TruColor Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 What I meant was they're close enough that a casual fan would hardly notice. It would be like if the Pistons wore their Bad Boys-era uniform. It's similar to the uniform they were today, just not as slick.I think throwbacks are stupid, obvious cash-grabs and way-overdone in the NBA, but if a team insists on wearing them, the might as well go back to something really different. The Cavs in orange, the Lakers in blue, the Sixers with that goofy stars-n-stripes thing they wore.... Uniforms like that are different enough to justify the throwback night.OK, I get what you mean. If they had been completely different color schemes, logos, etc., then it WOULD make more of a difference.I still think most fans can tell the difference though:Although I'll admit that seeing them side-by-side probably just accentuates the differences... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leedsunited Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 Bad wordmark, though. Hate that "A".This could well be the only example of a gradient logo looking better (compare the original to the contemporary).We went through this a while back...I put this together to show the various logos next to each other:The original logo was sooo much better. I know the gradient was hard to reproduce, but there's really no comparison between that and the current one. The gradient gives the ball perspective, and adds to the "heated" aspect. Also note the clever use of white space with the ballseams. The newer one just avoids that entirely - and looks bush-league as a result. The insta-change from red to yellow thanks to the white rim? Lame. Just a complete and utter downgrade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruColor Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 The original logo was sooo much better. I know the gradient was hard to reproduce, but there's really no comparison between that and the current one. The gradient gives the ball perspective, and adds to the "heated" aspect. Also note the clever use of white space with the ballseams. The newer one just avoids that entirely - and looks bush-league as a result. The insta-change from red to yellow thanks to the white rim? Lame. Just a complete and utter downgrade.I agree 100%. I threw this together...it's not perfect by any means, but I wonder if they could do something like this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 Not bad - so much better than the one they use now. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powersurge Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 Wouldn't the net just catch on fire?Maybe that's what happened to the Nets' logo.Judging by their most recent level of play, I doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powersurge Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 The original logo was sooo much better. I know the gradient was hard to reproduce, but there's really no comparison between that and the current one. The gradient gives the ball perspective, and adds to the "heated" aspect. Also note the clever use of white space with the ballseams. The newer one just avoids that entirely - and looks bush-league as a result. The insta-change from red to yellow thanks to the white rim? Lame. Just a complete and utter downgrade.I agree 100%. I threw this together...it's not perfect by any means, but I wonder if they could do something like this:Not what I would call an upgrade by any means, I'd actually call this a downgrade from the gradient version.I'd rather see a solid red ball on fire with a yellow or orange outline than any incarnation of a color gradient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leedsunited Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 The original logo was sooo much better. I know the gradient was hard to reproduce, but there's really no comparison between that and the current one. The gradient gives the ball perspective, and adds to the "heated" aspect. Also note the clever use of white space with the ballseams. The newer one just avoids that entirely - and looks bush-league as a result. The insta-change from red to yellow thanks to the white rim? Lame. Just a complete and utter downgrade.I agree 100%. I threw this together...it's not perfect by any means, but I wonder if they could do something like this:There you go. Of course, the gradient logo looks better, but at least your concept retained the whitespace and used the other colors instead of just a giant red ball and as a result, it just looks better than what they did trot out as a replacement. It really makes you wonder who the hell came up with the current logo, and who the hell approved it... Just gross design incompetence at work... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterE Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 The original logo was sooo much better. I know the gradient was hard to reproduce, but there's really no comparison between that and the current one. The gradient gives the ball perspective, and adds to the "heated" aspect. Also note the clever use of white space with the ballseams. The newer one just avoids that entirely - and looks bush-league as a result. The insta-change from red to yellow thanks to the white rim? Lame. Just a complete and utter downgrade.I agree 100%. I threw this together...it's not perfect by any means, but I wonder if they could do something like this:Not what I would call an upgrade by any means, I'd actually call this a downgrade from the gradient version.I'd rather see a solid red ball on fire with a yellow or orange outline than any incarnation of a color gradient.I wouldn't call this a gradient by any means. There is no place in the logo where the colors blend together, just the "front" of the ball is orange while the seams of it provide a clear divide to where the rest of the ball is red, finishing up with the tail of the flame being yellow. I would call this a definite upgrade from the current logo. Get Ron Santo in the Hall of Fame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowBoutThemFins Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 I wonder if they just gave 'Zo the one he wore back in the day? Heck, he could've borrowed mine, as I have a Mourning jersey from then.One of these days, they should have Seikaly/Miner/Smith/Rice/Askins night or something.they actually had seikaly night last night and will honor a former player at every home game where they wear the throwbacks. glen rice saturday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powersurge Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 The original logo was sooo much better. I know the gradient was hard to reproduce, but there's really no comparison between that and the current one. The gradient gives the ball perspective, and adds to the "heated" aspect. Also note the clever use of white space with the ballseams. The newer one just avoids that entirely - and looks bush-league as a result. The insta-change from red to yellow thanks to the white rim? Lame. Just a complete and utter downgrade.I agree 100%. I threw this together...it's not perfect by any means, but I wonder if they could do something like this:Not what I would call an upgrade by any means, I'd actually call this a downgrade from the gradient version.I'd rather see a solid red ball on fire with a yellow or orange outline than any incarnation of a color gradient.I wouldn't call this a gradient by any means. There is no place in the logo where the colors blend together, just the "front" of the ball is orange while the seams of it provide a clear divide to where the rest of the ball is red, finishing up with the tail of the flame being yellow. I would call this a definite upgrade from the current logo.I never called this logo a gradient. I referred to the gradient version and called this an incarnation of that version...which it is since it is trying to include the same colors the gradient version did in a similar way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GFB Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 OK, I get what you mean. If they had been completely different color schemes, logos, etc., then it WOULD make more of a difference.I still think most fans can tell the difference though:Although I'll admit that seeing them side-by-side probably just accentuates the differences...Does it bug anyone else that their current uniforms are almost exact ripoffs of the Pistons? While they may have change to them before the Pistons ditched the flaming horsehead, they wore that same style uniform for 30 years prior to the Heat.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krona Posted December 15, 2007 Share Posted December 15, 2007 Did White Chocolate get one of Shaqs Unis by mistake. He looks like Tweedle Dee (or is it Tweedle Dum?). I like how those shorts had the stripes on one side and the logo on the other. Funny, I never realized how close the colors resembled the old Bucco Bruce set. Also, I'm really starting to hate that Heat logo. It seems to look cheaper as the years go on. Time for an update IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krona Posted December 15, 2007 Share Posted December 15, 2007 DP and i havent a clue why Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.