kolob

No, that makes sense. But, I guess what I’m trying to say is — historically speaking “outlaws” wouldn’t be one the first things that come to mind for Utah compared to the states I referenced. The imagery of the west was won in this lawless — sheriff vs. outlaws — kind of way doesn’t really fit Utah in general when you understand how orderly most settlements were established (most were missions under the direction of Brigham Young).

The logo makes me think Yeti is going to be the winner. I wish it was purple because of the over abundance of blue clad teams in the league. But, I can live with the light blue. And, I don’t think this official marries the team to the color in the future (hopefully)?

The problem with "Outlaws" is that it just doesn't FEEL like a Utah name. Outside of Butch Cassidy, the outlaw imagery seems more appropriate for the Southwest (Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma) and Colorado. Not Utah. Then again, neither does Yeti or Mammoth either. Only solution? ICE JAZZ!

If they go with Yeti, I'm nicknaming them the "Yeets" -- it's what the cool kids do, right?

I am sure it will come down to Mammoth, Yeti, Blizzard and Outlaws. I won't lie, not much of a fan of either four.

People quote "The 5-Year Rule" like it's some unchangeable constitutional statue ... whether it's the NFL and NBA. The reality is, it will change if it makes sense (meaning $$$). The NFL does hold teams to a pretty stringent 5-year rule, which is good practice IMO. The NBA used to be that way, but since Silver has taken over that's changed, especially with bringing old logos back. But, it seems like the NBA has a "5-Year Rule" on main logos with a more fluid "policy" on the jerseys, especially with Nike. I believe ... initially in 2017 the rule was Icon/Association jerseys could be changed every five years, Statement every three years and the City Jersey every year. Obviously, that was all thrown out the window when the Jazz kept their first City Jersey for 3-4 years along with a number of other teams. So who knows anymore?

It could have been? But, that doesn’t necessarily negate why the Hawks, Magic and Suns didn’t have a black jersey during the early 2000s.

Just put long sleeves on these and call it good! ICE JAZZ!

I am looking for sources, but I believe in the early 2000s there was a "ban" on black alternate jerseys. It had nothing to do with "The Malice in the Palace" and I don't think it had anything to do with race? But, if I recall correctly, it was mostly to add more color into the league because by the end of the '90s a number of teams were kind of defaulting to black secondary jerseys. It's why we had these ...

Agreed. The “City Stories” should be simple. This is a good enough narrative.

I don’t mind the North Star imagery. That fits any Minnesota team’s narrative. However, the Wolves current identity feels like Nike’s attempt at replicating the Seahawks identity in the NBA, especially when they broke out the neon green jerseys in the rollout. Personally, the double blue makes the whole set drab, regardless of how much Nike tries to throw the neon green in there to liven it up.

Ehhh ... both aren't perfect and need fixes. I like the less abstract "shark wolf" of the older logo, but I do like the use of the North Star in the newer logo.

How haven’t we seen this on a Raptors jersey yet? If the Nuggets can have an elevation jersey — surely we can “6ix” jersey?! #ButPleaseDont

I won’t lie, I had no idea the Avs shoulder patch logo was a yeti foot until recently. I always thought it was a foot from the victim of an avalanche. Yeti foot makes waaaay more sense though.

I feel the same. They could have tweaked the first one slightly (like getting rid of the subliminal tree, but MUCH better than the current one. The green eye has always looked awkward to me. The placement looks off? I can’t tell? But, I hate it …

Eh. I think it’s fun, but if you talk big, you gotta walk bigger. And — DANG! Luka is clutch!

It kind of reads on the team's website that we won't get the next round until later in the summer? If that's the case, a part of me wonder if the team will present some logos and color options for a Top 8 or 4 names?

The answer always points back to the Mormons.

I'm more than okay with the Pacers sticking with the gold jersey.

But, the question is ... what made them hideous? Was it the design or the sleeves? The design itself (besides being BFBS) isn't THAT bad. The sleeves killed it.

I'm in different on which look I like better, but it's just nice to see the Wolves WIN in these jerseys, because they are solid. It blows my mind with the fact that if the T'Wolves win out and win the championship they'll have won more games in these playoffs than the whole 1991-92 season.

I still wish they would have gone with the Las Vegas Stars to go in line with the (Utah) Starzz, (San Antonio) Silver Stars and Stars names along with the former MiLB team Las Vegas Stars.

I like the idea. But, naming a women's team after a dog mascot just sets them up for some unflattering nicknames.

I agree. However, I am okay with the City Jerseys that are in team colors with no stupid HEAT CULTURE-like text. Additionally, I hate road teams wearing white on the road more so in the playoffs. I'm fine color vs. color, but I wish teams would keep things a little bit more traditional.

The Thunder really need to lean more into orange. But, generally speaking, as generic as their logo and jerseys may be ... the team colors are solid.