Ridleylash

Members
  • Content Count

    1,576
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by Ridleylash

  1. Turns out that the Lions aren't Built Ford Tough(tm).
  2. inb4 the "rEeEe sToP sTeAlInG dAlLaS' sTuFf!!1!" comment
  3. It's just the OEG logo, nothing to see there.
  4. Eh, I heavily prefer the gray to gold as Vegas' primary home color. This is a gorgeous uniform, and replacing it with some gaudy golden mess that looks worse on the ice as the primary home jersey just because "it's Vegas and they're Golden Knights" is silly. The gray base is completely unique to them in the NHL; gold is Nashville's thing, for better or worse, and the gold jersey just looks too inconsistent under different lighting for me to like it as a main look; sometimes it looks alright, sometimes it looks like a revival of the mustard Preds jersey.
  5. This is a sports brand, not a photorealistic illustration, it doesn't need to be literal. This is like saying "the Leafs should ditch blue and be a green team because maple leaves are green and not blue"; like yeah, it's not literally true, but it's not supposed to be a literal thing. Besides, I see nothing objectively wrong about this look, and certainly nothing that says "BFBS" (a term which has become so overused it's beginning to lose meaning beyond "uniform set that I don't like what has black in it"); UniWatch's definition of BFBS is "Stands for “black for black’s sake,” a reference to teams that gratuitously add black to their uniform design even though black was never one of their team colors.", and explicitly uses the black Mets jersey as an example. Personally, I think this is far more egregious a case of BFBS than any black-inclusive Flames jersey has ever been; Like, who looks at the A's uniforms and thinks "You know what this team needs? A black alternate which uses basically no green at all!"? That's what I qualify as BFBS; black being added for no other reason but to have black. The Flames changed their entire uniform design when they added black to the scheme, so I'd count it as more of a normal uniform overhaul as opposed to true-blue BFBS, since black was designed around rather than lazily slapped in to try and make it look cooler. Even in hockey, I'd say the Isles are exponentially more guilty of BFBS than the Flames;
  6. Probably didn't work on the Adidas template.
  7. When your superstar player is so out of it he can't even walk off the field without two people supporting him after struggling to even get to his feet to begin with, you're not putting that person back in for the next game. Better to keep Mahomes as healthy as possible for the next season than rush him back and potentially screw up your franchise QB. You can always make another Championship game next season. You can't replace Mahomes as the franchise cornerstone. The Chiefs didn't give Mahomes that massive contract because they want to rush him back from a potentially serious injury.
  8. You really think KC would risk the health of their best quarterback in actual decades for one game that they might not even win with Mahomes? To quote @Red Comet; There's no risk to sitting Mahomes to ensure nothing serious does happen to him that could derail his career. Playing him if he's not in peak condition is not the optimal move. They keep Mahomes out for this one game, they can keep him around for the next decade for many more playoff runs and potential Super Bowl appearances. Play him in sub-optimal health and he ends up either making crucial errors or, depending on circumstance, getting :censored:ed up by another injury. Also, dude was having clear as day balance issues. If he can't even walk to the locker room without aid and was having balance issues in locker room testing, no chance in hell he'd be able to run around a football field.
  9. With the way Mahomes was wobbling after that hit, I think it'd be a miracle for him to be back in by the time they play Buffalo. He looked like he was out on his feet, that's a clear as day concussion. And if you think KC risks the long-term health of their biggest player for even a single game, you're crazy. They'll be super cautious; better to just lose this one playoff game than risk permanently damaging Mahomes.
  10. The Dayglo orange they use as their main home color is also bad.
  11. Personally still think they should've gone with the white-striped version of this design, personally, but pretty much anything would've been an improvement over that Reebok holdover disasterpiece they had.
  12. Oof, those gold jerseys don't look that hot on the ice for Vegas; Definitely comes off more mustardy than anything.
  13. Since Buffalo's game is basically decided, have more Texans drama because there obviously hasn't been enough already.
  14. Navy only appears on their third jersey, though, and they already have navy equipment for those jerseys so it can't be excused as a matching thing. Unless they replaced all of the uses of slate with navy (which good luck there), then slate was the better call. I'd be alright with burgundy for the road, but the home should be slate equipment because it blocks better than black or navy would with the rest of the uniform.
  15. LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO :censored: Cal McNair.
  16. Because again, the league has never had fourth jerseys be used on opening nights even when they're revealed prior to the season starting. It's always been the normal road or home jerseys. Opening with a look you don't plan to use often is dumb.
  17. Since when have fourth jerseys ever been worn on Opening Night?
  18. I think everyone kinda knew this was coming among the fanbase; I'd be stunned if this isn't indicative of the team's direction in regards to branding.
  19. Eh, dunno. It's barely different from a visual standpoint. Sure, a puck isn't navy blue, but maple leaves aren't blue, either. A northman isn't an stylized igloo with a hockey stick. Dolphins aren't bright teal, and I can't remember seeing a jaguar with a teal nose, eyes and tongue. Logos shouldn't need to be strictly literal about how things are detailed, as long as it looks good. Hell, the Caps logo has a red hockey puck, which is far more egregiously "wrong" than a navy blue one.
  20. It doesn't really help that steel blue is probably an incredibly uncommon color for use on helmets, so there's not as much practice for manufacturing and color-matching that color in helmet shells.
  21. Must be a manufacturing thing, then.
  22. Here's another look at the helmet. I think it's fine, personally, just might take some getting used to for some people because we're so used to the Avs having black equipment.
  23. The black only looks good because of nostalgia, honestly. If the Avs were an expansion team in 2020 with black breezers and pants in an otherwise black-less jersey, people would be ripping them over it; you'd see people saying "Oh, nice beer-league equipment, dweebs!" and the like. But because they won a lot in that, it's just associated with success despite looking kinda bad visually; the blue makes more sense since their design has always been far more blue than black. I always felt it was just slapped into the Avs' jerseys because black was a trendy color in the 90's. The burgundy is fine as the dark contrast color. The only change I could think of is maybe using navy over slate, but either blue works a lot better than black.