Jump to content

Ridleylash

Members
  • Posts

    3,102
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by Ridleylash

  1. Yeah, that Blues jersey actually looks pretty damn nice. I'd maybe fill in the middle and add a simple stripe on the hem, but otherwise that's pretty solid for something like an alternate. Hell, maybe they could pull it out for the upcoming Winter Classic.
  2. I'd disagree on the Avs needing to overhaul their color palette at all. If they have to change anything, just adding a second navy stripe on the hem and sleeves would be enough; put it above the silver on the road jersey and above the slate but below the silver on the home and you've effectively brought back the same look as the 90's-2000's Avs, just with navy replacing black. Plus, I don't think the solution to the contrast issue is pairing a dark color (burgundy) with...a much darker shade of blue. If anything, that seems like the exact wrong solution for contrast and would just make the overall uniform seem dingy; the Ducks didn't pair their eggplant with forest green, after all, they paired it with jade because jade contrasted better with eggplant. That sort of setup really only works if you design the uniform around the dark color scheme, which the Avs uniform very obviously is not designed around.
  3. Black is completely and utterly unnecessary as an Avs uniform color when they already have a pretty dark color in their palette (burgundy) to contrast the blue and silver with. It's one of the purest examples of BFBS in the NHL, especially since they barely used it for anything anyways. The dark jersey only has it as an accent color for a single stripe on the hem and sleeves, and they didn't even bother putting black on anything but the NoB and numbers on their white jerseys; making the black equipment feel even less cohesive on what was their home jersey at the time. I'd rather they bring out burgundy pants if there must be a different pants color for the road jersey, because at least it keeps within the color hierarchy of the jersey.
  4. I think it's perfectly fine, honestly. It's no more weird than many other minor league team names (RubberDucks, Otterbots, Baby Cakes, Biscuits, Shuckers, Tourists, Mighty Mussels, Muckdogs, WhistlePigs, Sock Puppets, etc).
  5. It also helps the Cubs that they built an intense feel of mystique and notoriety over the years thanks to the Curse of the Billy Goat becoming so legendary, and the White Sox...really just kinda exist. They won a World Series before the Cubs and barely anybody but White Sox fans even remember that tidbit because of how much more iconic the Cubs and their win in 2016 are. New Comiskey doesn't even come anywhere close to the practical divine status of Wrigley or Old Comiskey, and they don't exactly have a lot of recent success to brag about; people born the last time the White Sox won a pennant are now legal adults, and all the franchise has won since is 2 division titles, one of which they won by proxy of being the only team in their division to not themselves.
  6. To be fair, when your most well-known nickname is "Broadway Blueshirts", it kinda makes sense that they'd end up keeping to blue for alternate jersey designs. Plus, there's the little problem of red jerseys being associated primarily with the Devils within the Tri-State Area.
  7. Really, if you're at the point where you're having to consider temporarily moving to a completely different state than the place you're actually trying to relocate to just so you can have a place to stay while you get a stadium built, you've officially reached boondoggle levels of planning. Like, who in Utah is going to give a about a team that views them as nothing more than a stopgap because they don't have anywhere to play where they actually want to be? Literally the only reason the league approved this in the first place was a blind desire to rush into Vegas, and now Fisher seems to be tripping and bumbling pretty much every step to even get the A's there in the first place.
  8. I think just a solid pink yoke would be fine, honestly, maybe with a thin white outline to match the flames on the sleeves. I think making it look like epaulets would make the design a little too busy between those two elements.
  9. Plus, as you said...they make a killing on throwback merch without having to switch at all. Why remove an easy source of free revenue? The only way I think they rebrand back to looking more like the Mighty Ducks is if they include orange instead of one of the other colors (probably silver, given how otherwise superfluous it is on the jerseys) and change the jersey design a bit so that they can still hock throwback merch.
  10. Sure, fans that moved south with the team from Minnesota or who bought North Stars jerseys long after the fact because they thought it looked nice; but let's not pretend like Dallas fans give too much of a about the Stars' time in Minnesota when they've won a Cup in Dallas and the North Stars didn't exactly have a lot of glamor on the ice. No, but the fact that the only time Dallas ever considered a North Stars throwback design got scrapped while they've been perfectly OK with Minnesota making two different North Stars throwbacks with the Reverse Retros while they went all-in on their Dallas history kinda indicates that the Stars doesn't really seem to care too much about their Minnesota days anymore beyond the historical aspect. Plus, Gaglardi doesn't seem interested in green and gold throwbacks, either, so it's not like it's any skin off his back to let the Wild have all of that fun when North Stars stuff would be mainly selling in Minnesota, anyways. And yet they deliberately chose to homage an old-school Texas team in their current colors over any kind of North Stars homage, which would've printed them money. Seems to me like they just don't think they need the North Stars imagery; which makes sense, the Stars have been in Dallas longer than they were in Minnesota and won their only Cup in Texas, so why bother with making an homage to a team the majority of their own fanbase would only know from history videos, Wikipedia and video games?
  11. Given the Saints' 50th logo on the side of the stands and the use of the Rams' old logo on all the screens showing the scores, Google's images are definitely from 2016. Dunno if I'd necessarily call that "current".
  12. I think it's pretty obvious the black alt will lead to them trying a equipment swap (black gloves+pants with the home set, teal gloves+pants with the alt) at some point. We've seen that happen with multiple teams (Columbus' blue pants come to mind, Carolina did it as well and it happens all the time in the NFL), wouldn't surprise me if the Sharks at least test the waters to see how the combo looks. As for the fin logo, I think ultimately using it for an alternate's main crest is fine. It'd be the first time something besides the primary was on the front of a Sharks jersey, which would at least give it a sense of uniqueness; and alternates are supposed to be where you have a little fun with the branding.
  13. I mean, any joke can stop being funny if it's repeated too often. And Uno's constant whinging is getting to that point.
  14. It's probably some kind of Gasparilla-themed thing, given the logo shown at the end doesn't match the leaked alternate at all.
  15. Between the Packers and Cowboys, I 100% take the Packers every time lmao
  16. Fun fact: the last time the Cowboys were in the NFC Championship is closer to the moon landing than it is to today.
  17. I mean, it was, but this adds another wrinkle to the whole ordeal which makes it even funnier in hindsight given the picks Houston got were turned into some of the key contributors to their turnaround which lead to this very moment.
  18. I mean, I don't really mind it. It's not like people take the ASG all that seriously, anyways; may as well say it and go balls to the wall with weird design ideas if you don't have a set theme like the RR-based designs from last year.
  19. That DeShaun trade may well become the biggest blunder in a history of long Browns 2.0 blunders if the Texans can keep this run up. What a curbstomping lmao
  20. Is going back to a rotted root really a good idea, though? Again, they've literally never won anything in the postseason as the Los Angeles Angels without "of Anaheim" stapled to the end, the name without that addendum has no historical significance for the franchise beyond losing years without a playoff berth. Especially since they've spent the majority of their existence as the California Angels, and won a World Series under the Anaheim Angels name, which is infinitely more success than they've had as the LA Angels; so if anything, that's the name that should stick with them, not a name associated with failure.
  21. 5 years in LA compared to 58 in Anaheim is a pretty vast difference, though? Not to mention their height of success came from winning the World Series...as the Anaheim Angels; from 1961 to 1997, they had a grand total of 3 playoff appearances, all of which were under the name California Angels. They never even won a round until the 2002 playoffs, 42 whole years into their existence as a franchise and long after dumping the name "Los Angeles Angels". They've not gotten to the ALCS since 2009, haven't made the playoffs since 2014, when they got swept by the Royals, and haven't even had an above .500 win percentage since 2015, their last season with "of Anaheim" in their name. Frankly, it seems the name "Los Angeles Angels" is cursed when it comes to this franchise, considering they've never made the playoffs using that name unless they've tacked "of Anaheim" on at the end of it.
  22. Why would Disney have put the Ducks a whole 95 miles from their California park, especially considering they were literally branding the team after one of their movies in the first place? It makes more sense to put them close to Disneyland so that you can easily cross-promote the team and the park.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.