WSU151 Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 Will the D with the ball and hoop remain at midcourt? Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CS85 Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 When do they get the matching top with ventilation mesh over the nipples? Quote "You are nothing more than a small cancer on this message board. You are not entertaining, you are a complete joke." twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwalk Posted August 14, 2011 Author Share Posted August 14, 2011 Will the D with the ball and hoop remain at midcourt?Nope. It's being replaced with this same D. They're also making the lettering on the baselines smaller (probably because so much of the old letters was covered by photographers.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_RH_ Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 I don't understand the new obsession with making basketball shorts lighter when the players wear them past their knees. It seems like cutting a few inches off the bottom would get rid of more weight than making holes in the material. If players are so concerned with their shorts weighing too much, why not just go back to shorter shorts?Exactly. I think it's hilarious how tight the top half of college basketball unis are, and how baggy the bottom half is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewG70 Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 I see London...I see France...I see the Dukies' underpants! The (unofficial) NHL Uniform DatabaseThe WHA Uniform Database Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Wolf Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 I don't understand the new obsession with making basketball shorts lighter when the players wear them past their knees. It seems like cutting a few inches off the bottom would get rid of more weight than making holes in the material. If players are so concerned with their shorts weighing too much, why not just go back to shorter shorts?Short shorts look ridiculous. This isn't 1970 or something, back when basketball players wore daisy dukes. Unless nerds like Steve Urkel decided to play basketball there's no reason to wear them short.It's something with people around here, they get all pissed off because athletes want to wear long shorts or pants. It's like that with every sport. I can't even begin to count the number of times I see "baseball players need to wear stirrups or high socks." Who cares?Obviously if somebody doesn't like shorts going to the ankles they must want the nut-huggers back. Not a happy medium or anything. It has to be the opposite extreme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewharrington Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 I don't understand the new obsession with making basketball shorts lighter when the players wear them past their knees. It seems like cutting a few inches off the bottom would get rid of more weight than making holes in the material. If players are so concerned with their shorts weighing too much, why not just go back to shorter shorts?Short shorts look ridiculous. This isn't 1970 or something, back when basketball players wore daisy dukes. Unless nerds like Steve Urkel decided to play basketball there's no reason to wear them short.It's something with people around here, they get all pissed off because athletes want to wear long shorts or pants. It's like that with every sport. I can't even begin to count the number of times I see "baseball players need to wear stirrups or high socks." Who cares?Obviously if somebody doesn't like shorts going to the ankles they must want the nut-huggers back. Not a happy medium or anything. It has to be the opposite extreme. Exactly. Timeless style is about avoiding the extremes, because the definition of 'well-fitting' is just that; not loose, and not tight, but perfectly tailored. I still don't have a website, but I have a dribbble now! http://dribbble.com/andyharry [The postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the position, strategy or opinions of adidas and/or its brands.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwalk Posted August 14, 2011 Author Share Posted August 14, 2011 I don't understand the new obsession with making basketball shorts lighter when the players wear them past their knees. It seems like cutting a few inches off the bottom would get rid of more weight than making holes in the material. If players are so concerned with their shorts weighing too much, why not just go back to shorter shorts?Short shorts look ridiculous. This isn't 1970 or something, back when basketball players wore daisy dukes. Unless nerds like Steve Urkel decided to play basketball there's no reason to wear them short.It's something with people around here, they get all pissed off because athletes want to wear long shorts or pants. It's like that with every sport. I can't even begin to count the number of times I see "baseball players need to wear stirrups or high socks." Who cares?Obviously if somebody doesn't like shorts going to the ankles they must want the nut-huggers back. Not a happy medium or anything. It has to be the opposite extreme. Exactly. Timeless style is about avoiding the extremes, because the definition of 'well-fitting' is just that; not loose, and not tight, but perfectly tailored.Generally, Duke's uniforms have been that. The System of Dress and HyperElites were both looser on top and shorter on the bottom than the templates suggest. These appear to be different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mstein Posted August 15, 2011 Share Posted August 15, 2011 The only design difference between these and the ones they've worn for years (that I can see) is that there's no ball and hoop in the middle of the D. Hardly anything to get too excited about.Yeah that's the only difference I see tooI think it's actually a substantial difference. The rebradning is making this particular D (no hoop, no Devil head), the official university logo. It's a small change on the shorts, but a fairly substantial one around campus...and it's a change a good number of fans are not happy about.It is an extremely substantial difference. And one that must be rectified. (While we are at it, we need to get the black off of the white and blue jerseys). The Duke Basketball logo with the ball and hoop (no Devil head has ever appeared on a uniform) dates back to 1973.Extremely substantial? Based on the fact that the ball and hoop portion is removed? Extremely substantial. Come on.Yes, based on the fact that one of the most visible college teams in the country just rebranded its logo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohryan Posted August 15, 2011 Share Posted August 15, 2011 I don't understand the new obsession with making basketball shorts lighter when the players wear them past their knees. It seems like cutting a few inches off the bottom would get rid of more weight than making holes in the material. If players are so concerned with their shorts weighing too much, why not just go back to shorter shorts?Short shorts look ridiculous. This isn't 1970 or something, back when basketball players wore daisy dukes. Unless nerds like Steve Urkel decided to play basketball there's no reason to wear them short.It's something with people around here, they get all pissed off because athletes want to wear long shorts or pants. It's like that with every sport. I can't even begin to count the number of times I see "baseball players need to wear stirrups or high socks." Who cares?I don't recall saying they should wear "daisy dukes." I really don't care how long or short the pants are (although I do think that 20 years from now the long pants with the tight tops and wide shoulders will be looked upon as being just as ridiculous as the 70's short shorts). I was simply saying that if they are so concerned with making the shorts lighter, then making them shorter would probably be more effective than having holes in the side panels. Combining the two ideas would definitely make them lighter. Since the shorts aren't getting shorter, then it's pretty obvious that the weight of the shorts is a secondary concern to making money on new merchandise. It seems like more of a gimmick than anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted August 15, 2011 Share Posted August 15, 2011 Seriously? Have you ever played basketball before? Or, I don't know...run and had a penis at the same time?No, I switch off. That fabric looks pretty ridiculous. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LetsGoOakland9 Posted August 15, 2011 Share Posted August 15, 2011 God damn uncle toms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamikel Posted August 15, 2011 Share Posted August 15, 2011 God damn uncle tomsDidn't know Jalen Rose posted on the CCSLC... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.