NJTank Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 I like that the bottom of the eagle is shaped like the Capitol Dome www.sportsecyclopedia.com For the best in sports history go to the Sports E-Cyclopedia at http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 I like that the bottom of the eagle is shaped like the Capitol DomeConceptually, I love that.But the execution... Paul Lukas is right. Looks like a pigeon with an oil can being shoved up his a$$. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cap10 Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Haven't watched the video of the unveiling yet, but I guess we can infer that there are 2 versions (opposites) of the secondary eagle, likely facing the front of the player, the same way military unis reverse the flag? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habsfan1 Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 I'm surprised there's only one white stripe on the arms of the red jersey and vice versa. Front only. Would of been better on front and back.Still hands down to RBK for granting the fans their requests! 3 for 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordie_delini Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 The secondary shoulder logo is a far better logo than the main crest, and the jerseys are disappointing to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tBBP Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 This could grow on me.The wordmark crest looks a little...wierd, to say the least, but I'm loving the W-eagle crest logo. The numbers, by looking at that 8, look like they might be somewhat similar to the Agency Bold font. *Disclaimer: I am not an authoritative expert on stuff...I just do a lot of reading and research and keep in close connect with a bunch of people who are authoritative experts on stuff. || dribbble || Behance || Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkrdevil Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Haven't watched the video of the unveiling yet, but I guess we can infer that there are 2 versions (opposites) of the secondary eagle, likely facing the front of the player, the same way military unis reverse the flag?YEs there are two the eagle faces forward. They said that at the unveiling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Despite not seeing these on ice yet, I have to officially declare myself a fan of this update. I'll give them a B / B+.A couple (or three) thoughts:1. The W-Eagle sleeve patch really doesn't go with the uniform at all. It is an alright logo in and of itself, but really is out of place here. It may be there just to provide some context for a future alternate jersey (blue with the WEagle crest.)2. The stars could be bigger, and there could have been a few on the sleeves or breezers.3. This is my biggest peeve. Actually, this is my biggest peeve with a lot of wordmark-crests (and some baseball scripts) these days:The wordmark is just a patch that is placed on the jersey. The old authentics used to have each letter individually placed on the jersey, so that the space in between letters was the same color / texture as the rest of the jersey. Not anymore. This drives me nuts with (among other MLB teams) the Phillies uniforms, and it really keeps me from giving these new Caps jerseys an A. I know it costs more, but it is so worth it.Here's an exaggerated picture of what I'm talking about:Obviously the outline was the result of a photoshop job or something else, but it shows what I'm talking about the wordmark just being a big patch. I hate it, hate it, hate it. I don't like it neither. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milo Meningocele Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 I love the idea to update the old logo, but I think they really missed the mark on the font they chose. For lack of a better word, it's too futuristic. Furthermore, the tilt of the "t-stick" bugs me (even though I realize it's supposed to look like it's handling the puck below), as do the sharp corners on the blade. Finally, that stylized puck looks atrocious to me--I'm surprised I haven't seen anyone else complain about it yet. I know it's just based on the old one, but that was extraneous to start with. This one's just an italicized dash.Overall upgrade, but just barely--and mostly due to returning to the old colors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VitaminD Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Meh. I'm not in love with it, but I like it enough to live with it.It's not better than the blue/bronze look (underrated and sacrificed on the altar of Black Overkill For Merchandising Dollars), and it's not any better than the look it's derived from (more stars, and as BBTV said, outlining the wordmark is a bad move instead of putting the elements on separately). But it is better than the mismatched crap they've been using, with the Capitol on one sweater and the eagle on the other, and the ridiculous black overkill that destroyed actual proof that a DC-area team did NOT have to use red/white/blue to look good (copper rulez). "Start spreading the news... They're leavin' today... Won't get to be a part of it... In old New York..."In order for the Mets' run of 12 losses in 17 games to mean something, the Phillies still had to win 13 of 17. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.