Neon_Matrix Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't he say in your article that the logo was green? He claims the color was blue and white, and the logo was green, as is shown on the hockey cards.It certainly supports the fact that the Edge version is off, but your argument about a green crest seems debunked by your own references.Part of his argument was that the rest of the jersey is green while according to his sources, it said the wool of the jersey was blue and red, not green and red. And yes there was no tie-up on it, but it's not like they can make a mock-turtleneck jersey. My problem with that article is that it lacks something all REAL historians look for - footnotes. It has no references to where the info came from, so we can't check the original sources where this guy got his info from. As a result I'll take it with a grain of salt but it is still an interesting read. Because Korbyn Is Colour Blind, My Signature Is Now Idiot Proof - Thanks Again Braden!!Go Leafs Go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westcoastoiler Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 can someone please tell me if THIS AWESOME OILERS CONCEPTis somewhat close to what the Oilers will actually wear this year? I assume this is a photoshop job...based on the logo circle and the stripes at the bottom, but I'm not 100% sure when it comes to this kind of thing. Anyway, I love the dark blue and orange....I'd be happy if the Oil went with something like this. I especially love the laces.So without asking for too much from those "in the know" can someone just tell me if, based on my love of this concept, I'll be a happy oiler fan in a week? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neon_Matrix Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 can someone please tell me if THIS AWESOME OILERS CONCEPTis somewhat close to what the Oilers will actually wear this year? I assume this is a photoshop job...based on the logo circle and the stripes at the bottom, but I'm not 100% sure when it comes to this kind of thing. Anyway, I love the dark blue and orange....I'd be happy if the Oil went with something like this. I especially love the laces.So without asking for too much from those "in the know" can someone just tell me if, based on my love of this concept, I'll be a happy oiler fan in a week?Hopefully not, as that is the Bruin's jersey. They are wearing the old 80's era jersey... with a tie-up. Thats that the word has been. Because Korbyn Is Colour Blind, My Signature Is Now Idiot Proof - Thanks Again Braden!!Go Leafs Go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VC// Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 I thought the oilers were wearing the 80's jersey for their 3rd?It amuses me how some of these teams are acting like its unveiling of a brand new design when some are just showing an old school jersey as a 3rd. LETS GO PENGUINS! 5x Stanley Cup Champions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oakland ehs Posted October 3, 2008 Author Share Posted October 3, 2008 Why is this question still being asked?The Oilers third will be EXACTLY like their jersey of the 80s. No lace up, which was in early reports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westcoastoiler Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 Why is this question still being asked?The Oilers third will be EXACTLY like their jersey of the 80s. No lace up, which was in early reports.Well because the logo on centre ice and on their shoulder patch shows what looks like a darker blue. Also, why would they have all the hoopla over what already exists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRutka Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 Why is this question still being asked?The Oilers third will be EXACTLY like their jersey of the 80s. No lace up, which was in early reports.I love how so many people post something as fact. (and it is not just you, oakland ehs)If you have some sort of "inside" information, post it. If you don't, then quit posting as fact. Until something is released, there are no guarantees as has been proven with Buffalo, St. Louis, and Carolina. If we believed the posts that people put on here as fact, all 3 of those team's jerseys would be very different. If you are basing it off of Berger's descriptions, that also has been proven false as he totally botched the descriptions of Buffalo (the exact same jersey as they wore in the 70's), St. Louis (striping pattern) and Carolina (stars along the bottom). See all of my concepts at: Designed by DRutka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sodboy13 Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 Shouldn't you be busy begging for 2K9 codes? On 1/25/2013 at 1:53 PM, 'Atom said: For all the bird de lis haters I think the bird de lis isnt supposed to be a pelican and a fleur de lis I think its just a fleur de lis with a pelicans head. Thats what it looks like to me. Also the flair around the tip of the beak is just flair that fleur de lis have sometimes source I am from NOLA. PotD: 10/19/07, 08/25/08, 07/22/10, 08/13/10, 04/15/11, 05/19/11, 01/02/12, and 01/05/12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRutka Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 Shouldn't you be busy begging for 2K9 codes?What's that supposed to mean? See all of my concepts at: Designed by DRutka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corvus Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 FYI, Canucks third will be unveiled November 15nth vs the Leafs per CEO Chris Zimmerman on TEAM1040 this week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letterform Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't he say in your article that the logo was green? He claims the color was blue and white, and the logo was green, as is shown on the hockey cards.It certainly supports the fact that the Edge version is off, but your argument about a green crest seems debunked by your own references.haha cmonI may have too much time on my hands, but certainly not enough to write a 100 page document in order to win an online arguement.I also never said that the Habs didn't or couldn't have had a green leaf crest. There could have been a second set.My beef is really with the green stripes and the laceups. I look at these uniforms and think to myself: that's not the 1910-11 uniform. I'm sorry. It just bugs me. DEATH TO REEBOK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letterform Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 They could have made these work without a laceup. Is this so bad without a laceup? I think it looks better. DEATH TO REEBOK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youcan'tseeme Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 They could have made these work without a laceup. Is this so bad without a laceup? I think it looks better.I actually like it with the laceup more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddball Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 As an innocent bystander, is it me or does anyone find that we have an argument going over what is right over a jersey produced, and yet the person who claims the Canadians jersey is wrong has brought no proof to the argument that the jersey color is wrong. I keep reading that there were few pictures and the few pictures that are out there are wrong. So where are the right ones? In an argument to prove someone is wrong, you have to have proof, not just your word. There has to be tangible evidence. Don't get me wrong, it's not like I don't believe that you're right, but you've brought nothing to the table to prove that you're correct. Give us an article, a correct picture. What evidence do you have that backs up your claim that you're right. If there's little document, how do we know that you are right? You bring this claim, but with no proof. You've talked about doing research, but where is this information for us to see? Again, I'm not saying you're wrong, I want to believe that you're right and there's a part of me that believes you and what you say about the pictures, etc. What I want to see is further proof to back up your argument. Right now you have a very flimsy case, and no one will believe just your word. I want to be able to say that you were right, but I only have your word to base it on and in any court that doesn't fly even if you are an expert, because you need to show that you're an expert. I want to see that you're an expert on early NHL/NHA uniforms. Â Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korbyn Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 They could have made these work without a laceup. Is this so bad without a laceup? I think it looks better.I think it looks better like that ...Anyone want to do a photoshop of what the 1945 jersey will look like in RBK Edge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letterform Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 As an innocent bystander, is it me or does anyone find that we have an argument going over what is right over a jersey produced, and yet the person who claims the Canadians jersey is wrong has brought no proof to the argument that the jersey color is wrong. I keep reading that there were few pictures and the few pictures that are out there are wrong. So where are the right ones? In an argument to prove someone is wrong, you have to have proof, not just your word. There has to be tangible evidence. Don't get me wrong, it's not like I don't believe that you're right, but you've brought nothing to the table to prove that you're correct. Give us an article, a correct picture. What evidence do you have that backs up your claim that you're right. If there's little document, how do we know that you are right? You bring this claim, but with no proof. You've talked about doing research, but where is this information for us to see? Again, I'm not saying you're wrong, I want to believe that you're right and there's a part of me that believes you and what you say about the pictures, etc. What I want to see is further proof to back up your argument. Right now you have a very flimsy case, and no one will believe just your word. I want to be able to say that you were right, but I only have your word to base it on and in any court that doesn't fly even if you are an expert, because you need to show that you're an expert. I want to see that you're an expert on early NHL/NHA uniforms.I claim that the stripes were blue, not green. I pasted a link to an independent newspaper researched work to back this up and referenced the hockey card which clearly shows a blue stripe on the collar. That's as far as I'm willing to go here. I really can't be bothered to order microfilm from the library, translate it, and buy the rights to photos just to prove a point on a forum. It's not like I'm writing a book or getting paid to do this. This is proof enough for this purpose. DEATH TO REEBOK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JQK Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 I claim that the stripes were blue, not green. I pasted a link to an independent newspaper researched work to back this up and referenced the hockey card which clearly shows a blue stripe on the collar.The same hockey cards which you blast for being wrong about having the green "C" leaf on them. So which is it? Are the cards right, or are they wrong? Stay Tuned Sports Podcast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neon_Matrix Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 I claim that the stripes were blue, not green. I pasted a link to an independent newspaper researched work to back this up and referenced the hockey card which clearly shows a blue stripe on the collar.The same hockey cards which you blast for being wrong about having the green "C" leaf on them. So which is it? Are the cards right, or are they wrong?His source also lacks any form of citation so it is hard to take as legitimate. Being a well trained student of history, I know better than to trust someone random website on the internet which lacks credits or links to materials used. You say you're an expert but you trust the opinion of a random site with no links. Just claims of stuff he read, much like the claims you are making... Because Korbyn Is Colour Blind, My Signature Is Now Idiot Proof - Thanks Again Braden!!Go Leafs Go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarred Revolver Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 Not logo related, but I just noticed that the Detroit Red Wings are using a different font for players names than last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew22 Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 Not logo related, but I just noticed that the Detroit Red Wings are using a different font for players names than last year.It's just for preseason. They don't arch the name until the season starts. Eagles/Heels/Dawgs/Falcons/Hawks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.