Sec19Row53

14 minutes ago, Jamesizzo said:

Will you guys ever add a fire emoji? 

Isn't that equivalent to the applause emoji?

1 hour ago, Germanshepherd said:

Oregon vs. Washington’s color on color is pretty crispy too

If by crispy you meant it burned my eyeballs, I agree 

1 hour ago, DCarp1231 said:

Are the off-white/cream decals on Oklahoma’s helmet really that dingy?

Yeah, they are. That's their cream.

24 minutes ago, DCarp1231 said:

Would 3D printed logos really be that much of an injury risk? Seems doubtful.

Agreed. But this seems like a low hanging fruit thing that the NFL would be all over.

Fix turf for safety reasons? Nah, that costs money.

Not allow 3-D logos? Yup, you might cut someone with that.

47 minutes ago, DCarp1231 said:

The camera in this Oklahoma-WVU is making the Sooners uniform look grody

I don't think the camera has anything to do with it.

47 minutes ago, Discrim said:

Wouldn't be practical every week, but maybe Super Bowl only?

Seems like a huge injury risk. Pass.

2 hours ago, DCarp1231 said:

Honestly, the pewter jersey is a really good alternate. The only problem I have is the absence of orange and black which requires the need for two pairs of pewter pants.

 

I hope it reappears this season.

Doesn't your second sentence invalidate your first?

I'm not trying to gotcha, but I need to understand that logic.

10 minutes ago, Captain Poncho said:

Already submitted the survey and can't view it again, but the jist was that they asked:

 

• Rank the uniform sets from the past to current in order of preference (1-4)

• Rank the current jerseys in order of preference (white, orange, navy, color rush)

• Rank past and current helmet design in order of preference (1-4)

• Preference on past/current logo and if the "D" should become primary, the horse head should remain primary, or if a new logo was needed

• Preference on jersey color as home primary (orange, navy or something else)

One of the questions was also about where survey-takers thought the Broncos ranked among the rest of the league, with three options:

1) Current unis are among the best of the league

2) Not the best, but there are others much worse

3) The rest of the league has passed the Broncos by

 

Then there was an open comments section at the end, where I was quite... lengthy in my response.

Thanks for the insight. I'd guess they have some merger idea in mind.

16 minutes ago, Volt said:

 

 

 

 

 

I don’t hate any of these (except for the Orange pants).

I don't think the size of the current logo lends itself to a helmet strip like the one presented here. This depiction of the helmet scales down the logo size (unless that was the intent -- and I doubt that).

16 hours ago, Brass said:

I'm trying to ride that fine line of not being a spoiled Boston fan, and I completely understand why people might find this conceited, but really hoping the Red Sox open the pocketbook and resign Bogaerts and Devers this offseason. I know they need pitching, but they also need these two guys as the faces of their franchise. I don't want to hear the "well they have prospects to fill the holes." BS, because the sense I get from the management now is that they'll unload those prospects when they start producing as big leaguers.

 

I don't want to sound like a whiny Boston fan (ya'll know I'm not that way) but I feel like if you are a fan of a big market team, it's understandable to expect them to behave like a big market team in the offseason. Maybe I'm wrong; I would welcome another perspective as always.

If you're a fan of a large market team, why WOULDN'T you feel this way? The only way I could have a bad impression of a fan for this is if you were a bandwagon fan - then all bets are off.

13 minutes ago, Captain Poncho said:

Just got a survey from the Broncos about a uniform redesign:

 

The Denver Broncos are embarking on a uniform exploration project and would like to hear from you.

 

Throughout this process, we will collect feedback from our fans and work within the framework of NFL uniform policies and guidelines throughout this one- to two-year exploration process should we decide to make changes.

 

We want to know what YOU think about our current uniforms and are making this survey only available to our Broncos Country fans. Please take a few minutes to participate in the survey below to better inform our decisions for the future.

Can you post the survey questions? I'm really curious how they are framed, as in, are they trying to lead fans in a particular direction.

1 hour ago, coco1997 said:

Has anyone attempted to create a version of the classic (or updated) script "Twins" with a tail under the "win"?

Doing that would underline the whole word, right? That loses the effect of Win Twins, which was previously on the Minnie and Paul patch.

1 hour ago, Cujo said:

 

Which is tough is you follow more than say 20 people..

 

In the end, a simple resolution to all this would be to re-color real celeb checkmarks to red or something. But that kinda defeats the purpose of the new checkmark people are paying for.

 

Ah, what a fine mess this turned out to be.

Maybe. Maybe not. I limit my follows because I'll see what I need. I recognize that my use of Twitter doesn't match anyone else's, but I'm also positive I'll never fall for a paid-for check mark.

Yeah - that's asking for it to bite me in the backside.

2 hours ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

 

People you follow may share the fake content. Then you'll see it.

When they do, change your settings so that you don't see their re-tweets. If something is real, you'll see it based on your follows.

I busted the chops of a local sports radio station who re-tweeted a fake retirement of Nick Saban two weeks ago before all this started. Guard who you follow and this doesn't happen.

53 minutes ago, BBTV said:

I don't totally understand this.  If you follow the real people, then how do you even come across these fake accounts?  A legit local NFL reporter was fooled by the fake Adam Schefter account even though he obviously follows the real Schefter.  How would these fake guys even come up in people's feeds?

Agreed. All I can figure is that they saw someone who WAS fooled (however it happened) and re-tweeted it. The person who follows the real Shefty didn't think, and thus it spreads.

All this harumphing about buying your check is funny to me. It won't change who I follow, so I don't really care about it. 

41 minutes ago, LA Fakers+ LA Snippers said:

What if Detriot took a page out of the NBA's book and went oversimplified?

I think it still needs white.

The white outline on 'Bubbles' (the original Lion logo) was added mid-season in 1970 for better television contrast. Hi-def TVs make that less necessary, but I think it helps. Id rather there be some white on the uniform a well.

18 minutes ago, leopard88 said:

 

I was counting the Bills as one of the 4.  I was thinking it was five out of five, but then I remembered the Jets changed in the late 70s.  Before that, it was five out of five staring in 1971,

Yup - simple words went over my head. 4 of 5 were white, and they made it three of 5.

18 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

I can't disagree with you, but it's worth pointing out that a number treatment like that might solve the whole "lack of white" problem on their uniforms. These would likely stand out much more under indoor lighting than the non-shiny gray numbers do now. 

Returning the favor, I can't disagree with you, but white would be better 

14 minutes ago, Carolingian Steamroller said:

Actually, if Nike would like to get a little creative with reflective fabrics, the Lions might be a good place for that.

 

Imagine this but instead of green and yellow, Honolulu blue and silver:

 

 

Aaaand maybe a chrome helmet.

Don't take this personally, but no thanks. That's a college aesthetic, not a pro one.

Why yes, I am yelling at clouds right now

2 hours ago, leopard88 said:

 

I'm not disagreeing.  However, in soccer this is done specifically to avoid confusion for the players. 

 

Clashes aren't allowed between shirts, shorts or socks on the theory that players may confuse players from both teams based on similarly colored items of clothing in the mass of legs.   Presumably, no one in football considers matching pants or socks to be an issue on that basis . . . or even helmets, for that matter.

 

As an aside, my recollection is that the Bills originally switched to red helmets to help Joe Ferguson spot receivers.  At the time four of the  five teams in the AFC East wore white helmets, so at least six games a year matched white helmets.

The Jets changed to green (1978) before the Bills switched to red (1984).

2 hours ago, BBTV said:

This word almost always guarantees that a post will be incorrect. 

Extra props for throwing almost in front of always. Well played.

3 hours ago, DCarp1231 said:

Shame. Tampa Bay had a good thing going for identity.

I thought their helmet logo was too weak on the current helmet shells. It got lost against the various vents and such.

6 minutes ago, Cujo said:

 

Losing streak still intact. It's working out great for them!

Not so fast, my friend

-Lee Corso

23 minutes ago, walkerws said:

Don’t forget, sometimes old manufacturers own the copyright so they have a lot of match work to do

The team would own their colors, not a manufacturer, wouldn't they?

18 minutes ago, GDAWG said:

Packers would have blown out the Lions today if they had run the ball the first two times they were in the red zone. 

 

And did I hear this  right?  The second INT in the red zone Rodgers threw was intended for David Bakhtiari?  

And was underthrown.

7 hours ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

 

I'm old, but I remember when the Oakland A's were the coolest franchise in baseball, at a time when baseball was actually cool.

 

Ricky Henderson, Mark McGwire, Jose Canseco, Dennis Eckersley, and Dave Stewart...just such a cool group of dudes.

 

Was the late 80s/early 90s the true golden age of baseball? Or do I just have elder millennial narcissism?

I thought you were going to go here, when the A's were really cool: