JDK101

Nike Or Adidas?

85 posts in this topic

In all seriousness...

Nike wins in soccer and it's not even close.

Football? All Reebok. Nike's sweat boxes and giant collars do nothing for me. Nike can re-enter the conversation when they figure out how to properly replicate a single shade of green over a single jersey.

Hockey is close. I would have said Nike back in 2010, when they seemed to perfect their hockey template. Then 2014 rolled around and they began obsessing over weird colours with faux laces and strange materials. Almost like they let their football design monkeys design hockey uniforms. It's all Reekbok/CCM now that the more egregious aspects of the EDGE sweaters have been scaled back or eliminated.

I agree that Reebok was the king of NFL uniforms, but since they are not around anymore we are stuck with the hideous sweat boxes. But I will say that Under Armor is doing a better job as of late than Nike and will always be better than the tire-tread jerseys of Adidas.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD CAN REEBOK COME BACK TO THE NFL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adidas! It's iconic, time tested, and appeals to my German heritage. I hate how Nike has to put their swoosh on everything and they used child labour sweatshops to produce their shoes.

I will say they Nike has a better art and design division than Adidas as far as graphics and logos.

You hate the swoosh? What, does Adidas not put on both the logo and the triple stripe?

Nike doesn't force their swoosh into the design like Adidas forces the 3 stripes into everything.

For me, it's Nike. Even their hockey jerseys, faux-laces and all, are incredibly comfy to wear in game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nike doesn't force their swoosh into the design like Adidas forces the 3 stripes into everything.

Did you watch the Rose and Sugar Bowls? Each of the top four had giant chromed swooshes.

Also, they designed the Seahawks' current look with a design element that exists primarily to draw attention to the swoosh. Nike's just as shameless as Adidas. Just in a different way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nike doesn't force their swoosh into the design like Adidas forces the 3 stripes into everything.

Did you watch the Rose and Sugar Bowls? Each of the top four had giant chromed swooshes.

Also, they designed the Seahawks' current look with a design element that exists primarily to draw attention to the swoosh. Nike's just as shameless as Adidas. Just in a different way.

I agree the diamond swoosh was a bit different. But once the games started i wasn't drawn directly to it. When adidas has added a design element it almost always stands out from the rest of the uniform. Under Armour is guilty of this too. The counter argument may be that Seattle and Tampa Bay do too, but i still place their garish looks on what the teans wanted, not what Nike pushed on them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nike doesn't force their swoosh into the design like Adidas forces the 3 stripes into everything.

Did you watch the Rose and Sugar Bowls? Each of the top four had giant chromed swooshes.

Also, they designed the Seahawks' current look with a design element that exists primarily to draw attention to the swoosh. Nike's just as shameless as Adidas. Just in a different way.

Yep, that giant chromed out swoosh is completely distracting me from the rest of the uniform /s

4609613081.jpg?w=780

Keep wearing that tin foil hat Ice it looks great on you.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nike doesn't force their swoosh into the design like Adidas forces the 3 stripes into everything.

Did you watch the Rose and Sugar Bowls? Each of the top four had giant chromed swooshes.

Also, they designed the Seahawks' current look with a design element that exists primarily to draw attention to the swoosh. Nike's just as shameless as Adidas. Just in a different way.

Yes I watched both the Bowls. Yes there were 4 chromed out Swooshes on the uniforms. Cool. They colored in their company logo with a diamond pattern. As I recall, the previous Nat'l Championship trophy was a crystal ball and most of the time the national championship winning team gets a championship ring with diamonds in it. There's justification for that. The Seahawks uniforms were inspired by the totem poles of the Pacific Northwest. It just so happens that the NFL mandates the manufacturer's logo to be on the sleeve, right in the middle of the sleeve design. That's not the design's fault. The diamond swoosh wasn't a distraction, and the Seahawks design doesn't say, "hey look at the swoosh".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nike doesn't force their swoosh into the design like Adidas forces the 3 stripes into everything.

Did you watch the Rose and Sugar Bowls? Each of the top four had giant chromed swooshes.

Also, they designed the Seahawks' current look with a design element that exists primarily to draw attention to the swoosh. Nike's just as shameless as Adidas. Just in a different way.

Yep, that giant chromed out swoosh is completely distracting me from the rest of the uniform /s

4609613081.jpg?w=780

Keep wearing that tin foil hat Ice it looks great on you

What is it about Nike fanboys declaring anyone who doesn't shower praise on their chosen company to be crazy conspiracy theorists?

Nike doesn't force their swoosh into the design like Adidas forces the 3 stripes into everything.

Did you watch the Rose and Sugar Bowls? Each of the top four had giant chromed swooshes.

Also, they designed the Seahawks' current look with a design element that exists primarily to draw attention to the swoosh. Nike's just as shameless as Adidas. Just in a different way.

Yes I watched both the Bowls. Yes there were 4 chromed out Swooshes on the uniforms. Cool. They colored in their company logo with a diamond pattern. As I recall, the previous Nat'l Championship trophy was a crystal ball and most of the time the national championship winning team gets a championship ring with diamonds in it. There's justification for that.

Yeah. The old trophy was crystal. And it was replaced by a new trophy that doesn't include diamond or crystal months before these uniforms were created. As for the rings? That's a stretch. Every championship team in the Big Four gets diamond-studded rings. Using your logic we should break out the chromed diamond patterns for everyone!

Come on. They were giant reflective Nike swooshes on the chests of the four most prominent college football teams. You're either naive or a Nike fanboy if you think that wasn't about promoting Nike's brand.

The Seahawks uniforms were inspired by the totem poles of the Pacific Northwest. It just so happens that the NFL mandates the manufacturer's logo to be on the sleeve, right in the middle of the sleeve design. That's not the design's fault. The diamond swoosh wasn't a distraction, and the Seahawks design doesn't say, "hey look at the swoosh".

Really? You're aware that the NFL's guidelines re: manufacturer logo placement were in place long before Nike got the exclusive contract, right? Meaning they designed the Seahawks' uniforms from the ground up knowing exactly where they were required to put the swoosh. And then they coincidentally stuck a giant coloured box around it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nike doesn't force their swoosh into the design like Adidas forces the 3 stripes into everything.

Did you watch the Rose and Sugar Bowls? Each of the top four had giant chromed swooshes.

Also, they designed the Seahawks' current look with a design element that exists primarily to draw attention to the swoosh. Nike's just as shameless as Adidas. Just in a different way.

Yep, that giant chromed out swoosh is completely distracting me from the rest of the uniform /s

4609613081.jpg?w=780

Keep wearing that tin foil hat Ice it looks great on you

What is it about Nike fanboys declaring anyone who doesn't shower praise on their chosen company to be crazy conspiracy theorists?

I'm not a fanboy at all actually. I'm just not a fan of your consistent use of hyperbole to try and prove your point. There's a smart discussion to be had about the current situation of company branding within sports. You've just proven time and time again you're not the person to have it with.

Not everything Nike does in uniform design is an effort to push their brand forward, but they are definitely guilty of doing it. Hell the biggest indicator of Nike pushing their brand is staring you right in the face in that very picture. (Hint: it's not the logo)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nike doesn't force their swoosh into the design like Adidas forces the 3 stripes into everything.

Did you watch the Rose and Sugar Bowls? Each of the top four had giant chromed swooshes.

Also, they designed the Seahawks' current look with a design element that exists primarily to draw attention to the swoosh. Nike's just as shameless as Adidas. Just in a different way.

Yep, that giant chromed out swoosh is completely distracting me from the rest of the uniform /s

4609613081.jpg?w=780

Keep wearing that tin foil hat Ice it looks great on you

What is it about Nike fanboys declaring anyone who doesn't shower praise on their chosen company to be crazy conspiracy theorists?

Nike doesn't force their swoosh into the design like Adidas forces the 3 stripes into everything.

Did you watch the Rose and Sugar Bowls? Each of the top four had giant chromed swooshes.

Also, they designed the Seahawks' current look with a design element that exists primarily to draw attention to the swoosh. Nike's just as shameless as Adidas. Just in a different way.

Yes I watched both the Bowls. Yes there were 4 chromed out Swooshes on the uniforms. Cool. They colored in their company logo with a diamond pattern. As I recall, the previous Nat'l Championship trophy was a crystal ball and most of the time the national championship winning team gets a championship ring with diamonds in it. There's justification for that.

Yeah. The old trophy was crystal. And it was replaced by a new trophy that doesn't include diamond or crystal months before these uniforms were created. As for the rings? That's a stretch. Every championship team in the Big Four gets diamond-studded rings. Using your logic we should break out the chromed diamond patterns for everyone!

Come on. They were giant reflective Nike swooshes on the chests of the four most prominent college football teams. You're either naive or a Nike fanboy if you think that wasn't about promoting Nike's brand.

The Seahawks uniforms were inspired by the totem poles of the Pacific Northwest. It just so happens that the NFL mandates the manufacturer's logo to be on the sleeve, right in the middle of the sleeve design. That's not the design's fault. The diamond swoosh wasn't a distraction, and the Seahawks design doesn't say, "hey look at the swoosh".

Really? You're aware that the NFL's guidelines re: manufacturer logo placement were in place long before Nike got the exclusive contract, right? Meaning they designed the Seahawks' uniforms from the ground up knowing exactly where they were required to put the swoosh. And then they coincidentally stuck a giant coloured box around it.

Quite aware of the manufacturer's logo requirement. But if nike is all about their own self-promotion, then why not do the same with the Bucs, Jags, Dolphins and Vikings? Nike easily could've found soemthing to highlight the swoosh on those uniforms.

As for the college swoosh, they weren't any bigger than usual and they weren't very reflective. The First football Final Four might be getting diamond studded rings for making it to the semifinal, but I bet if you asked Mark Helfrich or Urban Meyer, they weren't chasing the Rose or Sugar bowl ring. And last time I checked, diamonds don't stretch with ease.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a fanboy at all actually. I'm just not a fan of your consistent use of hyperbole to try and prove your point. There's a smart discussion to be had about the current situation of company branding within sports. You've just proven time and time again you're not the person to have it with.

Well I'm sorry you feel that way, but I'm rather confident in my "body of work" (sorry Vet) here. No offence? I'm not feeling the pressing need to change how I post or my opinions on these matters because you've decided you don't like the way I talk about Nike, Adidas, and UA. Or how I feel their need to push their brands above those of the teams these uniforms are supposedly for has changed the world of sports design for the worse. You're entitled to your opinion, but so am I.

Not everything Nike does in uniform design is an effort to push their brand forward, but they are definitely guilty of doing it.

Of course they are. They stuck chromed swooshes on the front of the four most visible football teams in the world on New Year's Day. I said this to bkknight95 but it goes for you too. You're naive if you think that decision didn't have anything to do with pushing the Nike brand.

While we're "critiquing" debate styles...

Posting a single picture where the chromed swoosh wasn't very reflective and then insinuating that this was the norm for all four teams all the time is incredibly disingenuous.

Quite aware of the manufacturer's logo requirement. But if nike is all about their own self-promotion, then why not do the same with the Bucs, Jags, Dolphins and Vikings? Nike easily could've found soemthing to highlight the swoosh on those uniforms.

Any number of reasons. The Vikings' uniforms are very neo-classical. The team probably had a very clear idea of what they wanted. It's entirely possible that the Seahawks gave Nike free reign. It's not as if each NFL team's relationship with Nike is the same. The fact that the Raiders, Packers, Falcons, and Panthers have elected to keep the older templates and materials is proof positive of that.

The Seahawks, like the University of Oregon, are right in Nike's backyard. There was a lot of talk about Nike making the Seahawks the "Oregon of the NFL." If there's any truth to that it would mean that Nike had more of a free reign. Which would allow them to put little things like a design element that highlights their logo into the larger package.

There's also the fact that the Seahawks' new uniforms were the first redesign they did after getting the contract. So it's the one they'd want to make the biggest splash with re: their own branding.

It's also quite telling that you seem dismissive of the idea that Nike wouldn't jump at any opportunity to promote its brand. It's a business. It's what they do. I don't care how much you like their shoes. Or their uniform designs. Liking a company does not mean that it's run by benevolent forces who don't sink to the dirty tricks their competition uses.

Nike, like Adidas and UA, will promote their brand when given the opportunity. That doesn't make them "evil." It makes them successful companies.

As for the college swoosh, they weren't any bigger than usual and they weren't very reflective. The First football Final Four might be getting diamond studded rings for making it to the semifinal, but I bet if you asked Mark Helfrich or Urban Meyer, they weren't chasing the Rose or Sugar bowl ring. And last time I checked, diamonds don't stretch with ease.

You misunderstood me when I said "Big Four." I meant the four big pro leagues in North America. The NFL, MLB, NBA, and NHL. The champions of all four all get championship rings covered in diamonds. By your logic, that the diamond-pattern chromed swooshes make sense because of the rings, giving all sixteen teams in the Stanley Cup Playoffs a large chrome diamond-patterned Reebok patch is a great idea!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adidas has been consistently terrible in both design and quality control at every sport for several years now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So maybe this is just a dumb question, but it was just coincidence that Nike had all four playoff teams in their fold? They don't have some special kind of contract to do all playoff teams? I'm worried about what happens with the uniforms in the future when we have Nike v. Adidas in the playoff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So maybe this is just a dumb question, but it was just coincidence that Nike had all four playoff teams in their fold? They don't have some special kind of contract to do all playoff teams? I'm worried about what happens with the uniforms in the future when we have Nike v. Adidas in the playoff.

It was a coincidence. Nike, as far as I know, doesn't have a "playoff uniform" contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD CAN REEBOK COME BACK TO THE NFL!

Why, so we can see more "great" designs like the Cardinals' and Bengals' crap? Or the hideous TechFit template that Reebok was beginning to force on the NFL before Nike took the contract away?

I know Nike gets a lot of hate on this site, but let's not rewrite history to pretend that Reebok always did a great job with the NFL, because they didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any number of reasons. The Vikings' uniforms are very neo-classical. The team probably had a very clear idea of what they wanted. It's entirely possible that the Seahawks gave Nike free reign. It's not as if each NFL team's relationship with Nike is the same. The fact that the Raiders, Packers, Falcons, and Panthers have elected to keep the older templates and materials is proof positive of that.

The Seahawks, like the University of Oregon, are right in Nike's backyard. There was a lot of talk about Nike making the Seahawks the "Oregon of the NFL." If there's any truth to that it would mean that Nike had more of a free reign. Which would allow them to put little things like a design element that highlights their logo into the larger package.

There's also the fact that the Seahawks' new uniforms were the first redesign they did after getting the contract. So it's the one they'd want to make the biggest splash with re: their own branding.

I never thought of the new Vikings uniforms of being neo-classical, but now that I think of it, they are.

Also, the Patriots chose to stick with the Reebok-era uniforms

Edited by Ice_Cap
threw a quote box around the material you wanted to quote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD CAN REEBOK COME BACK TO THE NFL!

Why, so we can see more "great" designs like the Cardinals' and Bengals' crap? Or the hideous TechFit template that Reebok was beginning to force on the NFL before Nike took the contract away?

I know Nike gets a lot of hate on this site, but let's not rewrite history to pretend that Reebok always did a great job with the NFL, because they didn't.

In terms of build quality? I never saw sweat boxes, transparent pants, mismatched shades of green, or large ugly collars on the Reebok uniforms.

Nike CAN be the undisputed number one here. They aren't because they tend to buy into their own hype. The hockey and football teams need to take notes from their soccer counterparts. Less is more. Nike's soccer team understands that. If their hockey and football teams did too? They'd be golden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We did see plenty of ugly piping, awkward side panels, and of course, the terrible TechFit jerseys that stretched and warped everything back when Reebok had the contract, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We did see plenty of ugly piping, awkward side panels, and of course, the terrible TechFit jerseys that stretched and warped everything back when Reebok had the contract, though.

The piping and side panels were on the design end of things. I'm talking about build quality. The TechFit jerseys were horrible, but even then? At least we didn't see sweat boxes, large ugly collars, flywire on the outside (where it serves no practical purpose), or transparent pants. Adidas and Nike both had templates that needed to be tweaked. Adidas' flaws were less egregious, in my opinion.

As for those Reebok design elements? Those were a product of the times more then anything else. The Broncos had the first panelled uniform, and in many ways it kicked off the trend that would lead to the crap we see in Cincinnati and Arizona. It was also a Nike design. We also saw piped and panelled designs by Nike at the collegiate level. Chances are we'd have gotten similar looks if Nike had the contract in the early 2000s.

The Reebok era also gave us the Bills' current uniforms, much like how the Nike era has given us the Vikings' uniforms. The design tendencies of both companies can be reigned in by a team that has a clear idea of what it wants. Build quality, however, is something else all together. And it's the area where Nike falls short of Reebok/Adidas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While we're "critiquing" debate styles...

Posting a single picture where the chromed swoosh wasn't very reflective and then insinuating that this was the norm for all four teams all the time is incredibly disingenuous.

I kind of thought picking a picture in direct sunlight at one of the brightest games of the year would work but I guess not. Maybe I should have picked a picture of FSU or Ohio State where the swoosh was fairly hard to see against the white jerseys instead. The diamond swoosh wasn't really any more visible or in your face than the regular team coloured versions. You likened it to Adidas' use of the three stripes and I pointed out how ridiculous that statement was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While we're "critiquing" debate styles...

Posting a single picture where the chromed swoosh wasn't very reflective and then insinuating that this was the norm for all four teams all the time is incredibly disingenuous.

I kind of thought picking a picture in direct sunlight at one of the brightest games of the year would work but I guess not. Maybe I should have picked a picture of FSU or Ohio State where the swoosh was fairly hard to see against the white jerseys instead.

Maybe it's because I'm a uniform geek but I noticed the chromed swooshes on all four uniforms. More so then I would have if they were just in contrasting team colours. Those tend to just sort of become part of the expected scenery. The chromed swooshes did stand out.

The diamond swoosh wasn't really any more visible or in your face than the regular team coloured versions. You likened it to Adidas' use of the three stripes and I pointed out how ridiculous that statement was.

Heh. When did I piss in your Cheerios, exactly? I think this is longest back-and-forth you and I have ever had.

Anyway I stand by my assertion. I don't think it's ridiculous at all. They stuck chromed versions of their logo on four of the most notable football teams in the world on a day full of notable football games. No, Nike doesn't have a singular design element like Adidas' three stripes that they work into every uniform they design. They still find ways to promote their brand (which is the swoosh) at every opportunity though.

No, the ridiculous sentiment at play in this thread is that Nike is somehow more restrained then Adidas when it comes to their branding. That's laughable.

On Adidas' three stripes...it's a thing, but it's not as widespread as many make it out to be. They don't slap it on their NCAA football uniforms. Nor do they incorporate it into NBA team uniforms they work on. It's there on soccer uniforms, and plenty of NBA merchandise. In terms of football though? It's notable by its absence. Not that this makes Adidas seem any less "restrained." Like Nike they push their branding in other ways in the absence of a singular design element.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now