similar in XXXIII: It’s such an odd placement, I don’t really understand it.
  9. Does anyone know what the story was behind the Rams’ “throwback” end zones in the Super Bowl last year? Was that an exemption or something they could do because the throwback was technically the primary? I only ask because I wonder if that could be precedent enough for both the Chiefs and 49ers to use the wordmarks and colors from their throwback end zones this year.
  10. This matchup has a little bit of both to me, to some degree. Yes they both wear red, but (if the 49ers wear the primaries) two key elements - the helmet and pants - will be completely contrasting colors and work enough for me to keep it interesting. And of course, both are great classic looks and even if the 49ers somehow get the throwback exception, this is a matchup free from ridiculous piping or unnecessary bells and whistles. The field is probably where the problem will be (I expect all red end zones), but the uniforms aren’t a problem to me at all.
  11. Yep. This is a case of two teams wearing their best, head to head. Even with all the red, there’s still sufficient contrast with the 49ers’ gold helmet and pants. Not the best matchup of all time, but barring the Chiefs being stupid and going mono-red, this will be one of the best in a while.
  12. EDIT: Whoops, missed this thread and posted it in the NFL thread. Still though....HALLELUJAH. About time.
  13. I think the Chiefs in red vs. the 49ers in white would still be a nice matchup. San Francisco’s gold helmet and pants with the white jersey would provide a nice contrast, with there being a little less red from them. Also, I heavily doubt it’d happen but if they do meet, it’d be great if one of their end zones is an alternative color. A yellow Chiefs endzone vs. a red 49ers one would look awesome.
  14. I’m not sure about any kind of narrative that Lamar was to blame for the loss. Yeah he made a few bad throws, but he also made some really good ones that receivers just flat out dropped, tipped, or in one near-TD case, literally just let bounce off their chest. Also put in perspective that of Baltimore’s 530 total yards (yes, you read that right), Lamar accounted for 508 of them. So yeah he wasn’t perfect by any means, but he wasn’t anywhere close to awful either. With Ingram being out for most of it and the receiving corps looking completely lethargic and disinterested, Lamar was really the only offense they had and they were really lucky to even score 12 points, let alone manage to rack up 530 total yards. I hope Lamar keeps playing well and stays healthy, because I truly do enjoy watching him a lot. As more defenses figure him out, perhaps he’ll struggle a bit, sure. Maybe he’ll flame out like RG III did, who knows, but I really hope he sticks around and keeps up a high level. And I think he will. Throwing 36 TD’s while also breaking the single season QB rushing record in the same season is something I figured you could only do in Madden, so I’ve got upmost respect for what he did this year.
  15. This is not to say the Titans have any good looks right now at all, but I think the best (meaning least bad-looking) home combo options they have for a potential Super Bowl are navy/white and navy/powder blue. Navy/white is probably the “cleanest”, and navy/powder blue has the best color pop. That said though, if they were to get the Seahawks, they may as well wear whatever they want because no matter what either team does, that’s going to be a dumpster fire of a matchup.
  16. Re: the Browns’ pant stripe, I never had a problem with orange/brown/orange on the white because I saw it as being the interior three stripes of the five stripe layout on the sleeves; brown/orange/brown/orange/brown, if that makes sense. So I always made that connection and could see how it “fit”. Just me, though.
  17. I think orange jerseys worn once, maybe twice a year is just fine so long as it’s always over white pants. To be honest, I always loved this uniform, drop shadow and all: On the flip side though, I haven’t been as big a fan of the orange pants as others are. They’re okay with the white jersey (and even then I’d only want that maybe once or twice a year too), but I think the orange pants with the brown jersey is, frankly, a bit ugly. The traditional orange-brown-white always struck the perfect balance of colors to me, and I think orange pants just throws it off terribly.
  18. Just a visual effect from 80’s photography. You can see it to some degree on a blue like the Colts’ as well: EDIT: beaten to it!
  19. I always hesitate to read too much into social media graphics because they don’t always mean anything (example, the Twins have used a few brighter colors on social media that aren’t used anywhere else). The timing of their rollout is interesting, though, so I could potentially see it being something. IF it is, then I’m a bit lukewarm. The right uniform design could make it look good, but the throwback royal blue just looks right. I’d rather them stick with that.
  20. That Eskimos logo is so much better and cleaner without the drop shadow. It’d be nice if that ended up being adopted, and if they eliminated the drop shadow from the jersey numbers as well (among other uniform fixes).
  21. I definitely agree with the bolded, design is subjective and open to all sorts of interpretation and discussion! And I certainly appreciate that (I think this has been a great discussion, btw). And Oregon has indeed improved over the years, you’re absolutely right on those points. I think embracing Apple green a little more, if anything, has been a giant step in the right direction. So yes, they’re definitely out from where they were and are further along. It’s my opinion though that they still have some bad habits and fads to shed, and that it’s really time for them to finally settle down on a concrete look and color scheme. I’m just personally the kind of designer and design fan that prefers things be made to last, so that admittedly influences and has influenced my feelings on Oregon heavily. I understand too though that others feel different, and that’s totally cool. Nobody’s wrong!
  22. I disagree for the most part; though the Dolphins uniforms improved with the recent tweaks and are decent in and of themselves, the belly flop/cruise liner/aquafresh dolphin is a disaster of a logo and still pulls that identity down significantly. And the Marlins somehow managed to roll out an identity with teal and coral red, and STILL look like a black and white team from a distance, with a black jersey that has unreadable numbers and text to make matters worse. Both teams took a really bad hit in my opinion.
  23. I understand where you’re coming from, and it is indeed progress, so some kudos to them for that. But I can commend said progress while still maintaining it’s a poor uniform and that Oregon still has some bad habits they haven’t dropped yet. The chrome helmet is not only a fad that’s run much too long a course in general, but does not go with anything else on the uniform. Sure the wings are mud green, but there’s no other silvery element from the neck down that justifies any use of chrome a chrome shell on the helmet whatsoever and looks terribly out of place. The chrome isn’t there to look good, it’s there to be “cool”, and lends some evidence to me that that is what Oregon still concerns itself with. A yellow shell matches and looks good (as well as balanced). Chrome does not. The green they are wearing is terrible. Sometimes it looks black, sometimes it looks vaguely piney, sometimes it looks like mud. It’s not a pleasant color and is not a necessary color either when they have a nice Apple green and a better forest green to choose from. And why do you have to have another green anyways? If you want to wear something that dark, why not just wear black? Again, Oregon still tends to concern itself philosophically with the wrong things. “Cool/different” =/= good. They’re getting better as other combos suggest, yes, but the scale is still tipping the wrong way when you bust this kind of combo out at all, let alone the Rose Bowl. They’ve learned one mistake from the 2012 Rose Bowl set; the yellow numbers are a much better contrast than the duck feather ones they had before. I’ll gladly give them applause for figuring that out, and again, that is some progress. But they’ve still got a ways to go in my opinion overall. Once they stick with consistent colors, drop chrome and other unnecessary colors, and start designing stuff meant to last and not be a walking fad year after year like they’re obsessed with being, then they’ll be much better off.
  24. For some reason, as a kid these uniforms had this kind of intimidation factor to it. Similar to the Raiders, it just had this gritty, tough, no-nonsense feel that really made it stand out to me. The logo would need serious improving (not the current logo; a better attempt than that thing), but I would love to see something like this come back. If not that though, I’ll admit that for some reason in my studies of past uniforms for fun, I’ve grown more fond of the Falcons’ red heavy sets of the 80’s and if they ever go red helmet again, I’d prefer they go all out on red like they did back then:
  25. I’m slightly worried now that it’s the Raiders. Can’t imagine they’d ever do too much, but opportunity is there with the move. Another possibility I’m thinking of is the Seahawks? I imagine that’d stir up some controversy here. Or Washington?