Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by OnWis97

  1. I watch college football and I'm still not going to love this in the NFL. It's one of the things that separates the two. Plus, in college, there are just so many players on the roster that strict adherence to NFL rules may not even work. So Kickers wear #98, DEs wear #8, DBs wear #4. They'll even have a starting safety wearing the same # as the starting QB. I kinda like that in college; it makes the roster look as malleable as it is.* (The only thing I don't like is the occasional QB in the 20s; it's rare but throws me every time). *Though, NFL rosters probably turn over just as much (but fewer people total per season)
  2. Might as well get started on Jones’s Hall of Fame bust.
  3. The bone would not be so bad if there was absolutely no white on it.
  4. I think the OP has a couple of nice examples. The Raiders because of their (now in the rear view mirror) "Just Win Baby" culture and the Islanders probably because of the cups. The latter just screams 1970s. And the Raiders, while not terrible, isn't quite right for a helmet in that you can't really see what's going there except for closeups. Most of the rest of these are just bad and that's it (except the Devils, which is just great). The first one I came up with is the Flyers. Kind of like the Islanders, it's definitely a product of its era, but I really like it and would never want them to change.
  5. I'd love to be a fly on the wall at the NFL office. "Damn. We should have run this by him first."
  6. I bet someone could come up with a solution to this. Oh yeah, the Bengals did...in 1981. The brilliance of that design was that orange stripes were never needed; omission of one of the colors was never needed; contrasting sleeves were never needed. It was always black stripes on orange whether the item was white or black. It works on orange pants/jerseys as well (though that would be VERY orange). Admittedly, that worked better with the older jersey cuts but without TV numbers it seems like it could work. It certainly would be able to work on the pants.
  7. Unpopular opinion, I guess: The pants with the black stripes are worse than the pants with the orange stripes.
  8. Big upgrade. So much cleaner. They show that the last uniforms didn’t have to be trash. These really are much more reflective of the last set than the 80s/90s. And they’re...really nice. The biggest problem I have is the white pants. They should have one pair of white pants with the stripes taken right off the black pants. They don’t need two (or are there three?) and neither color should be totally omitted. The other issue I have is the thin number outlines but I m just relieved they used outlines at all. As good as the original tiger stripes? No. But pretty nice. I can’t believe they had that last set for like 20 years.
  9. I'd suspect the NFL is the most regional of the MLB, NBA, NFL, NHL, MLS and attendees probably average a much further travel distance than the others. I'm not really sold that this always means a state name is better than a city name. I don't think Vikings fans in Duluth would be less likely to travel. But maybe it makes sense in Charlotte. When the Panthers started, there were probably plenty of Falcons fans in South Carolina. Perhaps that regional identifier provides a connection that helps tip the scales for parts of South Carolina? For the Hornets, well, it's not like a lot of people are coming up on Tuesdays from Charleston. So I do see the logic. Of course, the Carolina Hurricanes being located further from SC and having essentially the same schedule formula as the Hornets is not consistent with that. So ultimately, I suppose new teams are usually named based on one-time rationales (be it gut feeling, cadence of the full name, owner preference, or some sort of strategy to reach more populations, or maybe there's some market research involved?).
  10. I tried to say that in my post, but you did it much better. I think I read here (but haven't found it elsewhere) that the Twins wanted to be the "Twin Cities Twins" to the point that the "TC" hat was designed with the "place name" before the American League said no. So while I always assumed the "TC" was to avoid the perception of an "M" being for "Minneapolis" it's also possible that it lingers as symbolic of a somewhat prototypical name, which would be a pretty cool story. I'm not aware of the consideration of "Minneapolis Saints," but that would have been an interesting solution and may have flown since naming big league teams after states was so rare back then.
  11. I don't know. Seems like a missed opportunity to have even more halo-A's on their uniforms.
  12. This may be true. The world is smaller now and there are more (for example) Bills fans in Missouri or Orioles fans in Florida than there probably were before so many people had access to all the games or even highlights. Though I still do think most fandoms are based on geography more than anything. Two early examples were the Vikings and Twins going with "Minnesota" and I think it was to not "alienate" the fans in (presumably) St. Paul by naming the team (presumably) Minneapolis. I don't think it would have hurt the fanbases in the long run but I understand the logic. In more recent decades we've seen more examples, particularly in one-metro states like Arizona and Colorado. I also think the Florida Panthers and Texas Rangers (being the second teams in their state/sports) were probably going for "lets get the fans in the middle." ** Then we have Carolina, New England, Golden State, etc. I'm not saying it works, but I am saying it's common practice. **I suppose there are several other factors with the Rangers and Panthers. They sort of have similar situations to Minnesota (though the other three Miami and other three Dallas teams seem to make it work). Also, I am aware that both "Florida Panthers" and "Texas Rangers" make more sense than replacing with city names but maybe that's why they chose those names.
  13. Vegas or Seattle. There’s a 1% chance of any other scenario. If it’s Seattle, the Minnesota franchise will cease to exist and never be caught as the losingest big league franchise in North America.
  14. I should not be surprised but this is the first I've heard of this. Blech. The Red Sox in yellow and blue. The NBA's been doing this for a few years. It's bad. And so is this. But it's somehow just a bit worse in baseball, which is more tradition-oriented. This isn't going to be pretty...
  15. Do people tend to think of these as lazy or do you like them? I love them. As someone who knows every uniform since I started buying cards i the early 1980s, I enjoy seeing these modern takes. I see them more as tributes than rip-offs.
  16. I went to FanFest in 2014 here in Minnesota. Didn't make an effort to go to the game (feel like I should have). FanFest seemed to have people from all over the country. It made me feel like the ASG was a decent draw.
  17. It's really a shame Brian McCann never played for the Cards.
  18. I like the decision. I think we should be able to talk about it without mentioning T***p, B***n, or even G******R K**P. Sports has often been on the forefront of social movement. In fact, I could make that argument that this isn't "politics" at all (though the potential for explosiveness means it's effectively so), just like integration wasn't "politics." This is a strange time in America and MLB is probably waking quite a tightrope, here. But hey, after I get vaccinated I might want to catch a Twins game and less competition (from those who I am guessing tend towards the anti-social distancing and anti-masking) is fine by me! Hopefully in other threads we'll be able to try this out, for example, the name/imagery of the very team that is no longer hosting the game. Not to mention Cleveland and Washington. Even if you have to be quick with the suspensions.
  19. I suppose that's a side-effect of almost any such boycott, be it for states using the Confederate Flag prominently or the aforementioned Arizona and North Carolina issues. Several musicians cancelled concerts in North Carolina that year. The idea is to hurt the economy (thereby sending a message to politicians, but there is definitely some service-worker collateral damage. I say that without commentary (I think) and without really knowing what's "right."
  20. I tend to agree that there's a difference between doing the politics we did right up until the election of, well. someone and when it's connected to our topics at hand. The recent / ongoing name changes and this All-Star game issue, among a few other things. The boards have chosen to error on the side skipping key elements of a topic as opposed to letting the political elements of the topics in. That said, thankfully the internet is a cesspool and I can go anywhere to hear people argue about the (redacted) versus (redacted) elements of the All-Star game decision.
  21. I suspect by jumping up several pages, someone's mentioned the Bills (looks like that's what all this face mask talk probably derived from). Did I see that the Bills are going to white as their "primary" face mask color? Does that mean they may show up one Sunday with gray, red, or blue face masks? Or would that only be in the case of a throwback or something? College teams switch face masks a lot (Wisconsin bounces between red and white) but in the NFL the helmet is such a major identifier, I'd be kind of surprised to see this happen frequently. It seems like a mistake to have helmets changing a lot. Jerseys? Sure; fans buy those. But is there really a big run on helmets (full-sized and/or mini) that Bills Mafia members are going to need one with each face mask color? I think the move to white is an improvement, though blue or red would have been better. Gray generally sticks out like a sore thumb on teams without gray or silver. But we're probably at the point at which the topic of gray face masks need to be given the distinction of "quasi-political" and banned.
  22. It's crazy when I am looking at what game(s) to attend and those four teams just dominate the schedule. I'd be all for unbalancing the intraleague schedule. Also, Cleveland vs. Texas in the 1980s at Municipal Stadium. That must have been one tough ticket to get... A few years ago, I went back through my ballgame attendance history and determined the only team I was missing was the Dodgers. They came to Target field on like a Tuesday/Wednesday in April. It was cold, windy, drizzly and miserable. But I needed to get that final notch on my belt. Nobody would go with me. So I went by myself. As an adult, I've traveled to a lot of ballparks (and have since been to Dodger Stadium), but as a kid in the 1980s, I never saw anyone. Sure, it wasn't Aaron and Mays, but I never saw Tony Gwynn,* Ozzie Smith, Eric Davis, etc. *I was actually able to see the Padres Twice at County Stadium (First interleague and second after the Brewers made the switch) but Gywnn didn't play either game. Boo. I'd love to have seen Tony in his prime, wearing the awesome pinstriped road jersey (with the superior-to-yellow orange trim) in the dumpy Metrodome.
  23. I like interleague, too but I wish the interleague schedule was more like the NFL's intraconference schedule. Bascially, play one division from the other league either at home or on the road. It would make the crosstown rivalries more special. Of course, interleague primarily exists so those rivalries can happen all the time, as they sell a lot of tickets. I remember when it first started and people would say "nobody cares about a Royals/Pirates matchup." Maybe so, but nobody cared about Royals/Twins either. The last thing I need when trying to figure out what game I'm going to is more Tigers games. Getting the Padres or Nationals in on occasion is a nice change of pace. That said, I know it's "just sports" but I do like the idea of the maintaining some scheduling integrity and doing the NFL-like division arrangement would be good for that.
  • Create New...

Important Information

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