DGivens87 Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 Beautiful!The team auctioned off the game-worns the following game. $500...waaaay outta my price range!Is there any place I could get this kind of jersey template to create my own? A large cheese pizza, just for me.New England's source for soccer newsAnd hey, I made it to ESPN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JQK Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 What beautiful uniforms...Absolutly Beautiful... Stay Tuned Sports Podcast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian in Boston Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 Meh. Boring.They should have gone with the team's 1948-49 uniforms, which featured Providence Journal cartoonist Frank Lanning's famed "Raging Rooster" logo.In fact, P-Bruins' ownership should dump the team's current identity in favor of restoring the Rhode Island Reds moniker to the ice full-time. A quality updating of Mr. Lanning's logo - something akin to the modernization the Miami Dolphins' logo underwent - would make for an outstanding brand. Put it on the throwback template the P-Bruins used and you'd have a dynamite jersey.I'd also replace "Providence" with "Rhode Island" on the logo, as the latter place-name was always the one more often used by Ocean State locals... even long before the official switch in the 1970s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
totc Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 I'm just wondering if the Bruins are still wearing those gold, pink, and orange Dunkin Donuts warmup jerseys. Yeesh!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lumbergh Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 What beautiful uniforms...Absolutly Beautiful...I don't understand why retro uniforms like this are looked at as "awesome" just plainly because they are throwbacks. If a team came out with these uniforms today, it would be a shower of cries that would be for "ugly". These uniforms are plain, boring, and not in the slightest unique. But since they're throwbacks...I guess I should buy one...yeah...no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedy Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 yeah i do not like these uniforms at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Swamp Yankee Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 I really gotta disagree. Something about these look good. It doesn't matter when they're from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddball Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 The style of the uniform is good, the striping and use of the right amount of black and red. The "REDS" diagonally across the chest, well looks stupid and would if they came out with it today. Now, yes it does hearken back to the days when these were worn, and for that I like it. If they were a Rangers affiliate and used the same style as the Rangers do, they'd really look good. I do agree with the person who posted that rooster logo that the logo would go very well with these uniforms. Â Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCScout76 Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 Simple and nice - a great tribute to the REDS!!!  Kansas City Scouts (CHL) Orr Cup Champions 2010, 2019, 2021     St. Joseph Pony Express (ULL)  2023 Champions   Kansas City Cattle (CL) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldogbarks55 Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 Hey, Dumb and Dumberg or whatever your name is and Speedy. You guys have no taste whatsoever. You guys probably want hockey teams to wear sublimated jerseys with indistinguishable graphics that frankly look like clown uniforms. I remember the original Providence Reds. Their uniforms were real, classic hockey uniforms in the glory days when you could pronounce players' names with only a year of high school French and a passing grade in English. You guys' taste is where you sit. The P-Bruins should return to the "Reds" name, Springfield should still be the "Indians" and the new Cleveland team should be the "Barons." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedy Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 Hey, Dumb and Dumberg or whatever your name is and Speedy. You guys have no taste whatsoever. You guys probably want hockey teams to wear sublimated jerseys with indistinguishable graphics that frankly look like clown uniforms. I remember the original Providence Reds. Their uniforms were real, classic hockey uniforms in the glory days when you could pronounce players' names with only a year of high school French and a passing grade in English. You guys' taste is where you sit. The P-Bruins should return to the "Reds" name, Springfield should still be the "Indians" and the new Cleveland team should be the "Barons."Well bulldog, sorry I disagree with your absolutely fantastic and all important opinion. I guess that leaves me and Milton open to personal attacks, wait, no it doesn't. I am a huge traditionalist when it comes to hockey sweaters, but this one just doesn't do it for me, the diagonal lettering doesn't look good in that type-face, the stripes do not match, and the numbers don't look right in that posistion. Yeah, I guess I have no taste or fashion sensability whatsoever, sometimes I even wear white after Labor Day, can ya believe it? Your post makes me wish I was illiterate, but thanks for trying to seem like you are the god of taste and uniform design, it almost worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 What beautiful uniforms...Absolutly Beautiful...I don't understand why retro uniforms like this are looked at as "awesome" just plainly because they are throwbacks. If a team came out with these uniforms today, it would be a shower of cries that would be for "ugly". These uniforms are plain, boring, and not in the slightest unique. But since they're throwbacks...I guess I should buy one...yeah...no.Objection, your Honor. Assuming facts not in evidence.You're presuming that people like them only (or primarily) because because they are throwbacks. That may be the case for some, but is certainly not the case for all.I like these because they are simple. Bold, yet not flashy. Give me classic and timeless over "unique" any day. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldogbarks55 Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 Sorry for my comments, Speedy. But remember, I'm an old (60) fossil who has seen all the crazy uniform fads in all sports during the last 45 years. I just happen to like uniforms like this. It reminds me of the day when hockey was a simpler game and had more order to it. The best use of a UCLA-type sleeve insert was by the AHL Buffalo Bisons from 1961-69. My all-time favorite hockey uniforms are the Rochester Americans from 1959-70. But then I'm partial because the company I worked for made them. The trend of minor league teams mimicing their major league parent is so unimaginative. Creste your own identity like the old Reds, Amerks, Barons, Bears, Aces, Bisons and Indians did. Those were some truly classic uniforms. They didn't look like NHL cookie-cutters and you knew who they were. Again, my apologies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JQK Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 What beautiful uniforms...Absolutly Beautiful...I don't understand why retro uniforms like this are looked at as "awesome" just plainly because they are throwbacks. If a team came out with these uniforms today, it would be a shower of cries that would be for "ugly". These uniforms are plain, boring, and not in the slightest unique. But since they're throwbacks...I guess I should buy one...yeah...no.The style and the design are just beautiful and well put together. I have an appreciation for the older designs, and i am a fierce traditionalist. I just like classic looks. It's how i do. You don't like it, Cool. whatever. Don't disrespect me again, though. Stay Tuned Sports Podcast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian in Boston Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 Don't disrespect me again, though. He quoted you, then offered a conflicting opinion to your own. That's not disrespect... simply a difference of opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JQK Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 Don't disrespect me again, though. He quoted you, then offered a conflicting opinion to your own. That's not disrespect... simply a difference of opinion.Difference of opinion is fine. Disparaging my opinion while trying to make his own point? That's disrespectful. Stay Tuned Sports Podcast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCScout76 Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 like these because they are simple. Bold, yet not flashy. Give me classic and timeless over "unique" any day.Gentleman,Insulting those who do/do not like something is not what we are all about. Let's not make personal attacks about someone's OPINION - it's just that. Someone should and can express their opinion about something they like and dislike. But let's not get personal, if you need to do that, then take it outside to the alley, but let the rest of us who like reading different opinions, read them w/o the insults.I am not a judge on what is "good" or "bad" but I share my opinions and people disagree with them, and I can live with that. If someone doen't share your opinion on a subject, leave it at that. It's their view and by God this is America and we can speak about how we feel and we don't have to catch hell about it (all the time) - Keep the comments coming - just don't get personal. I don't agree with everything written, but I can tolerate them.By the way - I love the simple look. It's nice to have change once in awhile. These unis are crisp and simple looking. I would not wear them everyday, but I like them. Some of the 'off the wall' stuff is good and sometimes it 'blows monkey chunks' . Sincerely,KCScout76 - and if you don't like my opinions, life will go on anyway.  Kansas City Scouts (CHL) Orr Cup Champions 2010, 2019, 2021     St. Joseph Pony Express (ULL)  2023 Champions   Kansas City Cattle (CL) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letterform Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 It's a unique uniform template that doesn't have elements or stripes that are unnecessary, or can't be seen like much of the newer hockey stuff that's coming. I don't see the problem with the sweater part at all. It's simple and it looks like a Reds uniform should. It's instantly identifiable to that team.I do agree that the Lettering is a little weak however. I think they messed up the font a bit. The letters are a little thin. The rooster logo should definitely be on the sleeves or the front of the sweater too because they used to do that on a lot of their uniforms and it would deemphasize the Lettering a bit. DEATH TO REEBOK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldogbarks55 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 I saw the original Reds play many times in Rochester. In 1961-62 they wore white jerseys with white lettering trimmed in red. The step-down "REDS" and the white-on-red numbers were almost invisible from the stands. They wore the reverse at home. I'va also seen pictures of the throwback uniform that is the subject of this thread and they had the "Raging Rooster" logo on the left sleeve in place of the numbers. The right sleeve carried numbers. The style of lettering used on these throwbacks is very, very faithful to the originals. The numbers are very unique. I happen to like the style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis10 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 I saw the original Reds play many times in Rochester. In 1961-62 they wore white jerseys with white lettering trimmed in red. The step-down "REDS" and the white-on-red numbers were almost invisible from the stands. They wore the reverse at home. I'va also seen pictures of the throwback uniform that is the subject of this thread and they had the "Raging Rooster" logo on the left sleeve in place of the numbers. The right sleeve carried numbers. The style of lettering used on these throwbacks is very, very faithful to the originals. The numbers are very unique. I happen to like the style.From the pictures at the top, the number font looks an awful lot like the Red Sox numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.