Teams that ignore their 90s identity

[Kevin W.]

Even with the silver, that Dodgers uniform looks good.

[Denver_The_Sinaloa]

On 6/28/2019 at 6:06 PM, BringBackTheVet said:

 

Something is goofy with your pics.  Here's other images (from NBA Jersey Database):

 

NOTE - they got the shoulders wrong on the V2 - they should be much wider.

 

 

i hate being THAT guy but weren’t those red jerseys only worn on Valentine’s day? i don’t recall them anywhere else

[Ark]

12 hours ago, Bowski said:

 

We fans don't speak of that blasphemous use of the color associated with beginning the collapse of the franchise.

 

This is the same bad argument Penguins fans use. Uniforms are about looks. Full stop.

 

Which reminds me,

 

 

 

 

And this logo in general

 

 

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

3 hours ago, Ark said:

Uniforms are about looks. Full stop.

 

Nope. Uniforms are also about associations. The White Sox' beach blanket uniform is worn as a throwback not because it is beautiful, but because it conjures memories of a beloved team.

[Around the Horn]

On 6/28/2019 at 11:39 AM, VandyDelphia Mike said:

Maybe not in this scrutinizing community, but it's worth noting that the black-heavy Sixers actually had 3 iterations of uniforms when the gold-heavy logo was the primary.

 

Version 1 - narrower shoulders, wordmark outlined in red.

 

Version 3 - Neck trim changed, shoulder trim removed, piping.

The version 3 unis are so bad I completely forgot they existed.

[BBTV]

4 hours ago, Denver_The_Sinaloa said:

i hate being THAT guy but weren’t those red jerseys only worn on Valentine’s day? i don’t recall them anywhere else

 

Nope. They were in the rotation, albeit minimally. 

[IceCap]

6 hours ago, Ark said:

 

This is the same bad argument Penguins fans use. Uniforms are about looks. Full stop.

 

Which reminds me,

*pictures snipped for space*

I fell like there's a lot to unpack in just this post....and I'm gonna do it

So first off...no. Uniforms aren't just about looks. Uniforms are often associated with team performance, for good or bad. The Angles got brought up a lot in this thread. Is it any shock to people that the 90s look is generally ignored? They sucked in it! Meanwhile the current look has a World Series Championship to its tenure, along with a stretch of competitive baseball.

 

Ok, secondly. What reason do the Penguins have to reference the robo-penguin uniforms? The Penguins have two general "eras" of success. The early 90s and the late 2000s/2010s. The team won multiple Stanley Cups in each. And what was the common element to their identity across all of that? The skating penguin logo. The robo-penguin era between those two periods of success was the nadir of Penguins hockey in the modern era. Outside of the novelty of the identity? There's little to nothing from those years worth remembering.

 

Third point, which ties in with the second point.

Not every uniform from the 50s, 60s, 70s, or 80s gets a throwback. Go to any database for the Big Four, and scour uniforms of decades past. You'll find plenty of designs that have never once gotten a throwback. Know why? Because not every uniform from the 50s, 60s, 70s, or 80s is worth throwing back to. Be it a design that didn't resonate with the fans or an identity that coincided with forgettable or bad teams, there are plenty of old identities from the beginning of time-1989 that just aren't brought back.

So given that...why do you expect every 90s identity to get a throwback? The entire premise of this thread you started is a loaded question. You're assuming the answer of "nobody throws back to the 90s" and then demanding to know why. And you've ignored posters such as myself who have pointed out that no, plenty of 90s identities have been, or will be, referenced by teams in the North American Big Four. Not every 90s uniform will get a throwback though, because not all of them really need one.

 

The problem is that the 90s were such an experimental time for design that the identities created in the decade have created a hyper-loyal "cult" following. And hey, if you like that more outlandish stuff? All the power to you.

The problem is that this hyper-loyal/hyper-defensive fandom of the 1990s aesthetic leads to demands that everything from the teal pistons to the robo-penguin get time in the sun. And that's just not how throwbacks as a concept work. Not every design from the decades that proceed the 90s gets thrown back to, so why should every design from the 90s itself get a throwback? Really? Not all of them should.

[mcj882000]

21 hours ago, Bowski said:

 

We fans don't speak of that blasphemous use of the color associated with beginning the collapse of the franchise.

Red was in their uniforms for a good chunk of the playoff streak - it started in '80 and red debuted in either '84 or '85 - but okay. I mean by that logic the 1998-2007 set, the one that inspired their current unis, is the real cursed uniform, because they switched to that right as they peaked & the wheels began to fall off... 

[Bowski]

2 hours ago, mcj882000 said:

Red was in their uniforms for a good chunk of the playoff streak - it started in '80 and red debuted in either '84 or '85 - but okay. I mean by that logic the 1998-2007 set, the one that inspired their current unis, is the real cursed uniform, because they switched to that right as they peaked & the wheels began to fall off... 

 

The uniforms shown were the ones from 1995 - 1998, which was the start of the collapse.

 

As for red being used on the uniforms in general, I know a theory I've heard from my Hawks fan friends; is that the color red cursed the Blues and Hawks until the Blues dropped it.

 

To be honest though, anything to spite the Hawks is good in my book, so maybe we should add red back to the uniforms.....

 

 

 

 

p.s. making the playoffs in the NHL is not indicative of the stability of the franchise, see 18/19 Pens, literally every Capitals season before 17/18, etc.

[DC in Da House w/o a Doubt]

I'd like to see the Caps throwback to the late 90's blue uniforms eventually.  Maybe the next time that they play an outdoor game or something.  Overall, they've definitely ignored all aspects of this era since moving to the current red look.

 

[ScubaSteve]

10 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

Nope. They were in the rotation, albeit minimally. 

 

They had to have been the least-used third jerseys I've ever seen (pre Nike). A rotation of that and the Iverson blue and whites would have been so nice to see

[Ark]

If a team plays well or poorly, it's 100% about the players and management, and 0% about their uniforms. If the Browns won the Super Bowl this season, everyone would rightly want them to go back to a traditional design next season. 

 

If a team wanted to go back to a previous set, they may prefer one over another because they won more in that set. But to ignore the other because of losing or a "curse" is just stupid. In that sense it really is all about looks. The Red Sox and Cubs broke the most famous curses in sports history wearing essentially the same uniforms for most of their franchise histories. Most people would prefer if the Eagles wore kelly green and the Buccaneers wore their creamsicle uniforms. 

[mcj882000]

5 hours ago, Bowski said:

 

The uniforms shown were the ones from 1995 - 1998, which was the start of the collapse.

Fair enough, but your original wording seemed to imply that you meant the entire red era, not just those 4 seasons.

[MDGP]

39 minutes ago, Ark said:

If a team plays well or poorly, it's 100% about the players and management, and 0% about their uniforms. If the Browns won the Super Bowl this season, everyone would rightly want them to go back to a traditional design next season. 

 

If a team wanted to go back to a previous set, they may prefer one over another because they won more in that set. But to ignore the other because of losing or a "curse" is just stupid. In that sense it really is all about looks. The Red Sox and Cubs broke the most famous curses in sports history wearing essentially the same uniforms for most of their franchise histories. Most people would prefer if the Eagles wore kelly green and the Buccaneers wore their creamsicle uniforms. 

 

Well, at least regarding the home uniforms for the Red Sox and Cubs. Both have had a bunch of different looks on the road over the years. The Sox in particular wore the vastly inferior red letter road uniforms in 2004, then switched back to the vastly superior classic blue letters for 2013, then back to the vastly inferior red letters for 2018. 

 

But I definitely agree with your point that championship nostalgia shouldn’t get in the way of going with your best look. Then again, teams shouldn’t change uniforms for the sake of change either, but naturally human emotion results in stupid decision making too often.

[MC Buffalo]

On 6/25/2019 at 8:24 PM, Ark said:

The inspiration for this topic is the Buffalo Sabres, who are NOT ignoring their 90s identity.

 

 

Many teams wear throwbacks of identities they started using in the 80s or before, but sadly it seems a lot more rare for teams to wear throwbacks of identities they started using in the 90s.

I don't think this is an actual anniversary logo released by the team itself. I belief this is just a mockup someone did. The team has released two 50th Anniversary logos, one for the jersey and one for advertising etc... and both were based off current color scheme/logo.

 

I personally hope they NEVER EVER bring back the red and black era of Buffalo Sabres, unless the team is gong to wear prison stripes.

 

To Buffalo Fans old enough to remember the Knox ownership era, the Red and Black represents an era of corruption and fear that the team was going to have to be sold to out of town interests and leave. When John Rigas purchased the Sabres he changed their colors to Red and Black to match his Adelphia Cable Communications empire where he made most of his money. It made no sense to the fans of Buffalo and it wasn't all that well received, but this era coincided with a brief uptick in performance led single handedly by the goal-tending of Dominik Hasek. When a team is having some success, secondary irritants, like team colors logo tend to take a back seat to the fun (as it should).

 

Lo and behold it turned out the Rigas family were using the Sabres organization as their personal "slush fund" to build Golf Courses, take Vacations etc.... Well John Rigas and I believe two of his sons were indicted, which set off a three year :censored: storm where I was convinced we were going to lose this team.

 

Thanks to Rochester Businessman Tom Golisano the team's future in Buffalo was secured for a few more years. His interest in the Sabres was purely in the hopes of securing votes in Western NY for a run at the Governors Mansion in New York State. Once he lost that election, you could tell he had no more interest in owning the Hockey Team and once again things got a little dicey around here until Terry Pegula stepped up and purchased the team and truly did cement that the Buffalo Sabres would be staying put for the long haul (then he extended his empire and influence in the region and purchased the Buffalo Bills when Ralph Wilson died a few years later).

 

My sons love the Red and Black Sabres era uniforms/logos, but simply because it's the first one's they can remember from when they were little.

 

I would prefer they wear the Buffaslug logo/uniforms than the red/black Goat Head, and I think that statement clearly shows how much I hate the red/black if I am embracing the slug.

 

 

[Echo]

1 hour ago, MC Buffalo said:

I don't think this is an actual anniversary logo released by the team itself. I belief this is just a mockup someone did. The team has released two 50th Anniversary logos, one for the jersey and one for advertising etc... and both were based off current color scheme/logo.

 

That logo was absolutely released by the team, along with 3 others, one for each era: the original royal blue and gold, red and black, navy blue and gold, with the slug logo and the current navy and gold.

 

 

https://twitter.com/BuffaloSabres/status/1143593451084288005

[MC Buffalo]

40 minutes ago, Echo said:

 

That logo was absolutely released by the team, along with 3 others, one for each era: the original royal blue and gold, red and black, navy blue and gold, with the slug logo and the current navy and gold.

 

 

https://twitter.com/BuffaloSabres/status/1143593451084288005

I stand corrected on it being "official" but stand hard behind the statement... "Anyone who embraces the return of the Black and Red era is either under 30 or not a true fan..."

[IceCap]

5 hours ago, Ark said:

If a team plays well or poorly, it's 100% about the players and management, and 0% about their uniforms. If the Browns won the Super Bowl this season, everyone would rightly want them to go back to a traditional design next season. 

 

If a team wanted to go back to a previous set, they may prefer one over another because they won more in that set. But to ignore the other because of losing or a "curse" is just stupid. In that sense it really is all about looks. The Red Sox and Cubs broke the most famous curses in sports history wearing essentially the same uniforms for most of their franchise histories. Most people would prefer if the Eagles wore kelly green and the Buccaneers wore their creamsicle uniforms. 

Except that's not how human beings function. The instincts to recognize patterns and link different senses together (such as visual cues and emotional highs or lows) is ingrained in us. So while a uniform has no impact on the game itself? You're being woefully and wilfully stubborn if you can't accept that people, by and large, associate uniforms with on-field success.

Sometimes this can be overcome. The New York Yankees and Montreal Canadiens, as examples, have worn pretty much the same uniform for long enough that they transcend that. Good or bad, those looks are those teams. That being said? Not every team has that longevity of identity, or even a desire to have it.

 

I mean hell. Look at the Buccaneers. Buco Bruce is controversial, but plenty of people here on this forum have said how the Bucs' first season in the new post-Bruce uniforms felt like a new team. Like the baggage of the Buco Bruce years had been jettisoned. The Bucs came out that season on fire too, and it was the first campaign in a rebuilding process that culminated with a Super Bowl Championship. Now obviously the uniforms didn't make the players any faster, more accurate, or more talented overall. Had they kept the Bruce look? History probably doesn't change all that much. That being said? The idea people have of the first crimson and pewter set being the start of a new era was born because they mentally linked those uniforms debuting with a better team.

So it's very hard to separate on-field success or failure from a particular look. The only times you can are when teams wear the same look for so long that it just becomes ingrained as "their" look.

[Ridleylash]

20 hours ago, MC Buffalo said:

I stand corrected on it being "official" but stand hard behind the statement... "Anyone who embraces the return of the Black and Red era is either under 30 or not a true fan..."

Ah, yes, the infamous No True Scotsman fallacy; "I don't like the Red and Black Goathead look, so anybody who does like it isn't a true fan!".

 

Get outta here with that crap. A team shouldn't ignore a prominent part of their history (and yes, the Goathead look is a prominent part of the team's history since they went to the Cup Finals with that look and it was around for 10 years) just because you personally don't like it when a lot of other people do like it. Don't be a gatekeeper where you only accept one vision of what is "the best" for a team. A fan is not determined by which jersey era they prefer.

[C-Squared]

21 hours ago, MC Buffalo said:

Anyone who embraces the return of the Black and Red era is either under 30 or not a true fan

 

>30 ✔

True Fan ✔

Likes the Black & Red ✔

 

I associate the red & black with the best team in franchise history ('98/99 > 06/07 > 74/75) and the best goalie ever.