OnWis97

Members
  • Content Count

    14,477
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by OnWis97

  1. I agree with this philosophy. But for both the Penguins and Flames, I'm willing to set my principles aside. They just look so darn nice. And now the Penguins have it back full time. I hope that's where the Flames go, as well.
  2. I want the Eagles to go back to that. But it’s so nice, I would take the Jets over nobody.
  3. That's crazy. Neverthess... 1986 Phillies: .534 winning percentage. Not a terrible team; just a better than mediocre team behind a 108-win buzzsaw. 1995 Royals: .486. Again, behind dominant team (Cleveland won 100 games in a 144-game season) 2018 Twins: .481. Not the gaudy "games back" number of the other two. Cleveland only won 91 games last year. I'd argue that the Twins are the worst of this bunch. Philly was over .500. The Royals? Well I don't recall whether the schedules were unbalanced in 1995 or if that happened later but the Royals either 1) had to play a ridiculously good Cleveland team a bunch of times or 2) did not get the benefit of playing the lowly Central a ton. Either way, I think the Twins had an easier schedule.
  4. Most of those are pretty nice. My favorites: Hat: Brown hat with yellow logo. I really don't like any other hat. Swinging friar should not be on an on-field hat. I don't like front panels and I find the two-colored "SD" to be jarring. Home jersey: Pinstriped. The chest logo one is too boring (needs piping). Not a fan of the yellow wordmark or the yellow piping. The bottom-row white jersey is solid and a close second. Road Jersey: This is the weak point of what I'm seeing. I think gray-road pinstripes gets old (and I'm a Twins fan). But that's my favorite because the gray is more gray (or is it that the pinstripes make cause that illusion?). The "San Diego" wordmark is good and would be nice on a truer gray. I like the "SD" with piping (but brown logo would be better). Brown Alt: Love the SD with piping. I like the tan trim, even if I don't want tan road uniforms. With the exception of the hats, it's mostly splitting hairs...from the neck down, these would look great no matter what. As an aside, I don't see too much complaint about this but does anyone else dislike the little gap in the "D?" I HATE it. It's one of the most most annoying little details I can think of to come out in the last few years. Is it supposed to provide the illusion of of a drop shawdow? Or is it just trying too hard?
  5. I tend to agree with most of this. Nationally, these leagues are no threat to the NFL (not that the poster is really suggesting they will). Most football fans have an NFL team and, even if they live in one of the minor league towns will probably be more invested in their NFL team than their minor league team. It might end up looking like other minor league teams. I've lived in minor league towns where the teams draw OK due to the low cost and local presence but I've never really witnessed a lot of local excitement for those teams. If, say, Colorado Springs gets a team in one of these leagues, fans might go and buy gear. But they'd probably trade a championship for a week 7 Broncos win. I live in a major league town. St. Paul has an independent minor league team (St. Paul Saints) that has a nice little new ballpark. They draw fairly well. Last year a friend got free tickets for a playoff game and I went. The place was probably less than 25% full...for the playoffs. My best guess is that because it wasn't on the pocket schedule released in March, it wasn't on anyone's radar...That doesn't happen with the big-league teams.
  6. The Twins finished second last year and I have a hard time believing there's ever been a more hapless second-place team in MLB. Being in that division and the existence of an unbalanced schedule should be enough to get Cleveland to 90.
  7. I misinterpreted the Falcons logo as well. I recognized the correct head but thought the rest was just an abstract mess that included a wing. I don’t think I recognized it as a wing flapping in flight until I saw a Falcons-inspired high school logo at an angle showing both wings (it was a way better logo).
  8. I'd guess that in less time than that you'll see a lot of high schools dropping football. I totally agree with you. "Developing brains" and "informed consent" are the two phrases I see being used to push the needle on the age that tackle football starts. Much, much, more needs to be learned, but I would not be surprised if starting younger makes the likelihood of lifelong damage significantly greater.
  9. When teams have so many uniforms, they need a mannequin to display the combo of the day... http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/26075907/meet-mannequin-keeping-nats-endless-uniform-combos-straight
  10. That seems to be a part of the team's approach to its brand nowadays.
  11. Wild: well just about anyone has a better name. What I really want is for Voyageurs to have been chosen...with this color scheme. Twins: I don’t want anyone else’s look, but I do want the Twins to narrow their look. Vikings: Nah. Wolves: Nah. Regarding the North Stars debate dominating this thread, I am no fan of Cleveland Deals so as great as pre-1991 North Stars looks were, no.
  12. Three would be a reduction for most teams. Thanks to the Yankees, Cubs, Red Sox, etc., I don't foresee the death of home and road designations like in the NBA. I just cannot fathom the Yankees in gray at home hosting the Red Sox in white. Looking at the NFL and NBA takeovers, some possibilities might include: More one-year uniforms...maybe even using the title "earned" for teams from the previous year's postseason. Maybe in place of "City" uniforms, they'll have "historic" fauxback type gimmicks. One or two teams with a very "Nike" overhaul like the Seahawks and Bucs. Maybe the Rockies? Mariners? D-Backs? I think Nike's NBA takeover is much, much worse than its NFL takeover. If I turn on a random NBA game, I frequently need extra looks to determine the teams or who's at home. Teams too frequently dress in colors that have nothing to do with them, white vs. dark is not an indicator of who's at home, it's just kind of a mess. The NFL takeover has been more of a mixed bag. I think MLB will be more NFL-like, though the number of games could lead them to take step in the NBA direction. But I really don't think you'll see white being worn by the road team (nor gray by the home team) and I am hopeful that we won't see too many non-team color combos like a purple Twins "Prince" uniform or a silver Pirates "Steel City" uniform.
  13. I don't expect everyone to be as outraged as I am about advertisements on the uniforms. But I'm surprised whenever anyone thinks it's a positive or even neutral to put them on. In my opinion it cannot be done "tastefully." Any logo, including manufacturer logos, is distasteful. Some are not as distasteful. The current ad on the sleeve of MLB jerseys is distasteful...but it just happens to be so difficult to see that it barely registers. Swooshes on NFL sleeves? A bit more distasteful. The more that it's done the more distasteful it gets. The NBA definitely crossed a new line with its corporate ads. I expect the rest to follow suit. But even on this board some people are OK with it or even prefer it. I don't get it. Now the Celtics share their brand with GE. And that photo above? I was able to recognize that Sounders logo, but they really aren't putting the team out there very well. But obviously the cost/benefit improves when teams water their brands down and share their "billboards" (i.e., the uniforms their players are wearing) with un-related corporations.
  14. I like interlocking letters but I actually like that only a select number of teams really can use them. I would not want to see them overused. I absolutely do not want to see TX, AZ, etc. Then' we'll get alts with ATL, PHILA. I am not a fan of postal codes and other abbreviations (especially on MLB hats if they get to be more than two letters). Using the nicknames and cities...I'm generally not a fan, but it makes more sense to me than interlocking a postal code. I kinda like the "CA" above (and the short-lived version just before the "winged-A" disaster). I'm not a fan of the "CR" in theory, but in practice it at least looks OK. The "Motre Bame" hat is the only bad part of an otherwise great look from 1994-1999. I thought that hat was awful. There are a couple of midwestern quirks: The BiG. I know that's an "M" and a "B" but obviously, they designed a "clever" logo and while I don't like it as much as some do, I don't consider it bad that they had both letters on the hat, as they arrived at it in a different way. The Twins "TC." This is one of the most unique cap logos in baseball in that it doesn't include the city (state) name at all and from a literal standpoint, should not represent "Minnesota Twins." But part of its charm is that it's rooted in the confusion of how to handle the whole "Minneapolis/St. Paul" issue. The Twins were the first team in North American team sports to take the field with a non-city name. Add to that that an "M" could have been seen as "Minneapolis" and not "St. Paul" and they ended up with a unique solution as the location of the "Twin Cities" is what prompted the whole mess to begin with. Also... I can't remember where I saw this...probably from someone here...I think they were considering calling themselves the Twin Cities Twins, which would have rendered that cap viable to the "city letter on the cap" norm. But the American League did not sign on to that name (thankfully). So they went with Minnesota but kept the hat. If that's true, then that makes it an interesting story. So, yeah, I kinda give my team a pass...
  15. I guess. Though I was not alive at the time, I've always viewed it as a way to get more runs on the board. That pitchers could not hit well was not in itself a problem. Watching NL games today, that's how I feel anyway. How we got to the point that pitchers cannot hit may be more "organic" but the change itself was not really (that change, though, would be impossible to make organically, I suppose). We're kinda splitting hairs, but if baseball needed pitchers not hitting, the NL would have switched decades ago.
  16. I don't know that I'd call it organic. The AL established the DH as a way to increase the number of runs on the board. One one hand, I think the days of the NL and AL being separate leagues are essentially over...so it's odd that the two conferences have different rules. On the other I love the NL game and I don't want them going to the DH. (What I really want is the AL to dump the DH, but that's not happening). I agree that there can be some knee-jerkness and that's part of why a rule against shifting would be a bad idea. What I hope happens in response to shifting (and I acknowledge this will take some time) is that players start to be able to hit away from it, which would deter it from happening. I do think, though, that MLB's most important things to address are on the field. They need to find a way to make games go more quickly (which is part of why I don't like the DH). Due primarily to teams being smart (fresh arms, taking pitches, etc.), the games are just taking too long. It's a difficult problem, but it's probably not best to have weeknight games routinely going until 11:00.
  17. Well, I don't know if anyone really believes that one helmet is a significant benefit to the issue of long-term quality of life...but I tend to agree. If it is "safety" then stick with it all the way...for PR if nothing else.
  18. I don't think too many people around these parts would disagree with the first bullet. They seemed to get dark just because that was the thing and folks here prefer vibrant colors. I personally don't think the Pats have ever gotten it right in the elvis era. The 1994 home uniform (same numbers on shoulder as front/back) was sold but they still blew their white uniform with different-colored shoulder numbers. I personally hated the giant elvises on the shoulders. Along with the dropshadows, I thought they made these uniforms way over-done. But I, along with most on the board, definitely preferred the more vivid colors. No sure how popular your second bullet is. I associate Pat the Patriot with one of my all time favorite looks from the neck down. That red jersey was sooooooo nice. So I was dragged kicking and screaming, but elvis is a better logo. Pat is far too detailed. Elvis took some getting used to for sure, but I think if the Pats had been an expansion team in the 1990s and those two logos were offered, most people would have gone for elvis.
  19. I don't really know what a "clara" is but Santa's not going to enjoy this.
  20. I know the NFL was keeping it in check better than college, and I think the NFL recognized that the primary helmet is an important part of a team's brand. So while I fear they'd let it get out of control, I think it would be reasonable to hope that it would not. With only 16 games per year, though, I'd like a different helmet to be less than once-per-year.
  21. I don't think a Super Bowl that comes down the 4th quarter can be among the worst all time games. I'll take it over Seattle's dismantling of Denver any day. There was lots of good defense. And, no doubt, lots of bad offense. By no means was it a great game, but I'm old enough to remember San Francisco beating Denver 55-10. And Washington clobbering Denver. And the Giants. Wow, the Broncos lose their games huge. Not to mention some recent blow-outs in the college playoff and BCS. This game kept my interest.
  22. Unpopular opinion: I like the one-helmet rule. Sure, it costs us a few throwbacks we'd like (Bucco Bruce, for example) but I think more bad than good can come from more freedom to have multiple helmets. There are college teams that mess with their helmets enough that they don't really have an identifiable helmet. I don't think we really need the jets wearing navy blue titans helmets once or twice per year.
  23. Current: The Kings. I love the purple/gray combo. It is (minus the advert, of course) the best they've ever looked. Recent: The Cavs primaries when LeBron returned. Simple and beautiful. Older: Bucks Irish rainbow; no red. Just green.
  24. It's a downgrade but I don't think the previous logo was good enough for it to be "the biggest" downgrade.