throwuascenario

This would literally kill the sport within 30 years. No sports league will exist when their only market is existing, die-hard fans. They will never gain any new fans when you have to pay to watch. Ask the NHL, MLB, and NBA how that's worked over the last 30 years with their cable deals. And if they're charging to watch all games, football will turn into a niche sport and lose any casual fans they have too. Other sports should be copying the NFL, not the other way around. If your billion dollar business's only real asset is a brand, hiding that brand is beyond dumb. When you're focused on nickels and dimes, you lose the whole dollar.

I mean, in theory they could threaten MGM to face the stadium another direction if they don't pay them. That's the only feasible way they could get money from them, if MGM even cared.

So he's immature for literally saying nothing? And how on Earth do you know what he's saying to his kids? And yeah, she threw the word "routes" into a question that didn't at all need it just to make it seem like she knew football. So he roasted her for it. And maybe you don't have a problem with guys being confident but NFL GMs clearly do. Guys like Marcus Mariota, Matt Ryan, or Sam Darnold will never run out of chances because they make NFL coaches, GMs, and owners feel good about themselves. Guys like Cam, Baker, and even a Malik Willis make them feel threatened. So they can't wait to put them in their place.

If all they're doing is adjusting the color, I wonder why they even announced it. They put those jerseys on sale for nothing, most fans wouldn't have even noticed.

He has literally never had one issue with maturity. I don't know what you're referencing. Touchdown dances maybe? And yeah, by talent alone he is a starter. He took the worst roster in the NFL to a 7-8 record in his last meaningful playing time. His #1 receiver was Jakobi Myers, who would've been cut from some other NFL rosters that season. There is a reason Brady left. It then took an NFL record free agency class for Mac Jones to even match that this year. NFL management doesn't like confident players. They like guys that come in, put their head down, and shut up. Same reason Baker Mayfield was released by the Panthers. Sam Darnold is a little weakling that talks to the ground and knows how bad at football he is. He doesn't make Matt Rhule or David Tepper or any other NFL GM or coach feel bad about themselves by having a healthier self-esteem than them. Case in point: Matt Ryan, Marcus Mariota, and Geno Smith were starters last season. None of which had had a productive season since 2018. All of them have in common that they talk to the ground and are generally scared of the world. They are totally unthreatening, something NFL teams value more than winning apparently. It's hard to explain to someone outside the Panthers fanbase what Cam meant to the team. It always felt like we had a chance to win when he was there. That's never been true any other time in team history. He made people care about Charlotte and every person in Charlotte care about the Panthers. It's a complete disgrace the way his tenure ended. As if it wasn't a bad enough ending releasing him in 2019, they had to bring him back just so Matt Rhule could bench him for one of "his guys" after just 2 games to try and scapegoat his way into keeping his job one more year. Cam's last home game with the Panthers was a meaningless game where the team had already been eliminated - and after I believe two drives - one of them a scoring drive, no less - he was inexplicably benched for Darnold for the rest of the game - in which they barely passed midfield. I will never understand why he couldn't finish that last home game and will never really forgive anyone involved with the Panthers for letting it happen.

No, you're misunderstanding what I'm asking. I'm not asking if they should switch. I'm saying, assume the following scenario. This offseason, the Montreal Canadiens announce that they are unveiling a brand new uniform. It doesn't have the center stripe and has a different logo on it. They were this for 10 or 11 seasons before they realize that fans like their old uniforms better. So they decide to go back to their exact classic uniforms with the CH logo and the blue center stripe. The question: In this scenario, is going back to their old look lazy?

I don't get this either. I thought they totally fixed the stripes when they switched templates in 2019. Shortening them will make them a lot worse. Does this reset their 5-year change window? Not worrying about them switching to Nikefied garbage for 5 years would honestly be the biggest positive of this change

It's pretty much all players that play with his playing style or played in his youth camps. And the three rookies this year. As a Panthers fan, I'd love to see him come back to mentor their draft pick this year. We should've never gotten rid of him in 2019 and this is the first chance we have to upgrade over him. The team would've been 1000x more watchable if we had just kept him until now.

I don't think that the Blues' current uniforms look dated, nor do their originals. I just think that their current uniforms have a much worse color balance and that navy is honestly not needed anywhere in their scheme at all. It's way overused in their current uniforms. Get rid of the navy, up the yellow, and their currents would be better than their originals. If that was the case, they should continue to use them because they're better. Not because they once wore the originals so they should be out of the running. I actually feel the exact opposite about the Sharks. To me, the overly-cartooned 3D shark is way more dated than their original logo. The logo is actually the thing that puts their originals above the currents for me. The old logo or a new 2D logo on the current jersey would be their best look IMO. So let's just say that Detroit, or Chicago, or Rangers, or Canadiens, changed their uniforms next season to something totally new. There was outrage but they changed nonetheless. In a few years they realized they made a mistake and wanted to go back to what they wore before. Would it then be lazy to change back? To me, the Avalanche made tweaks to their jerseys which is much different than a new uniform. The Hurricanes did not make tweaks between their original and 2017 uniforms. They're completely different uniforms. That's the difference. I just think the Hurricanes are one of the teams that totally got it right the first time. Every time they've altered their brand since has made it worse, with the exception of the 2017 Adidas reds, which were an improvement over both what came before it and after it. But far worse than the originals. I do think small tweaks can improve them. For instance, on their current throwbacks of the 2006 uniform, the bottom stripes curve on the back. I actually love that look and it's something that wasn't original to them. I'm also saying all this as someone who hates throwback uniforms (with rare exceptions). If you don't think it's good enough to be your full-time look, it's not good enough to wear ever. Lol, the NBA will approve a uniform that doesn't inclue any of your team name, city name, team logo, team colors, or team typefaces (so literally anything that distinguishes it as your uniform) but will restrict you from using your own old uniforms. What a joke of a league.

I apologize if this is the wrong place for this, but I couldn't find another sports business related thread. Does anyone else think that one of the reasons that the NHL, along with the NBA and MLB have fallen eons behind the NFL in popularity is because of how available the NFL makes games on TV? I've never understood why you woudn't do everything to copy the NFL if you're one of these leagues that is eating its dust. With the further decline of cable, teams in all 3 of those leagues should be giving their games away, at least locally, like the NFL does. I'll use a baseball example because it applies to me, but the exact same thing could easily apply to the NHL or NBA: I grew up in a market with no MLB team. A few years ago, I moved to a city that doesn't have one but is very close (1.5 hours) to one that does. I would've very likely became a fan of said team and bought tickets, merchandise, and contributed to ad sales by watching their games on TV. But I don't have cable and would've had to buy a Bally Sports+ subscription to watch them. Seeing how I didn't grow up a fan and have no current attachment to the team, that was more than I was willing to do. So I gave up on the idea and they've made exactly $0 off me since. If your only marketing to people who are already fans of your product, you literally cannot grow your fanbase by definition. It boggles my mind that with all the revenue extra fans can bring in, that they'd nickel and dime people completely out of their fanbase by making their games inaccessible. Look how many fans the Cubs brought in when WGN was nationally broadcasting their games. Astonishingly, exposing your brand to the widest possible audience works to expand your fanbase. Who would've thought?

Why have complete control over development, easy logistical access to call-ups, and expand your fanbase into one of the fastest growing markets in the US that can lead to increased ticket sales, merchandise sales, and TV viewership at the NHL level, when you can get a slightly better financial deal from a team across the country who's fans and management couldn't place Raleigh on a map?

I think that both the Blues and the Sharks are wearing worse uniforms now than they were at one point before. If they switched tomorrow to their respective old uniforms, they would be switching to a superior uniform (in my opinion). There's nothing lazy about upgrading your uniform. It simply doesn't matter whether or not you've worn them in the past. They're just better uniforms. There shouldn't be some uniform police saying they can never go back to a better uniform (in my opinion). Yes, that is the best they could look. They were the perfect uniforms for them. The 2017 set was miles better than they're current garbage, but was worse in pretty much every way than the set it was based on. It was basically the original set stripped of all character. There's nothing you can do to "evolve" that set but strip it of character and bastardize it. So just wear them as is. To further understand your position - do you think all teams should be changing uniforms every few years? The Canadiens? Rangers? You seem to be implying that uniforms need to evolve or else they become outdated. Or it specifically teams that mistakenly switch away from uniforms that for some reason means they should never be able to bring them back?

Actually the logo looks great on white. I change my vote to white with blue as a close second. Just not black where the logo completely disappears.

There's a tiny amount of silver that could easily just be switched to white. That's what I'd want but it's obviously not what they'll do. I think the palatability of the uniforms will come down to helmet color. White or blue helmet and they're on their way to doing well. Black helmets and the whole thing will be a train wreck no matter what. The blue pops on the black jerseys in a way it doesn't as the base for a jersey. Still, as long as the jerseys aren't overly modern trash, it will still be decent enough. I really hope they don't touch the logo. It's perfect as it is.

Honestly, I'd have no problem with white helmet / blue jersey / white pants. I'd rather they just keep their current blue jerseys, but I can live with it if it's tasteful. I'd still prefer blue / black / blue but that wouldn't be bad.

I don't understand this take at all. Every team should look as good as they can. It doesn't matter if the uniform they're switching to has been used before or not. I think you're arguing that teams shouldn't use old designs because of nostalgia. I totally agree with that. I think the Coyotes and Senators made that mistake. They picked uniforms that are not their best look because they used them before. That's bad. But it's also bad to say that teams can't use old looks because they've used them before. Buffalo and Edmonton switched back to uniforms that happen to be their best look. There's no reason they should be precluded from having done so just because they used them in the past. We've seen both teams try and try again to improve on their original looks and they never have. To think they will given more time when they've had 20+ years is foolish. They never will. They never should've switched them in the first place and never should again now that they're back. It's not lazy for them to wear their best look. In the same vain, I would cry with joy if my Hurricanes switched back to their original look full-time. They, like Buffalo and Edmonton, have never improved upon it and should give up trying. To think that their beautiful original uniforms should be banished just because they once wore them and switched away is absurd. That is their best look and what they should always look like. It would absolutely not be lazy for them to announce this offseason they were going back to them.

Is there still a chance the Panthers change this year? If so, any leakings on what direction they could be headed? I really hope they don't change. They absolutely nailed the jerseys from day 1. I do think silver muddies up the color scheme and would much rather them wear a blue helmet and blue pants full time. Would look fantastic with the home and away sets. But they would never make that change alone. If it even came at all, it would come with trashy "modern" jerseys that set them on the 5-year carousel to hell. Let's hope they learned from their mistakes at QB and don't make the same with the unis. Sometimes what you have is as good as you're gonna get. Changing just to change is not the answer.

Unpopular opinion: I actually like this better than with the white pants. There are exceptions but as a general rule, in my opinion - the helmet should always match the pants unless it matches the jersey. It creates such a balanced look. I know the stripes don't match, but they look like crap matching or unmatching so it doesn't really matter.

Well, that's where we differ. I totally hate clutter as well (excessive anniversary patches drive me crazy) but I like having something that commemorates something as big as getting to the World Series or any other league's finals and that you can look forward to every year. I feel similarly about someone's debut. It's a big deal.

I mean I get that. I just don't think this is it. It's an MLB logo with the word debut under it. To me it just commemorates a special occasion, like a World Series patch on a smaller scale. What they do with the patch later doesn't really matter to me. If they had put a Fanatics or Topps logo on the patch, then I'd totally agree.

I don't understand the hate for the debut patches. I actually think it's really cool. Like watching highlights years from now of future star players it'll be cool to see. The trading card aspect of it is dumb but who really cares.

I don’t like the white uniforms either but much prefer them to the black ones. I think the diagonal lettering thing always feels like a Rangers ripoff but that double flag logo is so bad on a hockey jersey that it’s even worse. Add to that the fact that the Hurricanes are a red and then black team, so those don’t even feel like Hurricanes uniforms. At least the colors are right on the white ones. I actually kind of like the red helmets. It balances the colors nicely. I’d say it’s equal to the white helmets in my eyes. Or y’know, just wear their 1997-2007 home and away uniforms for the rest of time . BTW: The Hurricanes have worn 12 different uniforms in the past 10 years, with only 2 of them matching. Their current roads and this year’s reverse retro that they wore for 2 games. So they’ve worn 11 different jersey designs with 5 different logos and never had a matching home and away design.

Not sure if this opinion is unpopular or not but: Teams in all sports go WAYYY overboard with the anniversairy stuff. Celebrating one every five years is just way too often. It completely waters it down when you do have a legitimate one and just adds visual clutter to your identity every five years. Here are the legitimate anniversairies: 10, 25, 50, 75, 100, 150, 200, 250, 300, etc. Even worse is in the NHL when they insist on putting the anniversary logos at center ice. Your center ice logo should be your primary, core brand. Not some one off. To think the Canes could hoist the cup this year on top of a one-off logo while wearing those horrible black jerseys.... yuck.

Okay, I understand. I do disagree that he was even part of the problem. The problem has plagued the Panthers since the year Mayfield got drafted, and that's their owner. At least Jacksonville had the common sense to can him after one season. Every single player that Rhule coached played better before and after he was their coach. Not one player came to the Panthers and improved and every single player played much better either after leaving or after he got fired. All that to say, Meyer was worse but if I had to choose between 1 season of Meyer or 2.5 of Rhule, I'll take Meyer.

So I said Mayfield wasn't the problem. In response, you said that they were better without him. You're seriously saying that I can't infer from that statement that you were implying that he was the problem?