Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'BFBS'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The CCSLC
    • Forum Policies and Announcements
  • Sports Logos
    • Sports Logo News
    • Sports Logo General Discussion
    • General Design
    • Concepts
  • General
    • Sports In General

Calendars

There are no results to display.


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Homepage


Twitter


Instagram


Snapchat


Google Talk


Skype


Jabber


Location


Interests


Favourite Logos


Favourite Teams

Found 7 results

  1. Everyone known what the term “Black For Black’s Sake’s” is regarding sports logos and uniforms. Paul Lukas, founder of the website “Uni-Watch” and former ESPN writer, is credited for coining the term. Teams with no prior history of having black in their color scheme either adding black to their color scheme or overhauling their identify altogether with a strong emphasis on black. Many expansion teams of the 1990s were likely to add feature black in their identities. But when did the fascination with black began? It depends on the league. I’ll only focus on the four major sports (NHL, NFL, MLB, and NBA). If anyone wants to mention minor league teams, college teams (football and basketball), the CFL, and soccer teams (MLS, Premiere League, etc) down the line, that’s fine. I'll start with the NHL NHL I’ll pinpoint to the Los Angeles Kings’ 1988 rebrand (switching from Laker colors to Raider colors), combined with trading for Wayne Gretzky, as the beginning of the increase of the color black in NHL (and in all of sports). As a result, the Kings would soon become one of the more popular teams in the NHL and play a key role in the NHL’s expansion into other California cities and in the Southern USA (much to the chargin to some Canadian/Northern US traditionalists). Unlike most teams that changed to black from the late 80s onward, the Kings are one of the few teams that actually look good in black. Pre-1990s Of the original 6 teams, only the Boston Bruins wore black as a major color with yellow (athletic gold) as the secondary color. The Chicago Blackhawks have black as a secondary color as red is their primary color. When the NHL expanded in 1968, the Philadelphia Flyers introduced an orange/black color scheme with orange as the primary color. For example, the lineup of NHL team uniforms during the 1975/1976 season. 1976/77 – California Golden Seals relocated to Cleveland to become the Barons. The franchise changed their color scheme from tealish-green/yellow to dark red/black. 1978/79 – The Barons folded and merged with the Minnesota North Stars. - The Vancouver Canucks have new uniforms and changed their color scheme from blue/green to black/yellow/orange. 1979/80 - Inspired by then-recent champion success of the other Pittsburgh teams (Steelers and Pirates), The Pittsburgh Penguins changed their uniforms during the middle of the season. The color scheme changed from navy blue/light blue to black/yellow. The Bruins objected to the Penguins’ color scheme, but the NHL allowed the Penguins to change their colors. 1980/81 - The Penguins’ first full season in their new color scheme. 1981/82 - The Minnesota North Stars add black as a 3rd color to their green/yellow color scheme 1985/86 - The Canucks changed their uniforms (toned down from the ugly “V” uniforms) but retain their color scheme. The uniforms would be further toned down exchanging yellow jerseys for white in 1989. 1988/89 - The Los Angeles Kings changed their logo and uniforms from “Laker” (purple and yellow) colors to “Raider” colors (black and silver). - The North Stars change the color of their shorts from green to black.
  2. Hi everyone, Recently I had an idea: What if the Black for Black's Sake fad of the late '90s/early 2000s had caught on? I decided to create a new black alternate for each team in MLB that does not use black as a uniform color (with the exception of the Yankees, whose shade of blue is practically black anyway). This premise will naturally work better for some teams than others, so prepare yourselves for some late '90s gaudiness. Let's start today with the Phillies: The Phillies wound up translating really well, as the black and bright red complement each nicely. I'll try to post a new team each day, and some teams whose identities have changed over the years (such as Tampa Bay) will be getting multiple designs. C&C appreciated!
  3. So, in my opinion, the new New York Islanders alternate jerseys aren't that bad. They're (Sadly) Brooklyn's team now, and they need to represent it. Alternate jerseys should also jump out of the box and be unique, which is what the new alternates are doing. The 'B' logo that's inside the arrow is on the sides of the pants, which is only visible on the full-body presentation. Regardless, I decided to see if I could 'Spice it up' a little, so here we go! I have one presentation with the jersey flat and another with it on a person. So yeah! Let me know what I could do to make it better, besides taking black out all together, below!
  4. The griffins new logo, per the mothership.
  5. In your opinion, what are the worst offenders of all time in the still-ongoing "black for black's sake" trend, or the newer "gray for gray's sake" trend? Current? Past? A few that get on my nerves: BFBS: West Virginia men's basketball, black alternate: They wore these in the 2010 NCAA Tournament, making it all the way to the Final Four, so I'm sure many of you remember them. With dark blue being their primary color, there simply wasn't enough contrast with the numbers. I don't know whether they still have them; I read about a GFGS alternate they were getting a couple of years ago. Temple men's basketball, late 1990s: They still have a BFBS alternate, but this one wasn't an alternate---it was their only road uniform, replacing the gorgeous and iconic cherry red they had worn for years. Kansas City Royals road/alternate, Toronto Blue Jays entire uniform set, Cincinnati Reds road, mid 2000s: All three teams have a color as their nickname, or at least in their nickname, so why would they replace it with black? The Royals' was probably the most atrocious of the three; it was dated even before its introduction and wouldn't have looked good to my eyes even when it was in style (black-heavy late 90s). The Reds' black caps should've been killed off a lot sooner than they were---honestly, I don't see why they even need it as an accent color. I actually thought the Jays' GFGS home cap from 2004 looked decent, but overall they underutilized blue in that set. I was glad to see them go back to a more traditional design. Golden State Warriors alternate, present: Would this be BFBS or GFGS? Either way, it's unnecessary. Detroit Lions, former alternate: It didn't look altogether terrible, had it been for an expansion team or something. But it was for the Lions, who have a tradition-rich (and generally very tasteful) uniform history, with an excellent one-two punch of Honolulu blue and silver. They don't need black at all, much less as a jersey color. Best BFBS: Washington Huskies football and men's basketball alternate, late-2000s to present: Like with West Virginia's, these render the numerals hard to read; unlike West Virginia's, they look cool to me, in a modern "techy" sort of way. Arizona Cardinals: Their BFBS jersey isn't amazing, but it looks much better than their awful red jersey. I do find it slightly annoying, though, because Cardinals aren't black, they're red. This team's whole set (minus perhaps the logo and helmet) is due for a redesign, but they should maintain a black alternate jersey when that happens. Butler Bulldogs men's basketball: They actually look cool. I think navy blue uniforms would also look cool, though. I'd like to see them alternate between the two. Personal pet peeve: As briefly mentioned above, teams that have colors as (or in) their nicknames but wear another color (most commonly black, but not always) instead: Duke Blue Devils men's basketball and (more recently) football: Luckily they use the black as an alternate rather than eliminating the blue altogether. It doesn't look awful, but their blue looks much better. Stanford Cardinal men's basketball and football: Looks terrible, and cardinal is a color that they wear well in addition to being their nickname. You'd think people at such a prestigious school would see the incongruity here. Harvard Crimson men's basketball: Ditto, and they actually don't wear crimson now because of it. Boo. Niagara Purple/Purple Eagles: They sported black unis a few years back when they made the NCAAs. A real head-scratcher. North Texas Mean Green: Same thing. They're not the "Mean Black," they're the "Mean Green." Best and worst GFGS: Tennessee Volunteers football alternate: Best because the gray is a unique shade, it actually looks pretty good (esp. with orange numbers), and it makes me think of Tennessee's legendary Smoky Mountains. Worst because their orange is also a unique shade and it looks great, so any chance they pass up to wear it is a mistake. Next-worst GFGS: Wichita State Shockers men's basketball: Because it denies them a chance to ever wear yellow, the main color of their logo. Anyone else's thoughts are welcome!
  6. While BFBS is still highly prevalent amongst college football teams, I've noticed more and more white being employed by teams unlike ever before. While it's hard to argue White for White's sake since almost every team uses white in their scheme, it seems like every big road game is being played in a stormtrooper look. Turn on the SEC game of the week and you'll see color vs. all-white. Some teams have gone stormtrooper on the road before it was cool (Texas, Auburn, etc...) but it's become the new norm. As an OU fan, every team that's come to Norman has worn a white helmet. (ULM, Tulsa, WVU, TCU and TTU today). Only one of those teams had a white helmet a few years ago. While it's more tolerable than BFBS, it's beginning to make games look bland. I'm all in favor, as I think most of CCSLC would be, in a soccer-like clash uniform system. I'd love to see OU-TTU today be Crimson vs. Black. Or Oregon's Green vs. UCLA's Powder Blue tonight. (If Oregon would ever wear green...or Adidas could actually produce a powder blue uniform...) I'm sure this isn't a revolutionary thought, but just something that's been on my mind this morning.
  7. Welcome to the first annual Mr. Nascar's BFBS College Football Uniform Grades thread! (I'm kinda surprised that no one has posted something like this before) Here, I will be posting my opinions on college football teams, mainly at the FBS level, that are guilty for using black uniforms... well, just because they can. I actually happen to like black uniforms of any kind. But some BFBS uniforms are bad or make no sense at all (I'm looking at YOU, Stanford!) The whole point for this thread is BFBS, so please don't say your hatred towards them or questions as to why the use black; just your opinion of the overall design. Every few days, I will be posting a team that either previously or currently uses uniforms, helmets, or pants that are black that either improve or bring down the team's overall look. The first school up for debate will be The University of Washington Huskies! I give this set a B-. I kinda like the mono-black set, the purple numbers with the gold outline is pretty good, but I think the one thing that actually brings down the look is using the gold helmet. There is no black on it. I know, there was no black on it to begin with, tis not in their color palette, blah blah blah. I get that. But if you're gonna go BFBS, go head to toe. Go all out. The just went from the neck down. That's why I give it a B-. So that's my opinion. Please, feel free to post your thoughts and your grade. College Football wouldn't be the same without BFBS uniforms!