nash61 Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 Double Post On September 20, 2012 at 0:50 AM, 'CS85 said: It's like watching the hellish undead creakily shuffling their way out of the flames of a liposuction clinic dumpster fire. On February 19, 2012 at 9:30 AM, 'pianoknight said: Story B: Red Wings go undefeated and score 100 goals in every game. They also beat a team comprised of Godzilla, the ghost of Abraham Lincoln, 2 Power Rangers and Betty White. Oh, and they played in the middle of Iraq on a military base. In the sand. With no ice. Santa gave them special sand-skates that allowed them to play in shorts and t-shirts in 115 degree weather. Jesus, Zeus and Buddha watched from the sidelines and ate cotton candy. POTD 5/24/12, POTD 2/26/17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUELANDbeliever Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 boring is not a synonym for unoriginal.this thread is filled with awful examples.This^unoriginal |ˌənəˈrijənl|adjectivelacking originality; derivative : an uninteresting and unoriginal essay.Unoriginal means everyone is doing it. The Panthers third jersey and new Lightning jerseys are a perfect example. The Browns helmet is not.For something to be unoriginal, there must be historical precedent.Ok, it has a leaf on there. It's a Canadian team. Unoriginal.So the RCAF roundel means nothing then?Please get over the team leaving Atlanta.i have. i'm being as serious as i can. It's the biggest cliche in the book to have a Canadian team have a leaf in the logo. So unoriginal. BigMac's posts make me want to punch babies.Hockey is weird and I love it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lights Out Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 Not this argument again.This is the RCAF roundel:This is the Jets' logo:The leaf makes sense for reasons beyond "we play in Canada". Period. You're just looking for another excuse to bitch and moan about the Jets, because you still can't handle the fact that nobody supported the Thrashers and they moved. Of course, you're going to go off on your usual "we were protesting the ownership" rant, but ask Charlotte Hornets fans how that worked out for them. POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUELANDbeliever Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 no. I did notice the RCAF roundel. Doesn't matter. It is a canadian team. It has a leaf in the logo. Unoriginal. Just like every team out there that is named the 'Americans'. Easiest theme to implement ever. BigMac's posts make me want to punch babies.Hockey is weird and I love it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altosax29b Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 I think a lot of people are confusing simple with unoriginal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 I think a lot of people are confusing simple with unoriginal.Bingo. https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidnightSun Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 i wouldn't say it's a ripoff, but the phillies road unis always reminded me of the yankees, both are pretty plain with the same striping on the sleeves, and all the fonts outlined in white.Are you kidding me?again, i wouldn't say it's a rip off, or it's unoriginal, i just said the phillies jersey reminds me of the yankees. wasn't aware the rules of this message board stated that certain jerseys aren't allowed to remind you of other jerseys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockey week Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 Unoriginal means it's derived from somewhere without much change. Iowa copying the Steelers, Delaware copying Michigan, THOSE are unoriginal!Saying every gray jersey that has simple piping and an arched name across the front is the same as the Yankees IS NOT unoriginal! I'll respect any opinion that you can defend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habsfan1 Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 Close:No, that jersey's at least somewhat original, what with it being the first like it in NHL history. The road was completely unoriginal.Yeah. The black home jersey gets a pass because the overly simple design looks good in dark colors. I always disliked the white one more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nash61 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 I present to you, the roundel, the most unoriginal logo in hockey. On September 20, 2012 at 0:50 AM, 'CS85 said: It's like watching the hellish undead creakily shuffling their way out of the flames of a liposuction clinic dumpster fire. On February 19, 2012 at 9:30 AM, 'pianoknight said: Story B: Red Wings go undefeated and score 100 goals in every game. They also beat a team comprised of Godzilla, the ghost of Abraham Lincoln, 2 Power Rangers and Betty White. Oh, and they played in the middle of Iraq on a military base. In the sand. With no ice. Santa gave them special sand-skates that allowed them to play in shorts and t-shirts in 115 degree weather. Jesus, Zeus and Buddha watched from the sidelines and ate cotton candy. POTD 5/24/12, POTD 2/26/17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stampman Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 and they have laces, but they were never around when laces were originally worn.So what?I like the laces, and that "rule" seems arbitrary.If I got to design an actual team's jersey I would consider laces.I might not use them, but I would consider on how they look with the jersey as a whole.Not on whether the teams was around when they were originally worn. Comic Sans walks into a bar, and the bartender says, "Sorry, we don't serve your type here." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBubba Posted July 25, 2011 Author Share Posted July 25, 2011 and they have laces, but they were never around when laces were originally worn.So what?I like the laces, and that "rule" seems arbitrary.If I got to design an actual team's jersey I would consider laces.I might not use them, but I would consider on how they look with the jersey as a whole.Not on whether the teams was around when they were originally worn.I didn't mean it as a "rule", as in it should be against the NHL Laws to put laces on a team that wasn't around when they were originally worn. I meant that it looks stupid when these modern teams (TB, Columbus, Florida) trying to be old-school and vintage, while they aren't. And besides, when you think of the Lightning, you don't thik of some old-school, classic look. You think of a sleek, black, modern look. Whoever designed these stripped away the teams' identity. Nobody cares about your humungous-big signature. PotD: 29/1/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnySeoul Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 The leaf in the Jets logo is historic and therefore acceptable. Calling it unoriginal is laughable. JohnnySeoul's WikipageIF ONE IS CONSIDERED RACIST, THEN BOTH MUST BE CONSIDERED RACIST.BOTTOM LINE: NEITHER ONE IS RACIST. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stampman Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 I don't think they look stupid, and the reason you gave against them was they weren't around when laces were originally used.So I asked, "So What?"But as for thinking they look stupid, that's different, and you're entitled to think that.I am also entitled to like them, and I do.Obviously other people do as well.I liked them before they came back.So I'm not jumping on a bandwagon.I wondered for years why they went away.So yeah, I like them.They may not fit every jersey--but they fit this one.Which isn't exciting or anything, but better than what they had. Comic Sans walks into a bar, and the bartender says, "Sorry, we don't serve your type here." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altosax29b Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 I present to you, the roundel, the most unoriginal logo in hockey.How does the Winnipeg logo fit in there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cujo Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Nominee for Most Unoriginal Primary Logo:Not so unoriginal now is it? Huh? Those are three of the most originaly helmets the NFL have ever had.Especially the Browns. Only team without a logo on the helmet. Sounds pretty original to me when looking at the rest of the NFL.Getting back to my original statement.... I'm talking logos, not helmets. The Browns official primary logo is their boring-ass plain orange helmet. Not an actualy logo, but a graphic of equipment which they wear. That's like Major League team using a cap as their main logo. Sounds pretty dumb, doesn't it? It honestly doesn't get any more unoriginal than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockey week Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 I present to you, the roundel, the most unoriginal logo in hockey.How does the Winnipeg logo fit in there?With the exception of the one Chicago Wolves logo (which is not a ring around the logo, rather it's in a circle, so it's not really even the same), it's the only one without words in the ring. Honestly, in that list, it kinda pops. Definitely breaks the mold more than most are saying...who knew? I'll respect any opinion that you can defend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vmd9 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Nominee for Most Unoriginal Primary Logo:Not so unoriginal now is it? Huh? Those are three of the most originaly helmets the NFL have ever had.Especially the Browns. Only team without a logo on the helmet. Sounds pretty original to me when looking at the rest of the NFL.The Browns official primary logo is a freaking helmet. Not an actualy logo, but a graphic of the helmet that they wear. That's like Major League team using a shot of their hat as their primary. Sounds pretty dumb, doesn't it? It honestly doesn't get any more unoriginal than that.You rip the Browns every chance you get, that's pretty dumb...isn't it?They've used that as their primary for over 40 years and unlike other sports it is a common practice to use a graphic of a helmet as a logo. MLB teams wear more than one hat so that argument doesn't work. But if you want to bring up the MLB, how do you feel about the redsox just using a pair of socks as a logo? they wear that don't they? The most recognizable aspect of a football team is their helmet, and the Browns have one of the most iconic helmets in football history. When people see an orange helmet with white and brown stripes they will automatically think of the Browns, like it or not that's just the way it is and they don't need a logo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gothedistance Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Did somebody say this yet?The Arizona Cardinals alternate black jersey. It's like a knockoff of the Atlanta Falcons black jersey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjrbaseball Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 delaware.If you can nominate Delaware, then I can nominateMichigan for the same reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.