UniWatch Power Rankings

[BrandMooreArt]

read 3 of them then realized why i never read anything from UniWatch.

This times 100.

I haven't been on his site in a while now.

From inserting his left wing BS, his odd hate, his cocky attitude, and just overall douchebaggery, I stopped going there.

I come here for all my uni/logo related needs. I don't care what Paul Lukas says or thinks.

well, then it's a good thing you don't read his blog.

first, let's start here: why is this is a thread of opinions bashing someone's opinion. if you follow the site, you know lukas hates the ranking stuff. seems like he got some kind of push from ESPN to do it.

also, there's no way to say he's right on the money or dead wrong about any of this. it's subjective.

and legend, this is like the eighth time you've accused someone of being too left wing. please just stop. don't try to draw people into a political debate.

also, i don't get why uniwatch is polarizing. well-balanced human beings are able to take things with a grain of salt. do i agree with every single thing paul has ever said or written? no, but i read his column every day and take away the stuff i find relevant and interesting to me. some of you guys have way too much time to tear someone down, specifically someone who (whether you like him or not) has done a pretty good job at organizing the interest around sports aesthetics and getting it into the public consciousness.

im totally with Legend here, but moreover i have no interest in reading critiques from someone who dosent know the first thing about critiquing design. now its my turn to sound like a douchebag, but his ignorance is not equal to my knowledge. so the "its just his opinion" thing dosen't fly with me

[TruColor]

I've mentioned this before, but actually know Paul.

We email frequently, we've chatted numerous times on the phone, and have even eaten dinner together (in Queens, at a now-defunct place called "Donovan's").

We are polar opposites in terms of uniform/logo design, politics, etc.

But I consider him my friend and I like him.

Sometimes it's just hard to interpret a person's tone online. One-on-one personal communication is so much more difficult to figure out at times when you're purely reading text.

I've learned the hard way that how a person comes across in a forum or on a blog might be quite a bit different if you were standing face-to-face.

If there's one thing all my years on this forum has taught me, it's that.

[NJTank]

Those 1969 Padres uniforms were awesome

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

This guy has the Chicago Bulls at 67 (13th in the NBA). They're easily top 5 in the league and that's coming from a Pistons fan.

[slats7]

We are polar opposites in terms of uniform/logo design, politics, etc.

So you're a conservative? Me too!

[bosrs1]

Those 1969 Padres uniforms were awesome

Don't know if I'd go that far. But they were decent.

[RyanMcD29]

I'm surprised he put the Texans down all the way at 75th, but even if I'm not agreeing on some of his choices (I think he's being a little too negative with everything) it's still a fun little read.

[McCall]

/The Bulls logo is pretty ugly, though.

Kids these days.

[McCall]

Those 1969 Padres uniforms were awesome

Don't know if I'd go that far. But they were decent.

I would. Far superior than anything they've ever worn.

[infrared41]

i have no interest in reading critiques from someone who doesn't know the first thing about critiquing design. now its my turn to sound like a douchebag, but his ignorance is not equal to my knowledge. so the "its just his opinion" thing dosen't fly with me

Serious question, why does someone need to be in your field to be considered qualified to critique a uniform design? Maybe I'm misreading what you're saying here, and I'm really not trying to be a pain in the ass, I just don't follow your logic.

If I'm following you correctly.... What you're saying would be like me saying that your ignorance with regard to TV production is not equal to my knowledge of it therefore your opinion of a TV show carries no weight. It doesn't take a TV producer to point out a bad TV show. It doesn't take an architect to point out an ugly building...and so on.

Here's another serious question; aren't design rules basically arbitrary and therefore subjective to begin with? Is it written that certain elements have to be used certain ways?

Again, I may have misinterpreted your post. If I did, I apologize. Could you elaborate so I can get a clearer picture of that you mean?

[andrewharrington]

i have no interest in reading critiques from someone who doesn't know the first thing about critiquing design. now its my turn to sound like a douchebag, but his ignorance is not equal to my knowledge. so the "its just his opinion" thing dosen't fly with me

Serious question, why does someone need to be in your field to be considered qualified to critique a uniform design? Maybe I'm misreading what you're saying here, and I'm really not trying to be a pain in the ass, I just don't follow your logic.

If I'm following you correctly.... What you're saying would be like me saying that your ignorance with regard to TV production is not equal to my knowledge of it therefore your opinion of a TV show carries no weight. It doesn't take a TV producer to point out a bad TV show. It doesn't take an architect to point out an ugly building...and so on.

Here's another serious question; aren't design rules basically arbitrary and therefore subjective to begin with? Is it written that certain elements have to be used certain ways?

Again, I may have misinterpreted your post. If I did, I apologize. Could you elaborate so I can get a clearer picture of that you mean?

Great points. Being a professional in a field certainly should entitle one to have an opinion on the things that have to do with that field (though in today's world, it doesn't necessarily mean a lot to call oneself a 'professional' anything, which may discredit that), but not being a professional in that field shouldn't exclude one from having a valid opinion. There are just as many professionals who have no business critiquing design as there are amateurs or civilians who have a great understanding of design and how to critique it.

Paul Lukas knows what he's talking about when it comes to design, I think to a fairly high degree for someone who's not a designer. Some of his opinions and critiques are total head-scratchers, but by no means would I say that he's out of his league critiquing design.

[BrandMooreArt]

i have no interest in reading critiques from someone who doesn't know the first thing about critiquing design. now its my turn to sound like a douchebag, but his ignorance is not equal to my knowledge. so the "its just his opinion" thing dosen't fly with me

Serious question, why does someone need to be in your field to be considered qualified to critique a uniform design? Maybe I'm misreading what you're saying here, and I'm really not trying to be a pain in the ass, I just don't follow your logic.

If I'm following you correctly.... What you're saying would be like me saying that your ignorance with regard to TV production is not equal to my knowledge of it therefore your opinion of a TV show carries no weight. It doesn't take a TV producer to point out a bad TV show. It doesn't take an architect to point out an ugly building...and so on.

Here's another serious question; aren't design rules basically arbitrary and therefore subjective to begin with? Is it written that certain elements have to be used certain ways?

Again, I may have misinterpreted your post. If I did, I apologize. Could you elaborate so I can get a clearer picture of that you mean?

think of something you're knowledgable about (TV production). would you care to read something about it from someone who didnt know anything about the subject? do you think an amateur's opinion is really as valid as your knowledge and experience? i would hope not. i don't mind what he is doing, ranking the uniforms. but its all based on what he likes/dislikes without understanding anything about it. when i grade a uniform theres at least a system to it.

i have read very little from UniWatch. but i havent seen anything from it to suggest he knows a damn thing about design. i don't care to read about how someone dislikes everything purple and critiques like "this team should be wearing that uniform because its better" and "this is just a mess". its all his amateur opinion. im really not sure if he can name a single principle or design theory. but again, i've read very little. and it will remain that way.

it probably sounds like im going on about Lucas and you might be relating it to this board in general, which isnt the case. the difference is there are plenty of people here who do offer valid opinions and sometimes proper critiques. there's plenty of "i hate it/ i love it/they shouldnt wear that" crap too, but i like these boards because theres something worth reading here, especially from people who are passionate about their teams. often, they are more knowledgeable about their teams history than i am too. theres plenty to learn from others here. does Lucas even like anything? it seems like he hates everything; and likes it. another thing is Lucas is quite the jackass, or at least writes like one. but i suppose i do as well sometimes

design principles and theory are not arbitrary. they are the things thats have lasted through human history and consistently work as good design/art. rhythm, balance, repetition, unity, movement, perspective, color theory, gestalt, etc. these things are never bad. that said, you'd be correct in saying its okay to break the rules. encouraged even. thats nothing to do with Lucas' critiques though. if there is a team who steps outside the box, can he say anything besides "thats a mess"? UnderArmor's pants look odd (think Auburns pants stripes) becasue it creates a tangent at the end; visual tension. Oregon's new jersey pattern is off because the flow is abruptly ended without completion. The Laker' shave a great color palette because purple and yellow are complimentary colors; perfectly acceptable. does UniWatch ever explain things like this?

EDIT - i know how i sound in this post. not meaning to come off as an elitist douche. just trying to be honest

[infrared41]

i have no interest in reading critiques from someone who doesn't know the first thing about critiquing design. now its my turn to sound like a douchebag, but his ignorance is not equal to my knowledge. so the "its just his opinion" thing dosen't fly with me

Serious question, why does someone need to be in your field to be considered qualified to critique a uniform design? Maybe I'm misreading what you're saying here, and I'm really not trying to be a pain in the ass, I just don't follow your logic.

If I'm following you correctly.... What you're saying would be like me saying that your ignorance with regard to TV production is not equal to my knowledge of it therefore your opinion of a TV show carries no weight. It doesn't take a TV producer to point out a bad TV show. It doesn't take an architect to point out an ugly building...and so on.

Here's another serious question; aren't design rules basically arbitrary and therefore subjective to begin with? Is it written that certain elements have to be used certain ways?

Again, I may have misinterpreted your post. If I did, I apologize. Could you elaborate so I can get a clearer picture of that you mean?

think of something you're knowledgable about (TV production). would you care to read something about it from someone who didnt know anything about the subject? do you think an amateur's opinion is really as valid as your knowledge and experience? i would hope not. i don't mind what he is doing, ranking the uniforms. but its all based on what he likes/dislikes without understanding anything about it. hes the common critic.

i have read very little from UniWatch. but i havent seen anything from it to suggest he knows a damn thing about design. i don't care to read about how someone dislikes everything purple and critiques like "this team should be wearing that uniform because its better" and "this is just a mess". its all his amateur opinion. im really not sure if he can name a single principle or design theory. but again, i've read very little. and it will remain that way.

it probably sounds like im going on about Lucas and you might be relating it to this board in general, which isnt the case. the difference is there are plenty of people here who do offer valid opinions and sometimes proper critiques. there's plenty of "i hate it/ i love it/they shouldnt wear that" crap too, but i like these boards because theres something worth reading here, especially from people who are passionate about their teams. often, they are more knowledgeable about their teams history than i am too. theres plenty to learn from others here. does Lucas even like anything? it seems like he hates everything; and likes it.

design principles and theory are not arbitrary. they are the things thats have lasted through human history and consistently work as good design/art. rhythm, balance, repetition, unity, movement, perspective, color theory, gestalt, etc. these things are never bad. that said, you'd be correct in saying its okay to break the rules. encouraged even. thats nothing to do with Lucas' critiques though. if there is a team who steps outside the box, can he say anything besides "thats a mess"? UnderArmor's pants look odd (think Auburns pants stripes) becasue it creates a tangent at the end; visual tension. Oregon's new jersey pattern is off because the flow is abruptly ended without completion. The Laker' shave a great color palette because purple and yellow are complimentary colors; perfectly acceptable. does UniWatch ever explain things like this?

Fair enough. In defense of Lukas, this particular list doesn't leave a lot of room for him to go into much detail. It's a simple ranking list. My guess is his editors would not allow a detailed critique of each choice. He does go into more detail than just "I don't like it" in a lot of his columns. But I do understand where you're coming from.

[BrandMooreArt]

i have no interest in reading critiques from someone who doesn't know the first thing about critiquing design. now its my turn to sound like a douchebag, but his ignorance is not equal to my knowledge. so the "its just his opinion" thing dosen't fly with me

Serious question, why does someone need to be in your field to be considered qualified to critique a uniform design? Maybe I'm misreading what you're saying here, and I'm really not trying to be a pain in the ass, I just don't follow your logic.

If I'm following you correctly.... What you're saying would be like me saying that your ignorance with regard to TV production is not equal to my knowledge of it therefore your opinion of a TV show carries no weight. It doesn't take a TV producer to point out a bad TV show. It doesn't take an architect to point out an ugly building...and so on.

Here's another serious question; aren't design rules basically arbitrary and therefore subjective to begin with? Is it written that certain elements have to be used certain ways?

Again, I may have misinterpreted your post. If I did, I apologize. Could you elaborate so I can get a clearer picture of that you mean?

think of something you're knowledgable about (TV production). would you care to read something about it from someone who didnt know anything about the subject? do you think an amateur's opinion is really as valid as your knowledge and experience? i would hope not. i don't mind what he is doing, ranking the uniforms. but its all based on what he likes/dislikes without understanding anything about it. hes the common critic.

i have read very little from UniWatch. but i havent seen anything from it to suggest he knows a damn thing about design. i don't care to read about how someone dislikes everything purple and critiques like "this team should be wearing that uniform because its better" and "this is just a mess". its all his amateur opinion. im really not sure if he can name a single principle or design theory. but again, i've read very little. and it will remain that way.

it probably sounds like im going on about Lucas and you might be relating it to this board in general, which isnt the case. the difference is there are plenty of people here who do offer valid opinions and sometimes proper critiques. there's plenty of "i hate it/ i love it/they shouldnt wear that" crap too, but i like these boards because theres something worth reading here, especially from people who are passionate about their teams. often, they are more knowledgeable about their teams history than i am too. theres plenty to learn from others here. does Lucas even like anything? it seems like he hates everything; and likes it.

design principles and theory are not arbitrary. they are the things thats have lasted through human history and consistently work as good design/art. rhythm, balance, repetition, unity, movement, perspective, color theory, gestalt, etc. these things are never bad. that said, you'd be correct in saying its okay to break the rules. encouraged even. thats nothing to do with Lucas' critiques though. if there is a team who steps outside the box, can he say anything besides "thats a mess"? UnderArmor's pants look odd (think Auburns pants stripes) becasue it creates a tangent at the end; visual tension. Oregon's new jersey pattern is off because the flow is abruptly ended without completion. The Laker' shave a great color palette because purple and yellow are complimentary colors; perfectly acceptable. does UniWatch ever explain things like this?

Fair enough. In defense of Lukas, this particular list doesn't leave a lot of room for him to go into much detail. It's a simple ranking list. My guess is his editors would not allow a detailed critique of each choice. He does go into more detail than just "I don't like it" in a lot of his columns. But I do understand where you're coming from.

yea i was thinking the same thing. thats a ton of writing he has to do and probably not a lot of time to do it. ill give him that.

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

OK- today's 26-50 list is my breaking point. He's got the Blackhawks at 49th overall. The Penguins (excellent logo yes, jerseys are most generic in the league), Blue Jackets and Wild (nice, but better than the Hawks? C'mon) higher in the NHL.

This guy gets paid to do this?

[OnWis97]

OK- today's 26-50 list is my breaking point. He's got the Blackhawks at 49th overall. The Penguins (excellent logo yes, jerseys are most generic in the league), Blue Jackets and Wild (nice, but better than the Hawks? C'mon) higher in the NHL.

This guy gets paid to do this?

I knew there would be some indignation over that.

[McCall]

I'd rank the Braves a little higher despite all the alternates and the all-navy road cap. It's a situation of addition by subtraction, simple as that. Ditch one or both colored alts, and make the home cap the all-around cap again. Perfection. I would personally consider that no actual design changes needed would not effect the ranking position.

I knew the Cardinals would be in the last set. I'm just wondering if he deducted for not having "St. Louis" on the roads or what not.

BTW, if someone has the time, maybe they could figure out what teams are left. Could predict the final countdown (duhda-duh-duh, duhda-duh-duh-duhn... ) I'm at work so I can't until later.

[Kevin W.]

Wow, I was completely wrong about the reasoning he used to argue against the Blackhawks. Not one complaint about the imagery of the logo. I'm surprised.

That said, putting them at #49 is a travesty.

[TimEOBrien]

Wow, I was completely wrong about the reasoning he used to argue against the Blackhawks. Not one complaint about the imagery of the logo. I'm surprised.

That said, putting them at #49 is a travesty.

Meh, he doesn't like the red jersey. I get that. I disagree, but I get that. Even he said that if he could just pick one jersey/uniform he'd pick the road white and the 'Hawks would be much higher.

[OnWis97]

Wow, I was completely wrong about the reasoning he used to argue against the Blackhawks. Not one complaint about the imagery of the logo. I'm surprised.

That said, putting them at #49 is a travesty.

Meh, he doesn't like the red jersey. I get that. I disagree, but I get that. Even he said that if he could just pick one jersey/uniform he'd pick the road white and the 'Hawks would be much higher.

And it's not a travesty. It would not be a travesty if he ranked the Yankees dead last because he blames them for pinstripes. Nor would it be a travesty if he ranked the Thunder #1 (and he did actually rank them surprisingly high).

Where the Blackhawks are is in "good" territory. And quite honestly, I've never understood why I always see it listed as "fact" that it is obviously the #1 uniform in hockey. I definitely prefer Detroit and Toronto (pre-edge, anyway, for the leafs). It's not like he ranked it #105 or something.

In any case, it's subjective.