Sorry not feeling this one at all. Text is bad IMO, also the heavy scratch brush looks terrible because of how high the opacity is on it. The...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (JHair @ Sep 7 2005, 02:41 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>its crap compared to this.. No offenseWall with the same...
for a battle:[img]C+C
Sorry, the use of the number brushes looks horrible. They're like on top of one another and it just looks bad. Text looks good, although the main...
This is great for Big Ben. With this WR corps there is NO reason for Ben to struggle. IMO this is a lesser talented replacement for Burress....
thats pretty sick man, nice!
[img]C+C?Yeah, text is bad. Need some new idea to try!
V2-[img]C+C? Better?
yeah this is nice, everything fits.
thats sick man, great work!
for a battle V1-[img]V2-[img]C+C
oh, I wasn't listing like the Depth chart. I was just saying they got so many "pretty good" receivers.
V1:[img]V2:[img]C+C
I like that style a lot. Hardly any brushing, right? It looks really good IMO.
Another receiver! Who do they have now.1.Burleson2.Marcus Robinson3.Troy Williamson4.Kelley Cambell5.Travis Taylor6.Koren Robinson!There might even...
you serious? Everyone says this sig looks bad on other sites [img].35 opacity(normal blend setting) on the gradient text. Thanks
I attempted to make a smooth look. I've not been posting any sigs lately cause they sucked. I haven't been satisfied with any of my text...Need...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tha.New.Look.Giants. @ Sep 4 2005, 07:25 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>Very nicee, just a bit plain.</div> It's...
yeah, not liking this one at all for some reason. Dunno why, just doesn't look too impressive.
that looks great, just like DP's stuff. That bg is awesome.
Separate names with a comma.
