PlayGloria

1 minute ago, FiddySicks said:

San Antonio tried that with their AAF team, and it looked pretty nice! 

Just looked that up after your post. Nice color combo for sure. That was exactly where my mind was

You know, a double red scheme would look really nice. I'm thinking sort of how the StL Blues use royal and navy, the Cardinals could use red and maroon. 

3 minutes ago, tBBP said:

 

It also wouldn't be the first time Nike has literally modeled a football uniform after a  bird. Observe...

 

 

 

(Still can't believe that actually made it onto an actual field of play in an actual game...)

 

Am I wrong for actually loving this? 

If these are truly the new Cardinal uniforms then I approve 100%. All they needed was an update, not an overhaul. Granted, they could have used that update about 10 years ago, but this is great. If there was a time for a franchise and Nike to show restraint, this was the time to do it. They have a classic look

16 minutes ago, LMU said:

Bravo to the Bidwells. With all the insurance money they got on Kyler’s salary they bought themselves one hell of a fancy leakproof box.

My theory is that a bunch of people have seen the uniforms, but they are so off-the-wall that no one realizes that it's actually the new Arizona Cardinals set. Hence they don't leak the info 

3 minutes ago, ramsjetsthunder said:

 

Alright, everybody. Take one last look.

 

 

All that's needed: lose the piping/side panels on jersey and pants.

What we are getting:

A maroon, orange, gray, sparkly helmet overhaul. 

Again, I'm excited as a uni lover. But when you see it in writing, it seems really absurd.

12 minutes ago, jags1828 said:

The Falcons uniforms have grown on me (besides the red gradients). The number font is a little ehhh though.

Same for me. I actually think the helmet is fantastic. The combo below is their best look. 

Tru Color gave us the colors already

9 hours ago, Krudler said:

The Cardinals jerseys should be red.

As simple as this statement is, it is really difficult to argue against it 

Historic team, historic colors, historic helmet

As a someone who loves sports unis, I'm pumped for an "outside the box"  cardinals set. But deep down, I know that this team should probably be primarily red and white with their classic helmet. 

Either way, the suspense is killing me

11 minutes ago, flyersfan said:

Is there a world where the new colors not used in major sports is simply Red-Yellow-Blue? As in the state flag?

 

there are plenty of teams that use 2/3 but no team uses all 3 besides the avalanche/blues/devils alternates…??? Real Salt Lake but idk if that counts to TruColors hints?

Plus he has said that they can "own it." It has to be something with the flag. 

I wonder if the cardinal logo on that briefcase is precursor of what is coming? Just more of an outline of the Cardinal head in all red.

2 hours ago, TruColor said:

However, he and other contact of mine (who showed me the pic of the new White helmet) both have the exact same descriptions of the helmet. That I DO believe. No idea what the uniforms will actually be. I have a suspicion the Maroon/Orange/Silver could be an abandoned concept that is being put out there to throw us all off.

 

Sorry if I missed it in a previous post, but what was the description of the white helmet? If you cannot share the info, no problem

10 minutes ago, oldschoolvikings said:

I think the biggest issue in the Cardinals' lack of tradition is the multiple relocations. Ending up in Arizona in a modern stadium makes it hard to remember that the Chicago Cards wearing faded hand me down jerseys from the U of Chicago Maroons even existed. 

 

That said, I don't know why "simple" has to read as "traditional" necessarily. 

Agreed. Maybe it's because I'm  a St. Louisan but the Cardinals brand just feels like St. Louis's team. It probably has to do with the St. Louis Baseball Cardinals as well. 

I actually like this Flyers update. Love the return of the original orange. Really nice update to their set IMO

Hustle Town, Slam Diego, Brew City.... yikes. This stuff is cringy. 

21 hours ago, McCall said:

I don't think government agencies are gonna be using taxpayer money to buy ad space on baseball jerseys. Or I would hope not.

At St. Louis Blues games, Ameren Missouri (our local electric utility company) sponsors the Blues Power Play. It drives me absolutely crazy. St. Louisans don't have a choice on who we purchase our electric utilities from. They have a natural monopoly of basically the entire metro region. So why are they wasting money advertising at a sporting event?? Save the money and lower our damn bill. 

I've changed my mind on the Canucks new skate jerseys. I dig em. I actually think the elimination of white from the crest is a nice update and make for a cleaner logo. And once it was gone from the crest, it makes sense to eliminate it from the stripes/numbers. I don't love the number font but it doesn't bother me that they would want to have something consistent for once since they have had more uniforms and color schemes than the rest of the league combined 

Man I view the Flyers as having one of the classic unique looks in the league. I don't like the sound of this at all.

Wordmark crest just don't work on most hockey jerseys IMO. The star in Arizona feels like it would fit the Wild more than the Coyotes. I also feel like the hem design is fitting, but the designer forgot to fill it in with the paint bucket . 

Swap out the word mark for just a large crescent moon crest and I might be on board with this color scheme. 

3 hours ago, jc... said:

 

I don't get the love for them. They wore them 9 seasons, and they look too much like the Colts. Give me some color. 

I think the helmet looks fantastic in blue and white, but that's just me. 

It reminds me of what the Sens just did with their primaries. Went back to the logo everyone wanted, but changed the rest of the design so now its just a sub par version of the original. I don't hate it... I just wish it was the original skate jersey.

9 hours ago, Old School Fool said:

 

 A large majority of Rams fans just did not want the navy and white. They gave fans a choice of at least changing to the helmet and pants in a fan poll because people just didn't want to see St. Louis colors. They absolutely had to do blue/yellow.

They didn't use Navy/White in St Louis. They were royal/yellow when they first moved to STL and when they won the Super Bowl in STL. Then switched to Navy/Gold. They were blue and white in LA only in the 60s and 70s. 

Regardless, if the fans didn't want it, then I guess that makes some sense. 

On 1/9/2023 at 9:00 PM, oldschoolvikings said:

 

Rams in yellow, which would be terrible.

 

 

 

I will just never understand why the Rams reinvented the wheel instead of building around the blue and white helmet that they had when they first moved to LA. That uniform set during their first few years was visually awful. But in reality, the helmet and simple pants were a good start to what could have been a sick uniform. All they really needed was a jersey to match and white socks. 

Bias alert: I am a Blues fan, so I'm sure that plays into this post. But the Blues look rad in the RRs last night. 

6 hours ago, VampyrRabbit said:

There should not be such huge differences between the kit that the players wear and the versions sold to the public. Having said that, I like the replica STL shirt  more than the authentic - less sponsors, no huge blue panels on the sides and the collar looks cleaner.

I think if the replica had the same sleeve stripes as the authentic, that would be the perfect look. 

All in all, I really dig the fact that they owned that magenta color. Very unique. Paired with the navy, it reminds me a tad of the Kraken color scheme, with a unique bright color paired with navy. The yellow acts in a similar fashion to the red eye on the Kraken logo. It makes me wish that the Kraken's color scheme was flipped with aqua being dominant and navy being a trim color.