I don't know, it just seems like people want change for the sake of change. A bunch of teenagers who know nothing about history and tradition are tweeting for the Dolphins to change the logo with reasons like "herp derp the Marlins changed their logo and uniforms and we should too!" No, the Marlins have the worst logo and uniform in professional sports. They have 573 colors and 127 different uniforms and guess what? They suck. So there goes the BS theory that change helps the team win. The other terrible argument is that it looks too "cartooney". C'mon son. It's a sports logo, not a painting. Look around at logos throughout the sports world. They're ALL cartooney looking. A majority have heightened features with different types of colors. And that brings me to my final point and the WORST reason for wanting a change. "Dolphins aren't aqua." C'MON SON! Again, it's a SPORTS TEAM LOGO. EVERY team uses their colors in the logo despite what the team nickname is. Just look at the NFL alone. Are lions blue? Are rams blue? Are patriots silver skinned? Do jaguars have turquoise tongues? How about broncos, do they have orange hair? The answer to every single question is NO. And no one cares because it's their teams logo that embraces the team colors. And that's how it's supposed to be. So yeah, a uniform change is fine. I wouldn't mind that. But I really hope they keep the logo or go back to the original because it would be a shame to change something that's been part of the team since the day they were born. End rant.
The alternate logo on the helmet. Keep the regular logo and helmet and they're fine by me. Again, change the uniforms all you want. Just keep the logo.
Yeah, I'm partial to keeping the logo too. I'm OK with some tweaks, but nothing drastic. I was just throwing out there as an idea simply because I get the feeling Ross is going to go with a major overhaul. Don't know why, just a gut feeling.
Right, but what's the point of changing that at all? The regular logo is on the jersey, just put it on the helmet too. Like it's always been.
In case you've skipped over the month of October, this is what you've missed: Look at all that un-nintimidating pink. Those teams must've been terrible. Willis, Lewis, and Harrison strike the fear in no one in those girly accent colors. Maintaining some semblance of tradition is significantly more important than altering the uniform based of some false belief of "intimidation". You know what does make the uniform more intimidating? The player wearing it.... and winning. That's what.
Cant tell if serious or.... Nice constructive reply I guess? I have no problem with our old or new logos. frankly i dont care about the whole discussion and id be happy with the old, current or a new one and support it regardless. but the part when speaking about logos/mascots and intimidation meaning nothing.... that is plain stupid. I dont care what anyone says. the definitive icon of your team doesn't have many purposes aside from leaguewide individuality and maybe representation of an area/demographic.... but one of them would be to be attached to a team name and in turn be intimidating...... the logo and a good team would go hand in hand in that sense. please stop me if i'm wrong and maybe throw in some coherent details or a fact or two instead of instantly rage mongering/defending someone that is blatantly whining about nothing. I wasnt saying anything positive or negative about the logo or anything about changing/not changing it. I have no problem with ya and pretty much agree with all of your posts Rocky, but someone saying that logos and intimidation have NOTHING to do with eachother ONLY because they are clearly mad at someone that made a comment that they must agree that animals wearing hats are silly ---- ( is dumb. )
To me, rooting for a new uniform & logo change that drastically differs from its origin is basically no different than deciding to root for another team. What I mean is--- if the colors, logos, [and a false sense of "intimidation"] are more significant to a fan than its tradition, then why not simply pick a team with the colors & logo you like? After all, what are the "Miami Dolphins"? It's not like we were programmed to love 'em; we chose to. For most of us fans, the original players from when we first became fans are no longer here; the ownership has changed; Shula is gone; the undefeated team is gone; the team is no longer located in Miami. Basically nothing about the team is the same. The truest thing holding it all together is the uniform & logo. If that goes, nothing's left. A person might as well say, "I like black and gold so I'll become a Steelers fan".
I wasn't sure if you were serious or not as well. I just don't agree with the whole intimidation factor with logos and colors. Opposing players aren't scared of that stuff nor do teams get pumped up for it.
No no no!! That's not where I started this back and forth! He is the one who keeps harping on the word silly. I said the current logo is 10 times better than the one where there is a Dolphin drawn up with an M in the middle of it's back.
This convo always goes to the extreme in both sides, when in fact all that most are saying is some modernization to our tradition, the change is to inspire a new enthusiasm, it has nothing to do with intimidation..b
Grow up? Na, I want to go back to my youth and act like a know it all again! hint..... I see that you've gone as far as making crap up now. I don't need to bully you! I don't act like a thug either! You never once saw me say, HEY, don't call the logo silly. However, you have misread 90 percent of my posts in this thread. Then insinuated that I don't understand certain words, and so on. You need to shut that crap up! Period! That's not a threat but if you wish for this to go on and on until a mod steps in be my guest.
I'm guessing that most of the fans supporting these drastic uniform changes are roughly 25 years & under and lack a real sense of the team's history & heritage. I look at it from a relationship standpoint: *If you've been a fan since the 60's & 70's, it's like a great, 40+ year marriage. IE: It's had its ups and downs but you wouldn't change a thing about your spouse; however, if your spouse decided to make a semi-drastic change, it might be difficult to swallow. A new hairdo is tolerable. *If you've been a fan since the 80's, it's like a great 15+ year marriage. IE: you dont mind a little change in your spouse but anything drastic is too much. Perhaps she gets some botox around the eyes but that's about it. *For some, if you've been a fan since the mid 90's, it's like being engaged. IE: significant change is quite tolerable and sometimes encouraged so they can become who you want them to be rather than loving them unconditionally for who they are. Heck, you might even buy her implants as a wedding gift. What the younger generation of fans need to realize is---- one day they, too, will be that "40+ year marriage" fan, and they, too, will be upset if the team's history isn't very recognizable in the present. They'll be even more upset knowing they supported changes that led to it. Uniforms should look timeless so that fans can magically feel like the entire history of their team is emerging from the tunnel together. #39 should readily elicit memories of Csonka, #12- Griese, and so on.
I think we should just go back to the 1972 uniforms and stay there. And, if we can get #39 and #42 and #66 ... that will be gravy.
What in the hell are you talking about? A logo is not intimidating. It is make to resemble the name of their teams! Not to scare anyone. With that logic teams would be called Krips and Bloods and have pictures of bandanas on their helmets. Oh man, the Saints logo just scares the crap outta me...
To be fair there are a lot of really young cats that absolutely love the logo but you're definitely spot on about some...
If that were to be forced upon us, it is not the end of the world but I don't think we see a color change made to the team colors. As an alternate thats fine, and there will be a couple of alternates if Nike has there way. I think the helmet should also be made to twice the size
Part of the reason I want change is the fact this is not the NFL I grew up with. The NFL now is way more pass happy than even the Marino years. The NFL has changed so much that tradition is meaningless to me. It is holding on to something that doesn't exist. Plus I have been through a cartoony change during the Jimmy Johnson years. In fact this current logo to me, screams Jimmy Johnson. I do not agree that uniforms should look timeless. Changing the uniforms and the logo is not going to change the history of the Miami Dolphins. It is not going to taint the past of the Miami Dolphins. All it is going to do is change the logo and uniform.
The '72 Dolphins would vehemently disagree with this ridiculous statement. HELLO-----> aqua, orange, cute dolphin logo, undefeated season?? It was terrible times back then with the wimpiest looking color combination & logo in the NFL. Intimidation comes from the team and/or players, NOT colors & logos. No offense but perhaps you haven't played football since junior high or pee wee league where players credulously believe that colors & logos actually make the opposing team play better (like Clark Kent turning into Superman or something). But you know what happens? People grow up and realize capes don't make you fly.
The thing about history is it always exists. Just b/c the NFL, itself, has currently diverged somewhat from history, it doesn't mean the Dolphins can't preserve its own. No, changing the uniforms & logos won't "change" the history or "taint" the past; it'll simply make it easier to forget it. What would be the point of that?
So what, that's what dolphins are like (unless you're a shark or sardine.... or give it a machine gun). We won back to back Super Bowls with that cute, adorable, silly, pretty logo. You know what would be "sillier" than our current Dolphin logo? ----> trying to make a dolphin look formidable. It's like sporting a toupee or comb-over: you're not fooling anybody but yourself. Wear the original logo with pride, especially since it's already one of the most recognizable American sport's logos on the planet.
It's great to see you youngens who care about tradition, if that's what you're implying. BTW, I wasn't insinuating that all 25 and younger care more about change than maintaining tradition but rather that most advocates for change (or more drastic change) likely comes from roughly that age and younger.
Yes, that is what I'm implying. I might not have been around for the first 20 years of the team's existence, but I understand it, and I appreciate it. That is why I vote to keep the logos and colors as is.
I do not agree that it makes it easier to forget. If the Oilers had an awesome history, they would still be remembered, even though they have both changed the logo and the name of the team.
it certainly doesn't facilitate remembrance that's for sure. There are vastly different degrees of "remember", and being remembered by some isn't the same as being remembered by all. The Tennessee Titans (the uniform, logo, and name change) do not elicit memories of the Oilers. Their Oiler heritage is completely unrecognizable when they enter the field. You, yourself, might forever passively remember the Oilers (as will most of us non-amnesia sufferers who watched them play); however your narrowness in scope doesn't account for future generations of football fans who haven't watched them, and as such will be mostly clueless about their history and need to google their existence. Without using google yourself, can you rattle off all the old AFL teams?
Personally, It has nothing to do with the logo, keep it the same, go back to the old, doesn't matter, it's about the uniform, and by the way, that has changed for the worse since the bad *** old school colors when Zonk was carrying the rock, all I'm asking for is lets make the uniform better, cooler..Keep the damn logo.
That happened before I was born. Having the same logos or jerseys does not help me know that. Future generations are not going to remember things that happened before they were born. It is not narrow of scope, it is the reality of the situation. In fact, changing the uniforms would help people remember their history because they can chunk it into different eras based on a symbol.
Tradition for tradition's sake is easily one of the more pointless things humans do. The simple fact of the matter is your argument holds no water. Traditions distort history, not honor it. Our everyday lives are filled with proof of that. All traditions end up doing is replacing actual history and memories with rituals and symbolism. My mom cuts the top off a roast beef before she puts it in the oven. Why? Because that's how my grandmother did it. Why did my grandmother do it? Because my great grandmother did it. Why did my great grandmother do it? Because she had a tiny oven. So instead of remembering how awesome my great grandmother was for overcoming adversity and setting up future generations....we cut the top off of a roast beef. Tradition, yay. Progress is better than tradition. You can progress and still respect the past. You however cannot progress if traditions are more important than anything else.
And what happens if the logo changes and it is god awful? Like Miami Marlins awful? It's simple to me. If it ain't broke don't fix it.
What if its awesome? And prove it isn't broke. you can't. The look is subjective. Either way, that fear has nothing to do with respect, tradition, honor, etc. You're arguing a different point than my post was dealing with.
She needs to take that roast, salt and pepper it liberally with the top on, heat up a very hot Dutch oven type pot, put some olive oil in the pan, along with some carrots, onions, garlic, and sear a crust on that bad boy before she puts it in the oven, once seared on all side, almost black on all sides,add your stock and red wine to deglaze, fill the pot up til it almost covers the roast but not quite, throw in a bushel of fresh thyme, rosemary, other herbs, put the top on and then throw it in the oven, few hours later you will have heaven in a pot.
