NFL 2017 changes?

[JWhiz96]

I think the red-white-and-blue Oilers identity is slightly overrated yeah, but their original red-silver-blue identity is gorgeous. If the Titans went that route I certainly would welcome the change. As it stands now, they happen to look dated. And their primary sucks.

[FSUViking]

How long before "chrome" finds its way into an NFL uniform combo?

[The_Admiral]

4 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

I may be the only person on the board who thinks this, but the Oilers identity is hilariously overrated

 

You're hilariously overrated! It was a spectacular identity. The logo was such effective minimalism, the color scheme is one that always looks good (Sac. Kings, Nordiques, Expos kind of), and the striping matched across every instance. The only change I would have made would have been to drop-shadow the names and numbers to match the wordmark (if only in spirit; the wordmark's drop shadow was huuuuuge). 

 

A great thing you could have done with the Oilers today is the versatility of the road uniforms. While the home set pretty much has to be white-blue-white-blue, you could go one of three ways on the road depending on maximum separation with the home team: blue pants with white socks, white pants with blue socks, or white pants with white socks. All three combos look cool in their own way, but the head-to-toe white would be the one that would feel like some kind of special appearance.

 

Oilers > Texans > Titans. I'd have rather had the Houston Oilers and a Tennessee Titans team that mostly looks like the Texans.

[San Diego]

 

 

 

 

[UnclearInitial]

The Oilers 80's identity was fantastic, definitely my favorite football uniforms.Love it, it's footballing uniforms perfection. Great colors, great striping consistency, great logo that was simple and instantly recognizable. Even though the titans couldn't reach those heights and they're a "modern" team, I would't mind if they just took those Oilers uniforms and just swapped red with navy, since the oilers aren't coming back anytime

[SFGiants58]

8 hours ago, the admiral said:

 

You're hilariously overrated! It was a spectacular identity. The logo was such effective minimalism, the color scheme is one that always looks good (Sac. Kings, Nordiques, Expos kind of), and the striping matched across every instance. The only change I would have made would have been to drop-shadow the names and numbers to match the wordmark (if only in spirit; the wordmark's drop shadow was huuuuuge). 

 

A great thing you could have done with the Oilers today is the versatility of the road uniforms. While the home set pretty much has to be white-blue-white-blue, you could go one of three ways on the road depending on maximum separation with the home team: blue pants with white socks, white pants with blue socks, or white pants with white socks. All three combos look cool in their own way, but the head-to-toe white would be the one that would feel like some kind of special appearance.

 

Oilers > Texans > Titans. I'd have rather had the Houston Oilers and a Tennessee Titans team that mostly looks like the Texans.

 

Well, here's my problem with the Oilers' identity:

 

Floating stripes: these things look hideous, no matter how they're applied.

 

 

 

The color scheme is wasted on these uniforms that everybody chalks up as "classic." Making the center stripe red would produce a far better uniform.

 

I like that the road uniforms had that versatility, I really do. But they shouldn't have had floating stripes. We give Ohio State and Florida rightfully deserved grief for their floating stripes, but somehow the Oilers get a pass because "classic." Floating stripes, unless it's the trim on a basketball uniform, should never get a pass.

 

Also, I don't like the logo, especially when compared to the Texans' and Titans' logos. The Texans' logo is a beautiful appropriation of the Texas flag, one that deserves to be seen on a white helmet:

 

 

The Titans also have an excellent logo in their set, one they've sadly limited to their shoulder caps/sleeves:

 

 

Get some powder blue on that thing, and you'd have another logo that's better than the oil derrick. 

 

I want to like the Oilers' identity, but I can't bring myself to do it. This is what you might call "hype backlash." Give the Titans and Texans a few tweaks, and they'd both be better looking than the Oilers ever were.

[TBGKon]

13 hours ago, Dolphins Dynasty said:

The thing I don't like about the Titans uniforms are the shoulder panels; they just look weird.

I thought they were great back in 99 and the early 2000's because it was different.  Now that it's been 17 years or so, it looks a bit dated.

 

I wouldn't do a ton, but a tweak is necessary.

[TBGKon]

10 hours ago, FSUViking said:

How long before "chrome" finds its way into an NFL uniform combo?

if you're talking full helmet, it's going to have to be the right team.  As for elements, the Bucs use a chrome facemask fulltime currently.

[aawagner011]

I don't recall anyone else ragging the Oilers, Florida, or Ohio State for what you're calling "floating stripes." I assume you mean the middle stripe matching the jersey color. I've never had a problem with it. It's just a striping pattern.

[Gothamite]

I hate it on the Giants' pants.  Really ruins the look for me.

 

 

[SFGiants58]

Just now, aawagner011 said:

I don't recall anyone else ragging the Oilers, Florida, or Ohio State for what you're calling "floating stripes." I assume you mean the middle stripe matching the jersey color. I've never had a problem with it. It's just a striping pattern.

 

That's exactly what I mean, and I don't like it. Heck, making the center stripe red would be a far better solution to the Oilers' "floating stripe" problem, as demonstrated by @oldschoolvikings' work on the Titans:

 

 

I could get behind this for the Titans, namely them wearing a fixed-up version of the Oilers' uniforms. But I still would rather see tweaks to their current template, as I happen to like the "shoulder yokes."

[Gothamite]

I also like the shoulder yokes, hearkening back to a classic football look.

 

 

[Sport]

I like "floating stripes" as long as there's a purpose. In the Oilers' case the stripes were always the same no matter where they appeared. They could plop those stripes in those colors on anything, even without the logo, and people would know what they meant. That's brand strength that you'd lose if you went flip flopping the colors around depending on what background they appear. 

 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

 

 

 

So good!

[leopard88]

 

45 minutes ago, McCarthy said:

I like "floating stripes" as long as there's a purpose. In the Oilers' case the stripes were always the same no matter where they appeared. They could plop those stripes in those colors on anything, even without the logo, and people would know what they meant. That's brand strength that you'd lose if you went flip flopping the colors around depending on what background they appear. 

 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

 

 

 

So good!

 

What made it work well for the Oilers is that the stripes never appeared on a red background, so they could always use the same pattern.

 

Florida's problem is that when they insisted on always keeping the colors in the same order, the orange "stripes" disappeared on an orange background.

 

 

They appear to have moved away from that application . . . though it still exists on the helmet and pants if we assume they're supposed to use the same pattern.

 

 

[Ray Lankford]

32 minutes ago, leopard88 said:

 

 

What made it work well for the Oilers is that the stripes never appeared on a red background, so they could always use the same pattern.

 

Florida's problem is that when they insisted on always keeping the colors in the same order, the orange "stripes" disappeared on an orange background.

 

 

They appear to have moved away from that application . . . though it still exists on the helmet and pants if we assume they're supposed to use the same pattern.

 

 

Except that's how the stripes are on the helmet. The new orange jersey no longer matches.

[leopard88]

It's a question of priorities.  Do they want to always have a pattern with five visible stripes (including 2nd and 4th stripes that match the background) or do they want to always have an O/W/B/W/O pattern . . . even if that means the orange stripes effectively disappear on an orange background?

 

For the most part (at least until the recent change to the orange jersey), they have stuck with the O/W/B/W/O pattern, which makes thing seem mismatched to me . . . even though I know exactly what they're going for.  For example, the white jersey sort of seems to have a different pattern than the blue jersey because the stripe that matches the jersey is in a different location in the pattern. I think that's because my eye doesn't see the stripe that matches the background as a stripe (meaning, for example, that I see the blue jersey pattern as an O/W/O Northwestern stripe instead of a five stripe pattern).

 

 

* -- You're welcome for the blue example.

 

 

 

[leopard88]

P.S.  Despite what I said, I visualize five stripes on the white jersey, which is also how I see Ohio State's red jersey.

 

 

On that note, I like how Ohio State always keeps the red and black stripes in the same place, but substitutes gray/silver for white on a white background.

 

[hawk36]

3 hours ago, Gothamite said:

I hate it on the Giants' pants.  Really ruins the look for me.

 

 

Completely agree. I'd even go one step further and simply have a single red stripe on the pants to match the single red stripe on the helmet. My example probably has the stripe too wide (better to match the width of the Raiders' one) but you get the idea.

[Ray Lankford]

The stripe on the Giants helmet is effectively blue-red-blue.

[leopard88]

8 minutes ago, Ray Lankford said:

The stripe on the Giants helmet is effectively blue-red-blue.

 

The blue stripes are just reeeeaaallllllyyyyyyy wide.