FinsUp1214

Members
  • Content Count

    2,818
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by FinsUp1214

  1. I’m a big fan of this idea. If there’s any question, it’s a simple and easy enough reference to point to and answer with. I think that’s the way to go.
  2. I’m usually a stickler for the bolt being against the same consistent color background, but you know what? Somehow the way they’ve done it is really working for me. Maybe because they’ve treated the bolt AS the stripe rather than contained within one? I don’t know, but they found a way to make it really work. I’m really happy with that. The home and road combos are excellent. They’ve really done a fantastic job of modernizing a classic, and somehow managed to even clean it up just a smidge. I also love the lack of a jersey wordmark, and the helmet numbers really work fine for me honestly (lots of historical precedence for them, they’re not just “tacked on”). The new bolt looks great on a helmet, too. My only gripes are the color rushes, while the designs aren’t horrible, they look extremely out of place when compared with the powder blue stuff (and the powder blue hype). This kind of “wheel of alternates” does more to confuse a brand than diversify it, and I don’t like the idea of them making a big deal of simplifying things back down to powder blue and yellow, only to come back and re-introduce two other blues they’d presumably dropped. That’s the one unfortunate mistake they’ve made here, and it’s really going to look like a mistake when one of those sets are worn for a prime time game and not the powder blue they’ve supposedly championed again. Again though, everything else is fantastic. I’d say this is a really deep triple; shed the color rushes and it’s a grand slam.
  3. Excellent identity! Really love the logos, colors, wordmarks, everything. They did a fantastic job.
  4. I agree that the Chargers should stay with a white helmet; each time I watched the Renegades, though, I personally couldn’t help but think of how much I wished the Titans had gone with a light blue helmet instead.
  5. I look at the Jaguars’ set and still can’t believe they chose black numbers for the white jersey. Teal numbers would improve that jersey significantly; of all the possible tweaks I can think of league-wide, that’s the one I think would make for the most dramatic improvement. (Granted, the Jaguars should still be wearing the Brunell set today and forever in my honest opinion. But still...)
  6. All Ekeler says is that the helmets are “different”...that could indeed mean they’re a different color, but could also mean other things too. It’s a given that the new bolt is there, but they could also be “different” in that they have numbers under the bolt, or just “different” in that Ekeler really paid attention to detail and is just referring to the new bolt. Or a different facemask color. Or some other minor detail. I’m not terribly worried (yet).
  7. I never have played a game with that combo, but I have tried it in the “select uniforms” preview and it looked pretty good! On the subject of the Patriots too, I’ve tried the 90’s Flying Elvis helmets and pants with the 80’s red jersey, and that wasn’t a bad combo either, surprisingly. “Redcoat” argument aside (which I get, BTW), Flying Elvis helmets look good when paired with a red jersey.
  8. I think the Bills’ color rush jersey is really great, I just don’t like the mono-red combo. On more than a few occasions I’ve played with the Bills on Madden wearing red tops, white pants, and red socks and it’s looked really good.
  9. Eh, I personally disagree. There’s a lot of things about the current word mark that bother me. The “tails”, if you will, on the bottom of the “A” and the “T” look very tacky and thrown on. I get the intended function - to round out the arch - but ultimately they aren’t necessary as the arch is still plenty visible without them. Every letter is spiked at the center exept the “A” and “S”, and if that feature doesn’t function across the board, it’s probably not worth using (the Angels show there’s ways to make it work). Flying Elvis is just tacked on there, for what reason? It does nothing to me but clutter a wordmark that’s already trying a bit too hard with unnecessary frills like the spikes and “arch rounding tails” (don’t know what else to call them ). The old one isn’t perfect, but it doesn’t bother me near as much as the current. I’d pick it over the current any day (but would still be totally fine with them trying something else that’s better).
  10. This is a great opportunity to get rid of that wordmark and release a better one...don’t know if they’ll do it, but I really hope so.
  11. Funny story that’s related: when I was a little kid (mid 90’s, about age 5-6), my family had a full encyclopedia set. In the “football” article, they had lots of pictures of different football legends. There was a picture of Johnny Unitas in the white jersey (wearing his helmet too), and was printed in color, but something was off with the print/coloring/lighting and everything that was blue (numbers, stripes, horseshoe) looked black. So as a 5-6 year old I thought the Colts were a strictly black and white team, and it wasn’t until I played Blitz a couple years later that I realized they weren’t. I didn’t see any Colts games at that time (seems like only the Broncos, 49ers, or Cowboys were ever on in my house), so I didn’t see them on TV for a while. And as it’d turn out, I became a Colts fan soon after I did start watching them!
  12. Put Brownie at midfield, and we’ve got a deal. That’s a great looking endzone.
  13. I’m totally with you there, I hope they wouldn’t do that either. If they’re allowed to do that though, I could see it being tried. My guess is if the Colts can add facemask grey and anvil black to their style guide, the Chargers could be allowed to do something similar.
  14. I don’t want a grey alternate at all, but could they feasibly make the facemask grey, put the color value on the style guide (like the Colts just did) and say “it’s a team color”? Just thinking out loud.
  15. I’m strongly assuming by “same royal blue” he means same color as last year as not “the same uniform”. I 99.9999% doubt they’d retain the same exact color rush set after a full-on rebrand, I just think it’s an odd choice of words that could potentially be misleading to some. If he and/or his source are correct, I’d be intrigued to see how inspired the Color Rush is by the original LA uniform, if at all. The grey, on the other hand, seems absolutely stupid. I’d have to see it of course, but it doesn’t sound good at all (and a little far fetched, if I’m being honest).
  16. After the Bucs released their new unis, NFL Live had a brief segment on them and Marcus Spears said he couldn’t tell the difference between the new set and the outgoing one. That floored me! I mean, I know a lot of people outside of this community aren’t as into the really fine details as we are, but I feel like some stuff is more obvious than not.
  17. With a white helmet, they could technically wear the original LA Chargers throwback as-is, or a fauxback of it with the new bolt. Don’t know that it’d happen, but I kind of like the sound of that.
  18. I seem to recall some tweets posted here that Brownie the Elf was going to have a more increased role on various applications (but not the uniforms). I’m holding out hope that’s true and that he’s rolled out more in the future. Though he’d make a far better primary than the helmet, maybe having him around more would offset and balance the use of the helmet a bit? Related note, I have a Brownie ‘47 Clean Up cap, and it’s honestly one of my favorite caps I own. I hope they roll out more Brownie merch and sideline gear for sure.
  19. This has been brought up as “the correct” solution a few times, but I think orange/brown/orange is just as correct and consistent. Orange/brown/orange matches the stripe layout within the sleeve stripes (brown/orange/brown/orange/brown), so it fits just as fine. Maybe the brown pants could use some white, but where they are worn with the white jersey and (presumably/hopefully) not the brown one, they matched the pant stripes to the same stripe layout on the white jersey’s sleeves. You’re entitled to your opinion of course, but I don’t see the stripes being such an egregious mistake. I see the logic behind those layouts perfectly. — The Browns look like the Browns again, and that’s all I ever hoped for. The color rush is a bummer, but everything else about this set is so refreshing. Well done, Cleveland!
  20. I get that there’s the logo/monogram vs. wordmark difference, but my only point had less to do with style and more to do with the quote (as I understood it*) implying that Atlanta was the only team that can abbreviate its city name on a jersey and have it universally resonate. NY and LA can do that just as easily (and have done it for longer across sports), and the Giants already do that now (even if it’s a monogram and not a wordmark). *If I’m understanding that assertion wrong, feel free to correct me. That’s just how I read it.
  21. This may be stretching it a fair bit, but technically:
  22. You know what? I think I’m gonna hop aboard that train too. The more I see those numbers on the Packers, the more I love them.
  23. That’s kind of where my thoughts have gone with the Jets, now that I’ve sat on the new set a while. I don’t think the new set is bad at all really, but I do think it’s kind of an average modern uniform, one that’s just kind of “there” and not anything super special. I agree with you and think the only problems the Jets really had previously were fixable with tweaks, and a rebrand wasn’t ultimately necessary. Had they changed to the green they wear now (maybe even a tint brighter) and fixed the stripes, then that would’ve checked off the needed boxes and made it much better. I always have a hard time with the idea that minor problems require major changes or a full-on rebrand to fix; that’s an approach that spawned the Titans’ and (outgoing) Bucs’ spacesuits, and what I always fear is going to happen with the Panthers someday. Thankfully the Jets’ efforts wound up being pretty tame and safe in comparison, but even still, the Jets traded a classic, historical look that just needed some fine polishing to be perfect for something that’s just okay and decent at best.
  24. I can totally understand that and get where you’re coming from, but I don’t think it would bother me at all if the Cowboys ever were to go ahead with vintage serif numbers as well, though. The Colts and Cowboys coexisted with vintage serifs for about a decade (in the same league) just fine, both looked great in them, and I think they could still coexist today; despite some similarities in branding like you mentioned, I think those are ultimately not as major in comparison to the differences they have. They both have some very different things going for them that still set each other apart, even in color scheme and uniform elements, enough so that I wouldn’t see too much of an encroachment. I even watched a broadcast of Super Bowl V yesterday and was surprised at how even in 1971, the two teams still looked fairly distinct from each other despite some shared similarities (in my eyes, at least). Granted they did have different number fonts, but everything else altogether was still distinct enough that even if the Colts still had the vintage serifs then, it wouldn’t have bothered me. The Cowboys could also further distance themselves if they’d like by switching out regular silver for the greenish silver across the board (helmet and pants), and just own the color outright to make that one of their “things”. That’s something I’ve hoped they’d do for a long time, honestly.
  25. As a Colts fan... Black swoosh on the road - stupid New wordmark - excellent Throwback numbers - excellent I was hoping for some striped socks too, but I can’t complain for the most part (aside from the odd minimal addition of black). They did a lot of good here.