Ridleylash

Oh, no...Bruins, what're you doing?!

See, I disagree; because at this point we have the Bears, Cowboys, Broncos, Texans, Chargers, Patriots, Seahawks and Titans all using some variation of navy blue in their uniform sets, and the Texans and Patriots use extremely similar shades to boot. Meanwhile, the only NFL teams to really use powder in any way right now are the Chargers and Titans. In terms of standing out, powder would be much more eye-catching than navy and tie nicely back into Houston's history with the NFL.

The only issue is the pants, but like...I actually really like how the Goathead uniform looks in blue and gold.

They didn't elongate the legs, though; the logo on the jersey is how it was in the WHL, which is what they're throwing back to.

All of DC is getting ready to party like Toronto did when Ballard croaked.

Coyotes beat the Panthers 3-1, which I think officially puts Florida into panic mode, considering they only managed a single goal against a team that is openly rebuilding despite dominating in shots.

THE PHILLIES SHUT OUT THE TRASHTROS TO TAKE GAME 3!

What a :censored:ing game Suárez is having.

Pittsburgh's doing the original Pirates design, judging by the P as their logo. That'll be interesting to see. Also, every Bruins fan in Boston just creamed about the idea of having both of their most beloved bear logos feature on the front of a jersey in the same year lmao

When you have giant numbers on the front and back of the jersey, I don't really think anybody needs the teeny little shoulder numbers, to be quite honest. Like, who watching the NFL on TV or close to the action can't see the giant "45" or "13" on either side of the guy's jersey? And like sioux said, it doesn't help at all for people sitting in the nosebleeds anyways. Like, in hockey TV numbers make sense since there's generally a whole lot of real estate on the arms to work with and teams generally put their logos on the front of their jerseys. In football, they aren't really as necessary when you already have much bigger numbers visible on both sides of the jersey.

Why would they relocate the A's to a market that's 2 hours from Seattle, doesn't have ownership wanting a team there, doesn't have an MLB-ready stadium and wouldn't even be the best option to go to in the Pacific Northwest (that spot goes to Vancouver), when they can go to Vegas and have a team that's in a booming sports market and is relatively close to the Dodgers, Angels, Padres and Diamondbacks?

There's a lot of value in honoring the teams that came before you in any sport, especially when said team is as enormously important to hockey history as the Metropolitans were. It makes perfect sense for the Kraken to homage the first US team to ever win the Stanley Cup since, you know, they're effectively that team's successor. The reason the Habs' jersey sucked wasn't because it was barberpole, it was because of how thin the lines were on that jersey which caused strain. The Metropolitans don't have that issue because the lines are much thicker; And nobody has any qualms with the Ottawa 67's, who use a barberpole design just fine; Hell, I remember many people on these very boards wanting the Senators to go back to their barberpole look full-time, as well.

You're thinking of Captain Canuck, not Johnny, and Captain Canuck was created long after the Vancouver Canucks were.

Maybe it'll even have an arrow on it in some form?

Frick, lmao, can't believe I messed the leagues up.

The Astros lost their last World Series when they got put up against a team of destiny from the AL East, as well...

I think the helmet would be fine being completely spotted, especially when teams like the Eagles, Bengals, Vikings, Chargers and Rams all have iconic helmet designs that lack traditional striping altogether; I think a fully-spotted Jags helmet could slot nicely into that sort of fold.

I think blatant jaguar spots could work in moderation, honestly; restrict it to the helmet and mayyybe the striping and I think it'd be a nice little aesthetic flourish to give Jacksonville's uniforms something visually distinct to them besides their colors...but having a bunch of sublimated spots all over the uniform looks way too collegiate for the NFL. There's a reason we left that in the 90's where it belongs. The Jags' ultimate problem is that, except for their actual logos and color palette, their entire look is completely bland and lifeless. Solid black helmet, basic color blocking and just a lack of any character or life to the jersey or helmet design. Something like this would be a nice balance for me, personally-speaking; still within the confines of a traditional aesthetic, but with a nice touch of uniquely Jags design elements.

Because replacing their white uniforms with a wacky unique color worked so well for the Rams, right?

No, I'd disagree there. I find teams that just use the same jersey as their parent club in different colors really uninspired, visually; the Eagles shouldn't just look like a palette-swapped Avs.

The Wranglers look exceptional, but I'm still really underwhelmed by the Eagles' uniforms. I think their look from the ECHL is far better;

How is it a "bandwagon fallacy" to point out that certain design trends have always worked while others just keep failing? The gradient Jags helmets were ugly as sin and couldn't even be marketspoken into acceptability. The Rams' bone jerseys were a colossal misstep that they've already begun minimizing in favor of the more traditional look. Meanwhile, people by and large loved the Bengals' rebrand because it didn't embrace :censored:ty gimmicks like gradients or gimmick colors like bone, and just focused on making a good-looking ensemble. There's a reason this rebrand; ...went down so much better than this rebrand;

How many friggin' Broncos are on IR right now?