OnWis97

If that happens, it's at least going to have to wait until Aaron Rodgers retires. And even then, the idea of an NFC Championship game not being able to be held at LAMBEAU FIELD! might be beyond the pale. All that aside, it's stupid. I would never be an NFL season ticket holder. They stick you with preseason games and take the occasional regular season home game overseas.* If they took away the opportunity to have this enormous game at home, I'd give up my (non-existent) tickets. *Maybe not as big of a problem if the extra home game is moved, but the idea of going to 7 games on top of two junk games always pissed me off. On the other hand, the NFL has such a captive audience, such money-making schemes are viable.

That play looked hilarious and it went so badly that we never even found out what it was supposed to do. That said, the chance of scoring there is so miniscule that this is not the focus of anything. It's the terrible play, particularly by Prescott, throughout the game that matters. Similarly, lots of Vikings whining about Kirk's checkdown at the end of their loss. It wasn't ideal but it took a 0.001% chance of victory away. The defense that let the Giants look like the Greatest Show on Turf was the problem.

This Vikings season ended exactly how it was supposed to…single-handedly to Daniel Jones. Time for a 99% overhaul on defense.

I'm kinda surprised to see so many people happy about the Packers. I always think of them as the second-favorite team of all non-NFC North fanbases. Is Aaron finally wearing people down?

It was so obvious. Seattle is going to get some calls on Sunday.

Packers versus Lions makes most sense for Sunday night, because if Seattle wins, then the Lions won’t have anything to play for.

Even though they don’t entirely control their own destiny, I would say that right now Green Bay is the biggest threat to Philadelphia in the NFC. That is in large part due to the obvious flaws of the teams that will be hosting wildcard week playoff games. But if the Packers get in, I like them in the most matchups.

An oldy but a goody: https://www.theonion.com/every-bar-patron-watching-world-cup-has-different-inco-1826831918 As a soccer novice, I find the offside rule confusing and it feels like a defender can just stop moving in order to force an offside. It's strange that the line can just move (or stop moving) at various times. The way it's done in hockey is much clearer.

Interesting hire. I guess I am happy about it because the offensive approach needs to be overhauled and I don’t think that was going to happen under Leonard. On the other hand if Fickel is successful enough Wisconsin will be a stepping stone again. Jimmy would not carry that risk.

Vikings won some ref ball yesterday. It’s a weird feeling. I thought the bobbling on that TD could have put the ball on the 1 (he pulled it out of the end zone during the process) but I don’t understand how it isn’t a catch. The kick return should have been called back. The better team did not win.

Based on the mix of uniforms, it looks like they'll wear the M cap more than the two TC's combined. This assumes 100% "M" on the road and a number greater than zero at home. I would not be surprised if we see the primary TC paired up with the blue alt and/or the gray more often over the next few years, though. The primary TC has a tendency to win out over time...

Interesting point. I'd argue that the M cap should have a red bill. An all-blue TC cap is a big part of the team history...I know they added a red-billed road hat for a while but I'd really hate for there to be no all-blue option with the white/red TC.

Either this past season for in 2021, the Twins added one world series champs flag and two AL champs flags for the Senators from the 1920s. I'm not exactly sure what led to this as I'm not aware of any specific effort beyond this to embrace that history. But as someone who is in the "history of the franchise" camp, I appreciated seeing this. I am sure at any given game, there are ten others that also appreciate it, ten who think it's silly to "claim that championship for Minnesota" (which isn't what that is), and thousands who don't even realize it's there. In any case, I think it's great and it's not because my heart wells up with joy when I think about Walter Johnson and the 1924 Senators. It's because these are things that happened to the franchise. The biggest difference between the Twins and the Dodgers and Giants is the name change. But those teams acknowledge their history and so should the Twins. I might even get a t-shirt with the 1901 on it. Then if someone asks me why it's there, I'll start talking like Grandpa Simpson under the lemon tree.

Home Jersey: C-. I think the red script is too bright. I'd rather it it outlined in blue (and thereby made thicker). I don't really like the state/star patch. Front number does help avoid the boringness of the last home jersey. Road Jersey: B. I am not a fan of pinstripes on road. But without those, that jersey would be may favorite of the bunch. Maybe I prefer the blue wordmark and red number to vice/versa or maybe the grey tones down the brightness of the red. The pinstripes might be the least-obvious ones in MLB history (which mitigates the issues, I suppose) Twin Cities jersey: B+. I'm torn here. Aestetically, it's the most appealing jersey to me by a long shot. But I don't like the absence of Red and using "Twin Cities" to me is like using "Windy City" for Chicago. Is this the City alt? If so, it's one of the best. But it's not really the identity I want to be highlighted. Blue jersey: C-. It's roughly what you'd expect from this set but the white letters make it look pretty plain. Primary hat: B. It's fine...but not a great enough change to warrant an A or a D. "M" hat: C-. I think it's the biggest departure this set makes from their identity. The T-wolves star isn't visible from afar. I started out with a "D" but upped it at the thought of the "M" being a potential nod to the Senators "W". Twin Cities hat: C+. Not necessary and omits a team color. But a bit of a bump for the "C" not being lost on the background. I won't miss Minnie and Paul (though I'm not sold on the flags logo) or the gold. So there is some addition by subtraction for me. Overall this is not a flop but certainty isn't the best they've ever looked. That red wordmark just sticks out more than it should and I really think fans would have like something with pinstripes that's closer to the 1960s alts they were wearing until a few years ago. They'll be, as they usually are, a middle-of-the-pack team.

Longshot prediction: No gray at all.

One thing I am seeing on the concepts based on the teasers is a lot of separation of the colors. Red and blue barely ever touch on the jerseys. It seems like that's a trend. Like with the white wild jersey using no red on the trim, the Canucks keeping green on the logo, and more I'm not thinking of off top of my head. I'm not a fan of that. If this plays out, I think this is going to be one of my least favorite Twins looks because of it.

The (apparent) new word mark is a little thin for my taste; not bold enough. I understand the idea and looks like fears of them going crazy and abandoning history were unfounded. I don't think it's going to be terrible, but it's not exactly how I would have liked the idea to be executed.

Justin Herbert just took a shot that reminded me that we probably should not be watching football.

Seeing these side-by-side kinda helps me see the improved continuity between the letters. I still don't prefer it but it at least makes more sense to me. The blue one is fantastic. It's a really good mix of early and modern. I prefer the less-sharp under line of that one along with the proximality of the "w" and "i" (I have never liked the longer line between them, as used in the red mark).

I'm definitely not liking the 1970s/80s vibe I'm getting off of those R/W/B stripes.

That reminds of of something I don't like; when teams with yellow (Vikings, Packers, Steelers) wear yellow accessories. I see so many non-existent flags when I watch the Vikings.

I like the little serifs on the current/old "T" and I find this logo jarring (whereas most fans won't even notice). That said, a bit more space between the two letters probably makes sense. Generally, I find this an unnecessary slight downgrade but I admit I may simply get used to it. That said, it gives me hope that the uniforms won't get too crazy/modern. But I doubt they'll keep the block font (which I prefer). I've seen it suggested that the "T" might not quite be white...interesting thought about the possibility of off-white uniforms?

I was referring to this season - big acquisitions, mortgaging of futures, on-court/filed mediocrity, and trade-partners being better. Historically, there is no franchise to compare the T-Wolves to.

The Timberwolves are the Broncos of the NBA.

My favorites: (I actually like the one with the two white stripes going down the middle) I like boring, I guess. I like silhouettes (Iowa, Texas) and letters. I think the "I State" logo is nice and really love their look (though I liked it a bit better when it first came out with a red/burgundy mask and more traditional jerseys). One no longer in use (or is it): Even with their shenanigans, I think this helmet had a chance to be a modern classic if worn with all their other looks. I really don't like the winged helmets. My tastes (don't love Michigan, don't like numbers on helmets, don't like over-done logos like Fresno State, or blanks like Penn State) are pretty unpopular overall.