Jump to content

OnWis97

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    10,925

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

 Content Type 

Everything posted by OnWis97

  1. OnWis97
    I've enjoyed the episodes so far, particularly how Chris and Paul sort of evolved into making uniforms and logos more than just an odd interest (like it always was for me).
  2. OnWis97
    Unpopular opinion, I am sure, but the full-body jag would look great on a helmet.
  3. OnWis97
    I just learned about this so maybe it's already been mentioned... Goalie Mike Murphy appeared in two NHL games. He gave up no goals. Career record: 0-1. https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=90954
  4. OnWis97
    The Twins/Wild mashup is pretty sharp. Their current (stupid) use of gold just slides right in there. However, I bet it would look even better without gold. After 60 years, I would not want to see the Twins change this much, but this would work really well if they were coming in today as an expansion team.
  5. OnWis97
    At the time, I agreed and I sometimes thought that the elite-level awfulness of that helmet drove people to think the rest was good because it was just standard-level awful. And maybe the new jerseys are having the same impact on me...looking back, I don't think that uniform (neck-down, of course) was terrible. Not one of my favorites, but at least it looked like a game uniform, unlike today. But still...they had it right the first time.
  6. OnWis97
    Exactly. When the teams started, I liked the Jags look a lot better. I've never liked Carolina's helmet logo nor the tapered stripes (and they're OK from neck-down). I loved the prowling jaguar and (as this is per my unpopular taste) the three-color block numbers. To me, just about everything Jacksonville has done has either been a downgrade or a shift from crap to a different kind of crap. Meanwhile, Carolina has kept a sturdy, albeit unspectacular, look. I think the Rockies/Marlins expansion is kind of similar in MLB. The Rockies have stuck with an unspectacular but generally inoffensive look and the Marlins have not been quite sure what to do. Carolina has its take on traditional striping and traditional two-color block numbers, whereas Jacksonville seems to chase trends a bit (when they're not trying to start a trend with a two-tone helmet). Their initial three-color numbers were kind of a 1990s thing (like in "The Program"). Right now, one-color numbers and simplicity are king. I would not go quite so far as to compare them to the Padres or Canucks. While I am sure someone could ding me on the pantones, they haven't undergone the color changes those teams have and their helmet logo has been "tweaked" (which in no way compares to the Canucks skate, orca, stick-in-rink history). But from a simple "uniforms" perspective, they just can't seem to sit still. I personally could not care less which jersey is their primary because all of their jerseys look like practice jerseys to me. I'm usually not a one-color number fan but to me this is the worst one-color number decision in NFL history. I'm generally OK with simple uniforms but this needs something interesting. From the neck down, this is definitely the worst the team has looked, in my opinion.
  7. OnWis97
    Anti-woke crusaders? I’m not a fan but I bet it could get a plurality of the vote.
  8. OnWis97
    I don't think the Buffaslug was a terrible logo. I just think it was a huge letdown given that the team was going back to it's blue/yellow roots (kinda) and people were hoping for something that reminded them of the familiar logo and/or something like the concepts that were floating around (basically a larger sword to buffalo ratio in terms of space taken up). I remember seeing the Buffaslug and just feeling the the rug had been pulled out from under me (and I'm not a Sabres fan). I think it was more the "wrong" logo than a "bad" logo. As for OKC, I think it was designed so whatever name was chosen to be placed on top of the "OKC." Seemed like a placeholder but here we are 12 years later and it's still in use. I'd have lost a lot of money betting on that...
  9. OnWis97
    I love that Niners ring. I kinda wish they'd won the game now.
  10. OnWis97
    I hope that's unpopular... I think my opinion that there has never been a good thing about the Ravens look is unpopular.
  11. OnWis97
    They should have let Seth take a shot...wouldn't have turned out much worse
  12. OnWis97
    Unpopular opinion: I tend to prefer the phantom yokes. The reason I do is because I prefer the shape it gives to the extra color on the sleeve. For example, the red Wild alternate did not have the phantom yoke and as popular as that jersey was I hated it in part because the green on the sleeve just looked like a box. When they upgraded it to primary, the phantom yoke gave the green that shape that was reminiscent of jerseys like the white Red Wings jersey, etc. I like that a lot better. Add the stripes to the bottom of the latter jersey and it's better by a mile. The green on the sleeves on the former was just to "boxy" for my taste, I guess. I also don't hate the phantom yoke when there's no barrier between to different colors: I understand why most people don't like it but it's kind of a guilty pleasure for me. In this example, I think it looks better than it would without.
  13. OnWis97
    I’m not always in agreement with the disdain some people have for “wokeness” in sports media but I just can’t bring myself to be even the least put-off by Shefter’s tweet.
  14. OnWis97
    LOL...I totally blanked on the NHL team when I was talking about the MLB team...but I also think it might be different than the US. (also, as you said there was an old team in hockey-crazed Canada. There was also an old team in the US (two in fact) and maybe it would have been considered more if they'd have had more success. I don't think people in DC had much connection to either edition of the Senators.)
  15. OnWis97
    I'd even suspect that takes Senators off the table. Even in 2004 or whenever the Expos moved, government is too polarizing at this point. In 1901 or whenever the original Senators were named, it was probably received better than it would be today.
  16. OnWis97
    Although they switched from uniforms that simply said "Sox" everywhere to a road uniform that said "Chicago" and a cap with a "C." I'd think sticking with "Sox" would be the way to go if that was the rationale.
  17. OnWis97
    I think the late 1980s White Sox uniforms are pretty nice in a vacuum. They're classic-looking baseball uniforms, albeit less-than-exciting. The only issue I had with the uniforms themselves was that the loop on the "C" was large enough to create ambiguity. (And I think they had sizable numbers on the pants, which I wasn't a fan of). But the overall problem is that those uniforms just did not say "White Sox." OK, they literally said that, but despite all the bucking of tradition that the team had done, the use of "Sox" on its own is pretty consistent. The next look, while seemingly jumping on the black/sliver bandwagon* set us straight that the "Sox" were back. If the team were an expansion team today, I'd probably favor the late 1980s uniforms if pitted against anything else they've ever had (though the over-used colors would be another concern). But they just seemed "off" for that franchise. *And it even turns out that the look stuck for the long haul, which at the time I never dreamed would happen given the trendiness of the colors and the team's history of changing.
  18. OnWis97
    I had the exact opposite reaction. I think the purple helmet really clashes with the red sleeves on the primaries. I think the Rays, Reds, and Spiders look fantastic. Pirates, too. There's nothing wrong with the Royals (in fact it makes sense given their name and the lack of that scheme in MLB) but I guess I just like their "boring" look. While I think the stars on the Astros primaries need blue rather than two bright colors, the only one I'm not fond of is the D-backs. Too many colors with too much clashing. It's funny. I find OSV to be a traditionalist in football but a fan of pushing the envelope in baseball.
  19. OnWis97
    Geez. I don't think anyone thinks that this school's "Clan" name is supposed to be the same as "(Ku Klux) Klan." It's not that it's confusing; it's that in the United States (EDIT; just realized this is in Canada...), the word "Clan" (or Klan) on its own conjures certain images. I know when I hear "Clan" I think "Klan" at first. If someone refers to their family as "the Smith clan" I don't. Why? Because a lot of people call the KKK the Klan for short. If that wasn't a thing...if it was always either "Ku Klux Klan" or "KKK" then the word "Clan" would not have the connotation that it does (or can). And this would be less likely to be an issue. So just because it's not racist and in no way connected to the KKKlan doesn't mean it's not the right* thing to do. And you what? If they'd decided to leave it, I'd have had no problem with that, either. But the institution had to decide what was right for itself and it chose not to connect itself to a word that, through no fault of theirs, causes a visceral reaction. Not everything's a PC conspiracy to win some culture war. *Actually, to me it wasn't "THE right thing" to do. But it was a perfectly viable thing to do. Some things exist outside of two absolutes. There's nuance to things like this.
  20. OnWis97
    Yellow CAN touch white. And it would make the numbers on uniforms like the Vikings, Packers, and Steelers better (Particularly the vikings, since they have more recent history of that than the others). The "rule" that yellow cannot touch white has contributed to the one-layer number fad and the addition of black where it's not needed. (Yellow cannot touch white on both sides, though, Vikings.)
  21. OnWis97
    To me Robo Pen is to Skating Pen as Helmet Dolphin is to Current Dolphin. Oddly most people here seem to prefer the sleeker, less soulful/cartoony Robo Pen to Skating Pen while they prefer the campy Helmet Dolphin to the "soulless" Current Dolphin. Cartoon logos are very popular here (Cartoon Oriole, for example). It surprises me that Robo Pen is so well-liked. I am the opposite. I hate Robo Pen but I love Current Dolphin. In fact, Skating Pen is really me breaking my own rule. I tend not to like campy, cartoony logos.
  22. OnWis97
    I'm not going to lose any sleep over this since it's a minor league team I seldom notice but I think it's a solid name and teams just changing names* is odd to me. I'd rather they have a presence that lasts. Hopefully the Mud Hens don't move into a new stadium soon. *Barring a Washington-NFL type reason
  23. OnWis97
    Granted, I've almost never talked with anyone outside of these boards about the logo, but I tend to think it's very well-liked in Madison and among alumni. Doesn't hurt that it's associated with the ascension of the football program. It has pretty much nothing in common with the Buffaslug, which was partly hated for the huge disappointment it was when fans were anticipating a return to the good ol' days. And to be honest, I am a lukewarm fan of the motion-W. I liked it on the football helmets day 1 when I was still a high schooler in Minnesota. And I'm so old that when I arrived on campus, it was pretty much just a football logo. That's how I kinda wish it had stayed. The previous "W" never looked that good on a football helmet to me. But I think the motion s**k W has been a negative elsewhere. The basic W look better on basketball shorts, for example, and particularly on the old-school sweater worn by Bucky Badger. So I'm not a huge fan of the logo, but I think it's very well liked. As for the crest, I never liked the logo, probably because I associated with University Ridge golf course (I had friends that loved golf and I don't). As for the issue at hand, I don't have the energy to discuss it. I don't think it's going to be a game-changer but I don't need to strut my cynicism and mock it, either.
  24. OnWis97
    I definitely find it odd that they'd have a CFP ring and a National Championship ring. It's like that Nats getting the NL champ ring and the World Series Champs ring.
  25. OnWis97
    I understand this. History has been really bad to these discussions. Given that there is a real social movement going on that's related to our topic at hand, I really feel we should be talking about this, including whether name changes are necessary for Washington and others. It just seems crazy that we've eliminated so much of what's relevant to this discussion, to the point we have to pretend the world is a different place. The Washington change is probably going to be driven by the current name...whether they go with a "lesser" native name or totally abandon...and "why they are selecting this name for the rebrand" is an important part of the discussion. I wonder whether we can even get through that. I suppose the board doesn't have a feature that enables moderators to stop individuals from posting in specific threads...That would be best to weed out the clowns and incentivize civility. I think it's an interesting and important topic with tons of nuance (not the Washington name but the spinoffs) and this is the place I'd like to be talking about it. I know I've lost this argument (well, I never had it) but I'd like to have it talked about even if it means mods are quick with suspensions. EDIT/Late Add: I don't love the politics ban, but it's not like I can't go find a place on the internet to have these talks. It's not important that this board be the place to talk about that kinda stuff. However, this board is the ideal place to discuss this potential issue.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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

  I accept