mafiaman Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 I hate the Sharks. They're the worst Bay Area team next to the Raiders and their fans are smelly.But...I want that jersey so bad.I hate the Sharks. In fact, I'm still ticked off about the 1994 series win over the Red Wings. Yea, the one where Osgood cried. Game 7. At home. Hate, hate, hate the Sharks.But......that jersey's pretty freakin' sweet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLAKnight Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 How come this is in the EDGE cut? I thought CCM made the vintage and throwback jerseys for consumer purchase through their "Vintage" line.When the Ducks wore their throwback the EDGE wasn't widely available, just the CCM version. Same I believe with the Devils when they wore the Christmas one the past couple years because my brother got a CCM one.I think it's only as of last season. The "forum blue" Kings jersey worn over the past few years only ever had the CCM cut, but the gold version worn last year was sold in the EDGE cut. Both are still available on the Kings shop. Arizona's throwback was sold as the EDGE cut as well, but their shop only has 1 in CCM so maybe they sold both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GFB Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 And it bugs me when people hate on the Mighty Ducks logo because it's "cartoon-ish". The team was using it well before D-2 or the cartoon series came out, plus there's other NHL logos (looking at you Pittsburgh and San Jose) that have equally silly logos.Neither of those logos were used as part of a Multimedia Branding Initiative. Perfect. Touch the logo up a bit (fix the tape issues and the perspective on the shark's left fin) and that's what the team needs to be wearing full-time. The logo needs more teal. It's their primary colour but barely appears on this particular logo... In that regard, the 2007 update was a huge improvement. I disagree that it needs more teal. A logo does not have to be the identical colors of the team. That is what the jersey and other merchandise is for. When the logo appears by itself on a white background, their main colour is barely represented at all. Once again, this is the main reason why I think the 2007 update was so successful... Just a shame they had to replace grey with orange as an accent.Do you dislike the Blackhawks logo because it has more green and yellow than red? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildwing64 Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 This jersey is fantastic. The Sharks always did look better in that colour scheme. They should switch back to something like this full time.But......If it was going to be a straight up throwback, rather than a "heritage" jersey that merely pays tribute to the past, why didn't they just say so in the first place? PotD:Â 24/08/2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GFB Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 I'm just saying, I can give logos a pass for not implementing team or school colors when it uses the realistic colors of the person or animal.... and I've seen a lot more black or silver/gray sharks than teal ones.The new logo is just too cartoony/mid-90s/AHL-worthy for my liking... the old shark has some issues, but at least it looks like a real shark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kw11333 Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Hopefully...HOPEFULLY this leads to a jersey change for the Sharks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ark Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 The bottom jersey is just bad, but the top one gives a decent example of Morgo's idea in practice.And it has the same problem as the original Florida Marlins uniforms, too much teal.Besides, the black shark logo matches the helmet and the pants.Just for fun: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgan33 Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 When the logo appears by itself on a white background, their main colour is barely represented at all. Once again, this is the main reason why I think the 2007 update was so successful... Just a shame they had to replace grey with orange as an accent.Do you dislike the Blackhawks logo because it has more green and yellow than red?That's actually a really good comparison because, like the 1991 Shark's logo, the Blackhawks logo looks infinitely better against the teams main colour. Only difference is that one team was able to rectify the problem, while the other has no reason to based on longevity and success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sport Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Hold on a minute, Morgo. Aren't you the guy who fights for the Canucks' orca logo? Last I checked that logo is missing one of the team's colors entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmic Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 I looks nice and all, but am I the only one who thinks the crest and the shoulder logos look like the crest and the shoulder logos don't go together at all? I like each of them individually; I don't think they belong on the same jersey. Maybe a black fin shoulder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-mer Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 I looks nice and all, but am I the only one who thinks the crest and the shoulder logos look like the crest and the shoulder logos don't go together at all? I like each of them individually; I don't think they belong on the same jersey. Maybe a black fin shoulder?I totally think that now. When I was younger it didn't phase me. I don't think I noticed it until the 2007 rebrand and they matched the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philly97flyer Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 It's hard to tell if they used the current teal or the throwback shade. It does look a little lighter than what they use now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charger77 Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 PotD May 11th, 2011looooooogodud: June 7th 2010 - July 5th 2012 Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianLion Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 That Sharks jersey is one of my favorites of all time. I remember being about 15 when it came out, and going bonkers over it. The logo is somewhat dated now, but it still holds up. Nice job, Sharks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VikWings Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 That Sharks jersey is just beautiful. Especially love the fin shoulder patches. It should be the primaries but it's way too heavy with all those stripes and will put the team at a major speed disadvantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CreamSoda Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 I think that Sharks jersey has received the best/most praise for an NHL sweater in the history of this forum...So naturally the Sharks will wear it once and never again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Giant Pacific Octopus Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 The Ducks uniform can't become the primary fast enough. Blows the main set clear out of the water.No way. The main jerseys are far superior because the "D" is a superior logo. The only cool thing about that jersey is that its orange and thats it.That cartoon Mighty Ducks logo should have went out with the bath water along with the Mighty Ducks name.I couldn't possible disagree more. The D is one of the most boring logos. It's easily among the very worst in the entire league. It's just a D shaped like a duck foot. What's so special about that? The Wild Wing logo on the other hand, is unique and easy recognizeable. Few teams sold as much merchandise as the ducks did, with that logo, back in the 90s. It was up there with the Jordan era Chicago Bulls. That logo made me a Ducks fan and a hockey fan. I'm thrilled that it's finally back on the front of a Ducks jersey. That logo is the star of the new third jersey. I'm not a fan of the orange, but i understand why they do it, being from orange country and all. But truth be told, i would have prefered something even more classic, something eggplant and teal. But in the end, i'm just glad that it's back.The reason I think the "D" is the best logo the Ducks have ever had is because its a simple effective design that doesn't have to resort to cartoonish to represent a team called the Ducks. The simple stylized "D' that doubles as a webbed foot is both aesthetically pleasing and unique. It looks like a sports logo rather than a cartoon used to sell toys. It gives the team the classy and mature look of a sports franchise rather than some Disney product to appease children. Its sharp and bold and jumps off the jerseys at you. Its very reminiscent of the winged "P" of the Flyers or the stylized blue note of St.Louis. An effective simple and sharp design The Mighty Ducks logo is a 1990's cartoon. A cartoon logo. For a team with a cartoon name. Designed by a company that specializes in producing cartoons. I'm surprised Tinkerbell and Goofy weren't in the logo.Disney bought the franchise to sell merchandise and that's it. They didn't care about the sport. They wanted to build a brand around their movie which the team is named after. This is the reason the team was called the "Mighty Ducks of Anaheim" rather than the "Anaheim Mighty Ducks". They wanted to emphasize the nickname as a brand/franchise. To appeal to the non-sports fan. It was used to promote the film sequels (this is why the kids switch from their own design in the first film to the NHL uniforms in the sequels). It was also used to promote a cartoon and a toy line. With the Disney ownership and silly "MIGHTY" nickname in the past (Thank God), its only fitting that Disney logo stays in the past as well. They did a great job building an identity with a real hockey logo. Why ruin it by going back to a dated Disney cartoon?This is a hockey team. Not a Disney product. The Catch of the Day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Best of everything with this concept from kiwi_canadian, maybe Nike template aside.Perfection. The new logo is so much better than the original, but the new jerseys are so inferior. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 It sure sounded like the jersey wasn't going to be a true throwback.Icethetics referred it as:Disappointing to many fans hoping for a true throwback was that the team described the jersey as representative of "the present of the Sharks franchise while paying stark homage to its past."The only differences that I can tell from the original is the collar and the shade of teal.If only it was going to be worn against teams that had at least some history against it. So they went with the inferior old logo, but passed on the old teal in favor of the current, inferior shade. Typical Sharks derpery, but it'll be great to see the inaugural jerseys on the ice again kinda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CreamSoda Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Maybe it's just nostalgia but I vastly prefer the old Sharks logo. The new logo is too forced fierce. It's a shark, it doesn't need any exaggeration of intimidation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.