Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Article: "Teams should not wear black jerseys"


PanthersATL
 Share

Recommended Posts

True statement from the article: Choosing to use black in any fashion, if not part of a team’s color scheme, is lazy, boring

But then there's this:

Here’s a list of teams that can wear black in their main unis or in an alternate, because black is part of their original color scheme:
.
.
Carolina Panthers — only because no one cares
.
.

I think we can all agree -- blue jerseys or black jerseys are where it's at.  White jerseys are questionable at best

Source: https://deadspin.com/teams-should-be-outlawed-from-wearing-black-1849825452

Edited by PanthersATL
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

Black absolutely makes sense since you know we are the Panthers.

 

We aren't the Bluebirds. We aren't the Ocean.

 

We are the damn Panthers. Panthers are Black.

I despise the Blue Jerseys and they shouldn't have existed.

You're wrong.  Blue top/white bottom is our best combo.  I said what I said.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This sounds like somebody’s personal opinion.  Something in people magazine, or on the view.

Key words are “Lazy”, “Boring “.  This just sounds like an opinion.  Probably was cut off by a black cat 🐈‍⬛ and crashed into the ditch.

there was an opinion, several years ago, that black uniforms were intimidating.  Atlanta Falcon coach, Jerry Glandville, changed team colors from red to black, for this reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're simultaneously in contention for a top 3 draft pick, and winning our division, and it's not every year you get to say that. So now is not the time for a fashion thread. Save that for March when we need something to talk about.

Edited by Captroop
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our logo is a black panther with blue highlights. If you’re going just by what makes the most sense with the team colors and mascot, our primaries would be all black with the blue stripes. Don’t lump us in with the rest of these teams who have no reason to wear black. You ever seen a black falcon?

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

Black absolutely makes sense since you know we are the Panthers.

 

We aren't the Bluebirds. We aren't the Ocean.

 

We are the damn Panthers. Panthers are Black.

I despise the Blue Jerseys and they shouldn't have existed.

ACKCHYUALLY hair face facial expression person nose text human behavior smile emotion male head cartoon forehead hairstyle cheek clip art black and white eyewear boy vision care

Black "Panthers" do not exist, they are just black jaguars/leopards.

Our mascot is as real as Unicorns and Dragons. We could make our main color whatever we wanted and it would work. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_panther

My apologies for being "that guy"

  • Pie 2
  • The D 1
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.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Miller being less raw and more pro ready makes sense of why they picked him. With us having a capable starter in Walker the lower floor higher ceiling player makes sense for us as well. I agree with that. 
    • I'm from Michigan and have had this discussion with my Lions friends, and they all agree with me, they were never going to take Freeling over Miller.  As, yes, you are correct, they could have left Sewell at RT and taken Freeling, but they are in a SB contention window right now. An OL with Freeling at LT and Sewell at RT is not as strong as Sewell at LT and Miller at RT would be for this upcoming season and likely at least next year as well. 5 years it could be looked back upon as a long term "mistake" to take Miller over Freeling, but for a franchise like the Lions, you can't worry about the long term when you have current SB aspirations.  It's all about maximizing their current SB window over the next 1-3 years. And it's not about style, it's about day 1 readiness, and a lot of "experts" aren't even sure if Freeling is ready to play Week 1 yet at the position he's used to, let alone switching to a side he hasn't played before, but a career starting RT is going to be more than ready to fill that role for them Week 1. I'm 100% convinced that if our draft positioning was swapped, we'd have still taken Freeling, they'd have still taken Miller, and both teams would have got the OT that they preferred due to what each team needs right now and what their current realistic aspirations are for the 2026 season. We're in a position where we can let our drafted OT sit and learn for a bit, they needed a week 1 starter, for me that's where this discussion becomes very easy to understand why each team took the player they did.
×
×
  • Create New...