OnWis97

Yes, I think the Suns did a throwback during the Barkley era to the original uniforms which had been used all the way up to just before Barkley joined Phoenix. I think they may have worn those in preseason that year and busted out the new ones for the regular season...but I may be making that up

The Devils current set is already the very definition of BFBS. They tossed out a unique colour scheme, that perfectly represented the area, and replaced it with something bland and safe. If they hadn't won 3 cups, I'd be a huge proponent for Green coming back full time. I disagree. Black and red are your absolute typical "devil" colours. Don't get me wrong - I liked the green and red, but this wasn't a case of BFBS. I tend to agree that this was not BFBS, but I also agree with Morgo's statement that "They tossed out a unique colour scheme, ..., and replaced it with something bland and safe." Red and black may be more "devil", but the red and green was great and we'll never get that scheme again...not like that where there are no silvers, blacks, grays, etc. New Jersey had its "simple" that it has now AND "unique". Now it just has "boring". I know black and red make sense, but boy were those old uniforms sharp...

I gotta say...that's pretty sharp. I cannot tell if the logo is outlined in blue or black...hopefully blue.

That's what the NFL lacks...cat head logos. Try this again:

Funny that you should mention brown since Uni Watch did a post about that yesterday. It seems that the issue that people have with brown as a sports color is that there are so few colors it goes well with. You're pretty much restricted to pairing it with variations of yellow and orange. Anything else just clashes with it too much. I'm with Big Red on this one. I love Brown. The Brown/Orange Padres of the late '80s was a beautiful look. I also like it with a little light blue trim (I think this is the official color scheme of Tufts University, but their bookstore online pretty much does not even sell the color scheme...I was thinking of buying a t shirt). It's try that Brown may not go with a lot of colors, but there should be room for at least one brown team per league. Browns, Padres, and one NBA/NHL. I think the bottom line is that individual teams want to sell merchandise. Black, blue, and red are generally what people like. Teams make the smart choice, but it makes the leagues a bit homogenous.

On the nook...cannot edit above post. Anyway....totally agree. After dumping the Motre Bame cap, thisset was awesome. Easily the best they have ever looked

I like the side with the Lombardi Trophy, but I don't like how busy it looks with all those years squeezed in. The other side would be nice, but I hate that they used "New York Football Giants". I wish that term would go away. It's been nearly 60 years since that distinction was needed. Still a great ring overall though, because the top (the most important part) is beautiful.

I like the design. Plus, if you don't like to wear a ring, you can use it as a paperweight.

Just saw these on twitter. Very nice I must say. I agree. See what happens when it's not 100% covered in diamonds.

I totally agree. Actually, what I don't agree with is what you are almost implying: that it would make sense if he was the "undisputed" best ever. Even if he is, so what. That's no reason for a league-wide retirement. To me, Gretzky is the greatest. But Robinson's league-wide honor is about his cultural significance. Just retiring a number leaguewide for "the best player" is silly.

Yeah not bad. I like the "color to diamond" ratio better in the 1980s and 1990s, but today, all you can ask for is this much color and not all diamonds. The blue around the logo at least gives it some "pop"

Oh man, those stupid circa 2006-2007 gradient undershirts. Those were awful. Yup. They were so bad that the MLB passed a law that said that undershirts had to be all-one-color on the parts exposed or something. For awhile, I actually liked them, mostly because I was twelve when they first debuted. I think that pattern was the manufacturer's (Nike?) way of getting around the rule that their logo could not be shown. I suppose this was MLB's way of making sure manufacturers did not start making these designs, rendering the undershirts un-"uniform" as a Nike-sponsored teammate's pattern would greatly differ from reebok-sponsored teammate's pattern. Good idea, MLB.

I absolutely agree. This was a great update. I wish they'd kept this through to today. But of course they decided to come out with practice jerseys for edge update, which probably hastened the desire to go back to the old. This is one of my top 10 all time NHL jerseys; maybe even top 5.

Not if you've seen how horrendous NHL fashion sweaters can get. I've seen plenty of examples, thanks. Neither of the two Oilers knockoffs posted here come close to being "on par" with any NHL fashion sweater I've ever seen. yeah, you're talking about two different things. Yes, NHL has some ugly fashion jerseys (see the two above jerseys), but from a quality perspective, the Oiler knockoffs are comically bad, unlike the official jerseys. Those official fashion jerseys suck, in my opinion, but they don't display the poor quality of the Oiler ones.

Some of your quality points are taken...but like with other poor-quality products, hopefully people send them the message by not buying them.

My first thought was that the Kemp jersey looks OK, but look at the transition from the orange-ish color to yellow on the circle and compare to the real thing. Also note the outlines...looks like the real one has a way thicker yellow and thin red on the "40", whereas the ebay ones are the same width. The color of the ball looks gray on the ebay one and pretty much the dull orange of the real ball on the Kemp photo. There are a few other small things too.

Not only do they know they are buying a fake, they brag and flaunt it. I have to disagree with you about this. The people on this site? Yes, they would know whether or not they're buying a fake. But almost any other sports fan would be clueless. People really underestimate how much the average fan knows about uniforms. Truthfully, they don't know anything about logos and uniforms. Most of the sales of counterfeit uniforms are fans that don't realize what they're buying is fake. People that know they're getting a fake but go ahead with it anyway, sure these people definitely exist, but they don't make up nearly the amount of people that buy counterfeits unknowingly. A large portion of my fans are Detroit sports fans and could careless about logos and jerseys. They all have fakes (Lions and Wings) They know they have fakes and are ok with it because they saved a few bucks. I suppose we all have anecdotal stories on this, but while I agree with -Dan on the issue in general, I tend to think that most people don't recognize that they are getting fake jerseys. Of course us "nerds" get it and most of us can pick 'em out. But it seems to me that most people don't notice some of the things we do. They don't notice "bubbly numbers" or even incorrect details. They don't remember that Player X was gone before that jersey even existed or that that old Twins wordmark should not match that current twins sleeve patch. I can only speculate the degree to which they would care if they did know...(Probably not alot) I'd say most fake jersey owners just think they found a good deal and that most that get their product with the big wordmark (MLB), wrong number font, slightly wrong color, etc. don't really notice it.

I was kind of dragged kicking and screaming, but I agree. Pat had far too much detail. I don't love the flying Elvis logo, but it's decent. However, my unpopular opinion is that the red 1980's Pats jersey (the one with the shoulder stripes) is a top-5 jersey in NFL history.

That picture looks legit, but just look at how they spell Minnesota in the listing. I'd be surprised if you got the jersey in that picture. yea, but the thing I dont get is that this seller is a top rated seller and all of his comments from the buyers are positive see, it's not hard to get. you can see why that would be in this thread. there are different types of people who buy knock offs. in one group, there are the people that don't know the difference. these are the guys who can see wearing one and bragging to their buddies, "yeah, authentic and only $40 on ebay!" then there are people who brazenly say, "i know it's a knock off, but [insert litany of justifications], so i just don't care." that makes for a lot of satisfied customers, so it would make sense that a knock off seller would have good feedback. (removed stuff I agree with, but we've been over) Yeah, I think the majority of buyers are happy for those reasons. Remember, we are NERDS. We recognize this stuff more than most. And most of the rest "get it" and "don't care". Though if he is doing a bait and switch with the photos, I'd expect a couple people would provide negative feedback. My guess, though...fake...cuz if it seems to good to be true, it usually is.

Who knows. They may use a legit photo and still send a fake.

The problem is one can make an economic argument to justify any illegal activity. I could name a hundred things I feel are overpriced...including cars.

The NOB font is hilarious.

That's a very popular opinion...I think I have the unpopular one. I hated Cy on the helmet and think the I State logo is better. I also love the current uniform and think they are a colored facemask away from perfection. I am aware of the USC issue, but I think it looks so good, that I can live with it...particularly the lack of white on the homes.

I prefer UCLA's block numbers to the stylized ones they used to wear.