dbackdiehard17

This seems to be the explanation they're gonna go with...

Could not agree more with this post it is a shame the state of uniforms these days in the NFL especially with the prospect of the Browns change. Very few teams modernize their logos without messing with their look. Carolina is the exception. Almost everyone else goes with a new look. But I agree. A refreshed logo for Tampa and Jacksonville would have been fine. Miami could've just lightened their aqua a bit, kept the awesome Dolphin in helmet and they'd be fine. Their change was totally unnecessary. The Jags panicked with their first redesign, and if you correct the gradient helmet (perhaps making it gold or more likely black), theyd have a nice look. Tampa just dropped the ball and their look is an unmitigated 21st century clusterduck

How they compare - I whipped this up real quick (old vs new)

It's kinda growing on me...

Full Color - Wall on Doak (used to be a helmet) Midfield - is it me or does it look small? Also, am I the only one who thinks they over-did the number of outlines? Seems excessive (see first pic)

Just a hunch, but I'm convinced this is Miami's new wordmark too, which if it is... Boring. This has been showing up all over their twitter, website, etc. I'm convinced it's the other piece.

I'm torn on this set: While the idea of the numbers is cool, I'm not sure if I like the look. The pants look good, and the jersey is rather minimalist when you break it down -- as many have -- no extraneous piping, ludicrous back stripe, none of that. As for the helmet, and I'm going to say it now: THIS IS A GAME CHANGER Remember the day that Rutgers unveiled their new helmets, because like Oregon, this is going to forever change helmet design. While Oregon has used unique surfaces for their helmet, college football has never seen quite anything like this, with the battle scars. How will teams looking for edgy and modern looks -- utilize these new potential features for their looks? -- I don't know. But it's a copy-cat world, and I expect to see some wild helmet designs in the future. Rutger's helmet for the record is amazing if you ask me -- And believe it or not, if they win, this thing can become iconic -- in fact, it could be quoted as a trend-setter (only time will tell). But seriously, wait till next year when teams named Tigers will try to have claw marks or whatever else is in the wood-works. I should note that UF had the gator-scale helmet but this is much more obvious. I'm curious to see how teams approach new helmet designs going forward after seeing Rutgers shoot for the moon with their new look. Finally, I agree with the majority: not a huge fan of all the silver helmets, but given that the idea is to look like a knight -- if people grasp that (people who aren't on sports logo message boards like us) then it's brilliant. Hey it's different. Iconic? Only time will tell.

For better or worse, the women's NCAA Final Four always has the most fascinating court designs. This year is no different. Utilizing Denver's rocky mountain backdrop, they have mountains along the court, which i've never seen before. What do you think of this year's design? Whats your favorite court from the Women's Final Four? Game live on ESPN now: I'm trying to find a good pic.

Hey guys! So Anthony Davis, the super Kentucky freshman, likely NBA no. 1 pick in June, was christened the AP College Basketball Player of the Year today. I started thinking about what the award meant and did a little research, and what I discovered is that the success rate of players winning this award to going onto becoming NBA HOF's is pretty amazing. I know some people don't like when I post videos on here (I promise i"m not spamming you) but it is a sports message board and I thought you guys would further appreciate just what an accomplishment this is for Davis, as a Wildcat and as a college player. Check it out. Alas, what kind of a pro do you think he'll be? Final Four on Saturday woot woot! Link below.

Who? Wisconsin... By state: KY (KY) NEW MEX (NM) IA ST (IA) LOUISVILLE (KY) VCU (VA) MURRAY ST (KY) IND (IND) MARQ (IL) COLO (COL) FL (FL) BAY (TX) NFOLK ST (VA) XAV (OH) LEHIGH (PA) MICH ST (MI) STL (MO) SYR (NY) USF (FL) K-ST (KS) OHIO (OH) VANDY (TN) NC ST (NC) WISC (WI) G'TOWN (DC) CINCY (OH) PURDUE (IN) FSU (FL) KANSAS (KS) GONZAGA (WA) OHIO ST (OH) UNC (NC) CREIGHTON (NE)

I would say probably because its pretty close to the geographic center of Division 1 basketball programs. You might get a rotation but I doubt it until/if the tournament expands. http://www.middletownjournal.com/middletown-sports/commentary-first-four-should-be-here-to-stay-1345276.html According to that article the First Four is set for Dayton next year and after that it's up for bids. Interesting... "In fact, the event should be Dayton?s forever and, frankly, throwing it open for bids ? as the NCAA plans to do after UD hosts it again next year ? seems like an insult."

March Madness has been nuts: thought you guys might like this breakdown I did of the final 32: By seed, state, etc. Just an extra little examination for ya. Check it out, let me know what you think! Breaking down the Madness

Mike D'Antoni is out as Knicks coach. New York has lost 6 in a row, Lin has returned to Earth, and D'Antoni's system didn't work in the Big Apple without Steve Nash or an elite pass-first guard. I just posted a video with my thoughts on it if you'd like to check it out: I've appreciated the feedback on the First Four and I enjoy the debates. What do you make of the Mike D'Antoni Era?

Hey guys, just did a video asking the question if the NCAA Tournament should count the First Four as the First Round, and if winning a game in the First Four should count like any other tourney win (For example: Northwestern St. was the first 16 seed to win a tourney game in 2001... do you really think it should count like that?) look forward to the debate! Watch the vid, let me know what you think! Thanks guys!

Yeah, the explanations are terrible and lame, but here's what bothers me: He writes at the start of the article "1. The rankings are based primarily on the standard home uniform -- jersey, caps, pants and socks (not that you can see the socks anymore) -- but there are so many alternate jerseys it is sometimes hard to tell which is which. So alternate jerseys have some effect on the rankings." And then he basically spent the rest of the article talking about alternate jerseys, lol... DUmb inconsistent criteria.