Jump to content

SCalderwood

Members
  • Posts

    541
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SCalderwood

  1. Maybe "throwing away" is too strong of a way to put it, but completely changing team colors is definitely a way of saying "we're starting over." For whatever reason, the Guardians didn't want to drastically change their look. They kept the same colors, and even their wordmarks and cap logo maintain the same overall "vibe" as the current Indians set. They're not going to look that different, uniform-wise, on the field next year. From far away, the changes are barely going to be noticeable to casual fans. So, the organization clearly likes their current aesthetic and does not want to deviate too far from it. I don't blame them. I've always thought that the Indians looked great, at least for the 30 years that I have been watching baseball. Your point is pretty much, "I don't like their colors, so they should change them to these colors that I like better and make more sense to me." I understand. The forest green and beige thing... fine, whatever. I think that could look dull, but it could look okay. I think it would be a lateral move. I don't see it looking all that better than what they have now. I don't care about the forest green seats and walls and stuff, I don't think that a team's colors have to match their seats and walls. I think forest green is just a nice neutral relaxing outdoorsy color that looks good in an outdoor stadium, which is why they chose that color. The Orioles have the same thing going on at Camden Yards, and it looks good. I'd rather they have forest green seats and walls at Camden Yards than black seats/walls or orange seats/walls.
  2. Ah, ok. Understood. To be fair though, the American league players were decked out in blue from head to toe. Maybe that's why the scorebug people thought it would have looked wrong to have the National League assigned blue on the scorebug, I agree though, I wish the league were more consistent with these league color assignments in general. I wonder how it would have looked with The AL wearing all red and the NL wearing all blue. I mean if they're gonna go monochrome, why not fully embrace those league colors.
  3. Maybe I'm missing something really obvious, but can you be more specific about what you think is so "frustrating" about this? I think it looks okay. What am I missing?
  4. I'll narrow that down further - they should have worn white, because the game was in Milwaukee.
  5. I see your point, there's definitely an abundance of R/W/B in MLB, and I guess this could have been an opportunity for an R/W/B team to change colors. But team history (or lack thereof) aside, I've never really looked at the Indians and thought they needed to shake up their look too much. They've always struck me as a beautiful and classic-looking team. We've seen many instances in pro sports where a team tried to totally shake their look up and it ended up being a disaster. So I'm just glad that by keeping their colors, next year they won't look like a completely different franchise.
  6. Yeah, but it's hard to picture Cleveland baseball without thinking of red, navy, and white. They are trying to make this somewhat of a seamless transition and not throw away their 100+ year history. When the Bullets changed to the Wizards in 1997 ( NBA), they ended up looking like a completely different franchise... the Wizards basically looked like an expansion team and it seemed like they were almost trying to completely ditch their entire franchise history. I think Cleveland is trying to avoid this. When we see the Guardians on the field next year, they won't look like a completely different franchise... they'll look like an updated version of the Indians. I think that's what they are going for, kind of like the Washington Football Team. I agree with everything you said about the logo package. I don't think this change takes effect immediately... I think it begins next season. Maybe they think that by revealing this change now, they'll get more fans to go to games, seeing as how these are their last couple of months as existing as the Indians after a 100+ year run. It might make these next couple of months seem more special, maybe more fans will try to make it to a game.
  7. I agree with everything you are saying, but I'm not hopeful. One only has to look at the past few years in the NBA to see what a mess Nike can turn a league into, uniform-wise, and over in that league there doesn't seem to be any sign of things turning back or even slowing down. This MLB season, Pandora's box was opened pretty wide, and as you said we've seen it with the unconventional City uniforms and the All-Star uniforms. I don't see things getting back to "normal" anytime soon. Not until maybe in a decade from now, at the earliest. One idea that gives me hope, I guess, is that a lot of uniforms were kind of crazy and unconventional in the 70s and early 80s, and then sort of returned to looking a little more conventional in the late 80s and early 90s, before eventually leading to what we have today, meaning that uniform craziness can be cyclical and there IS some precedent of things going from "weird" back to "normal." But with Nike in charge, who knows where things are headed...
  8. Yeah, still not seeing it. The yellow stands out as one big difference, and yes the other colors are the same, but those are literally just their team colors, so that shouldn't be that surprising. And even then, the way the colors are distributed is quite different. The number placement is a direct result of the slanted wordmark, which I already mentioned as the only really noticeable similarity. (You're usually not going to put the number in the center of a jersey that has a slanted wordmark - it's a balance issue.) There are way too many design differences between these two jerseys to say that one was based on the other. I didn't care to read the Nike-speak on these, but if they didn't directly mention something about these using their old jerseys for inspiration, then I doubt that is what they were going for. And if that IS what they were going for, they could have done a much, much, much better job in that regard.
  9. I don't see the similarities, either. They have a slanted wordmark... that's about it.
  10. So it is guaranteed that if the Phoenix Suns win the championship (which would be their first ever), they will do so wearing a jersey that says neither "Phoenix" nor "Suns." That's where we are now.
  11. Maybe it's still a team color, then. If it is, I'm fine with them having a gray/silver jersey, and yes, I'd even be fine with them wearing it in the Finals.... as long as it looks good.
  12. Silver/gray is not a Blazers color - they should not have any silver/gray jersey, at all, for that reason alone. A gold Celtics jersey and a Knicks gray jersey could look decent if executed well, but it seems like that could be difficult to do. But in principle I wouldn't be against either of those, because they are definitely team colors. Even in the Finals I'd have no problem with either of those from a "they shouldn't be wearing that color" standpoint. My issue might be more that they just don't look good aesthetically.
  13. They definitely have the Donruss Diamond Kings vibe going on.
  14. I would not be surprised at all if we end up seeing at least one game in Milwaukee with the Bucks in their black jerseys vs. the Suns in orange jerseys. We'll get NBA Finals games looking like summer league games with practice jerseys. I hope I'm wrong, of course.
  15. I think that might be the entire point, though. They probably want some teams that normally don't wear red to wear the red caps, and some teams that don't normally wear navy to wear the navy caps. That makes it look more jarring and draws more attention to the cap, which increases the visibility and sales of these things. A Tigers fan might be like, "well, I already have had a navy Tigers cap forever, but that red Tigers cap looks kind of sharp, maybe I'll buy one." Also, if the Tigers hat ended up being navy, a lot of fans might barely even notice that it's a different hat. Remember, they're not trying to make things necessarily look good or look right; they're just trying to sell merchandise. We've clearly learned that from City Connect.
  16. Blue IS a Bucks color, though. I don't see anything wrong with a blue Bucks jersey any more than I would with an orange Suns jersey, a red Pistons jersey, a yellow Cavs jersey, etc. I think those are all justifiable, even in the playoffs, and even if it were a Game 7 type situation.
  17. We sort of have different views on this, but I guess that's the point of these discussions. I think those Bucks jerseys are pretty hideous, but I'm not strongly against them, because they are blue, and blue is a team color. And I think they added blue to their color scheme in the first place to represent the Great Lakes... which sort of makes sense for Wisconsin, and ties in to the whole "nature" vibe they sort of have going on. So it at least feels a little purposeful. If they wanted that to be their only alt, I'd actually be okay with it. Since it is a 2nd or 3rd alt, that's really my main complaint about it, because I don't think teams should have more than 3 total jerseys. In fact, I actually think I like this jersey more than their green antlers jersey, because I also don't think teams should have 2 different jerseys that are the same color. My bigger complaint is the Hawks wearing red at home. They are at home, so they should be wearing white. That actually bothers me more than the Bucks in blue.
  18. If MEM is the eastern-most Western Conference team, then I think they should be the one to move East. I think it would bug me if we had an Eastern Conference team that was situated further west than a Western Conference team. It's also bothered me that TOR has been in the Atlantic Division, even though they are not really that close to the Atlantic. Maybe this?: Eastern Conference Atlantic Division BOS NY BKN PHI WSH Southeast Division MEM ATL CHA ORL MIA Central Division TOR DET MIL CHI IND CLE Western Conference Pacific Division PHX LAC LAL SAC GS Northwest Division SEA POR LV DEN UTA MIN Southwest Division SA DAL HOU OKC NO
  19. I think three is just right. It's a good balance between not enough variety and too much variety. But I still think the home team should wear white. I want to be able to glance at a game, see who is wearing white, and know that it's the home team. I was watching some random Youtube videos of NBA highlights from 2019-2021. Whenever I see a highlight, for whatever reason, this first things I want to know are what teams are playing, and where they are playing. I don't know, maybe it's just wanting to know the context of the highlight. So sometimes, I would spend the entire duration of the highlight trying to figure out what the teams are and where they are playing, and I would miss the entire actual highlight, and sometimes I wouldn't even be able to figure out the answers to those questions before the highlight ended. Anyway, I think the home team should wear white, and the road team should have either a road primary or a road alternate to choose from. Admittedly, I was really into the NBA in the 90s/2000s, and that's when I watched the most NBA, and that was kind of the way things were done in that era. So maybe I'm just stuck in the past, getting old, and need to get with the times. I definitely agree with no city or earned jerseys in the playoffs, and I would say no throwbacks as well.
  20. That's not really true, at all. The Nationals and Wizards also mainly use WSH. Local Wizards telecasts have pretty much exclusively used WSH every game dating all the way back to when they were still the Bullets.
  21. It's not so much that sarcasm doesn't translate well, it's that these uniforms are so ridiculous that your idea of a rice-themed jersey is something that one has to pause to think hard about before determining whether you were being serious.
  22. Oh, don't get me wrong, I love their regular red uniform, too. In my opinion they are both pretty much equally nice-looking in their own ways, but that's just me. I'm a big fan of their main three jerseys (the white one, the red one, and the black one), especially compared to the mess their previous uniform set was. I guess my broader point was that the Hawks black jersey totally makes sense to wear for playoff road games, as opposed to other black jerseys that should never have been worn these playoffs, such as the MLK alt (I don't care about it being a "lucky" jersey - they shouldn't be wearing it in the playoffs), the Knicks black alt, the Sixers black alt, etc. My praise for the black Hawks uniform was more in comparison to unnecessary black jerseys that we are seeing these playoffs, not in comparison to the beautiful red Hawks jersey.
  23. Black-vs.-white matchups are fine when they make sense. I have no problem with the Hawks "primary" black jersey; it's got actual team colors (black with red and yellow trim) so they actually look like the Hawks when wearing it. It also actually says "Hawks" on it, and not something like "Peachtree." They can wear it for every single ROAD game in the playoffs and I would be fine with that.
  24. I think he is using the word "contrast" incorrectly. I think he actually meant the exact opposite of that; that the colors/uniforms look too similar to each other.
  25. For me, it's not so much about aesthetics as it is about the league's responsibility to demonstrate a certain level of consistency, as a professional organization. The color-vs.-color matchups seem very arbitrary - yes, they are planned well ahead of time, but how are decisions being made for what uniforms each team is wearing in what game? There doesn't seem to be any planning in that regard and it feels very random. Any organization lacking rhyme and reason in their decision-making just makes me take everything else they do less seriously, like they don't really have a grip on what they are doing.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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