bipolarbear Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 it's time for the first "let's make a deal - sports logos edition".as you may know, the arizona cardinals are revealing a new logo tomorrow. as you may also know, lately nfl properties has been creating pure crap (bengals, seahawks, bills, etc.) so this has the potential to be baaaad. however, many think the cardinals current look is "cheap" and "boring".the question is this: if you could decide today to have the cardinals scrap their plans of a new logo without seeing it, would you do it? or would your curiosity get the best of you? risk versus reward, people!i'd vote to scrap it, though. they have a classic look and the nfl loves ruining classic looks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclopsis Joe Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 Keep it, look at it, let it settle and let the "newness" wear off so we realize it's crap..then scrap it. I don't speak for democrats, democrats don't speak for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boardname Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 New logo's already spilled.. check the other thread. Most people - me included - really like it.I'd also like to say, re: Bills/Seahawks/Bengals being crap, that i LOVE the Seahawks uniforms, except the all one color totally ruins it. That blue color rules, but it's just too much when its head to toe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian in Boston Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 The Seahawks' logo update is terrific! I'm not a fan of the monochromatic Seahawk Blue uniform combination, but I don't mind the unis when the Seahawk Blue jersey is worn with White pants. I would have liked the team to adopt a custom numeric font for the jerseys.Bottom line? Don't lump the Seahawks' overhaul in with that of the Bills or Bengals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.