Jump to content

GhostOfNormMacdonald

Members
  • Posts

    479
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by GhostOfNormMacdonald

  1. I do understand it's not about culture or basketball appeal or what feels right. I was just stating my opinion as a guy who grew up on the edge of the great plains watching the Big 10. God forbid I give my opinion from a fans perspective on what I'd like the conference to do, even if I know it probably won't happen. Not everyone with an opinion is an idiot that doesn't understand what's going on if the opinion/hope isn't in line with what's probably gonna happen
  2. Kansas and Iowa State to the B1G feels right. Having Hawkeyes vs Cyclones as a conference rivalry game will just make it way more intense. Plus Kansas would really bolster the conferences basketball appeal. They at least make more sense than Maryland and Rutgers did from a cultural perspective
  3. FIFY. Mainline (progressive) protestants want nothing to do with them
  4. I can't wait for the 2030s when the SEC gets obliterated by some bone headed Texan rube
  5. College sports as we know them are gonna change for the worse. It's one thing to have unprecedented dynasties, it's another to obliterate the regional aspect of conferences to jam as many good programs as possible into a conference
  6. Would losing A&M be worth it if they get UT and OU? I'd certainly think so. Leaves room for OK State
  7. They left their parents at age 14 in search of a better life. Eventually they take up an apprenticeship with a master designer and toil away for years, perfecting their craft. Eventually, when they're good enough, they try to join the local guild and set up their own sports branding design shop. As it has been done since the 1600s on this continent
  8. Honestly having a prepped contingency might have looked even worse from a PR perspective. Imagine the years of ignoring protests only for them to have a fully formed alternative ready the entire time. That would have been conceding they knew it was wrong all those years.
  9. There were riots. But race riot has a certain connotation within certain circles for certain purposes that I hope you aren't trying to convey
  10. You're right. But you also can't bar people from thinking it's dumb to do so in certain situations. The Ravens would look dumb with a purple helmet and some people would probably think they copied the Vikings. If they want to put a cluster:censored: on the field, more power to them
  11. It would be like if the Patriots wore a navy helmet and looked like the Texans, or Bills wore a blue helmet and looked like the Giants. Just because you can because it's a main color, doesn't mean you should
  12. They've also only had a black helmet since day one. And the Vikings have had a purple jersey and purple helmet since day one in 1960. Obviously a team can't own a color but it's ridiculous to think that if the Vikings made a black helmet or Ravens made a purple one that it wouldn't look like they're copying each other when they have such a similar color scheme. Vikings should have a purple helmet and shouldn't try out a black one, and the Ravens should have a black helmet and avoid a purple one.
  13. Idk what in sports history would be weirder than the Medicine Hat A's
  14. Inside sources have confirmed to me that the Las Vegas Raiders will wear black jerseys and the Minnesota Vikings will have horns on their helmet for the upcoming season. I know you guys won't believe me but I expect you all to grovel before me when the season starts
  15. Throw in Adrian Peterson and Chad Greenway to that. For as ugly as the previous unis were, they just look right in them
  16. I've noticed the Panthers have been using blue a lot this off-season. They even photoshoped Darnold into the blue jersey instead of black. Did I miss an announcement or is this normal?
  17. The Bills seriously need to just go with a blue mask
  18. Now there's there's guy that makes me want to get rid of my doghouse
  19. The world has always been hyper-politicized. Take off the rose-colored glasses when looking at the past old man and just accept that language changes and racial slurs aren't okay
  20. In the short term, maybe. The thing is brands last a long time. Eventually everyone angry about ditching the slur will be dead and an entire generation will have grown up only knowing the new name. I think basing your identity solely on the city without a nickname would limit how they can market themselves outside their market. For example: there are kids who decide their favorite team based on what nickname they think is the coolest. I know multiple people that picked the Falcons, Titans, Bengals and Lions as their teams despite having absolutely no connection to any of the cities they're in, simply because they like the nickname. I think going generic would limit that effect and hurt their brand in the long run.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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