NHL changes 2019-20

[mafiaman]

16 hours ago, the admiral said:

The home/road changeover of '03 might be a better marker: the Coyotes went from having like eight different colors to CCCP ripoffs...

I can’t picture any jersey Phoenix/Arizona has worn that made them resemble the 1972 Soviet team...

[Chromatic]

We’re definitely entering the era of 90s nostalgia, as we’ve already hit peak saturation of “Remember the 80s” as a culture. This goes beyond sports uniforms. Look at pop culture, with things like Guardians of the Galaxy and Stranger Things being wildly popular, or the recent resurgence of the 808 in pop music. 

 

Before too long we’ll have shifted again into 00s fetishization and start clamouring for the wacky uniforms from then too.

 

[M4One]

I don't remember if this was every posted here when the Canucks unveiled the heritage jersey, but here's a write up about it from the Province paper

 

https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/new-canucks-jerseys-embrace-past-present-but-mostly-future

[SFGiants58]

1 hour ago, Morgo said:

We'll ignore all that and call it a 90's jersey just to support Ice Cap's narrative...

 

48 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

Get over yourself.

 

Man, the old rivalry is back! It's a shame the match is going like the "Mark 'Gator' Rogowski vs. Street Skating" battle of 1988:

 

 

One is resorting to personal attacks and rejecting outside evidence, while the other is having to take the abuse.

[IceCap]

2 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

One is resorting to personal attacks and rejecting outside evidence, while the other is having to take the abuse.

It's ok. I once made the mistake of trying to have an intelligent debate about history on the YouTube comments section one time. This is nothing. 

[Eastport76]

On 8/30/2019 at 10:59 PM, Delicate Genius said:

 

Incredibility beautiful. Exactly, that's Kings should wear today. Well, I like their current uniforms, but they's no compared to Gretzky era jerseys.

[The_Admiral]

58 minutes ago, Eastport76 said:

Incredibility beautiful. Exactly, that's Kings should wear today. Well, I like their current uniforms, but they's no compared to Gretzky era jerseys.

 

Is English not your first language? What just happened here?

[Chromatic]

2 hours ago, M4One said:

I don't remember if this was every posted here when the Canucks unveiled the heritage jersey, but here's a write up about it from the Province paper

 

https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/new-canucks-jerseys-embrace-past-present-but-mostly-future

The Canucks art team needs to get their :censored: together. I don’t want to Canuckjack this thread but in the press release for the jerseys they describe the perforated number pattern as “rain” despite the designer saying its a reference to the waves on the city/provincial flag, and now the art director is saying they had a rule that green and blue can’t touch despite their most recent third for close to a decade having green and blue touch and it being the pitfall of the uniform.

[Morgan33]

2 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

Man, the old rivalry is back! It's a shame the match is going like the "Mark 'Gator' Rogowski vs. Street Skating" battle of 1988:

One is resorting to personal attacks and rejecting outside evidence, while the other is having to take the abuse.

 

Okay, snip one line of what I said and omit all evidence I posted as to why it's clearly not a 90's a design and why bringing it back for two games is not evidence of 90's being a trend in the same way as retro aesthetics were and currently are. 
 

5 hours ago, Morgo said:

Lets for argument's sake ignore the fact that all the Kings did in 1988 was apply a 50+ year old colour scheme to a toned down version of their previous jerseys and used a minor update of a logo from 1975 as a crest.  We'll ignore all that and call it a 90's jersey just to support Ice Cap's narrative...

The jersey is being worn two times.  It's not even entering the regular rotation as an alternate and this is being touted as proof of the 90's being the hot trend.  Talk to me when they follow in the footsteps of the Lightning and Hurricanes, at the height of the retro trend, and use it to replace the cup winning set.

It's telling that neither of you could address any of the facts I presented here but came down on me for one admittedly ill-advised line.  Does that constitute as winning a debate?

And does saying he has a narrative really constitute as a personal attack or abuse?  If it does I'd say people are getting too sensitive.  I'm not even offended by him comparing my post to a youtube debate.  Whatever.
 

 

 

[IceCap]

4 hours ago, Morgo said:

It's telling that neither of you could address any of the facts I presented here but came down on me for one admittedly ill-advised line.  Does that constitute as winning a debate?

Except I did. Here. 

 

https://boards.sportslogos.net/topic/118778-nhl-changes-2019-20/?do=findComment&comment=3029235

 

I don't have to repeat myself over and over again because you decided to respond with a reductive, disingenuous argument. At a certain point? I just get tired of arguing, man. I don't know if you think this is fun, or if you think I think this is fun, but let me assure it's not. 

 

Since you want to accuse me of "ducking" your arguments though? Fine. Here it goes. 

 

4 hours ago, Morgo said:

Lets for argument's sake ignore the fact that all the Kings did in 1988 was apply a 50+ year old colour scheme to a toned down version of their previous jerseys and used a minor update of a logo from 1975 as a crest.

50+ year old colour scheme- no. First off, the Raiders adopted black and silver in 1963. Meaning it was only twenty-five years old in 1988 when the Kings adopted it. You're not dumb, you're not going to make the mistake of assuming 2019 dates applied to the year 1988. So I have to assume this was a bad-faith move on your part to make the black and silver scheme seem older than it was at the time the Kings adopted it. 

 

Ok. Moving on. The idea that a twenty-five year old colour scheme being adopted by the LA Kings in 1988 means it's not a "90s design." 

Bull. The Raiders were ahead of their time when it came to branding, and probably inspired many teams in the 90s to darken their schemes on their own. 

Beyond that though? Harping on the Kings using the Raiders' colour scheme ignores the fact that the look was still very fresh in the NHL. 

And insisting it was a "traditional" scheme ignores the fact that the LA Kings' adoption of black and silver ushered in trends that would help define 90s hockey aesthetics, as I explained in the post of mine I linked above. You cannot get to the Sabres' goathead or the Capitals' slate blue and bronze eagle without the Kings' black and silver look redefining the game as far as NHL uniforms go. 

 

On the logo being a toned down logo from 1975...that doesn't matter! The Tampa Bay Lightning's logo was scribbled on a napkin by Phil Esposito. The Ottawa Senators' logo had to be put together pretty late in the process because the NHL told the Ottawa ownership group their Peace Tower wordmark logo wasn't going to cut it. 

The Kings didn't re-invent the wheel with their black and silver logo but it was certainly a trend setter. The North Stars, just three years later, introduced a metallic-heavy wordmark logo on a black sweater. Seems pretty '88 LA Kings-esque to me! Never mind what those logos then did to usher in the Lightning and Senators' original marks. 

So the fact that the Kings' '88 logo was based off of a previous design from 1975 means nothing in this debate and is another disingenuous red hearing on your part. Fact is that, whatever its origins, it ushered in many of the trends that would define the NHL's 90s aesthetic.

 

You seem to be operating under the idea that the 90s "look" sprung fully formed from the minds of designers, and it didn't. NOTHING works like that, man. And I don't "have a narrative" for pointing that out to you. That's just me explaining how trends build off each other. 

The King's '88 uniforms were among the first of a new breed of uniforms that would be defined as the 90s aesthetic. I think the evidence I've presented here and in the post I linked above lays that out pretty well. 

 

4 hours ago, Morgo said:

why bringing it back for two games is not evidence of 90's being a trend in the same way as retro aesthetics were and currently are. 

You REALLY need to stop attaching personal feelings and a personal sense of identity to uniforms you like. 

 

7 hours ago, Chromatic said:

We’re definitely entering the era of 90s nostalgia, as we’ve already hit peak saturation of “Remember the 80s” as a culture. This goes beyond sports uniforms. Look at pop culture, with things like Guardians of the Galaxy and Stranger Things being wildly popular, or the recent resurgence of the 808 in pop music. 

 

Before too long we’ll have shifted again into 00s fetishization and start clamouring for the wacky uniforms from then too.

 

See? Chromatic gets it. This is how the wheel's been turning since the dawn of time. Nostalgia constantly updates. Happy Days in the 70s was a result of the 50s generation feeling nostalgic, as an example. 

It's only been amplified as our society has become more commercialized. 70s and 80s uniforms were popular throwback options for a while and now we're coming up on the 90s. It's a natural part of pop culture cycle, and will pass into 00s nostalgia in due time. 

 

Your problem is what I've said earlier. You've let yourself get too attached personally. You've become such a cheerleader for what you define as "90s uniforms" that you can't see that you're part of the retro nostalgia cycle that you once lambasted fans of earlier eras of being a part of. 

 

Anyway I've repeated myself far too often to one person for my liking. I don't want to spend the second half of my four day weekend arguing about whether a uniform from the 90s meets your Platonic ideal of what a 90s identity should be. 

[SFGiants58]

I'm just here to poke fun at a guy who clearly takes himself too seriously and will defend his '90s love to the end.

 

 

Are you too sensitive for teasing?

[joekono]

Even though I like the King's yellow and purple jerseys the most, the 90's jerseys are waaaaay better than what the Kings have to look at when they look at the first Stanley Cup photo they took when they won their first two Cups. A third grader could have done a better logo (sorry to insult all of you third graders out there). The 2002-2003 jerseys were a nice uniform also if they used the King crown on the white and purple jerseys without a black third(but that was never gonna happen).

[infrared41]

3 hours ago, the admiral said:

4 hours ago, Eastport76 said:

Incredibility beautiful. Exactly, that's Kings should wear today. Well, I like their current uniforms, but they's no compared to Gretzky era jerseys.

 

Is English not your first language? What just happened here?

 

More like third, maybe fourth would be my guess. 

 

With regard to what just happened? I’m hoping “they’s no compared to Gretzky era jerseys” might end up in someone’s sig. 

[The_Admiral]

I like "incredibility beautiful" but not enough to supplant "permanently eliminated for the first time." Neither one is as good as "as a fan, I'm not a fan."

[bowld]

Just realized if you chop the sides off the retro Kings logo it leaves you with the home plate shape they use now... 

 

Also, read they will wear this against the Canucks. Maybe we get lucky and the Canucks wear their black skate uni same game. Would be incredible 

[BBTV]

Not going to go back and read all the arguing, but is someone trying to call the Gretzky jerseys a '90s design that's being brought back because of '90s nostalgia?

 

I apologize if none of the below points are actually what's being argued, but I'm assuming they're relevant based on some of the skimming of the silly fight.

 

• I would never call it a '90s design.  Setting aside it was unveiled before the '90s, it still doesn't meet any of the qualifications.
• It does clearly try to emulate the at-the-time-neighboring Raiders, but so what?  The whole point of the trade was to increase exposure to the NHL, so why not try to copy one of the most successful brands ever?
• It was a revision of a currently-existing logo, but IMO different enough to count as totally new.  The at-the-time logo was almost never used anywhere (not talking about the crown logo.

IMO that's a near-perfect hockey uniform, and while I get that purple is the color of royalty, that's still a perfect uniform for the Kings.  I really like the silver-number version more than the black-numbered one they came out with a couple of years later.

 

I wouldn't mind seeing a concept where the silver was replaced by vegas gold, just to add a little more flash and tie into the royalty theme a little more, but I get that it would probably not be an improvement, since that uniform is hard to improve on.  It's miles better than what they're wearing now, and light years better than what they wore immediately after.  That looks like the uniform of a serious-professional sports team.

 

 

[Ridleylash]

On 9/2/2019 at 10:24 AM, BringBackTheVet said:

Not going to go back and read all the arguing, but is someone trying to call the Gretzky jerseys a '90s design that's being brought back because of '90s nostalgia?

The team's calling it a 90's design. It was worn for the vast majority of the 90's. It debuted basically right at the end of the 80's and the beginning of the 90's and influenced many 90's designs.

 

It's arguably the archetypical 90's design in many aspects.

 

On 9/2/2019 at 10:24 AM, BringBackTheVet said:

I would never call it a '90s design.  Setting aside it was unveiled before the '90s, it still doesn't meet any of the qualifications.

It absolutely does, considering it set so many trends of what we consider the 90's NHL look in motion (metallics and jerseys primarily made of darker colors, like black, being the two massive ones). It was also worn for most of the decade.

 

What qualifications "make" a jersey design 90's? To me, it's dark colors and metallic fabric. 

 

The Lightning, Panthers, Mighty Ducks and Senators all used darker colors or metallic fabric. They were common on many expansion teams of the era, and other teams rebranded to bring darker colors to the fore of their identity; the Devils and Stars both changed into a darker scheme then what they had been wearing for years before then, and the Avs also wore primarily darker-colored jerseys when they relocated. Expansion teams late into the decade were still using that same design philosophy; Nashville was mainly dark blue and gray, Atlanta was mainly dark blue and maroon.

[Morgan33]

17 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

I don't have to repeat myself over and over again because you decided to respond with a reductive, disingenuous argument. At a certain point? I just get tired of arguing, man. I don't know if you think this is fun, or if you think I think this is fun, but let me assure it's not.

 

I've decided to take an extended break from the boards.  You're right, this isn't fun anymore and hasn't been for quite some time.  Perhaps some time away will change that but presently I have no interest in discussing the latest hanger effect, stealth look, number perforation pattern or the latest paint by numbers jersey that looks like it was thrown together in less than 5 minutes.  I got to see the Canucks do exactly what I wanted them to do with their new home and roads so I'll hold onto that.  Later.

[Bayne]

Lol so much drama. We are discussing hockey jerseys guys, seriously. That is so funny to me seeing people get so righteous and indignant about their opinion on this stuff to the point where someone announces they need to take an extended break, lmao.

[chcarlson23]

Yeah come on, you guys. 100% of these points don’t actually matter sooo...