Buffalo

NFL 2017 changes?

1,647 posts in this topic

41 minutes ago, Huntr said:

As the vapor untouchable The Limited jerseys have been discussed, what about the vapor untouchable the Elite as I would image the similar type that the 1st round draft players received? It has the elastic sleeves and the Nike swoosh on the right place close to the shoulder area. 

There isn't an elite version for the vapor untouchable jerseys just game, and limited. The players at the draft received limited jerseys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/30/2017 at 10:42 AM, BJ Sands said:

I'd almost bet the maker's mark moves to the front when the next supplier contract is signed. Happening in the NBA, MLB and really surprised adidas didn't find a way to sneak their logo onto the front of NHL jerseys.

 

Nike was given the option of one logo on the front only or a logo on each sleeve. They elected to keep the sleeves. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BRice16 said:

 

Nike was given the option of one logo on the front only or a logo on each sleeve. They elected to keep the sleeves. 

 

I'm very surprised by that, given how much Under Armour is presumably paying to have their logo on the front of MLB uniforms. I'd think that a logo on the front would be more visible than one on each sleeve.

 

Case in point: at the college level, where these things are much less tightly regulated by the NCAA at the macro level, and teams are free to make their own apparel deals, most manufacturers choose to put the logo on the front.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, kroywen said:

 

I'm very surprised by that, given how much Under Armour is presumably paying to have their logo on the front of MLB uniforms. I'd think that a logo on the front would be more visible than one on each sleeve.

 

Case in point: at the college level, where these things are much less tightly regulated by the NCAA at the macro level, and teams are free to make their own apparel deals, most manufacturers choose to put the logo on the front.

 

It's kind of surprising the manufacturer logo is not on the back neck in baseball (where the MLB logo is).  You see the back neck of the pitcher every pitch.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, WSU151 said:

 

It's kind of surprising the manufacturer logo is not on the back neck in baseball (where the MLB logo is).  You see the back neck of the pitcher every pitch.

 

Yeah. that'd be way more visible than the sleeve logo is. Betting Majestic wasn't willing to pay for that real estate, though.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, BRice16 said:

 

Nike was given the option of one logo on the front only or a logo on each sleeve. They elected to keep the sleeves. 

This is wrong, a logo on the front was never an option for the NFL because they don't want anything competeing with "the shield" it was either logo on the sleeve or no deal. It would take a mammoth of a contract for the NFL to compromise their logo, atleast when Goodel is commish.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, kroywen said:

 

I'm very surprised by that, given how much Under Armour is presumably paying to have their logo on the front of MLB uniforms. I'd think that a logo on the front would be more visible than one on each sleeve.

 

Case in point: at the college level, where these things are much less tightly regulated by the NCAA at the macro level, and teams are free to make their own apparel deals, most manufacturers choose to put the logo on the front.

The NCAA mandates onlyone logo on the front of the jersey.  It also forbids adidas using the three stripes on their uniforms and some coaching/sideline gear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dont care said:

This is wrong, a logo on the front was never an option for the NFL because they don't want anything competeing with "the shield" it was either logo on the sleeve or no deal. It would take a mammoth of a contract for the NFL to compromise their logo, atleast when Goodel is commish.

But what about this? There are two elements competing with the Shield. 

 

IMG_8919.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a nike logo can't compete with the shield, but it's fine if it competes with the actual team logos that appear on the sleeve right above or below it?  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know for a fact either way, but there's a huge difference between teams and the league putting logos on the front and allowing a manufacturer to put logos on the front. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gothamite said:

I don't know for a fact either way, but there's a huge difference between teams and the league putting logos on the front and allowing a manufacturer to put logos on the front. 

 

Oh sure, but at least you could argue that a front Nike logo would be far enough from the other marks to avoid the same kind of association that comes with it literally looking like a part of the team's logo or striping pattern in some cases.  Sleeves are so small that I think if it has to appear somewhere, and above the NOB isn't an option, maybe the front is actually the least intrusive spot, even if that sounds counterintuitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BJ Sands said:

But what about this? There are two elements competing with the Shield. 

 

IMG_8919.JPG

A captains patch created by the league, and a team logo that's a part of the league is different than a manufacturers logo...

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

Oh sure, but at least you could argue that a front Nike logo would be far enough from the other marks to avoid the same kind of association that comes with it literally looking like a part of the team's logo or striping pattern in some cases.  Sleeves are so small that I think if it has to appear somewhere, and above the NOB isn't an option, maybe the front is actually the least intrusive spot, even if that sounds counterintuitive.

 

Hmm.  Maybe. 

 

But there's also an argument to be made that putting swooshes on the sleeves makes them recede into the striping pattern.  Something on the front will always be separate from the rest of the design, even if it has to compete with other elements on the front of the jersey. 

 

And as an aside, I really really really really hate those stupid captain patches. Talk about pointless clutter.  They contribute nothing, and take up valuable space. 

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else hate the captain patches? The idea is great in principle, but they are so poorly executed...

 

EDIT: After actually reading the posts before mine, yes, I am not alone! :lol: If they are set on the concept, a simple, NHL-inspired, team-designed C would be a major upgrade

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually prefer the manufacturer's logo on the sleeve, rather than on the front. I do find it less intrusive, and the manufacturer's logo seems like a simple adornment on top of the striping pattern or TV number. It sticks out way less there.

 

And I loathe those captain's patches. They're terribly ugly, in addition to being way too big and totally unnecessary. Honestly, I hate any sort of captain's patch or identifier outside of the "C" in hockey and the armband in soccer. Totally unnecessary on a baseball, football, or basketball uniform.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, kroywen said:

I actually prefer the manufacturer's logo on the sleeve, rather than on the front. I do find it less intrusive, and the manufacturer's logo seems like a simple adornment on top of the striping pattern or TV number. It sticks out way less there.

 

And I loathe those captain's patches. They're terribly ugly, in addition to being way too big and totally unnecessary. Honestly, I hate any sort of captain's patch or identifier outside of the "C" in hockey and the armband in soccer. Totally unnecessary on a baseball, football, or basketball uniform.

 

The manufacturer's logo on the sleeve just seems normal in the NFL.  In the 90s, Starter, Champion, Apex, Wilson, Reebok, Puma, and Adidas all had their logos on the sleeves.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The captain patches are fine on the uniforms and don't really take much away from the shield or design/identity of the uniform. I don't look at a uniform and immediately get drawn to it. I like the idea of team designed captain patches as well.

 

I think a simple custom "C" in team colors would be fine. No need for the stars identifying how many years the player has held captain status.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/8/2017 at 8:54 AM, Gothamite said:

 

Hmm.  Maybe. 

 

But there's also an argument to be made that putting swooshes on the sleeves makes them recede into the striping pattern.  Something on the front will always be separate from the rest of the design, even if it has to compete with other elements on the front of the jersey. 

 

And as an aside, I really really really really hate those stupid captain patches. Talk about pointless clutter.  They contribute nothing, and take up valuable space. 

 

Pointless is exactly the right word. In addition to being ugly, the captaincy title doesn't seem to mean all that much. It's an honorific that means little other than who gets to participate in the coin toss. At least in hockey, wearing the captain's "C" is sought after. The players affix meaning to it. 

 

So yeah, you could redesign it and make it look better. But it would still be pointless. 

2 people like this

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