Jump to content

Unpopular Opinions


Recommended Posts

On 4/12/2018 at 10:18 AM, rjrrzube said:

 

You know, that's not really that bad. Although I would say have a LITTLE orange, just to tie it to their history. But brown and white ain't awful.

 

I’m a Browns fan, and I love their classic look, but I’m okay with them adopting a new look as long as it’s well done. I’ve gotta say, I’ve long been intrigued by this idea (among others). Throw some orange stripes on either side of the brown stripe (and add matching pant stripes), and I think you’ve got a nice, clean look that has historical roots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

Of all of the potential new names for the Cleveland Indians that get thrown around on social media and on these boards, "Naps"/"Napoleons" is my least favorite.

 

While "Spiders" has the stigma of "worst team ever" (counterbalanced by "Cy Young played for them, and the 'worst team ever' was because their owners owned another NL team) and "Blues" sounds too much like Blue Jays, "Naps" is just a bad name all around. Allow me to explain:

 

1. The name was an homage to Nap Lajoie, one of the best deadball-era players and a player-manager. However, he has descended into relative obscurity compared to similarly-abled deadball players (e.g., Ty Cobb) and Cleveland baseball players (correct me if I'm wrong, but there are no dedications to him at Progressive Field or in the city at large). I guess the name could be an educational opportunity for some fans, but his overall significance to the franchise has lessened over time. Names like the "Cleveland Fellers" or the "Cleveland Dobys" would be more appropriate.

 

2. They could always shift the name to a certain French general/monarch. However, that produces problems. There is a standard anglophonic antipathy towards Napoleon Bonaparte, hence the historically-inaccurate idea of the "Napoleon Complex" for short guys and unsympathetic depiction in historical media. Just look at Goya's "The Third of May, 1808" and see why it's a bad idea to name a team after the guy.

 

3. "Naps" sounds too much like a certain WWII-era slur for the Japanese. When getting away from a "racial" name, don't switch to something that's one vowel away from a racial slur.

 

Names like "Spiders," "Blues (guitar-themed, to not infringe on the St. Louis NHL team)," "Guardians (for those cool statues right by Progressive Field)," and even "Fellers/Dobys" are all better choices than "Naps"/"Napoleons." I'd rather they keep the "Indians" name over bringing back "Naps" or some "Cleveland Baseball Club" moniker.

Your #3 is a bit of a reach.. Also, it's a consonant away from the racial "slur" (although more of an abbreviation than a slur.. Kinda like how "Naps" is short for a longer word).. I don't think anyone would ever mistake them for being anything other than the Naps..

Although, I agree it's a terrible name for several other reasons

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WavePunter said:

Your #3 is a bit of a reach.. Also, it's a consonant away from the racial "slur" (although more of an abbreviation than a slur.. Kinda like how "Naps" is short for a longer word).. I don't think anyone would ever mistake them for being anything other than the Naps..

 

Well, it's both a consonant away from one racial slur for Japanese in WWII, and a vowel away from another racial slur for Japanese in WWII. Also damn close to "Nappy," a derogatory description of black people's hair, so there's that too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, kroywen said:

 

Well, it's both a consonant away from one racial slur for Japanese in WWII, and a vowel away from another racial slur for Japanese in WWII. Also damn close to "Nappy," a derogatory description of black people's hair, so there's that too.

It's closer to either of the slurs than "Nappy", imo.. Another reach.. But, as I've stated, I think it's a ridiculous name anyway, so if you feel like that lends justification to opposing the name, more power to ya.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ajunk1_zpsdu2wzrga.png

 

Number fonts rarely bother me. It has to get really goofy, like the Bucs' new font. A lot of people have been complaining about the Dolphins' font, but only the 7 looks a little off to me. I probably wouldn't even notice that if I weren't studying the numbers specifically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/12/2018 at 7:12 AM, daveindc said:

 

The Padres' uniforms have grown on me. My first reaction to them was "boring blue and white", but they're actually pretty clean and distinct. Pinstripes might have been nice, but I like the way the white pops on these too.

Maybe this is an unpopular opinion but I think that a yellow outline and the 2016 hat would've got (most) people to shut up about brown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ray Lankford said:

Maybe this is an unpopular opinion but I think that a yellow outline and the 2016 hat would've got (most) people to shut up about brown.

Doubt it. They would still blend in with the million other teams that use navy as their main color.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lights Out said:

Doubt it. They would still blend in with the million other teams that use navy as their main color.

 

Agreed. In a vacuum I really like the Padres identity. The problem is you have LA, KC and Detroit already using blue and white (albeit lighter in the first two cases) and a whole slew of teams with blue and white in their color scheme (usually with the addition of red but sometimes another color).

 

Wouldn't the Padres’ identity look just as clean with dark brown instead of dark blue? And in that case it would at least be unique.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ray Lankford said:

Maybe this is an unpopular opinion but I think that a yellow outline and the 2016 hat would've got (most) people to shut up about brown.

 

Oh I definitely agree. It was a great look that no other team had (other than the ate-up Brewers.) I noticed even the most vocal advocates for brown were quieter than normal that year. Even though they'll probably still rather have brown, you couldn't be upset with that look. It's really baffling how they wore it, and then ditched it after a year when nobody was complaining. Even if that was the initial plan, why not just keep it?

 

Image result for san diego padres 2017

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ray Lankford said:

Maybe this is an unpopular opinion but I think that a yellow outline and the 2016 hat would've got (most) people to shut up about brown.

I dug the look. Hell, I even got the hat. I know it was only for the ASG but they really should’ve stuck with it a little longer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that full incorporation of yellow (i.e., into the homes and roads) would have helped quiet the noise around brown.  At least they'd have done something  to set themselves apart.  

 

That temporary uniform was nice.  And assuming the Brewers don't go back to their old scheme, this would give them an identity beyond "blending in."

 

I'm not really a fan of the S and D on the hat being two different colors (did not like that in the orange and blue era) but that jersey was sharp and there would have been a great opportunity for a nice-looking blue alternate.  

 

I want brown and orange.  I'd settle for brown and yellow.  But I could deal with this.  It's a nice look and there is room for this color scheeme, which is sadly missing from MLB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More than brown, people should rally around the Padres bringing back the yellow permanently. Only two teams in the league use it and even then only the A's really highlight it. And whenever you watch a Padres game, because everyone wears their regular clothes, nothing sticks out (not even brown) except yellow. And it's the same on the road. The only time you can really make a Padres fan out is when they're wearing yellow.

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.