FinsUp1214

They've been doing the turtlenecks for years, haven't they? I seem to remember playing Madden 2000 as a kid and even then the Chiefs players wore turtlenecks in their pictures. I always thought it was kind of odd, but it's one of those little quirks you know them for, so I guess it works for them in that regard.

I think the Cowboys look better with triple-striped sleeves than with double: I figure it'd be unpopular since triple stripes are more of a 49ers thing, but triple looks better and cleaner to me than the rather clunky double stripes they have now. Also - maybe not as unpopular - but I'd be a very happy man if Dallas brought this whole set back (with the only difference being using the double outlined star instead). This pictured uniform here, I feel, is the best individual uniform Dallas ever had.

Oh COME ON!!

I'm not sure I'd ever want the Bucs to go back to the creamsicles, but it's not for the reason you think. It's a great uniform. Great colors. Super Floridian. But....dang it every time I see Bucco Bruce, I see Gob Bluth instead and I can't take them seriously. Not that it's Bucco's fault at all, seeing as he predates Gob by almost 30 years, but still! I seriously can't unsee Gob dressed like a pirate playing tricks (er, illusions) with my head.

To be honest, I still do. I think a Warriors uniform will eventually look a little more right on him to me the longer he's there, but for now I still think of him as a 76er first, a Warrior close second, and a Nugget distant last.

Crawfish should be the landslide choice here. ....And that's why we'll probably get the King Cakes.

Alright, so.... I like these ten times better than the currents: There, I said it. But, if you ask me what the best Warriors uniform of all time is? It's this one: The "City" uniforms are great on the front and shorts, but the crammed "number in the trolley car" gimmick just doesn't work for me. And while the currents aren't bad, if you're going to hearken to the throwback inspired crest and numbers on front, you've got to do it on a uniform that is more traditional to really complete the throwback inspired look. The modern(ish) look just doesn't work or mesh with it, even if the side panels are supposed to nod to the bridge. It's just too much competing for my attention. To me, choose one or the other. Modern application with just a wordmark and numbers, or crest and numbers on a more classic uniform.

I feel like I really shouldn't, but I really liked and still like everything about the 90's purple and green Bucks. Like, I don't know if it's just being a 90's kid and the natural nostalgia attacks that come with it or if it's a genuine design tastes thing, but for some reason I look at this: And my brain is like, "yep, looks good!" Although admittedly I think for long-term purposes I'd have switched the purple and green around to make the jersey green primarily, like their alternate was.

I'm definitely in the "more vests category". I feel like all three cited teams should still have them, with a big especially pointed at Pittsburgh. They achieved uniform perfection (at least home and road) with the vests.

As a sucker for hockey goalie masks, I love the idea of the goalie-esque catcher's mask designs - I remember Brian Schnieder having a really cool one when he played for the Nationals a few years back - but there's really no reason to extend it to the rest of the gear. Those chest protectors look more Fisher-Price than professional baseball....okay maybe a stretch, but for some reason I instantly thought "something I'd see in the Walmart kids aisles".

Awesome! That's a great jersey to have! And yeah, those three were something else. My favorite sports memories as a kid are pretty much monopolized by those late 90's Jazz teams. Still gets me down thinking they never could get a ring, haha. Dang MJ.

Speaking of Cowherd, I happened to watch his show this morning because it was playing on one of the food court TV's here at UVU. Within only five minutes, he suggested the Cowboys don't need to draft a quarterback because "they already have their franchise QB" and that Chris Paul should bolt to the Lakers. Just because Lakers. Well Colin...Romo was a franchise QB, but is now 36 and hardly has a collarbone left, and "LOL LAKERS" isn't the answer to everything like you and your former ESPN comrades think it is. It it physically hurts to listen to this guy sometimes.

The Canucks' recent throwback night is inspiring this one. Usually with franchises that have had a historical identity crisis (ex: Canucks, Padres, now Diamondbacks, maybe the Bucks, etc.), I'd feel compelled to look at their identity history and "pick one", so to say. But I suppose an unpopular opinion for me is that I just can't with the Canucks. Blue and Green? Love it. Black-Gold-Red '94 cup run set? Love it. Late 90's navy-Royal-red? Love it. Johnny Canuck? The skate? Stick-in-rink? Orca? Love it all. Can't choose. I suppose the only objection I have to anything in their history is the big-V sweaters they wore in the 80's. You can burn those. But in all seriousness, the Canucks are probably the only franchise in all of sports that I don't have a "favorite identity" pick for. It's to the point where they seriously could make the '94 throwbacks a full-time set again tomorrow and I'd be more than okay with it, even if such a move admittedly would only add to the identity confusion.

This has always been my favorite 49ers set: ...with the '94 throwbacks a close second. I do like the current set and Montana set, and get the historical significance behind that particular look. But I feel like this set did a very good job of modernizing while honoring and respecting that history, as well as being a solid, cohesive, and strong uniform in its own right. It brought eras together and is essentially what I wish they were wearing today. And to be totally honest? I love drop shadow numbers (that may be an unpopular opinion in and of itself), so there's another big reason there. The 49ers just pulled them off so well.

Born and raised in Utah, I've always been a Jazz fan. It's a frustrating way of life sometimes - usually consisting of sub-par seasons, painfully longing for the Finals days and missing the heck out of "Stockton to Malone", and our best players eventually bolting for larger markets - but I'll always love 'em. I hope I live to see the day they win the Finals. Even if I'm 99 at that point, I'll be right in the thick of the surely ensuing impromptu parade in SLC when that happens. In the NFL, I've been a huge Colts fan for many years. My favorite player as a kid was Peyton Manning, and I just figured naturally I might as well root for the whole team if I was going to root for him anyways. Even after he left, I'd been a Colts fan for 10+ years by that point, so there was no way I was leaving 'em. In the MLB, I've been a very casual Dodger "fan", really only because that's always been my Grandpa's favorite team. I don't get extremely into them though. I've got a lot of family from Seattle and I loved Griffey as a kid, so I naturally like the Mariners a lot as well. I attended Iwakuma's no hitter this summer at Safeco, and that was my first MLB game I've ever attended, so the Mariners will always have a special place in my heart for that reason as well. That was an awesome, electric experience. I don't really have an NHL team personally. Used to like the Mighty Ducks as a kid, and really got into them during their 2003 Cup run, but after their horrific rebrand it felt like they didn't even exist anymore. Sounds dumb I know, but I lost any interest in them after that. So I guess you could say I'm a fan of 1993-2006 Mighty Ducks, but also really anyone that isn't Detroit or New Jersey. In College Sports, I've become a big Ole Miss fan (which is the inspiration behind my user name, the "Fins Up" slogan behind the "Landshark Defense"). I served a two-year mission for the LDS Church in Mississippi and absolutely fell in love with the place. It's pretty much my second home, so I naturally adopted the Rebels and root for them even above the Utah teams. If I do root for a local school though, it's usually Utah State. And in the MLS, it's Real Salt Lake for hometown reasons.

I'll say this in general, many of these recent NFL shots just keep bolstering my opinion that the NFL looked at its best from around 1997-2002. All of those matchups are so good.

I think the pocket of time around 1998-2002 was probably the best the NFL as a whole ever looked. Even as a traditionalist myself. Sure there were some stragglers like the Bills' mess, but all across the board? It looked really, really good, with quite a few teams even looking at their best. It was after some teams made some good updates that modernized while keeping tradition intact (like the Dolphins and 49ers, which may be unpopular opinions in and of themselves), and before we lost the likes of Arizona, Cincinnati, Atlanta, and Minnesota to the reebok monster. And the Jaguars still looked like they always should have! Some quibbles aside (because there's some in every era), that was just a good looking time in the NFL to me personally, and my favorite just ahead of probably the late 60's.

This. It's a travesty they dumped purple. I agree. I would love to see someone make a mock-up with their old colors.EDIT: Someone made a mock-up with the roundel. I'm not sure there's a need for the extra colours of grey and red. We have a winner. Amazing how a simple color change can perfect a logo.

Ah that's right. I knew after I typed boxcar, I was probably off. My bad I just didn't like how it contorted the number. It was at this weird inclined angle, and the number had to be smaller and smooshed to fit in the trolley (which the size alone looked awkward in and of itself). I just think sometimes simple is better, especially when you already have a unique (and great) design that stands out on the front of the jersey. The trolley was just too much.

I agree...for the post part. I like just about everything except for the boxcar numbers on the back, but that's such a glaring problem for me that it pulls it down pretty far. It's a crammed, awkward gimmick, and every time a player turns around I just cringe at how bad it looks. Just regular numbers and NOB would pull that set way up for me. But hey...at least they look fantastic from the front!

My beef with the orange was that it seemed like a totally unnecessary addition. They had already nailed the colors, and those colors worked extremely well together. Orange didn't sink the ship, but it added absolutely nothing to the look but some pesky color-clutter demanding attention. Kinda like the Twins' gold trim. Also, this: Not totally exactly like the pre-edge colors, but pretty close in idea. The original colors (and even the darkened teal) was all they ever needed to fit the theme.

If it is...I really like the logo a lot, but don't like the colors. Even if there was an affiliation change, there's no reason for them to step away from purple and black.

I know I'm probably in the uber-ultra-minority with this one, but I really loved the Blue Bombers' gold alts from 2007: It looked best with white pants, but I didn't even mind it when they wore it with navy pants in the Grey Cup that year. I suppose it's more or less the jerseys and helmets on thier own I liked. Loved the number font, the solid navy "W", and just the overall simplicity and classic look about it. Still don't prefer it over the retro Royal Blues, but I did like it a lot.

I'm almost convinced on the road wordmark, that they typed it out in an existing font in MS Word, ran it through WordArt, then stretched it a little. And I'm not trying to exaggerate; it really kind of looks that way. It looks really amateur.

They gave up on thier Brandiose identity rather quick it seems...I think these are a downgrade, personally. In colors, text, number font (is that a Russell stock font??), and logos. It all just seems rather generic compared to what they had.