Jump to content

Unpopular Opinions


Recommended Posts

I hate bell-shaped front panel baseball caps.. The Padres, and anyone else who wants a colored front panel need to go full panel, not the ridiculous bell curve nonsense.

I'm guessing the bell shape has to do with the bells in the Spanish missions, which is where the original padres did their work. It's pretty clever.

Clever, maybe.. Ugly, definitely.. I like colored panels, but crudely chopping up a normal panel for a poorly conceived semi-bell-ish shape, just to be "clever" is a swing and a miss in my book

I'll admit, it looks a lot better when it's not on someone's head.

I don't know. I prefer the bell shape. The full panel seems overly big for the Padres.

PICT0003-9.jpg

Is it me or does that logo look a bit small?

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Warriors' "The City" throwbacks are mediocre and very overrated.

I agree...for the post part. I like just about everything except for the boxcar numbers on the back, but that's such a glaring problem for me that it pulls it down pretty far. It's a crammed, awkward gimmick, and every time a player turns around I just cringe at how bad it looks. Just regular numbers and NOB would pull that set way up for me.

But hey...at least they look fantastic from the front!

CCSLC%20Signature_1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Warriors' "The City" throwbacks are mediocre and very overrated.

I agree...for the post part. I like just about everything except for the boxcar numbers on the back, but that's such a glaring problem for me that it pulls it down pretty far. It's a crammed, awkward gimmick, and every time a player turns around I just cringe at how bad it looks. Just regular numbers and NOB would pull that set way up for me.

But hey...at least they look fantastic from the front!

The boxcar numbers are (in my opinion) the coolest part of that jersey.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah that's right. I knew after I typed boxcar, I was probably off. My bad :)

I just didn't like how it contorted the number. It was at this weird inclined angle, and the number had to be smaller and smooshed to fit in the trolley (which the size alone looked awkward in and of itself).

I just think sometimes simple is better, especially when you already have a unique (and great) design that stands out on the front of the jersey. The trolley was just too much.

CCSLC%20Signature_1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The primary now is rather busy, but at least it incorporates the Ohio state flag and says "Ohio team from a city that starts with a C," which, granted, could be one of three, but at least it all comes together, however busily. There's no gestalt to the original primary. It's just a star, a hockey stick, and a ribbon that twists around in ways a ribbon isn't known to twist around so as to sorta write CBJ (or CJB in monogrammed-dress-shirt form), all with keylines and drop-shadows that don't suggest anything. What is all that, really, I guess is the question.

  • Like 1

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hence why it's an unpopular opinion ;)

But really, how can you criticize the above logo for just being a ribbon twisting around and star and hockey stick when the current primary is essentially the same thing, minus the stick? Just replace the star lined ribbon with the Ohio flag and it's basically the same concept. What I like about the old logo, besides the fact it's less busy, is that it incorporates the letters "CBJ" as well as the sport itself without resorting to the flag. I also like that it rejects the tired red, white and blue, patriotic motif, so many teams fall into, for something never seen before. That neon green works surprisingly well with red, white, navy and silver. It's just a shame the "bug" shoulder patch and the rather generic uniforms brought it down. Just my two cents.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Resorting to the flag is better than resorting to the sport.

I am pretty sure he was posting his personal opinions on the CBJ logo with the understanding that it's an unpopular opinion (this is the "unpopular opinions" thread.). You really don't need to argue with him about what you think looks better. He already is under the assumption that most people don't agree with him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am pretty sure he was posting his personal opinions on the CBJ logo with the understanding that it's an unpopular opinion (this is the "unpopular opinions" thread.). You really don't need to argue with him about what you think looks better. He already is under the assumption that most people don't agree with him.

Whoa, didn't realize this was a Safe Space. I don't think we hit 283 pages by just having people scream into the void unchallenged.

  • Like 1

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hence why it's an unpopular opinion ;)

Resorting to the flag is better than resorting to the sport.

I am pretty sure he was posting his personal opinions on the CBJ logo with the understanding that it's an unpopular opinion (this is the "unpopular opinions" thread.). You really don't need to argue with him about what you think looks better. He already is under the assumption that most people don't agree with him.

This is the "Unpopular Opinion" thread but it's also an open thread on a public forum. As such any opinion you (a general "you") fell the need to share is fair game. You don't get to post your opinions on a discussion board and then argue that no one should be allowed to critique, comment on, or challenge them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Resorting to the flag is better than resorting to the sport.

I think both are cardinal sins but when sporting equipment can also double as one of the teams initials, it can be overlooked. But then, the flag does the same thing so neither applications are really problematic in this case :P. It's really just a matter of personal taste and I prefer the inaugural logo. Mostly for the original colour scheme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It didn't, but I thought the lime green was pretty cool, too. I also thought the black and navy blue worked together really well on that original third, even though it seems like the most obvious broken rule.

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The team is named after Union soldiers from the Civil War though. Shouldn't a "boring" and "tired" patriotic scheme work for them?

I don't see lime green fitting that Union soldier vibe.

It works, I just personally find it about as exciting as watching paint dry... Inaugural scheme was patriotic too, it just happened to have a splash of a bright, rarely used colour to set it apart from the other patriotic teams. It's not like it was used excessively either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.