udubs03

Members
  • Content Count

    973
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Prospect

About udubs03

  • Rank
    Former Taz enthusiast

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    North of Milwaukee, WI

Contact Methods

  1. Fond du Lac just announced the name of their Northwoods League franchise this morning: The Dock Spiders Logos:
  2. I pray to God they don't...we've all seen how great the Jets look in their three-green patchwork jerseys.
  3. There are more than the ones pictured in the first post, including Bernie and Lou Seal. Only place I could find them was on the FatHead site. These are very weird.
  4. I really didn't want to read through seven pages of ridiculous race debate, so this may have been brought up already. If they changed to the Redtails, they could use it as in Red-tailed hawks. I'm not sure if there are many if any in the DC area (according to any distribution maps I've seen, there are), but this would allow them to keep their feather motif while stepping away from the controversy of their current nickname. There is still a bit of a tie to Native American imagery, but it would be pretty benign. I could see that working out really well.
  5. And that would be a shame. I don't dislike gray facemasks in general, but they are clearly wrong in some cases. I could understand using a gray facemask if this was an actual throwback set, such at the '70s set with an updated horn and matching purples. However, if they are changing stuff up, going with a :censored:ty rounded block font and using an entirely new striping pattern, there is no reason whatsoever to use a gray facemask. It's like the Bills - their "traditional" uniform really isn't traditional because they put crappy collars, muddied everything with navy, and put a widening stripe on the helmet, but after all that, they throw a freaking gray facemask on. I tend to agree with you. I dont mind gray on throw backs at all, or if it's in your color scheme. The whole reason they were gray in the first place was technology, or lack there of, to color match the plastics on those days. Yes, part of it had to do with people not even thinking of the idea to change the color. Think of it as the Michigan Fab Five wearing black socks for basketball. People just didnt think of doing it then till someone, ya know, actually did think of it. Now days, going with gray face masks is not needed when there is technology to do other colors. I mean, look at what Oregon State did with their face masks... stripes! I guess what i am trying to say is that they had their place back in the day and certainly on throw backs, but to use them today just to use them because its your aesthetic preference is not smart design. As in everything, the design should be purposeful and objective based, not subjective. Sorry to beat a dead horse. I'll give this horse one more thump. Often the teams that use gray facemaskes do so to invoke a sense of nostalgia. A kind of 'this is the team your grandpa watched and we still embrace that brand of hard-nosed football', so it is definitely purposeful and I feel it works for teams like the Browns, Niners and Bills. The Cardinals have no excuse. I grew up a Browns fans and during my time as a youth, we did not wear gray facemasks so your point may be misleading. By the way I grew up in the Brian Sipe and Bernie Kosar era when the team looked outstanding. When I said that they are trying to invoke a sense of notalgia, I didn't mean for any team in particular, but more for an era where most teams wore gray masks...Love those orange pants, by the way.
  6. And that would be a shame. I don't dislike gray facemasks in general, but they are clearly wrong in some cases. I could understand using a gray facemask if this was an actual throwback set, such at the '70s set with an updated horn and matching purples. However, if they are changing stuff up, going with a :censored:ty rounded block font and using an entirely new striping pattern, there is no reason whatsoever to use a gray facemask. It's like the Bills - their "traditional" uniform really isn't traditional because they put crappy collars, muddied everything with navy, and put a widening stripe on the helmet, but after all that, they throw a freaking gray facemask on. I tend to agree with you. I dont mind gray on throw backs at all, or if it's in your color scheme. The whole reason they were gray in the first place was technology, or lack there of, to color match the plastics on those days. Yes, part of it had to do with people not even thinking of the idea to change the color. Think of it as the Michigan Fab Five wearing black socks for basketball. People just didnt think of doing it then till someone, ya know, actually did think of it. Now days, going with gray face masks is not needed when there is technology to do other colors. I mean, look at what Oregon State did with their face masks... stripes! I guess what i am trying to say is that they had their place back in the day and certainly on throw backs, but to use them today just to use them because its your aesthetic preference is not smart design. As in everything, the design should be purposeful and objective based, not subjective. Sorry to beat a dead horse. I'll give this horse one more thump. Often the teams that use gray facemaskes do so to invoke a sense of nostalgia. A kind of 'this is the team your grandpa watched and we still embrace that brand of hard-nosed football', so it is definitely purposeful and I feel it works for teams like the Browns, Niners and Bills. The Cardinals have no excuse.
  7. I thought this was going to be another one of those 'Truthful NFL logos'-type of thing that are usually painfully unfunny. What a pleasant surprise...and the teeth Jaguars and Bengals are the best part.
  8. Even when they control the environment and lighting and try to make it look as good as they can, this is still one of the very worst uniforms I've ever seen...and I'm saying that with no trace of hyperbole.
  9. I don't really see how uniforms being the same color as the playing surface gives a team a competitive advantage any more than a home team wearing white on a hot day does. I understand how one might come to that conclusion and for a TV viewing audience it might be a problem, but in reality, I don't think there's any camouflaging effect for the players on the field. What about endzones? Should those have to be a neutral, non-uniform color as well? That said, colored turf is dumb and I think monochrome uniforms look terrible, but the ends don't justify a rule change.
  10. I'm hoping for the tuxedo t-shirt look for the Orlando Magic.
  11. I'd love to see the Saints go back to a gold like this. It just feel it has so much more character than the washed out gold they use now. I think the NFL as a whole could benefit from going back to more vibrant colors (Saints, Eagles, Rams, etc.) I think that's what I like most about the NFL of the past.
  12. I'll echo what most are saying. The sleeves in and of themselves are not the problem. The mismatching golds, the pinstriped shorts with non-pinstriped jersey...add that to the already non-conventional jersey front the Warriors wear and this is an unmitigated disaster. I'd be really curious to see a well-designed sleeved NBA uniform now.
  13. To your second point, once a fumble occurs, can't you pretty much hold as much as you want? Kind of like a tipped ball negating pass interference. The scenarios in which there is a benefit to taking a penalty are few and far between. The NFL rulebook is big and convoluted enough...I don't think we need to add to it.
  14. I've never been a fan of that either. It would be great if they just put the numbers up in the style of the era in which each player played. Or for uniformity's sake, have them be in a non-specific font with the appropriate logo underneath like the Astros do. The only one that kind of makes sense to be in the current style is Uecker's 50, but that doesn't even qualify as a retired number
  15. I'm getting a lot of the same feelings too. I feel like I want to load it up in a design program and mess with it to make it seem a little less stylized and a bit more like a conventional beaver logo. The eye is what is bothering me the most. I feel as if I really want the eye to be more fierce and ominous as opposed to the somewhat scared or timid look it seems to have. That being said, I love the fact that it has movement and evokes some sort of swiftness and speed. It is certainly streamlined, which the previous one was not. I'm sure the Nike folk spewed a whole wheel barrow full of horse$#!t when they presented it to the OSU brass to define the look. I think it can definitely work but I will reserve full judgment until I see it within the context of the whole identity. Really curious to see the word mark/font they created. It can make or break the entire thing. EDIT: I will say that the more I look at it the more I really like it. That furry little $#!t is starting to grow on me I think the bolded portion of your breakdown is exactly why I DO like this. I'm sick of every animal sports logo having to look fierce or intimidating. While you certainly wouldn't want it to look scared or timid (which I don't think the beaver does), not every animal needs to look like it wants to tear your face off. The shape is odd on it's own, but does seem like it will work very well on a football helmet. I hope the give it the "Carolina Panthers treatment" and put this logo on a black helmet with no keyline