Oklahoma City .....

[TruColor]

I should also point out that the closest that the Eagles came to wearing a "dark" Green prior to 1996 was during the 1974 through 1984 seasons. For some reason, they actually designated a slightly darker Green for their helmets vs. their uniforms:

[DallasSports]

Well, I was hoping for a use of brown. If it is dark blue, light blue, and red... well I won't be too upset. It WILL be a unique combination, after all. But I'd much prefer there be no dark blue. I always loved the Houston Oiler's look.

Just a side not, it makes me mad how there's only one pro franchise that uses brown... Are they REALLY afraid of 2nd graders making potty jokes?

[AAO]

If it is dark blue, light blue, and red... well I won't be too upset. It WILL be a unique combination, after all.

Chances are you're being sarcastic. If not I need the clarification.

There is a tragic overabundance of navy blue and light blue. Jeez, let's see:

The Jazz

The Nuggets

The Grizzlies

The Mavericks (Uniforms)

Adding a 5th team in the NBA with anything navy blue and light blue wouldn't be the answer. There's so many other unique color schemes out there. You just have to try a little.

It'd be something like the Atlanta Dream, or the Charlotte Checkers, or somewhat like the old Houston Rockets.

Or the Atlanta Hawks, just replace silver with light blue.

[gosioux76]

Or the Atlanta Hawks, just replace silver with light blue.

The Hawks are exactly what I think of when I heard the OKC team may use those colors.

Now, that's not to say they can't somehow still look unique. I mean, if the primary color was red, with the two blues as accents, that would at least distinguish them from the other teams with like colors. Not by much, but it would be something.

[Burning River]

Well, I was hoping for a use of brown. If it is dark blue, light blue, and red... well I won't be too upset. It WILL be a unique combination, after all. But I'd much prefer there be no dark blue. I always loved the Houston Oiler's look.

Just a side not, it makes me mad how there's only one pro franchise that uses brown... Are they REALLY afraid of 2nd graders making potty jokes?

SECOND Graders?? Have you read any Cleveland Browns / browns pants comments?

Anyways... This blue and light blue thing is WAY out of hand. I guess if the majority of the uniforms were red, light blue with navy accent it would be a bit different.

New logos were once SO exciting... now, they just ruin the anticipation with these copy-cat color schemes.

[Gothamite]

Just a side not, it makes me mad how there's only one pro franchise that uses brown... Are they REALLY afraid of 2nd graders making potty jokes?

SECOND Graders?? Have you read any Cleveland Browns / browns pants comments?

Well, some people don't stop being second graders even when they get older....

[Sodboy13]

New logos were once SO exciting... now, they just ruin the anticipation with these copy-cat color schemes.

On the plus side, this will be an actual new logo in the NBA, instead of just a color shift with enough tweaks to fall under the percentage mandated by the NBA.

[Gothamite]

New logos were once SO exciting... now, they just ruin the anticipation with these copy-cat color schemes.

On the plus side, this will be an actual new logo in the NBA, instead of just a color shift with enough tweaks to fall under the percentage mandated by the NBA.

I keep hearing about this, but don't think anybody's been able to cite any documentation for it. Can you help?

[BBTV]

New logos were once SO exciting... now, they just ruin the anticipation with these copy-cat color schemes.

On the plus side, this will be an actual new logo in the NBA, instead of just a color shift with enough tweaks to fall under the percentage mandated by the NBA.

I keep hearing about this, but don't think anybody's been able to cite any documentation for it. Can you help?

I think it's one of those things that someone mentioned (without any facts to back it up) on here a long time ago, a couple of people remembered about it, and brought it up every time some team did a recolor. Now it's just something people throw out there all the time so that they seem "in the know" with how the league works.

I'm not saying it's not true, because I don't know. I'm just saying that it has never been confirmed.

[Billy B]

New logos were once SO exciting... now, they just ruin the anticipation with these copy-cat color schemes.

On the plus side, this will be an actual new logo in the NBA, instead of just a color shift with enough tweaks to fall under the percentage mandated by the NBA.

I keep hearing about this, but don't think anybody's been able to cite any documentation for it. Can you help?

I remember when somebody first stated it (I think it was with the Hawks redesign), and it came in an article from the Hawks saying that they would have had a large fee if they had completely changed their logo. I will see if I can find that article to make sure that I'm not just taking what somebody guessed as a fact.

EDIT- And here it is, from the Hawks new uniform release last year. It states that the NBA charges $500,000 for a team to change their primary logo.

[The_Admiral]

New logos were once SO exciting... now, they just ruin the anticipation with these copy-cat color schemes.

On the plus side, this will be an actual new logo in the NBA, instead of just a color shift with enough tweaks to fall under the percentage mandated by the NBA.

I still think they'll just recolor the Sonics' logo in dark/light blue and write OKLAHOMA CITY on it with the paintbrush tool. That or Copperplate.

[njmeadowlanders]

I remember when somebody first stated it (I think it was with the Hawks redesign), and it came in an article from the Hawks saying that they would have had a large fee if they had completely changed their logo. I will see if I can find that article to make sure that I'm not just taking what somebody guessed as a fact.

EDIT- And here it is, from the Hawks new uniform release last year. It states that the NBA charges $500,000 for a team to change their primary logo.

OK, but are they technically changing their primary logo? They're not the Seattle Supersonics anymore. It's not the same team. Oklahoma City has never technically had a logo of their own to change from. Just playing Devil's advocate...

[Gothamite]

I remember when somebody first stated it (I think it was with the Hawks redesign), and it came in an article from the Hawks saying that they would have had a large fee if they had completely changed their logo. I will see if I can find that article to make sure that I'm not just taking what somebody guessed as a fact.

EDIT- And here it is, from the Hawks new uniform release last year. It states that the NBA charges $500,000 for a team to change their primary logo.

So at what point is an old logo changed enough for the charge to kick in?

[BallWonk]

So at what point is an old logo changed enough for the charge to kick in?

What the NBA should do is submit any logo change here. If it's as great as improvement as the Bucks' logo was, then no charge. But if the new logo is not an improvement, then we get to set a fee. If the new logo is not an improvement, but it's still a decent logo, then $250,000. If the new logo is not an improvement and it sucks, then $500,000. And if the new logo is both worse than the old and just plain bad on its own, then the fee is a cool mil, and a tiny SK must appear in place of the TM next to the logo.

[The_Admiral]

I remember when somebody first stated it (I think it was with the Hawks redesign), and it came in an article from the Hawks saying that they would have had a large fee if they had completely changed their logo. I will see if I can find that article to make sure that I'm not just taking what somebody guessed as a fact.

EDIT- And here it is, from the Hawks new uniform release last year. It states that the NBA charges $500,000 for a team to change their primary logo.

So at what point is an old logo changed enough for the charge to kick in?

Apparently, they just eyeball it and say "that's samey enough." The Jazz and Hawks aren't exact recolors, either. $500,000 seems like such a small sum considering player contracts and the amount of money that the wave of new merchandise would bring in. It's hard to believe that would really be a major sticking point. Fork over your "rid the world of dated 1990s design" penalty and do the job the right way.

[Linus]

If a team needed to pay $500 000.00 for new uniforms, the Magic would be bankrupt.

[McCall]

If a team needed to pay $500 000.00 for new uniforms, the Magic would be bankrupt.

That fee is just for an entirely new primary logo, not uniforms.

[BenQR]

If a team needed to pay $500 000.00 for new uniforms, the Magic would be bankrupt.

They're paying Rashard Lewis more than $100,000,000 over the next five years. I think they can spare an extra half-mil.

[AAO]

Wow, people are hoarding some of our concepts over on some board, whoever had their Stampede/buffalo thundering logo with the 3 buffalo heads, the dude is right here saying it's his, but then says he did not render the buffalo, but ran out of time so he 'ripped it off'. I believe it's Sterling's or John Slabyk's stampede logo:

Thunder

[Telemundo219]

Wow, people are hoarding some of our concepts over on some board, whoever had their Stampede/buffalo thundering logo with the 3 buffalo heads, the dude is right here saying it's his, but then says he did not render the buffalo, but ran out of time so he 'ripped it off'. I believe it's Sterling's or John Slabyk's stampede logo:

Thunder

Is there a way (on this board) to prevent outsiders from coming in and jackin stuff off the board to use and claim it as their own? It's a shame how some take credit for other's hard work.