OnWis97

Members
  • Content Count

    14,495
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

OnWis97 last won the day on December 5 2016

OnWis97 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,463 All Star

About OnWis97

  • Rank
    It should always be Christmas in New Jersey

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Favourite Teams
    U of Wisconsin, Twins, Vikes, Wolves, Wild

Recent Profile Visitors

29,136 profile views
  1. And how are the not an F?
  2. It seems like only yesterday that C. Montgomery Burns wanted to scour the Federal League for ringers.
  3. I have to admit, I'm surprised they called it a major. I thought the only five-minute major in hockey was Murder 1. The Sharks were lucky Pavelski fell. But I'm fine with it; it's a cheap move and was not necessary. If you do something like that, you're risking the opponent's health and, therefore, your freedom (i.e., not being in the penalty box).
  4. Yeah...the yellow stripe really gets lost on the sleeve. Mimicking the color pattern on the pants would be better.
  5. I agree on Vikings, Twins, Wild, and United. The T-Wolves don't really have any connection to the Met Center. If anything, New Met Center would work for the Wild. For the T-Wolves, maybe the Mikan Center or just Minneapolis Stadium (and then informally referred to as "the Den") Saints might try something quirkier. I can't really think of what that might be though.
  6. This might be my least favorite feature on any uniform in the league. With the digital numbers second and the giant logo third. Maybe the Browns pants fit in there somewhere. This is pretty close to my list, at least in terms of sequence...my grades tend to be lower.. A- Lions: Agree that more white was needed but such an improvement. A- Dolphins: Including the new number update, it's fantastic. And I prefer the silhouette to the whimsical dolphin in a helmet. B- Vikings: Needs more yellow and the ship-sail numbers have worn out their welcome C+ Jets: Could have been worse. I actually like the helmet quite a bit. C- Titans:I kinda like the sword motif, but overall, it's too dark blue. D+ Browns: The pants are inexcusable. The brown facemask is the best change and I hope they keep it when they go back to their more traditional uniforms. D Jags 2.0: Blech. They haven't done anything right in a while...but at least the helmet is not a joke. D Seahawks: I still mourn the loss of that color (slate?). While I have gotten used to them, nothing about them is an upgrade. The original Nike team of the NFL. F Jags 1.0: The helmet was worthy of an "F" anyway, but it caused everyone to overlook how they still sucked from the neck-down. F Bucs: As you said, awful numbers, pewter shoulders, different logos on each sleeve. Bonus negative points for replacing a modern classic. And while I have some strong feelings about some uniforms, this is one of maybe three changes for which I flat out cannot fathom anyone considering it an improvement. That's why this belongs on the bottom. All they did was take a great uniform and wipe crap on it. I'd love to hear from someone that thinks this is an improvement.
  7. Maybe some school will go position-specific. "Cover the A-gap." "Laces Out!" "Hit the Hole."
  8. I was able to attend the Final Four for the first time... ...it was a blast. All three games were great as well as the fans from all four schools.
  9. This shows restraint. The Jets are exonerated. We don’t need the full official release.
  10. UniWatch had a pretty thorough write-up on the NY Lotto uniforms https://uni-watch.com/2019/04/02/lottery-ad-hits-jackpot-with-uni-related-details/?fbclid=IwAR0itfrL_syV3EniupD3LCg_8RwynckMDNtdZMMINtZ4QcDKuYnGgJIOlEA
  11. Basketball specific. The "O" was a ball. https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/BJ0AAOSwzJ5XVFO6/s-l1600.jpg
  12. To this day, I find It jarring. I’m not an Iowa fan, but growing up in Big Ten I certainly was used to the original. So if they had come out at the same time as finalists , who knows...
  13. I was in grad school at Iowa when that logo was unveiled. People there were pretty unhappy about it and I think that’s why it never replaced the classic logo (I.e., I think it was intended to). So at the bookstore, both logos were prevalent on apparel . Eventually, the new one was gone. I have seen that in the Twin Cities in recent years once or twice.
  14. Here's the thing...my gut (my gut is the best gut) says that the one helmet rule is not likely meaningful regarding mitigating risks. That said, I don't think the burden of proof needs to be on the NFL to prove it. There's no harm in the one-helmet rule. There's a slim chance of harm without it. So it makes sense, even if it's probably more of a PR move. Speaking of colleges, look at how often some of them change uniforms. Their football teams are not as recognizable as they used to be. They are watering down their looks, which is the very thing I suspect the NFL is actually trying to avoid here. A team's helmet is probably more recognizable than its primary logo. Maybe not as big of a deal in college, where you have mascots (that have a bigger presence than pro mascots), bands, other sports, etc. But the helmet is probably the most important team identity item there is.
  15. My gut reaction to the pass interference being reviewable was negative. There something more "judgement" about it than there is with determining whether someone fumbled. With a fumble, it either was or was not a fumble...not always easy to determine, but if you can see what happened the line is pretty clear. With PI, it's going to be difficult to determine where that line is drawn between minor contact and something blatant. What's next, holding? That said, pass interference is so impactful...as much as you don't like to see a missed call like in that NFC title game, I hate a 50-yard pass interference being called incorrect even worse. Just letting a QB loft the ball and awarding half the length of the field on a bad call really bugs me. So from that standpoint, I like it. It'll be very interesting to see how willing they are to change calls or even to change them to offensive PI. Bad calls are part of the game but they seem to be setting themselves for accusations of bad overturns, something that I don't think has been a big problem in the replay era (Outside of "what is a catch?"). And will there be inconsistency? For example "they didn't overturn that? He barely touched him. The call they did overturn in that Detroit/Cincy game was was much closer to true PI."