Jump to content

NHL 2017-18


Bmac

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, andrewharrington said:

 

It’s just not that great a uniform for some people. If they had matched the socks and sleeves (and maybe even the collar), designed a proper pair of matching breezers, and simplified the logos and typography a ton, it would be decent. As it was, though? A typical 1990s look teetering the line between fun and disaster without ever approaching the realm of good.

 

/end rant

 

^_^

 

Well, I agree with you about the breezers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gotta ask, am I the only one who thinks that the Rangers new Winter Classic jersey isn't very good? I personally don't care for it. I think their third jersey from last season is much nicer. Speaking of the Rangers, I have been reading on here lately about the Liberty jerseys they wore as alternates in the past and if they did bring out a new jersey with the Liberty logo, I would be okay with that. I know some of you feel differently about this than I do but their third jersey from last season in my opinion was really nice. I really liked the look of that uniform and I like it more than I like the Liberty jerseys. Hopefully that rumour of two alternate jerseys will come true. That way we can all be happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I finally got to see one of the NHL Fanatics replica jerseys in the cloth (if you get my drift) for the first time at a sports store in my mall.

 

My consensus: Yeah, it seems really flimsy. The fabric is somewhat cheaper than the old Reebok replicas, and the crests are also pretty thin. If I were to ever get a NHL Adidas jersey, I'd have to go for the real thing instead.

UBwef0L.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:

I gotta ask, am I the only one who thinks that the Rangers new Winter Classic jersey isn't very good? I personally don't care for it. I think their third jersey from last season is much nicer. Speaking of the Rangers, I have been reading on here lately about the Liberty jerseys they wore as alternates in the past and if they did bring out a new jersey with the Liberty logo, I would be okay with that. I know some of you feel differently about this than I do but their third jersey from last season in my opinion was really nice. I really liked the look of that uniform and I like it more than I like the Liberty jerseys. Hopefully that rumour of two alternate jerseys will come true. That way we can all be happy.

I'm not a fan. I don' think the yoke stripes work the same way with a phantom yoke as they do on the white jerseys. I also don't like what they did with that NY shield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/2/2017 at 5:26 PM, Gothamite said:

C’mon.  You can do better than complain about a diverse community.  Several of the people in it, you may have noticed, agree with you.  

 

A diverse community where you get jumped on and told you're "wrong" when you defend anything from the 90's.  Ever since Reebok destroyed the league's aesthetics in 2007 and then over-corrected by bringing back anything deemed "retro," no matter how visually and functionally inept (Flyers overlapping sleeve numbers and nameplates anyone?), the level of group-think on here has bordered on comical.  Uniform in question lasted 7 years after that decade?  Doesn't matter, it's totally Xtreme! :rolleyes: .

I find it particularly hilarious that the same people who call the Liberty logo dated because of some pointy text and metallic outlines are the same people praising the new Sabres Winter Classic uniform and its logo that looked dated in the 1980's.  You can spell out "Buffalo Sabres" without a "Buffalo" that looks like a nondescript blob and swords that look like third rate clip-art.  Ask John Slabyk...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 12/1/2017 at 9:27 AM, NYYNYR said:

 

Can you explain?

  The Rangers blue should be lighter like in their uniforms form the 1920's.

 

I've always thought that this is a much nicer look than the current royal blue.

 

No dropshadow nonsense. A simple, crisp uniform with a lighter blue that makes the red pop just a bit more in my opinion.

 

In fact, I believe that this is the best the Rangers have ever looked! Obviously the pants would have to be updated and last names would have to be added to the back of the sweater, but these have held up surprisingly well. Just make a white one with that classic mid-century shoulder yoke, and you've made all the changes you need to make to the Rangers.

 

As for the collars, I really don't know what to tell you guys. Considering the current template, I imagine it wouldn't be pretty.

 

Rangers03.png

 

Here are the other original 6 teams' best looks from throughout out the years, in my boring opinion:


Bruins35.png

 

Blackhawks42.png

 

RedWings21.png

 

MapleLeafs19.png

 

Canadiens43.png

 

 

 

thecatch.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Morgo said:

I find it particularly hilarious that the same people who call the Liberty logo dated because of some pointy text and metallic outlines are the same people praising the new Sabres Winter Classic uniform and its logo that looked dated in the 1980's.

 

If you find quotes where the same person praises one logo for looking dated and criticizes another for looking dated, then post them.  

 

Otherwise, you’ve proven my point.  Different people have different opinions, and you’ll find all of them on these boards. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've done that. I've said that some teams with '90s designs look "stale" while others are "a product of their time." Mariners, Ravens, Titans? Dated. Charlotte wearing teal and purple? They're a product of their time!

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since we're talking Liberty jerseys, here's where I stand with those: On their own, it's not really a bad set. But as a more progressive design being sandwiched between the very traditional Rangers look, it doesn't quite fit. But I suppose being wildly different was kind of the whole point of alternates when they were first introduced.

 

I'm all for them bringing it back if they must, but not without a few tweaks. For one thing they'd need to ditch the grey striping, which I feel is the one element "dating" this set the most, especially on the white version. In turn the typography needs to be simplified. The shoulder patch is rubbish and there's no saving that, and it needs to be either replaced with the regular version or removed altogether. The crest is fine, but it doesn't need the 3D outline. Probably not the red one either.

mTBXgML.png

PotD: 24/08/2017

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/30/2017 at 9:48 PM, Gothamite said:

I wouldn’t necessarily be opposed to a Lady Liberty logo; I’ve never loved their shield.  But they’d probably be better off reworking it to get rid of the “NYR” in the cant-you-see-how-edgy-I-am pointy font.  Either the full name of the team or leave it off altogether. 

They could easily fit the word "RANGERS" there in a more condensed font.

xLmjWVv.png

POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SenatorJake said:

The Rangers blue should be lighter like in their uniforms form the 1920's.

 

I've always thought that this is a much nicer look than the current royal blue.

 

No dropshadow nonsense. A simple, crisp uniform with a lighter blue that makes the red pop just a bit more in my opinion.

 

In fact, I believe that this is the best the Rangers have ever looked! Obviously the pants would have to be updated and last names would have to be added to the back of the sweater, but these have held up surprisingly well. Just make a white one with that classic mid-century shoulder yoke, and you've made all the changes you need to make to the Rangers.

 

As for the collars, I really don't know what to tell you guys. Considering the current template, I imagine it wouldn't be pretty.

 

Rangers03.png

 

That shade of blue would be interesting, and a nice change of pace from all the navy.  But I think the white letters and numbers look better than red.

 

Looking at your graphic on my phone, it really stood out why I don't like red outlined with white against a blue background.  Viewed at small size, they become very messy.  Look at these three uniforms, the first three in Rangers history.

 

U780OsD.png

 

The first one reads clearly, even at a very small size.  The others get muddy and hard to read.  The white outlines help a bit with the numbers, but not the letters.

 

Some colors can look good against blue (like athletic gold), but the values of red and royal are just too close together.  Even this lighter royal.

 

I'd love to see what the Rangers' dropshadow letters and numbers would look like reversed, white with red shadows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Morgo said:

You can spell out "Buffalo Sabres" without a "Buffalo" that looks like a nondescript blob and swords that look like third rate clip-art.  Ask John Slabyk...

 

 

Ugh....John Slabyk and his bouncing cotton ball bison?  Ask him if you can find him, he's gone incognito since swindling people for 37k on a Kickstarter project.

 

https://skullminerdotcom.wordpress.com/2013/09/11/obama-logo-designer-john-slabyk-defrauds-kickstarter-backers-of-over-37000/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ebod39 said:

 

 

Ugh....John Slabyk and his bouncing cotton ball bison?  Ask him if you can find him, he's gone incognito since swindling people for 37k on a Kickstarter project.

 

https://skullminerdotcom.wordpress.com/2013/09/11/obama-logo-designer-john-slabyk-defrauds-kickstarter-backers-of-over-37000/

 

That's unfortunate about the kickstarter project but it doesn't change the fact that this is a huge improvement over the so called "classic" Sabres logo.  Just need to replace the dull gold with athletic gold and it'd be perfect.  Bouncing cotton ball?  Really?

 

1csJ2gH.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Morgo said:

 

That's unfortunate about the kickstarter project but it doesn't change the fact that this is a huge improvement over the so called "classic" Sabres logo.  Just need to replace the dull gold with athletic gold and it'd be perfect.  Bouncing cotton ball?  Really?

 

1csJ2gH.jpg

 

Cotton ball or not, the point stands and is valid. The fuzzy details on the bison are too small and indecisive. It looks like the bison was intended to be a large stand-alone mark and was scaled down to be plopped into the circle. That’s objectively not the best way to do it. The shadows also don’t do a very good job of what they’re supposed to; establish a light source and define the different parts of the bison. They look quite random and the end result isn’t really a better or more defined bison, but rather just a splotchier one.

 

As much as the classic logo is clearly of 60s/70s ilk, John’s was of quintessential 90s/00s aesthetic, which, on the whole, sacrificed clarity for dimension and depth. I think these days we’re beginning to see a better fusion of clarity, depth, and quality of illustration.

 

17 hours ago, SenatorJake said:

 

  The Rangers blue should be lighter like in their uniforms form the 1920's.

 

I've always thought that this is a much nicer look than the current royal blue.

 

No dropshadow nonsense. A simple, crisp uniform with a lighter blue that makes the red pop just a bit more in my opinion.

 

In fact, I believe that this is the best the Rangers have ever looked! Obviously the pants would have to be updated and last names would have to be added to the back of the sweater, but these have held up surprisingly well. Just make a white one with that classic mid-century shoulder yoke, and you've made all the changes you need to make to the Rangers.

 

As for the collars, I really don't know what to tell you guys. Considering the current template, I imagine it wouldn't be pretty.

 

Rangers03.png

 

Here are the other original 6 teams' best looks from throughout out the years, in my boring opinion:


Bruins35.png

 

Blackhawks42.png

 

RedWings21.png

 

MapleLeafs19.png

 

Canadiens43.png

 

 

 

 

11 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

That shade of blue would be interesting, and a nice change of pace from all the navy.  But I think the white letters and numbers look better than red.

 

Looking at your graphic on my phone, it really stood out why I don't like red outlined with white against a blue background.  Viewed at small size, they become very messy.  Look at these three uniforms, the first three in Rangers history.

 

U780OsD.png

 

The first one reads clearly, even at a very small size.  The others get muddy and hard to read.  The white outlines help a bit with the numbers, but not the letters.

 

Some colors can look good against blue (like athletic gold), but the values of red and royal are just too close together.  Even this lighter royal.

 

I'd love to see what the Rangers' dropshadow letters and numbers would look like reversed, white with red shadows.

 

For what it’s worth, I don’t think the Rangers ever wore a lighter blue. While doing research for Winter Classic, I came to the conclusion that this information has likely been inferred from a few sources without any physical evidence to back them up.

 

First, there’s this image:

7618be2274688dc541836a3bc1bfe5b6.jpg

 

Reason one to take it with a grain of salt: it’s not a photo. Reason two: even if you subscribe to the light blue theory, the commonly accepted position is that by the time they switched to red pants, they also switched to the classic royal blue. Reason three: there are other program covers from this era in which the aritist depicted the Rangers in royal blue (actually, this cover may very well predate the one above, judging by what looks to be tan pants as well as a 15¢ price tag):

6ac2db83808e7dcc0ef12583444d2c4f.jpg

 

Illustrations are one thing, but many early photos show the Rangers blue being very light in value:

1928Rangers.jpg

 

I think these photos were taken with a filter to increase the contrast between the red and royal blue. Sans filter, the two colors look nearly identical in a monochromatic image because their values are so close. We can also look at a team like the Americans (a team who only wore royal blue) to help us debunk the theory:

latest?cb=20101117025238

 

Here they are, and I chose this image precisely because it shows two of their early jerseys; one with red shoulders and one with blue shoulders. The dark color in this photo is actually red, but regardless of which value is red and which is blue, having both jerseys in the photo is the key that shows us how these types of filters can radically alter the value of a known color and fool unseasoned researchers (thankfully, there are quite a few physical specimens that allow us to use these Americans’ jerseys as a model for color comparison in this case).

 

Side note, I think the Rangers’ team photo above, in particular, is also the main source supporting the theory that the 1927-28 jersey featured red typography with no white trim. I think this is also an erroneous claim because I wasn’t able to find any other convincing images to support it. What I did find is that the white trim was finer in the first few years than it was in subsequent years, and I think the combination of exposure and filter make the fine white trim blend in with the jersey color in this image.

 

You can see below the players on the left clearly have white-trimmed lettering, but several players on the right (esp. in the back row) have the older jersey on. The letters are taller, the G has that low arm, and the trim is so fine that it tends to disappear into the jersey in some instances:

AP281118014.jpg?wm=api&ver=0

 

Conclusion: the Rangers have worn royal blue since their inception.

 

B)

I still don't have a website, but I have a dribbble now! http://dribbble.com/andyharry

[The postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the position, strategy or opinions of adidas and/or its brands.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think the Rangers ever wore a blue as light as is commonly used for “vintage” Rangers stuff, but I don’t think they ever used navy either. 

In all likelihood? It was probably always a shade of royal, getting slightly lighter or darker due to year to year inconsistencies that were quite common back then. 

 

The current Rangers home and road set is great, by the way. The italicized and drop shadowed font is modern enough (even though the font was only introduced in 1941, with the drop shadow following a season later) to not seem overly dull, while also not being depended on 1990s gimmickry like metallic outlines and needlessly pointed logo updates. 

 

Of course this leaves leaves the question of what to do with the Rangers as far as alternates go. 

Using the older, simpler font for the wordmark on a navy sweater is ahistorical, and a bit redundant given how much of the home and road look it echoes.  

The Liberty alternates are a nice change of pace- in many ways what @Morgo has been saying, alternates in the true sense of the word- but they haven’t aged well. 

The “NYR” monogram bugs me the more I think about it (it should either be “NY” or “RANGERS”) and darkening the primary colours while also adding silver is so 1990s it hurts. Also that updated primary logo as a shoulder patch. Woof. 

 

So if I may humbly propose a compromise. The Lady Liberty sweaters but tweak it to lose some of the overt 90s-ness. 

What to keep: The navy (@andrewharrington has mentioned the team wants their alternates to be navy), the general striping layout, and the Lady Liberty shield primary logo. 

 

What to ditch: Lose the silver entirely. Replace the “updated” logo on the shoulder with the classic Rangers shield. Lose the “NYR” momogram in the Liberty shield with either an “NY” or “RANGERS” mark. 

 

You’d have a sweater that echoes the best of the Lady Liberty look without the more dated elements of the design. 

 

21 hours ago, Morgo said:

I find it particularly hilarious that the same people who call the Liberty logo dated because of some pointy text and metallic outlines are the same people praising the new Sabres Winter Classic uniform and its logo that looked dated in the 1980's.

Well the Sabres didn’t use their classic logo on their latest WC sweater. This is from the news article from the mothership...

 

XdD7Dud.jpg

 

The Sabres made a series of tweaks to the old buffalo and crossed sabres. Each tweak being insignificant on its own but, when taken together, really clean up the sloppy and dated elements of the logo. I dare say the tweaked mark- minus the NY mark- would be a perfect update for the Sabres’ full-time look. 

 

21 hours ago, Morgo said:

Ask John Slabyk...

His Sabres work was, as andrew pointed out, a product of the late 1990s/early 2000s. I loved it at the time, but then again I was a teenager in the late 90s/early 2000s. Looking back? It would have fit in with the sports aesthetic zeitgeist at the time but it would have aged poorly.

What the Sabres did with the current WC sweater is ideal, I think. The classic logo has all the right elements in place. It just needed to be touched up a bit. They did that, and it looks much better. So I say drop the "NY" that's only there because the WC is in NYC and use it as the full-time mark.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drop the NYR from the Lady Liberty shield and replace it with "Rangers." Bump it up to the shoulders. The chest gets the diagonal "NEW YORK" of the early-mid '80's road jerseys. And I say keep the silver in the lettering and numbering, because 1) I like it, so nyah, and 2) having just hints of silver with your navy base and red pants turns you into Not Quite The Blue Jackets.

 

Please note that I write this as someone who fully embraces the old Lady Liberty sweater, chrome Rangers shield and all, because the '90s broke something in me and I have made my peace with it.

On 1/25/2013 at 1:53 PM, 'Atom said:

For all the bird de lis haters I think the bird de lis isnt supposed to be a pelican and a fleur de lis I think its just a fleur de lis with a pelicans head. Thats what it looks like to me. Also the flair around the tip of the beak is just flair that fleur de lis have sometimes source I am from NOLA.

PotD: 10/19/07, 08/25/08, 07/22/10, 08/13/10, 04/15/11, 05/19/11, 01/02/12, and 01/05/12.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, andrewharrington said:

 

Cotton ball or not, the point stands and is valid. The fuzzy details on the bison are too small and indecisive. It looks like the bison was intended to be a large stand-alone mark and was scaled down to be plopped into the circle. That’s objectively not the best way to do it.

 

As much as the classic logo is clearly of 60s/70s ilk, John’s was of quintessential 90s/00s aesthetic, which, on the whole, sacrificed clarity for dimension and depth. I think these days we’re beginning to see a better fusion of clarity, depth, and quality of illustration.

 

The details might look slightly fuzzy on the small application I posted but not enough to provide any confusion over what's being depicted.  Compared to the "lets outline everything in silver" treatment of the current primary, it looks positively sharp.  I think people are forgetting that the most important application of a hockey logo (or it should be anyways) is in the form of a large, embroidered crest on the front of a jersey.  The subtle grey details on Slabyk's logo would work beautifully on that medium, adding some much needed texture and definition.  Besides, nobody complains about the cool little details of the Blackhawks logo getting lost on smaller applications.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.