Bad Uniforms/Logos made classic by Good Teams

[Gothamite]

<p>

I don't know that either of these are "bad" but certainly, some logos / uniforms are overrated by storied franchises.

• Packers. I love the yellow shell. And the uniforms are good overall. But the logo, a "G" for "Greenbay."

Crazy as it sounds, I could swear I've heard that the G didn't originally stand for Green Bay.

Oh, please, let's not start that back up. Somebody might take it seriously again.

Yes...rumor has it that it stands for "Greatness." Either way it does not work except for the fact that it has been with the most important franchise in the league for so long.

Please don't justify that nonsense by repeating it. I don't know where Tiki Barber got that, or if he just made it up, but there not a sliver of truth behind it.

When he started that stupid rumor, lazy journalists picked it up and we had a hell of a time scrubbing it from Wikipedia.

[Chilton92]

Surprised that no one's mentioned the Thunder. I guess it goes without saying?

The Oklahoma City Thunder haven't won any championships and they've only been in OKC for 7 years.

Who would think of their set as "classic"?

You're right. But the identity has been synonymous with winning, even if they haven't won a championship. Also, I might be wrong, but didn't someone say that they wouldn't change anytime soon?

[infrared41]

<p>

I don't know that either of these are "bad" but certainly, some logos / uniforms are overrated by storied franchises.

• Packers. I love the yellow shell. And the uniforms are good overall. But the logo, a "G" for "Greenbay."

Crazy as it sounds, I could swear I've heard that the G didn't originally stand for Green Bay.

Oh, please, let's not start that back up. Somebody might take it seriously again.

Yes...rumor has it that it stands for "Greatness." Either way it does not work except for the fact that it has been with the most important franchise in the league for so long.

Please don't justify that nonsense by repeating it. I don't know where Tiki Barber got that, or if he just made it up, but there not a sliver of truth behind it.

When he started that stupid rumor, lazy journalists picked it up and we had a hell of a time scrubbing it from Wikipedia.

Stand down, defender of the faith, I said it sounded crazy and I said "I'd heard." I never so much as hinted that it was fact. I was just throwing it out there.

Anyway, I think the G looks great. I've always told people that it the G stands for my first name which is Greg, as in Greg's Green Bay Packers. I do own part of the team after all. I suppose it could stand for Gothamite's Green Bay Packers too.

[OnWis97]

It is not that it does not look good (though it looked better in the old days when shaped more like a football)... but in the spirit of this thread I think it is one of those things that would not fly if it was newer. It gets a pass for being old (which is OK like name such as Athletics, Browns, and Packers) and is beloved for being attached to America's Team.

[Ark]

Absolutely, this is the best example.

[chcarlson23]

Don't care how much the Nordiques need to come back, this really doesn't have to.

[MCM0313]

I was thinking about this after I saw the good logos ruined by a bad team thread. There are just some uniforms/logos that are awful, but are hailed as classic, or even great, because of the legacy of the team.

Here are a few

Montreal Canadiens

While they're not bad, they're nothing like the actually classic red sweater.

Dallas Cowboys

Everyone here agrees that these are bad, but they're still classic. The logo is the same way.

Its not that good of a logo. It's only a double outlined star, I could have made this in Kindergarten, but yet it represents decades of Football glory...

What are some other ones you've noticed?

I don't think the Habs' logo is all that great, but I do like their uniforms in general. I'm in the minority in that I like the Cowboys' mismatched blues and the odd silver-green pants (especially the latter). They wear a color that no other team in pro sports wears (technically the Eagles have it as like their fourth or fifth color but they don't wear it), and I think it looks good. I just wish their helmets still had more blue tint like they used to.

1) Broncos flaming rats

2) Brady-era Patriots side panels

3) Crosby-era Vegas gold Penguins

4) Hasek-era angry goat Sabres

2, 3, and 4 I totally agree with. As for 1...I mean, I wasn't fond of it when it first came out and it looks kind of dated now, but...really, it's not all that bad. It's not great, but it was daring for its time and I think it really looks pretty good when they wear orange jerseys with it. Just wish they'd gotten around to that earlier, because when it's blue-dominant it's kind of drab.

[Morgan33]

Don't care how much the Nordiques need to come back, this really doesn't have to.

Agreed, this logo is atrocious

[Gothamite]

There's a cool igloo/N logo to be made, but that's not it.

My gods, the outlines. How many outlines did they actually need?

[FinsUp1214]

My gods, the outlines. How many outlines did they actually need?

And the weights, too! I can't ever un-see that thicker outline weight to the left of the hockey stick and within the igloo. My eyes just go there.

I think the idea was always there and good, but was not executed as well as it should have been.

[OnWis97]

That Nordiques logo is soooooooo 1970s.

When I was a kid I did not recognize the igloo, the N, the stick, or the puck. I did not know what the hell it was...I feel like there were a lot of abstract logos in the 70s but maybe I just did not "get" them.

Anyway, I am thinking of all the young punks that say "you only like that for nostalgia." While that comment is most often ignorant and pulled out as some "trump card" to shut us geezers up, I really do feel that the positive feeling I get for that logo is pretty much based on nostalgia. That represents a time when there were so many great NHL uniforms and so few awful ones. It also represents a time for me when the NHL was my #1 and I had the North Stars. But really, while I would love to see Quebec City get a team and would be OK with a "Cleveland Winnipeg Deal" I don't think the logo should be brought back. It belongs in the places we go to be nostalgic. The original Nords have been gone for 20 years (and that logo was to be gone either way). The new Nords would be best served by a new logo.

[MCM0313]

Absolutely, this is the best example.

The thing is, those silver helmets look good, and the silver pants look okay, and I like the shade of red they use. Their number font isn't bad either---it's not great, but you know it's the Patriots. It's just that they have to ruin everything by emphasizing that boring blue so much that they run it into the ground (blue pants=terrible), and with the stupid side panels.

[AnPheitseog]

That Nordiques logo is soooooooo 1970s.

When I was a kid I did not recognize the igloo, the N, the stick, or the puck. I did not know what the hell it was...I feel like there were a lot of abstract logos in the 70s but maybe I just did not "get" them.

Anyway, I am thinking of all the young punks that say "you only like that for nostalgia." While that comment is most often ignorant and pulled out as some "trump card" to shut us geezers up, I really do feel that the positive feeling I get for that logo is pretty much based on nostalgia. That represents a time when there were so many great NHL uniforms and so few awful ones. It also represents a time for me when the NHL was my #1 and I had the North Stars. But really, while I would love to see Quebec City get a team and would be OK with a "Cleveland Winnipeg Deal" I don't think the logo should be brought back. It belongs in the places we go to be nostalgic. The original Nords have been gone for 20 years (and that logo was to be gone either way). The new Nords would be best served by a new logo.

Im on the believe that all teams should be given the type of deal Cleveland got, but not the purpose

While I like the Nordiques logo, and think it should be a third, they should just resume with the logos and jerseys they would have used if not for the move

[hawk36]

When these first came out I hated the:

1. Numeral font

2. Green outline on the large numerals but not the shoulder numerals

3. Lack of enough of green accents on the helmet (in comparison to the jersey and pants)

But now, given their huge success wearing them, they look good to me. Weird.

[JayMac]

When these first came out I hated the:

1. Numeral font

2. Green outline on the large numerals but not the shoulder numerals

3. Lack of enough of green accents on the helmet (in comparison to the jersey and pants)

But now, given their huge success wearing them, they look good to me. Weird.

I pretty much just tolerate them. I guess that's because of the winning.

[MCM0313]

That Nordiques logo is soooooooo 1970s.

When I was a kid I did not recognize the igloo, the N, the stick, or the puck. I did not know what the hell it was...I feel like there were a lot of abstract logos in the 70s but maybe I just did not "get" them.

Anyway, I am thinking of all the young punks that say "you only like that for nostalgia." While that comment is most often ignorant and pulled out as some "trump card" to shut us geezers up, I really do feel that the positive feeling I get for that logo is pretty much based on nostalgia. That represents a time when there were so many great NHL uniforms and so few awful ones. It also represents a time for me when the NHL was my #1 and I had the North Stars. But really, while I would love to see Quebec City get a team and would be OK with a "Cleveland Winnipeg Deal" I don't think the logo should be brought back. It belongs in the places we go to be nostalgic. The original Nords have been gone for 20 years (and that logo was to be gone either way). The new Nords would be best served by a new logo.

Im on the believe that all teams should be given the type of deal Cleveland got, but not the purpose

While I like the Nordiques logo, and think it should be a third, they should just resume with the logos and jerseys they would have used if not for the move

Too '90s, IMO.

[Gothamite]

If the Nordiques had stayed, and had adopted that logo, they would have changed by now. Probably to an updated version of their original logo (hopefully fixing its numerous problems).

[Chromatic]

I'm genuinely surprised I'm the first person to say this. This logo is awful and in drastic need of an update. Not necessarily a completely new logo, but at least cleaned up a bit.

It looks like it was drawn by a 6th grader. I understand that "the best logos should be able to be doodled on a school notebook", but that doesn't mean the logo itself should look like it was directly ripped from one.

If it weren't for Jordan and those classic teams from the 90's I think this would be the first choice in the "need of an update" pile by most people on this board.

[SizzlinSabres]

It's considered to be one of the most iconic logos in sports, but it doesn't change the fact that it's poorly executed and horribly outdated.

Couldn't agree more, I can't stand it. Besides the cartoonishness, it drives me nuts that the "I" reaches further than the "S" and that it goes into the island (unless I'm missing something creative there?). And because the "N" is cut off by the circle, it creates the optical illusion that the left part of the N is wider and taller than the right.

With that said, I would love for them to keep with the theme of this logo and just update it to make it look more modern. It's classic but could use a serious makeover.

[SizzlinSabres]