logo lvr 224 Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 editC@C welcomed Think the Yankees suck? Than get your name on my signature by downloading this image and sending me a PM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goforbroke Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 teal huh -- is it 1993 already?haha just kidding. its a pretty cool i dea. i dont know if id go for quite as bright a blue- especially for the hat on the left. maybe like a royal and navy combination be a little easier on the eyes.also why dones one jersey say brookyn and the hat say LA?i guess he changed it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patsox Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 to the boards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
picklesque Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 god awful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audiodrama Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 Well...that's just...not very good. lolBut, it is your first post and first concept, so it's a start. No one's first concept is ever good, so don't worry.(What's up with the first "I" in Izturis?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMU Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 Although I hate the Dodgers, this would never fly. The only change they should make is to slap the names back on the unis... that's it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swilson160 Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 The Dodgers are the one team that doesn't need a new concept. Also, Izturis is #3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingssss Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 The Dodgers are the one team that doesn't need a new concept. Also, Izturis is #3. Agreed. And yea he is 3. 23 is Lowe.The only change they should make is to slap the names back on the unis... that's it.I don't mind the look of having no names on the back, but there are two problems with the Dodgers not having the names. 1) the number look too small to me, and 2) any year other than this one would've been better to take the names off the back. A lot of the players they have right now that aren't hurt are people that most non-Dodgers fans have probably never heard of. Yet, theyre still averaging 45,000 a night. but thats a diff story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMU Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 I don't mind the look of having no names on the back, but there are two problems with the Dodgers not having the names. 1) the number look too small to me, and 2) any year other than this one would've been better to take the names off the back. A lot of the players they have right now that aren't hurt are people that most non-Dodgers fans have probably never heard of. Yet, theyre still averaging 45,000 a night. but thats a diff story. Yeah, the numbers are not only too small, but they didn't raise them so it looks like there's an empty spot at the shoulders. And, I completely agree about not knowing anybody on the team. I do watch the periodic Dodger game (mainly to hear Vin Scully and because I was a Dodger fan back in the O'Malley-Lasorda days), and not only are there a bunch of minor leaguers, but they guys they brought in (Kent, Drew, Valentin) don't have names, so you have to look at their faces because a lot of people don't know what their numbers are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.