kimball

Members
  • Content Count

    2,107
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by kimball

  1. Brooklyn did have those Dodger inspired alternates.
  2. To further your point, I believe one of the reasons why they went with baby blue and gold was because then-GM Kiki Vandeweghe was an UCLA alum. There's a Denver Post article that talks about it, but it's pay walled. https://www.denverpost.com/2009/04/25/carolina-columbia-theyre-still-colorful/
  3. I wish I remembered where I read it, but the Rockets actually tried to backtrack on the logo change after the second title, but I think it was too late to reverse course because merchandise was already made and would have probably cost the team millions to reimburse the companies for unused merch.
  4. It feels weird saying Key Arena is the wrong arena for a player that played on a franchise that should have never left Seattle. But, yeah ...
  5. I think the Nets are fine. They went all in on the look when they moved from Jersey to Brooklyn ... and it works. But, that era in the 2000s produced some awfully generic and overtly blue jerseys for teams that had identities it didn't match.
  6. Neither should be an option.
  7. That's why I liked what the Hornets did with the same jersey with different colors the past three years.
  8. Yeah, the black and copper didn't match that current Jazz team. I do wish they kept this template when they switched to the double blue including the numbers.
  9. But, the Hornets could still do something like that with their City Jersey without necessarily acknowledging the Bobcats.
  10. If I'm making a throwback wishlist here, I'd love to see the Jazz throwback to the Utah Stars, especially since 2021 is the 50th anniversary of their championship.
  11. I remember when this was first unveiled and thinking it was just the ASG logo from 1993. The UTAH font is a match and it's heavily inspired by the ASG with the ball and mountains. I'd love to know the design process behind the '96 logo. Was the ASG logo an early take on the logo?
  12. Yeah, the Jazz's identity "crisis" is interesting to me. It really started in 1996 when they switched to the mountain logo. They were trying to distance themselves from the New Orleans identity after 17 years in Utah by going with something that was both UTAH and 'JAZZY' instead of playing off the music nickname. It was also economical as was the trend in the 90s with a number of long standing unchanging team logos. The recoloring in 2004 was all Reebok and what was hot (look at Orlando, Dallas, Atlanta, Memphis for examples). I didn't really mind the two blue look. I think it's more 'UTAH' than the original mountain look. The other problem was going back to the note logo in 2010. I get it. Nostalgia was big, especially after LHM died who LOVED the note logo. But, I don't know if they should have gone back to it? I love it too. But, I'm just as happy with it being a throwback than something in the current identity. The look was a mess until 2016 when they finally dropped the mountain logo for good. But, with the current looks, I struggle a bit with the redrock and note logos because it's that UTAH vs. JAZZ NOTE fight again, the one they tried to get away from in 1996. And, it's not a simple solution of renaming the team, because I don't see that ever happening with over 40 years here in Utah. So, I think this struggle will be a branding nightmare for a long time with the Jazz. It's either going to be all about UTAH, NOTE LOGO or some awkward forced marriage between the two?
  13. Ehhhh ... the original Nique jerseys lasted a decade. If anything that’s their most memorable look. Good? Meh. It gets more points for nostalgia.
  14. Found these the other day and thought it was interesting. It's Danny Manning without a number on the front of his jersey (I am still looking for a back view). This game was against the Minnesota Timberwolves in 1993 right after he was traded to Atlanta. This was his first home game, but not first game with the Hawks. He played a few nights earlier against the 76ers in Philly. I am curious to see what his jersey looked like there (going to go look).
  15. Awwww, gotcha. Thanks for the little history lesson.
  16. Same. You have to wonder how that look would have progressed over the past 25 years if they were awarded a franchise.
  17. After sitting on this for a few days and reading a number of comments here. Here's a little bit more in depth take on the new look and reaction. For everyone saying this is easily the worst NFL uniform ever ... um ... do you not remember the look the Bucs had before switching back to the SB-look? Hell, I'm more annoyed by the Titans and Falcons new looks than this one. Oh, and the Jags' two tone helmet is worse than what the Rams gave us. For a team that's been around for nearly 75 years ... yeah ... this is definitely a departure from a classic look, especially with the helmet horns. But, with that said, I'm "okay" with the new helmet. I like it. I get it. It stays true to the blue and gold, the shape of a horn, yet gives it a LA vibe with the tie-in to a wave. The jersey on the other hand is a different story, it's just over designed and especially over thought. I feels like an idea wall that people forgot to narrow down before finalizing the project. The patches, mismatching numbers, different sleeve designs and bone color all together is just too much. I love the colors, I love the blue jersey options and I'm okay with a bone color alternate, but it's way too gimmicky. I do want a white jersey. For being a LA/Southern California team the way blue and gold pop off a white jersey seems like a go to. I wouldn't be surprised if one of the two jerseys they're unveiling in the next couple of years will be one? The number font is kiiiiiinda growing on me? But, it is still a bit too much MS Paint-ish for me. But, I guess it makes sense with the roundness tying back to the horn/wave design? Blue/Blue/Gold is the best of the set options. Again, this isn't the worst design ever, it's just over designed and I bet within five years there will be some significant tweaks to the look. It's gimmicky like the Falcons new look which I don't like either.
  18. That’s a horrible take. Maybe I’m on edge today because people over in the Rams’ thread are acting like their look is the worst thing ever (it’s eh), but the two aren’t comparable. There’s oil in Tennessee (some, but obviously not as popular in Texas), but people from Missouri aren’t Texans. I think Tennessee could have kept the Oilers name and everything would have been fine. Especially after their Super Bowl run their first season as the Titans. Even with that said I don’t mind their current logo. The new jerseys are too much. They really should have kept the white helmet and simplified the look.
  19. Eh, I don’t know? New designs the past couple years have softened. If this was 4-5 years ago we’d get numbers that were bold, pointy and loud. Kinda like what Atlanta did. But, the rounded numbers and over designed elements are softer than usually seen.
  20. Yeesh. https://theathletic.com/1809735/2020/05/13/love-or-hate-them-you-should-know-the-inside-details-of-the-rams-new-uniforms/#_=_
  21. Some initial thoughts ... 1) Each set is over thought and designed. 2) I'm "OKAY" with the helmet with the new horn, mainly because of the colors. 3) I hate the mismatching numbers (front/back compared to the sleeves) on the away set. 4) The numbers bug me. The reflective outline is completely unnecessary and the font has serious MS Paint vibes. 5) The two 2021 and 2022 uniforms I'm betting are a gold and white jersey ... maybe throwbacks? Hopefully? 6) Those stupid patches seem like ad placeholders.
  22. Your credentials pan out ... you got the job.
  23. Wasn't Tennessee Presidents also considered? Also Tuxedos? Or am I just making stuff up without Googling it first?