buckeye

College Football Uniforms - 2017 Season

1,613 posts in this topic

3 hours ago, Lights Out said:

No, because it's not just a Nike problem. Adidas is a million times worse when it comes to shoulder stripes.

 

a0IBlPD.jpg

Not just being a Nike problem doesn't mean it isn't a Nike problem. 

4 people like this

Share this post


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

i wish i knew how to bridge this gap because i don't think "it just has to look good" does anything positive for sports design, but when we push reason and "why" in design a lot of people (not you) believe we're just making things up or pushing some marketing agenda.

Often because it seems like you or other designers are.

Stuff like Nike claiming the same mass produced template represents the "iconic jaws of Husky Stadium" and "the horns of a razorback" for Washington and Arkansas stand out.

Or how Nike claimed that Syracuse, a team for a school in Upstate NY, had vertically stretched numbers to represent New York City's tall buildings.

Or how the Timberwolves claim the A sans crossbar in their wordmark represents a Viking rune for wolves. When in reality that rune means oxen. 

As does some dweeb claiming a striping pattern used since the 1940s represents UCLA's "past, present, and future." 

No, UCLA chose that striping pattern back then for one reason. Someone thought it looked good. 

 

And I really don't get why you see that as a bad thing. 

Why do the Dodgers have red front numbers on a primarily blue and white uniform? It looks good. 

Why do the Blackhawks have different striping patterns on their home and road looks? It looks good. 

Why do the Yankees wear pinstripes? It looks good. 

 

Sometimes there's a deeper meaning to things. The Philadelphia Eagles chose their mascot to reflect FDR's NRA organisation meant to combat the depression for example. 

 

Design companies really just embarrass themselves by trying to imply meaning to EVERYTHING though.

It does come up like you're all making stuff up when the claims seem ludicrous under the tiniest bit of scrutiny. 

 

What's so wrong with saying "we made the Browns' orange brighter because we thought it contrasted better with brown than the older shade"? That seems like a perfectly fine explanation. 

The real explanation of "it represents the passion of the Dawg Pound" is just ridiculous.  

 

In order to properly pull off the "everything has meaning" you need to be both a philosopher and historian in addition to designer. And from what I've seen? Very few in your profession qualify as either. Let alone both.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, WSU151 said:

 

Numbers have never been compared to stripes, as they are two different functions.  The Patriots' red jerseys in the 80s weren't docked points because the numbers didn't match the scale of the stripes.

 

Certainly they have. A complete uniform is a whole comprised of several individual pieces of design, and the whole looks best when those individual pieces prioritize working together over working individually. Maybe you didn't dock the Patriots points for that, but I did.

 

3 hours ago, WSU151 said:

 

I realize you guys are design gurus, but I don't agree 100%.  There are many uniforms where everything is not perfect but it's still a great uniform.  So it's more like the trumpets are playing a different melody than the flutes, but it's all comes together and sounds fantastic.

 

If these shoulder stripes had thick gold stripes and thin white stripes it'd look really gimmicky.  As is, it looks traditional.

 

To me, the guy out of key would be like a Vegas gold helmet but neon yellow stripes.

 

It's true that heavy gold stripes with thin white trim to match the numbers would have looked odd here, but I never suggested that. I think you have to look at what the signature element of the look is and consider that the constant. They've been all over the map with numbers (one-color, two-color, three-color, shadow, block, Clarendon, futuristic, gold, white, blue, navy, you name it), but the color and proportion of that stripe has remained, so that becomes the base for coordinating the other elements. For reasons previously mentioned, I prefer one-color numbers with these stripes rather than two-color numbers. As @Ice_Cap so eloquently put it, it just looks good.

 

The home uniform has a *lot* of blue and gold, but very little white, and most of it is concentrated in those stripes. Aesthetically, I think white numbers greatly improve the color balance of the uniform. It leaves very little gold *on the jersey,* which is potentially less desirable for retail, but that's without a doubt the bottom of the priority list for me. In the context of the entire uniform, there is more than enough gold to make up for it. For the same reason, I'd prefer gold pants on the away uniform to balance all the white and blue. To throw your own argument back at you, solid white numbers would be a better functional choice as well.

 

3 hours ago, BrandMooreArt said:

 

agree 100% on the numbers and i think this font works best in one color too. how the outer stroke on the number closes up on the serif (see the 6) annoys me a bit— but, i still like where they ended up. i think with the home jersey because the whole concept is about this classic look, having a white number would look off. it wouldn't be traditional, but would be this new design that i think would probably feel stuck between eras. so in using the gold number, you probably need the outline (or a drop shadow as they've done before) to make it legible. it definitely isn't what i would like to have seen done if this were a brand new team, but this does feel more like UCLA. 

 

 

it's all part of the same design and every detail should work together. unless you're going to break it for a good reason like i described above. you can look to UCLA's previous Adidas jerseys to see how the stripes and numbers are at odds with one another. it ends up feeling as though each element was designed independently from the other and it looks cheap. the worst case scenario is something like the Browns, where the stripes and wordmark dominate the jersey so much, it makes the numbers hard to read— they're very distracting. when something is off like Andrew describes, its like one guy in a band that isn't playing in key. but again, for UCLA, we'll just say it's "visual jazz" :)

 

I actually think of the white as more classic. They used white numbers for years before they ever had gold ones. For me, combining the solid white numbers with the traditional gold-sandwiched stripe is a nice blend of the "original" UCLA stripe uniforms and and the "classic" UCLA stripe uniforms.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, andrewharrington said:

 

Certainly they have. A complete uniform is a whole comprised of several individual pieces of design, and the whole looks best when those individual pieces prioritize working together over working individually. Maybe you didn't dock the Patriots points for that, but I did.

 

 

It's true that heavy gold stripes with thin white trim to match the numbers would have looked odd here, but I never suggested that. I think you have to look at what the signature element of the look is and consider that the constant. They've been all over the map with numbers (one-color, two-color, three-color, shadow, block, Clarendon, futuristic, gold, white, blue, navy, you name it), but the color and proportion of that stripe has remained, so that becomes the base for coordinating the other elements. For reasons previously mentioned, I prefer one-color numbers with these stripes rather than two-color numbers. As @Ice_Cap so eloquently put it, it just looks good.

 

The home uniform has a *lot* of blue and gold, but very little white, and most of it is concentrated in those stripes. Aesthetically, I think white numbers greatly improve the color balance of the uniform. It leaves very little gold *on the jersey,* which is potentially less desirable for retail, but that's without a doubt the bottom of the priority list for me. In the context of the entire uniform, there is more than enough gold to make up for it. For the same reason, I'd prefer gold pants on the away uniform to balance all the white and blue. To throw your own argument back at you, solid white numbers would be a better functional choice as well.

 

 

I actually think of the white as more classic. They used white numbers for years before they ever had gold ones. For me, combining the solid white numbers with the traditional gold-sandwiched stripe is a nice blend of the "original" UCLA stripe uniforms and and the "classic" UCLA stripe uniforms.

 

I think white numbers in Clarendon (like they used to have and the 2009 alternate) would look better than white numbers in this designed block number font.  Note that in 2009 the throwback look didn't have gold in the stripes...

ucla_usc1.jpg

 

I would guess something like this will be worn in 2019 (as an alternate at a minimum) for the 100th anniversary of the school

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, WavePunter said:

It's ABSOLUTELY a better look than these:

IMG_0713.PNG

IMG_0714.JPG

Seeing as that first one was screened on they could have had it run down to the chest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the numbers do match the stripes. When you look at them they are both WGW, asking more the strokes to all be the same width on the numbers would look rediculous so having a traditional outline makes sense. Now on the aways I can see why they went with just blue numbers because BGB numbers would be difficult to read on white jerseys. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BrandMooreArt said:

 

yea, there is a disconnect between designers and audience. Andrew isn't saying you can't like something that is "off" but saying to him it's OK for it to be off (or, still be great) is like saying "it's OK for you to half ass your job because no one cares". and a lot of times the way we (designers) speak might come off as we're "gatekeepers of good design" or some :censored:, but honestly, you won't find many craftsmen like Andrew, and the details of the craft is something we both geek over. i wish i knew how to bridge this gap because i don't think "it just has to look good" does anything positive for sports design, but when we push reason and "why" in design a lot of people (not you) believe we're just making things up or pushing some marketing agenda. i don't know— i feel like we're all having one conversation in two different languages sometimes. 

I think some of that comes down to the fact that certain designers prioritize certain design elements over others, or carry different consistencies across a uniform than another designer might..

For example, the Dolphins' throwbacks have outlines on the numbers - everyone loves them (designers included).. The Browns' previous look had solid numbers - everyone loves them as well (designers included).. These two jerseys were the same basic design, just with different number treatment, so one would assume if there is an "optimal" or "perfect" design, then one of the two uniforms is "wrong".. 

A another example would be comparing Penn State and Notre Dame.. Both have solid jerseys and otherwise stripeless uniforms, yet one team uses number outlines while the other does not.. Logically, they can't both be "correct" from a design perspective..

I think that's where part of the disconnect lies.. Designers can try to correlate things that have no direct correlation and call it "good design", when the opposite design treatment could be argued to be superior.. In the case of Ucla's numbers, having a central gold element (the #) trimmed in white (number outline) would actually match the stripe (center gold stripe trimmed in the white outer stripes).. 

I also get the "scaling" or "proportion" argument as well, but I think it's only an actual design issue if it's out of balance enough to cause some legitimate visual dissonance, but using standard elements (standard size numeral with standard width outline) pretty much eliminates that possibility, since it has become "standard" due to consistently looking appropriate..

I'm not sure what exactly I would've done with Ucla's numbers, and I'm not a professional designer, but I personally don't see any "design" issues with the route they went with the home jerseys (only possible design issue in the set being difference in home/road number treatment, which can certainly be debated).

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

Seeing as that first one was screened on they could have had it run down to the chest.

The issue with that is they were screened onto the yoke before the jersey was constructed.. The stripes end at the seam..

 

I think we can still agree that there are certainly solutions to the issue.. Manufacturers are just generally too lazy/cheap to use them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A shot of the UCLA jerseys outside of a studio...Not bad.  The stripes do seem to be skinnier than what Adidas did.

 

The crazy thing is people are commenting on UCLA's Instagram "bring adidas back" and "UA ripped you off".  Adidas's UCLA football unis were, for the most part, pretty bad.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, WSU151 said:
The crazy thing is people are commenting on UCLA's Instagram "bring adidas back" and "UA ripped you off".  Adidas's UCLA football unis were, for the most part, a complete :censored:storm.

Couldn't agree more;).

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, WavePunter said:

I think some of that comes down to the fact that certain designers prioritize certain design elements over others, or carry different consistencies across a uniform than another designer might..

For example, the Dolphins' throwbacks have outlines on the numbers - everyone loves them (designers included).. The Browns' previous look had solid numbers - everyone loves them as well (designers included).. These two jerseys were the same basic design, just with different number treatment, so one would assume if there is an "optimal" or "perfect" design, then one of the two uniforms is "wrong".. 

A another example would be comparing Penn State and Notre Dame.. Both have solid jerseys and otherwise stripeless uniforms, yet one team uses number outlines while the other does not.. Logically, they can't both be "correct" from a design perspective..

I think that's where part of the disconnect lies.. Designers can try to correlate things that have no direct correlation and call it "good design", when the opposite design treatment could be argued to be superior.. In the case of Ucla's numbers, having a central gold element (the #) trimmed in white (number outline) would actually match the stripe (center gold stripe trimmed in the white outer stripes).. 

I also get the "scaling" or "proportion" argument as well, but I think it's only an actual design issue if it's out of balance enough to cause some legitimate visual dissonance, but using standard elements (standard size numeral with standard width outline) pretty much eliminates that possibility, since it has become "standard" due to consistently looking appropriate..

I'm not sure what exactly I would've done with Ucla's numbers, and I'm not a professional designer, but I personally don't see any "design" issues with the route they went with the home jerseys (only possible design issue in the set being difference in home/road number treatment, which can certainly be debated).

 

right on; im a believer that creative problems do not have correct solutions. but that doesn't mean that there isn't a craft to it all. i like your example of the stroked numbers vs one color, but the issue with UCLA is they used both within a set of designs where those other teams/schools are consistent in which way they go on both home/road and this leads to a consistent image. it doesn't mean one way or the other is right, its an option in the tool box, yet with UCLA what im saying is this number font doesn't really hold a stroke well— the strokes close in the positive space of the number and i think this makes the number harder to read, or at least is a bit annoying. and Andrew has a good point that a white number on blue would provide a better color balance throughout the uniform. i just prefer the way they actually did it not because i think it looks best, but because it looks more true to UCLA history to me.

 

but thats just me, i will say that if i had to pick 1 person to design a set of numbers, the person behind this set would easily be one of my top 2 picks, so i don't want to push back too hard on the number font topic. and for what its worth, Andrew would be my other pick. :)

 

 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

D2 school Ohio Dominican has new Under Armour uniforms that feature something (I think) we've never seen before - an outline of the front pants stripe panel - and a gradient inside said panel.

 

 

DE32jnYWsAEgn0V.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/15/2017 at 4:21 PM, aawagner011 said:

Interesting observation: the home set has a thin gold number with the white outline, which gives it a little extra weight. The road set does not have an outline, but it has the same weight as if it did have the outline. The numbers are a little bit thicker. For example, pretend the white jersey had the normal blue number, plus a hidden blue outline with the same stroke width as the home set. But to the naked eye, it's a slightly thicker number.

 

Also, can't remember if Texas had been shown yet but they are moving to the new template.

 

 

Way too busy. We have the longhorn, the XII, Nike swoosh, the word Texas all above the number. I think you remove the longhorn, scoot things up and you are good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Clintau24 said:

D2 school Ohio Dominican has new Under Armour uniforms that feature something (I think) we've never seen before - an outline of the front pants stripe panel - and a gradient inside said panel.

 

 

DE32jnYWsAEgn0V.jpg

That's a catalog UA option.. It's called the Diablo template.. And I think that's just light reflecting off that panel, not a gradient.. Unless you know for a fact that it's a gradient, then I withdraw my comment..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, rtrich11 said:

Way too busy. We have the longhorn, the XII, Nike swoosh, the word Texas all above the number. I think you remove the longhorn, scoot things up and you are good.

I don't think you really can scoot things up.. The longhorn is contained entirely within the collar, so unless you plan on putting the word TEXAS partially on the collar, it wouldn't be freeing up any space..

Share this post


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

 

right on; im a believer that creative problems do not have correct solutions. but that doesn't mean that there isn't a craft to it all. i like your example of the stroked numbers vs one color, but the issue with UCLA is they used both within a set of designs where those other teams/schools are consistent in which way they go on both home/road and this leads to a consistent image. it doesn't mean one way or the other is right, its an option in the tool box, yet with UCLA what im saying is this number font doesn't really hold a stroke well— the strokes close in the positive space of the number and i think this makes the number harder to read, or at least is a bit annoying. and Andrew has a good point that a white number on blue would provide a better color balance throughout the uniform. i just prefer the way they actually did it not because i think it looks best, but because it looks more true to UCLA history to me.

 

but thats just me, i will say that if i had to pick 1 person to design a set of numbers, the person behind this set would easily be one of my top 2 picks, so i don't want to push back too hard on the number font topic. and for what its worth, Andrew would be my other pick. :)

 

 

I agree with this being the only real design issue with the set..

I also think white numbers would've helped the color balance, but I understand not using them..

Navy outlines on both sets, navy Adidas logo on away jersey and both pants, and navy bumper wordmarks could've possibly worked as well..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UCLA looks good...does anyone know when the Ducks are supposed to unveil their NEW uni's?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ljginger said:

UCLA looks good...does anyone know when the Ducks are supposed to unveil their NEW uni's?

If the last 2-3 years are any indication, then I wouldn't expect any formal unveilings until the weeks of the games... It's also not exactly known yet the extent of their new helmets and/or uniforms for next season, so it's difficult to speculate at this point without knowing exactly what kinds of new things to expect. I'd say fall camp would be the earliest that we could start to really see or hear about some new things, but even then I wouldn't expect any formal unveilings until the individual game weeks.

Share this post


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

That's a catalog UA option.. It's called the Diablo template.. And I think that's just light reflecting off that panel, not a gradient.. Unless you know for a fact that it's a gradient, then I withdraw my comment..

 

Not sure if it a gradient or not. Just looks that way. Probably just the lighting like you said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know under Helfrich that was how things were done...I thought things might be done differently under Taggart that's all!

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