NFL 2018 changes

[jdavidev]

18 hours ago, Brown1 said:

The Chargers are a great example of a team with great colors that is executed poorly. The yellow and powder blue are great together and they are bored down by the overuse of navy and white. Throw in some yellow pants and a different helmet. They could do so much better than what they wear now in my opinion. Even powder pant would probably be pretty nice, but not with the current jerseys.

Agree on the Chargers.  I don't mind the navy, would prefer the powder blue (though the royal and yellow alt was awesome, too -- if the Rams are going Navy and white only?).  But I can't stand the blocks around the lightning bolts on the shoulders and pants.  Makes it feel like the bolts are being held back by a baby gate, afraid they'll get out.  Too clunky.

 

Jets old uni's were just not good, with or without the black.  I am not opposed to going to a green helmet, redesign of uni's, but not back to that (fat chase Nike doing that anyways).

 

Speaking of Bengals, would love to clean up their uni's, get rid of all the blocks and extra tiger stripes (but leave that cheesy, incredible helmet alone), just sucks that Jaguars decided to go black and white, because I liked their white and black only jersey's and with their bombastic orange helmet, it really worked for them.

 

Bucs need to UNDO, their last set was amazing, top 10 in NFL.

 

Ravens could go with their alt purple and re-make the uni's based on that as their primary.  It looked really good.

[jdavidev]

On 4/19/2018 at 11:45 AM, monkeypower said:

 

Lee seems to have taken it upon himself to spearhead the Twitter grassroots campaign for new jerseys. I don't think I have heard anything else besides from him on Twitter, so I don't know if there really is any indication the Jets might do something.

 

If they do, I don't know where they go. I'd like to see an actual jet incorporated somewhere and I wouldn't hate the retro one in that concept or the even more retro plane, but I'm unsure of going straight throwback with no modernization.

 

Looks like a green dolphin named "Jets" at SeaWorld pooping.

[DouglasQuaid]

The Vikings should do an update like Miami and drop the black facemask for a purple or white and get rid of the serifs on the numbers. Also add white socks while their at it.

[TheOldRoman]

On ‎4‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 6:09 PM, insert name said:

No to the Jets. The only thing they need to do is fix the green. They don't need a uniform overhaul especially if it's Nike in charge.

Unpopular Opinion: I never saw the appeal to the 70s-90s uniforms. It is the most basic boring football uniform ever. 

 

I agree (mostly) with the first point. All the Jets need to do is go back to Kelly green and also have Nike fix the shoulder loops.

 

But I absolutely loved the Esiason-era set. I thought black looked great in small doses with Kelly green. The stripes were great, especially on the socks. Also, the road set gave the perfect balance that the Bears, Chiefs and Redskins have: colored helmet, white jersey with striped sleeves, pants matching helmet color, white striped socks matching the jersey. Throw in the Champion font and, hot damn, those were some beauties. They looked so damn good.

 

But the Jets are the Jets, so if they do change, they'll make the worst possible choice - keep the forest green but lose the Namath look and basically wear the Giants unis, but in green.

[Brown1]

13 hours ago, gothedistance said:

 

I disagree. The Chargers play in a warm weather region, having a white helmet makes sense. Yellow pants would be overkill. Their design is not executed poorly. The navy and white compliments the yellow. The lighting bolt stands out.

This is a really odd counter. I can’t imagine that that had anything to do with the decision for white helmets. I mean I could be wrong, but it seems like a lame reason. I also said not to add new pants they’d need new jerseys.

[C-Squared]

22 hours ago, gothedistance said:

I disagree. The Chargers play in a warm weather region, having a white helmet makes sense. Yellow pants would be overkill. Their design is not executed poorly. The navy and white compliments the yellow. The lighting bolt stands out.

 

I mean, the sky is blue. A powder blue helmet with a yellow bolt seems more literally emblematic of the region... when I think of SoCal, I think of water and sun.

 

A powder blue helmet would really stand out after Tennessee dropped the ball on Colombia.

[leopard88]

57 minutes ago, C-Squared said:

 

I mean, the sky is blue. A powder blue helmet with a yellow bolt seems more literally emblematic of the region...

Except, if we're going to be literal, you don't usually see a lightning bolt against a light blue sky.

[C-Squared]

46 minutes ago, leopard88 said:

Except, if we're going to be literal, you don't usually see a lightning bolt against a light blue sky.

 

Not often, but certainly never against a white backdrop.

[whitedawg22]

16 hours ago, DouglasQuaid said:

The Vikings should do an update like Miami and drop the black facemask for a purple or white and get rid of the serifs on the numbers. Also add white socks while their at it.

In my opinion, white facemasks on colored helmets look goofy and obtrusive unless white is an integral part of the team's identity, which isn't the case with the Vikings. The only teams who currently do that are the Chiefs (who are more or less a red-and-white team, as their logo is mostly white) and the Rams (who are now a blue and white team).

 

The Vikings tried white facemasks back in the 80s and it looked terrible.

[bobt]

okay, then the Chargers helmet should be dark gray with light gray lines signifying rain 

[UnclearInitial]

8 hours ago, C-Squared said:

 

Not often, but certainly never against a white backdrop.

I mean, they do originate from clouds, which, depending on the way the light refracts inside can be seen as anything from dark gray to white. The clouds on this picture are a very light gray

 

[AgentColon2]

7 hours ago, whitedawg22 said:

In my opinion, white facemasks on colored helmets look goofy and obtrusive unless white is an integral part of the team's identity, which isn't the case with the Vikings. The only teams who currently do that are the Chiefs (who are more or less a red-and-white team, as their logo is mostly white) and the Rams (who are now a blue and white team).

 

The Vikings tried white facemasks back in the 80s and it looked terrible.

Might have worked better if they put a thin white lines between the should stripe colors.

[Dynasty]

The Vikings should only be using a purple facemask. I do not understand the reasoning behind them making it black.

[baymenxpac]

On a Jets podcast, Darron Lee (who has been pushing the #JetsNewUnis cause and tweeted those kelly green concepts) said there has been positive progress. Obviously wouldn't say more than that, but hinted there would be more details at the Taste of the Jets event, which is on May 17. Audio is roughly around the 23 minute mark of their most recent episode.

 

 

[bowld]

Watched some draft stuff this morning and noticed that they have mannequins dressed in each teams gear outside the stadium. Found it odd that every team shown used their primary uniform but Carolina was using the alternate blue one. Any word if they plan to make this the new primary over the black??

[DeFrank]

19 hours ago, Dolphins Dynasty said:

The Vikings should only be using a purple facemask. I do not understand the reasoning behind them making it black.

 

It looks good and they have black in their helmet logo. That's the reasoning from my perspective. It probably looks better as a complement to a satin-finished helmet also. Not sure what a purple facemark against that unique helmet would have looked like. I think it looks good. Black can be a neutral color like grey for shoes, gloves, etc.

[IceCap]

12 minutes ago, DeFrank said:

 

It looks good and they have black in their helmet logo. That's the reasoning from my perspective. It probably looks better as a complement to a satin-finished helmet also. Not sure what a purple facemark against that unique helmet would have looked like. I think it looks good. Black can be a neutral color like grey for shoes, gloves, etc.

I’m unsure if they can do a satin finish on a facemask. If not? It’s for the best that they don’t have a purple facemask. It may clash with the finish of the helmet. Black sidesteps the whole issue. 

[Sec19Row53]

35 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

I’m unsure if they can do a satin finish on a facemask. If not? It’s for the best that they don’t have a purple facemask. It may clash with the finish of the helmet. Black sidesteps the whole issue. 

Or, they could just do a gloss finish on the helmet and use a purple facemask, since that would look better.

[4_tattoos]

3 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

I’m unsure if they can do a satin finish on a facemask. If not? It’s for the best that they don’t have a purple facemask. It may clash with the finish of the helmet. Black sidesteps the whole issue. 

Pretty sure one of Oregon's helmets the last few years have satin finished green facemask.

[hormone]

4 hours ago, DeFrank said:

 

It looks good and they have black in their helmet logo. That's the reasoning from my perspective. It probably looks better as a complement to a satin-finished helmet also. Not sure what a purple facemark against that unique helmet would have looked like. I think it looks good. Black can be a neutral color like grey for shoes, gloves, etc.

So with that reasoning, the redskins could use black, the Steelers use red, gray, or blue, chiefs use black, and ravens use red? Sorry, vikings don’t get a pass here and need purple.