the admiral 28,295 Posted July 9, 2020 Close but no cigar for the Blues, who have the right idea but botch a few details: Thin yellow outline touching thin white outline. Not good! Looks like a print error or something. Why not go yellow/navy/white on the outlines for maximum contrast, maybe at a slightly heavier weight? Also, this way, you don't need two similar-but-not-the-same versions of the primary logo, where, with dark at home, the Blues aren't wearing the, ah, primary primary on their own ice. And enough's been said about the abandonment of the signature yellow numbers on blue, it's a small-but-big downgrade on par with the Bruins' new black socks. I'd like striping and shoulder yokes closer to the throwbacks, and more royal with less navy (which should only be on accents and helmets/breezers), but that I can deal with. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ridleylash 3,813 Posted July 9, 2020 Honestly, I don't really think the navy even adds much to the overall design for the team. Having two shades of blue simultaneously, both of which kind of blend together visually at a distance, seems kind of redundant. Royal looks better and is less overused in the league than navy is, so I think ditching the navy is smart. I'll go ahead and be that guy and propose bringing back the red to replacy the navy. It's a tie to the state and city, it compliments the blue and yellow well and it means we can avoid the problem of white touching yellow by removing that outline altogether and just having two outlines; one yellow, one red, like so; 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
QCS 2,348 Posted July 9, 2020 1 minute ago, Ridleylash said: I'll go ahead and be that guy and propose using red over navy. It's a tie to the state, it compliments the blue and yellow well and it means we can avoid the problem of white touching yellow by making the second outline red and ditching the third outline altogether, like so; More importantly, it's a tie to the city, whose flag is blue, yellow, and red. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the admiral 28,295 Posted July 9, 2020 I used to prefer red as the Blues' third color but, after some persuasive arguments On This Here Board, came around to preferring navy. There is something childlike about all three primary colors together like that, and the diagonal-stripe uniforms used way too much red and ruined the whole idea. I don't think the two shades of blue blend together. In fact, it's a good palette to have in the mix when other teams are head-to-toe in one shade or the other (Islanders, Canucks, Maple Leafs, Lightning, Jets, Sabres). 7 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ridleylash 3,813 Posted July 9, 2020 21 minutes ago, the admiral said: There is something childlike about all three primary colors together like that, and the diagonal-stripe uniforms used way too much red and ruined the whole idea. Eh, I'd disagree, personally. I think there's concepts in those late 90's jerseys that are worth revisiting; the yellow music sheet-esque striping was a really fun idea that, applied to a more traditional striping arrangement, I think would be a perfect touch for the Blues, and the red provides a nice bit of extra punch that, handled a little differently, I think could be a nice secondary color to punch up the uniform. I'm not at all ashamed to admit that I have a leaning towards more non-traditional designs for certain teams, but it is only a preference at the end of the day. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ark 2,753 Posted July 9, 2020 The mid 90s uniforms were too much but these have the perfect amount of red 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SFGiants58 13,824 Posted July 9, 2020 The Blues are perfect as they are right now. Yes, that includes the white numbers on the home sweater. 4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Morgan33 4,052 Posted July 9, 2020 1 hour ago, Ark said: The mid 90s uniforms were too much but these have the perfect amount of red The Red seems pretty redundant here. Aside from the collar, you can barely make it out. 5 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ark 2,753 Posted July 9, 2020 15 minutes ago, Morgan33 said: The Red seems pretty redundant here. Aside from the collar, you can barely make it out. Isn't that how it should be? 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Morgan33 4,052 Posted July 9, 2020 8 minutes ago, Ark said: Isn't that how it should be? If the colour is redundant, why include it? I don't think either Royal or Navy is redundant on the current jerseys, they both serve a purpose. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ark 2,753 Posted July 9, 2020 But it's not redundant. Its purpose is to be trimming for the uniform and the logo. 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bmac 869 Posted July 9, 2020 Blue, yellow, and red is the worst color scheme ever. I'm serious. It makes sense for St Louis, but it looks awful. 4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chromatic 2,420 Posted July 9, 2020 The "perfect amount of red" is none at all. 5 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the admiral 28,295 Posted July 9, 2020 1 hour ago, Bmac said: Blue, yellow, and red is the worst color scheme ever. I'm serious. It makes sense for St Louis, but it looks awful. I thought the Panthers got away with it when they had navy blue and red with some yellow accents. The Hockey-Rockies, who seemed to use a lot of all three, didn't. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bayne 1,027 Posted July 9, 2020 8 hours ago, Ark said: But it's not redundant. Its purpose is to be trimming for the uniform and the logo. But it is redundant because you can barely make it out. It's almost the definition of why something is redundant: it's not needed. I think the red conflicts too much with the purity of the blue, white and yellow. It muddies everything up unnecessarily imo and doesn't improve the look. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WSU151 9,540 Posted July 9, 2020 1 hour ago, Bayne said: But it is redundant because you can barely make it out. It's almost the definition of why something is redundant: it's not needed. I think the red conflicts too much with the purity of the blue, white and yellow. It muddies everything up unnecessarily imo and doesn't improve the look. If you're looking at old photos with bad quality and bad lighting, sure it's hard to make out. But in person the red's a bit brighter. The thin stripes didn't help. I always liked the touch of red, but that's probably nostalgia talking. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
andrewharrington 4,695 Posted July 9, 2020 16 hours ago, the admiral said: Close but no cigar for the Blues, who have the right idea but botch a few details: Thin yellow outline touching thin white outline. Not good! Looks like a print error or something. Why not go yellow/navy/white on the outlines for maximum contrast, maybe at a slightly heavier weight? Also, this way, you don't need two similar-but-not-the-same versions of the primary logo, where, with dark at home, the Blues aren't wearing the, ah, primary primary on their own ice. And enough's been said about the abandonment of the signature yellow numbers on blue, it's a small-but-big downgrade on par with the Bruins' new black socks. I'd like striping and shoulder yokes closer to the throwbacks, and more royal with less navy (which should only be on accents and helmets/breezers), but that I can deal with. I wish they’d adapt the throwback logo for full time use. I think the shape of the wing looks much faster and more elegant. 7 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bayne 1,027 Posted July 10, 2020 15 hours ago, andrewharrington said: I wish they’d adapt the throwback logo for full time use. I think the shape of the wing looks much faster and more elegant. Really? I like the throwback logo, but I think the modern version they use is almost perfection. The weight and balance of it just feels much more solid and better executed to me. I do like the simpler, thicker yellow stroke around the throwback though. I'm not that bothered though. I still think the Blues have one of, if not the best looking logo designs in the NHL. 5 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mingjai 1,027 Posted July 10, 2020 23 hours ago, the admiral said: I thought the Panthers got away with it when they had navy blue and red with some yellow accents. The Hockey-Rockies, who seemed to use a lot of all three, didn't. The same applies to Spain (when they use navy blue) and Real Salt Lake. These examples indicate to me that the key to using all three colors besides using a darker shade of blue is to make yellow the tertiary color behind red and blue. In fact, I would argue that to make the combination look good, the usage of red and blue should be close to equal--e.g., Spain and RSL wearing red jerseys with navy blue shorts or the Panthers wearing a primarily red jersey with navy blue breezers. The instances where one color dominated--like Spain or Florida in monochrome navy or RSL in monochrome red--doesn't look as good. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spartacat_12 1,248 Posted July 10, 2020 On 7/9/2020 at 9:57 AM, Bmac said: Blue, yellow, and red is the worst color scheme ever. I'm serious. It makes sense for St Louis, but it looks awful. Jokerit in the KHL probably has the best execution of the colour scheme (minus all the ad patches of course): 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites