u/HatsInThe410

I'm not saying they're BETTER than what they currently have. The opposite, in fact. While their original logo is still my favorite, their current logo is an excellent modernization of that logo.

I just think the logos of their BFBS era get a bad rap for being paired with the black and charcoal, which I believe is unfair. I think if they had introduced these logos as a replacement for the steroid-T Jay logo but kept the blue, these would be looked upon a lot more fondly than they are today.

The 2nd photo plays around with some different outline options as well as an slightly different colorway that removes the gray and charcoal from the logos (except for the bird's beak). Which option(s) do you think look best?

There's something about NHL uniforms that have bugged me ever since I became a fan 20ish years ago...and I couldn't really put my finger on it until just recently, because of a new trend that's emerged in only the last few years. The Sharks are the example I picked as the lead photo because they traded their previous issue for the issue with the new trend, but there are plenty of other teams that have at least one of the two things that bug me.

Several years ago, San Jose had one of my favorite home uniforms in hockey; I love the teal, and the black pants and helmets offset and complimented it perfectly. But on the road, and particularly from far away (i.e. watching live game action), they just kind of looked like a black and white team with barely any teal. Nowadays, they have one of my favorite ROAD uniforms, particularly with the teal helmets, but the apparent tradeoff to fixing the road uniforms is that the home uniform now is just WAY too much teal with no color balance whatsoever.

It seems that most teams really have two paths they can choose to walk when designing uniforms: a color-balanced home look that uses both the primary and secondary team colors at the expense of a muted road look that minimizes the primary color...or focus on having the primary color stand out on the road at the expense of having a potentially eye-searing mono-primary look at home, which minimizes the secondary color(s) across the board.

While team-color helmets on the road certainly has played a part in the more recent trend, the biggest driver of either path that creates these limitations appears to be...the pants. I am not sure why hockey is the only sport where uniforms tend to only have one pair of pants to go with both home and road uniforms, but it seems to me that allowing some teams to wear secondary-color pants at home and primary-color pants on the road would go a long way to fixing a LOT of teams in terms of having good looks both at home and on the road.

Are there any teams out there for you that would really benefit from two pairs of pants, one for home and one for road? Or is this a non-issue for most of you (i.e. you prefer the road look I've called 'muted' or you prefer the mono-primary look at home)? Feel free to discuss!

https://tiermaker.com/create/all-on-field-city-connects-thru-2026-19425684

Most tier lists are incomplete or static, meaning they don't keep up with new options. So I decided to make my own with every single City Connect hat that's ever been created for any team for the field, game or BP. BP hats are added onto the end, so they are easy to be optional for anyone who wants to rank just one set or the other, on-field or BP. Hats are in team-alphabetical order.

I'm thinking about creating one with all non-CC on-field standard cap options next, but that will likely generation some discussion on what should or shouldn't be included, since not every team wears what counts as an official alternate or whatever. And that one definitely won't include BP hats.

In the meantime, create your City Connect tiers and post your results in the comments!

The black jersey is traditionally the one that gets the different hats, but mixing them up with other jerseys isn't unprecedented. Do you think we should do it more often? Is there any hat/jersey combo we haven't tried that you'd like to see us try?