OnWis97

On 10/18/2022 at 10:53 AM, Sec19Row53 said:

Did you read the link? The 'highly successful coach' is what he called himself 

 

In other words, we agree!

Perhaps you are a highly successful NFL owner.

14 hours ago, habsfan1 said:

Unpopular Opinion: I enjoy the Oilers orange and navy more than the dynasty royal blue and orange. Visually, the old ones were much nicer to look at.

Same. Until the disastrous Edge version, those were really nice. I think too many teams were darkening their colors but I really felt like that was a nice update.

I'm in the minority in that I prefer the current logo to the older logos because I'm not a fan of cartoony helmet-wearing dolphins. 

That said, I suspect it'll come back in some form some day. This is a decent throwback inspired logo.

I love the sun here (and I really hope they never go back to the original sun with all those tiny dashes between each ray...so bad). Is it just a little bit small?

I like the swimming dolphin but I might go a little less mean on the face (though that's just me and my aversion to cartoons). 

A few years ago, I started a thread for small details that people love. It's now locked. Funny, I missed my personal favorite on my own thread...and it's right there in my avatar.

The North Stars in the 1980s had flattened out three of the five points on the star on their jerseys. And I think it looks so much better that way than with the five points. The mothership always shows five points (jersey and logos) so I don't know if the primary logos looked had the five points or the three flattened points.

Anyway, it's a really small detail that most people don't realize and I really think it improves the logo (and I don't have any idea why...)

^^
That's good news...I don't quite recall where I read the red/gold stuff.

I will remain nervous, but now also hopeful because there's plenty to clean up.

On 10/9/2022 at 2:57 PM, the_grateful_ted said:

Dishonorable Mention #1: ISU vs KSU

Iowa State is 100% to blame for making this list. Just me but 1) I think Kansas State's look is underrated and 2) I think Iowa State's primary look is the best in the country (seriously).

This would have been my easy #1 for the week (if not the season) and Iowa State took a big fat dump on it. (And they seem to wear that uniform a lot, too.)

10 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Many people here feel those colors are overused. Many people are likely right. But why should any one team that has used those colors for-freaking-ever feel inclined to change them just because other teams are also using them? That makes no sense to me from the perspective of the team.

I agree. As a Twins fan, I'm nervous...it's rumored the Twins are kind of abandoning blue and going red/gold. I suppose that's one less team with that color scheme...but it's going to be unsettling for a while (if true).

I guess the White Sox used to have that scheme and totally changed it and it's worked out pretty well.  But I'm not excited at the prospect of my team doing it and I don't blame Cleveland fans if they weren't either.

47 minutes ago, tBBP said:

 

Or not let Ms. Dan Snyder run/ruin the asylum. 

 

The more I look at the Guardians identity, the more I get kind of a DC Comics vibe from their primary logo--which isn't a bad thing by any means. I DO like that they G logo stands apart from all the others in MLB (and from most of the rest of major pro sports primary logos) in style & structure. I wonder if they might've pressed a bit more into either the classical Greco-Roman art vibe some, but I'm cool with what they have now.

 

As for WTF, well...that's exactly where I am with their identity: W...T...F??? Their primary W is actually very solid for what it is and what it needs to do. The rest of it, however? Aside from the burgundy and saffron/sunflower/cornbread/maize/call-it-whatever-you-want shade of yellow, the whole rest of it need to find its way out an antimatter container, ejected out the nearest airlock, and detonated with a photon torpedo.

My beef with the "G" is twofold:

1.  This cannot be separated from my OCD, but I don't like seeing a patch on the right sleeve while the left sleeve is blank. 
2. Even though you cannot see it, the logo certainly implies that there's a backwards G on the other side. This seems like something that should have killed the logo during its creation.

The Guardians G logo bugs me.

First, because if its (Angle? Perspectve? Whatever.) it has to be on the right sleeve and I really want patches on the left sleeve (an OCD thing).

And the "G" on the other side of the logo, even though you cannot see it, is backwards!

I think the G logo is the only negative in an otherwise great rebrand.  I think both they and the Football Team had a pretty solid challenge in terms of abandoning a long-standing name and trying to keep some franchise continuity. I think both names are OK (Guardians slightly better) and the teams avoided disastrous expansionesque names. But the Guardians (in probably less than half the time) came up with a visual identity that really keeps the franchise intact. The Commanders had the opportunity to do that and they acted like they were the Titans when in reality, they're more like all of their division rivals.  From the neck-down they looked pretty good and the "W" helmet could complement that pretty well. They should have waited one more year and learned from Cleveland...

I first saw that T-Wolves City (I think) jersey yesterday and I have yet to see what it's supposed to mean/represent.

I agree that the shell would be better for the Falcons. That said, I think it looks really nice in a vacuum.

This is out of character for me but I think these Cardinals helmets are really sharp.

5 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Should they have stayed at 12?

It will be 18 within 5 years. Give me more NFL - any night of the week. Yeah, I said it. I'll watch as many games in the regular season as I can.

Well, when they went to 14 and then 16, it was a different era in terms of our understanding of the impacts of the sport so the optics are worse.  That said, I acknowledge that I don't really know what the magic number to mitigate the danger in a sport that really cannot be safe.

I think there are a lot of fans that want more NFL every day of the week. And that's why Thursday night games, despite what feels like a history of being poorly-played snoozers are probably here to stay. 

4 hours ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

It's a shame the international games -- specifically London -- can't be scheduled on Thursday evenings, because I think making every team play that 17th game in a neutral site would accomplish goals of expanding the brand (puke), and also general fairness.

 

We all kind of accept that some teams play 8 home games and other teams 9, which is pretty crazy. That's not fair at all! And I'm not sure every team is playing Thursdays after 4 days of rest, which also is pretty unfair.

 

In my perfect world, there's a way for every team to play its 9th game in a neutral site, and for those games to be followed by extended rest and then a TNF game. I get that that would be challenging in practice, but it would at least be logical.

I actually think the league found a pretty good solution to the home/road balance by having NFC/AFC alternate years with the extra home game.  Though a neutral site game would have been fun...Europe, Canada, Mexico, Japan, Norman OK, Boise ID, etc...

Of course, they should not have expanded to 17...

Wisconsin is possibly the worst team in Power 5 right now. Worst talent? No. But so many penalties, virtually no interest showing from players or coaches. In some ways it feels like a quick hook (coming off of an OK season last year). On the other hand, the program's been waning since about halftime of the 2019 Big Ten Championship Game...and the Illinois loss was just embarrassing.

I'm not sure whether it was a bold move or Wisconsin's Bo Pelini moment.

I just stumbled on this today and it's fantastic. The Hawaii approach with the different plates for each island is terrific.

The majority of these are upgrades. Being from Minnesota (and painfully into color schemes, etc.) I was disappointed when they reduced the raised/blue letters to flat black letters. So while I like your design, it would be even  better with blue letters.*

I think Vermont was my favorite but there are so many great ones.

*As evidenced by this comment, the only criticisms I would have would be nit-picks. Nice work.

Random thoughts:

• A few states have plates that are getting really stale. Most notably, Wisconsin.
• New Mexico probably offers the most to work with due to their red/yellow colors, the Zia symbol, the chilies, and the significance of turquoise (And the balloons, which I just noticed...).
• Someone pointed out that Idaho almost looks like a nod to Montana. Maybe putting the state in the lower-right corner would solve that...

I have to admit I have never noticed that word mark that they use in social media. It is probably a pretty good guess that they will go with that. It looks pretty decent.

34 minutes ago, CaliforniaGlowin said:

60 years ago there were barely any color options. The only reason to keep it now is tradition.

Maybe. But I'll tell you that as a Twins fan it would be jarring to take a 60-year tradition and change to a "unique" set of colors.  If they do that, they'll instantly become the Astros/Padres/Canucks (i.e., "what's their identity? When are they going back?")

20 minutes ago, Kg54mvp said:

This Twins refresh makes me nervous!

Same. I know there's a lot of red/blue in MLB but the Twins have had it for 60 years. 

I can deal with a "refresh" if it involves deciding yea or nay on the gold (i.e., consistent; preferably nay), keep the red and blue, keep some version of the TC,* and use something close to either the current or original wordmark. 

It's time for an update, though not an overhaul. Their current home uniform is a snoozer. And the overall look is too all-over-the-place (gold used sometimes, primary cap with alt jerseys and vice versa, two "Twins" wordmarks). So there's an opportunity for improvement and consistency. But I don't think any fan (at least not the types on this board) doesn't get nervous when their team announces something like this...

*As I learned on this board, the red "C" in the "TC" logo doesn't contrast enough with the blue cap. I would love them to make both letters red with white outline or vice versa.

My guess? They keep red/blue, keep the TC (two-colored), come up with new "Minnesota" and "Twins" wordmarks, and keep the gold (across the entire set).

OK…so the Mike Evans suspension was probably appropriate…but did I just hear correctly that Jon Runyon, Sr., father of Packer player Jon Runyon, Jr., upheld the suspension?

Good look.

I like them a lot.  Feels like they went traditional/basic without approaching boring.

And my OCD is not going to miss the asymmetrical orange stripe.

On 9/6/2022 at 7:51 PM, the admiral said:

Initially, I was surprised no one pointed this out to them sooner, but then it clicked: American culture, specifically surrounding language, just wasn't hegemonic yet. The Klan isn't really a going concern in Canada nor a part of their history the way it is here. Even in a relatively Klan-free American state, calling a sports team "the Clan" would really be uncomfortable in a way I don't think it was in British Columbia until two summers ago.

 

"Red Leafs" is a pretty terrible nickname. It sounds like off-brand candy.

If I don't cut off my hand, I'm going to eat this entire $1.49 bag of Red Leaf gumdrops.

That Vikings set looks great. The purple primary says "LSU" to me...probably because, unlike in the white, the Vikings haven't ever done that in purple. But I'd still take it because it's so good (and the outlined numbers set it apart). In fact, I like  everything here, though would want the yellow to be a rarity.

I came in thinking that Nebraska would be better than expected. After all, the way they lost those games last year can’t continue. But perhaps it’s not a bad luck but something with the coaching that’s causing them to not be able to find a way to win a close game.