02-29-2024, 12:31 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-04-2024, 12:27 PM by ProdigalSon. Edited 1 time in total.)
Season 46 has some interesting color rush ideas, and I am here to judge them as a completely impartial and unbiased observer. I will be judging based on color, theme, cohesiveness, and overall vibes. This is using only the field designs as criteria, and says nothing about my opinions of the teams as a whole, or the artists who created these fields. Here are my rankings, from 22 to 1.
Disclaimer 1: I am mildly colorblind.
Disclaimer 2: I have 0 art background.
Not a Disclaimer: First media article, 2x bonus applies (I think)
22. Chicago Butchers:
Colors: B
Theme: D
Cohesiveness: C
Overall: C
I may not be smart enough to understand this field. I don’t know the connection between a frog, puddles, speed limits, and cracks on the field. Maybe if I was smarter I would get it.
21. Orange City Otters:
Colors: S
Theme: B
Cohesiveness: C
Overall: C
It appears the Otters heard the word “color” and ran with it. There is no lack of color in this field. However, that isn’t quite enough to make a good field design.
20. Honolulu Hahalua:
Colors: B
Theme: C
Cohesiveness: C
Overall: B
At least the end zone colors pop. I don’t know when the color rush field designs are submitted, but the tank is either a fantastic coincidence, a funny inside joke, or according to plan. All three scenarios are interesting, and two of the three can spark a completely different conversation.
19. Berlin Fire Salamanders:
Colors: A
Theme: C
Cohesiveness: B
Overall: B
I don’t understand this field. The colors are nice, but I don’t get the person walking or the significance behind it.
18. Portland Pythons:
Colors: C
Theme: C
Cohesiveness: B
Overall: B
The choice of colors is uninteresting. If the worm is an inside joke among the team, the theme score can potentially be moved up a letter grade.
17. New York Silverbacks:
Colors: A
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: C
Overall: B
While I can appreciate the Donkey Kong references, this design is overall distracting. The love theme does come through well. This is a solid field design.
16. Yellowknife Wraiths:
Colors: A
Theme: C
Cohesiveness: A
Overall: B
The theme seems to be the Yellowknife Wraiths from wish.com. While the imagery is beautiful and the colors pop, I don’t understand why they switched location and team name.
15. Bondi Beach Buccaneers:
Colors: A
Theme: B
Cohesiveness: B
Overall: B
Winnie the Pooh is in the public domain, so this is fair game. In my opinion, a field design should not have a full blown graphic, but to each their own, and this is well done and fitting with their team theme.
14. Kansas City Coyotes:
Colors: B
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: C
Overall: B
This is an interesting idea to rebrand for a color rush. However, the execution leaves a little to be desired. Overall, the word that comes to mind is “cluttered”. This field has a lot of potential, but sometimes less is more.
13. Sarasota Sailfish:
Colors: A
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: B
Overall: B
The love theme comes through, but those faces give me nightmares. Colors are popping without being distracting. Overall, good design.
12. Tijuana Luchadores:
Colors: B
Theme: S
Cohesiveness: B
Overall: A
This theme seemed off for a while, but then I understood it. The Luchadores want a fight. They will get one with this field design. They are trying to pick a fight with the rest of the DSFL with all their trophies overlaid on the field. They are picking a fight with Nintendo with the Pikachu, and I’m sure those lawyers are frustrated not being able to sue Palworld. Points for theme, but take points away for clutter.
11. Austin Copperheads:
Colors: A
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: A
Overall: B
There is definitely a theme of danger in this field design. The colors fit together and pop on the screen without being distracting. Overall, something just doesn’t quite click, but overall a solid design.
10. San Jose Sabercats:
Colors: B
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: B
Overall: A
Reminiscent of the old Raiders stadium, the baseball infield is a nice touch. Solid even if unspectacular. Personally would prefer more popping colors.
9. New Orleans Second Line:
Colors: B
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: B
Overall: A
The Big Sneezy is not the angle I would have gone with, but they committed with this field and quite frankly it is well done, all things considered. There maybe should have been more color in the end zones to fit the color rush, but overall a good field.
8. Colorado Yeti:
Colors: A
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: A
Overall: A
All-white fields should be used as a color more often. I am personally not the biggest fan of the handwritten font style used, but it is overall a good design
7. London Royals:
Colors: B
Theme: B
Cohesiveness: A
Overall: A
This is a solid, if unspectacular entry. Nothing is too bad or too great about it. The “Bang Bang” is not my cup of tea, but is clean and not too distracting.
6. Cape Town Crash:
Colors: A
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: A
Overall: A
This is just a nice clean field with solid colors. The color of the field slightly clashes with the horn, but overall well designed.
5. Baltimore Hawks:
Colors: A
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: A
Overall: A
While I am personally not a fan of pink, this field shows off the love theme well. The rebrand of Hawks to Love Birds is an interesting idea.
4. Dallas Birddogs:
Colors: A
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: A
Overall: S
The bird-dog logo is a clever play on words, and the colors pop without being distracting. Great design.
3. Minnesota Grey Ducks:
Colors: A
Theme: S
Cohesiveness: S
Overall: S
This is a clean and well designed field. The field is not cluttered, which highlights the clean 8-bit arcade graphics style. This is a great entry.
2. Arizona Outlaws:
Colors: A
Theme: S
Cohesiveness: S
Overall: S
This is a well designed field. The card suits in the end zone and a good touch, and the colors really shine. I personally would have preferred inverted colors (yellow field with blue end zone), but overall this field pops without distracting.
1. Norfolk Seawolves:
Colors: S
Theme: S
Cohesiveness: S
Overall: S
Excellent design with popping colors and a united theme. No notes.
Disclaimer 1: I am mildly colorblind.
Disclaimer 2: I have 0 art background.
Not a Disclaimer: First media article, 2x bonus applies (I think)
22. Chicago Butchers:
Colors: B
Theme: D
Cohesiveness: C
Overall: C
I may not be smart enough to understand this field. I don’t know the connection between a frog, puddles, speed limits, and cracks on the field. Maybe if I was smarter I would get it.
21. Orange City Otters:
Colors: S
Theme: B
Cohesiveness: C
Overall: C
It appears the Otters heard the word “color” and ran with it. There is no lack of color in this field. However, that isn’t quite enough to make a good field design.
20. Honolulu Hahalua:
Colors: B
Theme: C
Cohesiveness: C
Overall: B
At least the end zone colors pop. I don’t know when the color rush field designs are submitted, but the tank is either a fantastic coincidence, a funny inside joke, or according to plan. All three scenarios are interesting, and two of the three can spark a completely different conversation.
19. Berlin Fire Salamanders:
Colors: A
Theme: C
Cohesiveness: B
Overall: B
I don’t understand this field. The colors are nice, but I don’t get the person walking or the significance behind it.
18. Portland Pythons:
Colors: C
Theme: C
Cohesiveness: B
Overall: B
The choice of colors is uninteresting. If the worm is an inside joke among the team, the theme score can potentially be moved up a letter grade.
17. New York Silverbacks:
Colors: A
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: C
Overall: B
While I can appreciate the Donkey Kong references, this design is overall distracting. The love theme does come through well. This is a solid field design.
16. Yellowknife Wraiths:
Colors: A
Theme: C
Cohesiveness: A
Overall: B
The theme seems to be the Yellowknife Wraiths from wish.com. While the imagery is beautiful and the colors pop, I don’t understand why they switched location and team name.
15. Bondi Beach Buccaneers:
Colors: A
Theme: B
Cohesiveness: B
Overall: B
Winnie the Pooh is in the public domain, so this is fair game. In my opinion, a field design should not have a full blown graphic, but to each their own, and this is well done and fitting with their team theme.
14. Kansas City Coyotes:
Colors: B
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: C
Overall: B
This is an interesting idea to rebrand for a color rush. However, the execution leaves a little to be desired. Overall, the word that comes to mind is “cluttered”. This field has a lot of potential, but sometimes less is more.
13. Sarasota Sailfish:
Colors: A
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: B
Overall: B
The love theme comes through, but those faces give me nightmares. Colors are popping without being distracting. Overall, good design.
12. Tijuana Luchadores:
Colors: B
Theme: S
Cohesiveness: B
Overall: A
This theme seemed off for a while, but then I understood it. The Luchadores want a fight. They will get one with this field design. They are trying to pick a fight with the rest of the DSFL with all their trophies overlaid on the field. They are picking a fight with Nintendo with the Pikachu, and I’m sure those lawyers are frustrated not being able to sue Palworld. Points for theme, but take points away for clutter.
11. Austin Copperheads:
Colors: A
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: A
Overall: B
There is definitely a theme of danger in this field design. The colors fit together and pop on the screen without being distracting. Overall, something just doesn’t quite click, but overall a solid design.
10. San Jose Sabercats:
Colors: B
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: B
Overall: A
Reminiscent of the old Raiders stadium, the baseball infield is a nice touch. Solid even if unspectacular. Personally would prefer more popping colors.
9. New Orleans Second Line:
Colors: B
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: B
Overall: A
The Big Sneezy is not the angle I would have gone with, but they committed with this field and quite frankly it is well done, all things considered. There maybe should have been more color in the end zones to fit the color rush, but overall a good field.
8. Colorado Yeti:
Colors: A
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: A
Overall: A
All-white fields should be used as a color more often. I am personally not the biggest fan of the handwritten font style used, but it is overall a good design
7. London Royals:
Colors: B
Theme: B
Cohesiveness: A
Overall: A
This is a solid, if unspectacular entry. Nothing is too bad or too great about it. The “Bang Bang” is not my cup of tea, but is clean and not too distracting.
6. Cape Town Crash:
Colors: A
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: A
Overall: A
This is just a nice clean field with solid colors. The color of the field slightly clashes with the horn, but overall well designed.
5. Baltimore Hawks:
Colors: A
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: A
Overall: A
While I am personally not a fan of pink, this field shows off the love theme well. The rebrand of Hawks to Love Birds is an interesting idea.
4. Dallas Birddogs:
Colors: A
Theme: A
Cohesiveness: A
Overall: S
The bird-dog logo is a clever play on words, and the colors pop without being distracting. Great design.
3. Minnesota Grey Ducks:
Colors: A
Theme: S
Cohesiveness: S
Overall: S
This is a clean and well designed field. The field is not cluttered, which highlights the clean 8-bit arcade graphics style. This is a great entry.
2. Arizona Outlaws:
Colors: A
Theme: S
Cohesiveness: S
Overall: S
This is a well designed field. The card suits in the end zone and a good touch, and the colors really shine. I personally would have preferred inverted colors (yellow field with blue end zone), but overall this field pops without distracting.
1. Norfolk Seawolves:
Colors: S
Theme: S
Cohesiveness: S
Overall: S
Excellent design with popping colors and a united theme. No notes.