Unpopular Opinions

[Mitch B]

44 minutes ago, Silver_Star said:

 

What team was this and what football association?

 

World Football League, Southern California Sun?

[Lights Out]

On 6/19/2016 at 7:25 AM, miltonANDlumbergh said:

This is better than their current set which I've grown tired of:

I still think the Graphite Jays era was the closest they ever came to a perfect look. The shade of blue they used back then looked stunning in person. They just never quite figured out how to use that color scheme effectively. If they unveiled something like this back in 2004, they might still be wearing them now:

 

 

[Logojunkie]

On 6/19/2016 at 0:22 PM, Gates55 said:

I like these except for the numbers.

I think these 2 concepts look better. (Not my work. Posted in 2014 on other threads here.

 

[jp1409]

37 minutes ago, Lights Out said:

I still think the Graphite Jays era was the closest they ever came to a perfect look. The shade of blue they used back then looked stunning in person. They just never quite figured out how to use that color scheme effectively. If they unveiled something like this back in 2004, they might still be wearing them now:

 

 

 

These all look bad as :censored:. I'd even say worse than what they used to wear (God knows how much I hated their black set). The mismatched blue jerseys and pants set is especially brutal.

[daniel75]

21 hours ago, Logojunkie said:

I think these 2 concepts look better. (Not my work. Posted in 2014 on other threads here.

 

 

They'd need a new helmet with orange in it, otherwise it looks like a different teams helmet.

[Silver_Star]

On 6/20/2016 at 8:31 PM, Mitch B said:

 

World Football League, Southern California Sun?

 

Their team colors from what it looks like are Medium Fuchsia, Orange, and White? Similar to the NBA Phoenix Suns 1968-1991 or 1992 look? Gives me an idea for a dream NFL expansion team where Jacksonville moves to Orlando!

[Silver_Star]

 

On 6/20/2016 at 8:49 PM, Lights Out said:

I still think the Graphite Jays era was the closest they ever came to a perfect look. The shade of blue they used back then looked stunning in person. They just never quite figured out how to use that color scheme effectively. If they unveiled something like this back in 2004, they might still be wearing them now:

 

 

On the royal blue second alt, the grey pants would do wonders for that. The Columbia blue pants with the royal blue top just looks odd! But if that is how the 4th should be like, the let's see how the Columbia blue will play out with the royal blue tops!

[MCM0313]

On ‎6‎/‎20‎/‎2016 at 9:49 PM, Lights Out said:

I still think the Graphite Jays era was the closest they ever came to a perfect look. The shade of blue they used back then looked stunning in person. They just never quite figured out how to use that color scheme effectively. If they unveiled something like this back in 2004, they might still be wearing them now:

 

 

Not bad except for the last one. I like the idea of bringing back baby blue roads for at least one MLB team. I don't remember their shade of blue looking that great though - probably because they hardly featured it at all.

 

I semi-liked their 2004 set when it first came out because of the grey hat with the home uniforms, although it still bothered me that a team called "Blue Jays" had so little blue (not a single hat or jersey). Naturally, the grey caps didn't last long. I have a certain fondness for white and grey caps in baseball - wish someone would resurrect them.

[FamousAtticus]

On 6/19/2016 at 7:25 AM, miltonANDlumbergh said:

This is the best the Sixers have looked ever, and this is the best black jersey in league history:

 

 

 

I respectfully disagree. These are the best black jerseys in NBA history (although not an Unpopular Opinion)...

 

[DTConcepts]

Somebody probably already posted it, but the Isles killed it with these:

[DustDevil61]

12 minutes ago, Zeus89725 said:

Somebody probably already posted it, but the Isles killed it with these:

 

I'll admit, those are nice in a vacuum, and the biggest problem with them is that they're the Islanders' BFBS uniform.

[chcarlson23]

16 minutes ago, DustDevil61 said:

 

I'll admit, those are nice in a vacuum, and the biggest problem with them is that they're the Islanders' BFBS uniform.

I don't mind the whole BFBS, because of Brooklyn, but the execution is awful... The super thin stripes,the weird collar, and NO blue or orange other than the hanger effect. 

[BeerGuyJordan]

I'm actually excited about the NHL in Vegas.

 

Would I have rather seen stabalization of the four teams not really making a profit first? Yes. Are there other cities I'd rather see expansion going to? Yes. Was it the best decision for the league and the game? *shrugs* 

 

The fact is that it's done. We can't change it, so I'd rather get excited about it than whine about how it turned out or how little sense it makes (which seems to be the popular choice).

[jp1409]

2 hours ago, BeerGuyJordan said:

I'm actually excited about the NHL in Vegas.

 

Would I have rather seen stabalization of the four teams not really making a profit first? Yes. Are there other cities I'd rather see expansion going to? Yes. Was it the best decision for the league and the game? *shrugs* 

 

The fact is that it's done. We can't change it, so I'd rather get excited about it than whine about how it turned out or how little sense it makes (which seems to be the popular choice).

 

I'm :censored:ing tired having to pay $200 for last row weekend games tickets up north to compensate the losses of the teams who stay stuck with their $20 lower level tickets... The NHL is doing well because they totally ruin people who actually care about the game to be able to give away four beers, four meals and four tickets packages for 60 bucks to southern folks who don't give a :censored:. I'm not excited at all that my team will have to raise prices once again to finance another lame duck franchise through revenue sharing.

[BeerGuyJordan]

On 6/22/2016 at 8:44 PM, jp1409 said:

 

I'm :censored:ing tired having to pay $200 for last row weekend games tickets up north to compensate the losses of the teams who stay stuck with their $20 lower level tickets... The NHL is doing well because they totally ruin people who actually care about the game to be able to give away four beers, four meals and four tickets packages for 60 bucks to southern folks who don't give a :censored:. I'm not excited at all that my team will have to raise prices once again to finance another lame duck franchise through revenue sharing.

 

Teams is the North would charge the same amount even if they weren't trying to float teams. It's about supply and demand. Traditional hockey markets charge more because they CAN. People are willing to pay them. 

 

Also, when I was in Nashville, I got into the lower bowl for under $100 a seat ONCE, as part of a Black Friday promo. The upper bowl section I usually sat in cost me $45 a seat.

 

Phoenix did seem cheaper, I got a $99 coors 2-pack in the lower bowl on NYE last season when I was in town for the holidays, but as far as I know, NO ONE is selling $20 100-level seats.

 

Yes, some markets are struggling, and I'm not arguing that traditional markets cost more for tickets (now that I'm in MN, Wild balcony seats cost me about what lower bowl did for the Preds). Even if none were struggling, Boston, Toronto, Minneapolis, Detroit, etc. would still be charging what they are. That is because their ticket prices are market driven, not to offset Phoenix, Miami and Raleigh.

[jp1409]

30 minutes ago, BeerGuyJordan said:

 

Teams is the North would charge the same amount even if they weren't trying to float teams. It's about supply and demand. Traditional hockey markets charge more because they CAN. People are willing to pay them. 

 

Also, when I was in Nashville, I got into the lower bowl for under $100 a seat ONCE, as part of a Black Friday promo. The upper bowl section I usually sat in cost me $45 a seat.

 

Phoenix did seem cheaper, I got a $99 coors 2-pack in the lower bowl on NYE last season when I was in town for the holidays, but as far as I know, NO ONE is selling $20 100-level seats.

 

Yes, some markets are struggling, and I'm not arguing that traditional markets cost more for tickets (now that I'm in MN, Wild balcony seats cost me about what lower bowl did for the Preds). Even if none were struggling, Boston, Toronto, Minneapolis, Detroit, etc. would still be charging what they are. That is because their ticket prices are market driven, not to offset Phoenix, Miami and Raleigh.

 

You said it yourself, supply and demand. They simply couldn't charge the same amount if expansion/relocated teams were actually awarded to cities who care because these cities are normally close to other profitable markets which would logically add to the supply. Split Quebec's market in half, put another team in Ontario, one in Milwaukee and there won't be any "rooftop" seats selling for that much on a regular basis at nearby arenas. I live five hours from Montreal and can't afford to bring my father in law (who is the most die hard Habs fan I know) to a game since it would cost me around $400 for two last row tickets on Saturdays not including gas and hotel yet I paid $45 for two sixth row Panthers tickets last October. If the Nordiques were around, let me tell you the Habs wouldn't be able to raise their tickets every season with their :censored:ty team, supply and demand as you said...

[BeerGuyJordan]

I know it will never happen, but the hockey fan side of me would love to see them pack up the Hurricanes, Devils, Panthers and Coyotes, and give us an expansion team. Resulting in new teams in Quebec, Southwest Toronto, Indianapolis, Milwaukee and Seattle.

[dont care]

7 hours ago, jp1409 said:

 

You said it yourself, supply and demand. They simply couldn't charge the same amount if expansion/relocated teams were actually awarded to cities who care because these cities are normally close to other profitable markets which would logically add to the supply. Split Quebec's market in half, put another team in Ontario, one in Milwaukee and there won't be any "rooftop" seats selling for that much on a regular basis at nearby arenas. I live five hours from Montreal and can't afford to bring my father in law (who is the most die hard Habs fan I know) to a game since it would cost me around $400 for two last row tickets on Saturdays not including gas and hotel yet I paid $45 for two sixth row Panthers tickets last October. If the Nordiques were around, let me tell you the Habs wouldn't be able to raise their tickets every season with their :censored:ty team, supply and demand as you said...

that isn't how it works, you'd still have the same prices regardless, having the Islanders in Brooklyn doesn't deter people from going the MSG to watch the Rangers. you are still going to have the same ticket prices regardless because that is what fans are willing to pay. you might not want to and that is your prerogative but someone is going to be buying the ticket and taking the seat if you aren't. 

[Krz]

I hate the Red Sox numbers, just saying.

[DCarp1231]

-I love everything about the BC Lions new uniform set

 

-The sleeve number on baseball jerseys (a la Philadelphia Phillies) should be used more often