• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Prospect
  1. I actually didn't know that, so thanks for the clarification. The only thing I could think of looking at that Lance Alsworth picture was that is one big nine. The thing goes from his stomach to his shoulder practically, and takes up half of his chest.
  2. It's alright. I think the Raptors may not like it though because they are really trying to get away from the dino look. (I don't know why they just don't change their name) My favorite is the star with the Maple Leaf.
  3. I love the Minnesota one, especially the all gold design Wisconsin is alright, but I'd stick with their current ones before changing to this. Not to keen on Purdue, but the all black one looks alright.
  4. This was originally a bigger file, but I lost the file. Overall this took me about three hours to make, and was something I did about two years ago. If anyone wants to make unis for it feel free, but don't expect me to do so. This is the first one of these I've posted.
  5. I wouldn't even bother with the alternate. I don't know why the Chargers just don't go back to their classic powder blues.
  6. Too much like London's Olympic logo which is horrible. Possibly a 3rd alternate, but I'm not a big fan of it. I appreciate the effort though.
  7. If only the Leafs could play as well as these uniforms look. Really nice job.
  8. For 8 new teams here's where I would put them. 1. Los Angeles 2. Portland 3. Salt Lake City 4. Mexico City 5. San Antonio 6. Las Vegas 7. Orlando 8. Sacramento Alot of people may not be sold on the Mexico City idea, which I understand so I'd replace them with Columbus if I was told a Mexico City team would be out of the question.
  9. I think your new primary would be a great secondary logo, but I still prefer the current Panther look. What I would do would be to get rid of that palm tree logo, put the primary logo you have in it's place on the jersey, and leave the current logo there. I'd also make the 3rd alternate the primary home jersey. Your darks should always be your base color in my opinion unless the lighter color is white. Great job though, really like it.
  10. I never mentioned once that I thought the Islanders should stay, so I'm not sure what your point is, and both the Expos and Sonics ranked near or at the bottom in franchise value when they moved, so about as accurate as you can get in my estimation. But the Penguins also ranked 30th for years before getting Sidney Crosby, and a new arena promise (which was their biggest issue) and are now in the middle of the pack, so it's not a death sentence. Islanders biggest issue is a new arena. They get that, and they are staying in Long Island. But all of the southern teams have brand new arenas. They're down so low because they don't draw, and there is little to no potential for them becoming a long term draw. Period. True Winnipeg is a small market, but how many of those people are hockey fans that are willing to support a team versus Kansas City? Which I still ask what has changed about the city since the mid-1970's? They left because of low support, and financial woes. Right now there is little sign of support, and financial woes in the country. And economic wise I think Winninpeg is on the up, while Kansas City is at best staying stagnant. Also the business that's there in Winnipeg seems to be solidly behind a possible NHL team through various movements both in ownership movements, and political movements. I don't see any other movement coming from Kansas City to bring a team in, other then the one by the owners of the Sprint Center. The small arena issue needs to be looked if an NHL team looks at moving there at I agree. Expansion may or may not be out of the question. Depends on who you talk too. So far most say it is. I was done with this topic. The only reason I made that post was to call you out for making a dumb statement. If you want to say Winnipeg doesen't have the economic backing there's more ways of doing it then by Number of Global 500 companies located in your city which really doesen't say a whole lot about the economy there either way, unless you have a ton of them. I just gave you a bunch of cities that had none as well some of them I would consider very economically viable cities. One of them being Vancouver who gives the Cancuks a tremendous amount of financial support to allow that franchise to succeed. Now I'm done.
  11. "Perhaps Forbes rankings are not the best to go by, then. Or perhaps, if the NYC location has such an influence on the Forbes rankings, it may be open to questioning whether moving the Southern teams any where else would improve their standing." I've followed these rankings for years. I've seen no bias shown towards any city. And if Forbes is s biased towards NYC why are the Islanders ranked 29th, and the Giants and Jets were ranked 15 and 16th nearly every year running before their new stadium was announced? "And yet as of last checking, my hometown of Peoria has more Global Fortune 500 companies (1) than Winnipeg. (0)" That would also be 1 more then Las Vegas, New Orleans Denver, Vancouver, Miami, and San Diego. Use a better example then that for why Winnipeg's market isn't good.
  12. I still can't see anything new with Kansas City that would lead to a new franchise succeeding where they failed before. The Scouts were averaging 2,000 a game. That's a little more then not wanting to see a bad franchise in my opinion. That's a nobody cares market in my opinion. And KC has also lost another team in the Kings. So this is a market where half the major pro teams that have played there moved. As far as talent goes it's debatable as to whether it has expanded, stayed the same, or contracted. As far as the Devils go the only thing that gives them the edge over Southern teams is the amount of money available in the NYC metro area, which is why Forbes has them ranked 10th in franchise value. I'm not a Devils fan though, so I'm not going to make a huge deal over why they are so much better. Winnipeg's financial market is booming right now from all accounts written by business magazines. I'm not saying that overrides what your saying, but it at least puts the subject in debate. My bottom line is that I feel there are better markets out there then Kansas City right now, Winnipeg being one of them.
  13. "Now that the team is showing like they're trying to win, the seats are starting to fill up again." They're 28th in league attendance, and they play in an average sized arena. Also profits don't measure things like potential growth which is the basis for most of what determines a franchises value, and currently Columbus is 28th. But the we are a new franchise excuse doesn't work anymore after the 5 year mark. That's all I have to say about the Blue Jackets. One a side note obviously your a Blue Jackets fan, and will fight for why your franchise needs to exist. Any good fan would. I understand that, and am probably seem to be coming off a little bit of an right now, just try not to take anything I say personally. I'm not trying to attack people here, just the argument.
  14. I just glanced at the attendance figures, and all of them were low from a totals perspective, I couldn't find percentages however, which is kind of strange actually. (Does the NHL have some kind of rule against it that I'm not aware of) The financial data I can provide though if interested. I'll agree with your opinion about the Devils (I live in Jersey) And that's mainly their own doing. In my opinion they don't market aggressively enough, also Jersey itself really doesn't have an identity because most people that live in Jersey associate themselves with NYC or Philly before Jersey. Also I feel the Rangers may have something to do with why the Devils haven't marketed more aggressively because Cablevision owns the Rangers, and I don't see them promoting anyone other then the Rangers on MSG that often. But my opinion about the South with pro sports still stands, nor did you explain why the Devils situation relates. Also the NHL failed in Philly, St. Louis, and Pittsburgh before because of the great depression. When they came back the cities were no longer in a depression, and did much better. And I still ask what has changed since the mid-1970's that caused the Scouts to fail? As far as the issue of whether or not Winnipeg would be a good financial choice, I feel that is highly debatable. Seattle does not to pay for somebody's arena. That much is true, and honestly I can't say I blame them there. I see no reason why public taxpayer dollars should go to private enterprise such as pro sports, but that's a debate for another time. However if an owner was willing to build an arena, Seattle would gladly welcome a NHL team.