JagAaron33

Jacksonville Jaguars Unveil Stripped-Down Uniforms

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Ice_Cap said:

And you’ll continue to carry water for Nike because you’re a Swooshkateer with a baffling sense of loyalty to a shoe company that justifies poor design with “alchemy!”

Speaking of strawmen, this isn't true in the slightest. There are plenty of Nike uniforms I don't like - we're currently posting in a thread about one of them. I've also praised Under Armour, Majestic, Reebok, and even Russell and Adidas uniforms in the past when I've liked them.

 

Just because I'm not agreeing with people's theories about what the color of the Swoosh on teams' jerseys really means doesn't make me a "Swooshkateer."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Gupti said:

The Browns also use a jersey color outline, and I coulda sworn they weren't the only ones.

 

180323-kizer-deshone-phoner-950.jpg

This Browns set is a classic example of Nike and the team going one step too far to stand out. There is a good uniform here without the stitching and a full pants stripe, but Nike had to do that one extra thing.

 

Im not opposed to each team having a feature unique to only them, but it has to be done tastefully (see Jacksonville’s new duds). The modern shoulder/ sleeve stripe is perfect on its own. It screams Browns, and if that’s all they do they have a modern classic. But no, they cut the pants stripe off with a wordmark and pretended to be the Las Vegas Outlaws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Lee Noire said:

This Browns set is a classic example of Nike and the team going one step too far to stand out. There is a good uniform here without the stitching and a full pants stripe, but Nike had to do that one extra thing.

 

Im not opposed to each team having a feature unique to only them, but it has to be done tastefully (see Jacksonville’s new duds). The modern shoulder/ sleeve stripe is perfect on its own. It screams Browns, and if that’s all they do they have a modern classic. But no, they cut the pants stripe off with a wordmark and pretended to be the Las Vegas Outlaws.

Get rid of the pants, stitching, go back to standard helmet stripe, and swap the number colors and this is a pretty solid uniform. I even like CLEVELAND on the from for some reason. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is as bad when it comes to sacrificing team brands to highlight the manufacturer’s brand as Adidas, imo. They’ve been draping every soccer team in their lineup with that “three-stripe life” for years upon years and we just let them. Their techknit/primefit/etc. jersey treads that seem designed to direct your attention inward to the Adidas logo have also been stirring. Adidas basically makes sure that you never forget for a second that you’re looking at an Adidas product and it kinda makes me sick.

Share this post


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

Every change you could make to make it look good would just push the look closer to the classic Browns set it replaced. 

Which begs the question “why did they even bother?”

 

And you’ll continue to carry water for Nike because you’re a Swooshkateer with a baffling sense of loyalty to a shoe company that justifies poor design with “alchemy!” 

 

Anyway your argument falls flat here on two points. 

Point one: You assume we’re ok with the Adidas and Wilson examples above but not ok with Nike. You are incorrect. I find them all egregious.

What you’ve done here is construct a strawman of someone who is ok with the Adidas/Wilson examples but not ok with Nike. It’s not an opinion I’ve seen anyone here express, and constructing said strawman usually means you know you’re working with a weak argument. 

 

Point two: Nike seems to be intentionally designing uniforms to highlight the swoosh. The neon green wedges on the Seahawks’ uniform and the “sail” striping on the Vikings’ uniform both frame the swoosh. The Titans’ uniforms are devoid of red save for the red swoosh. 

 

What we have now is different. This differs from Adidas, Reebok, Wilson, Russel, or Puma just slapping their logos on uniforms made by Ripon in Winsconsin. This is Nike designing and manufacturing uniforms from the ground up with the intent to sacrifice team brands to highlight Nike’s. 

 

Oh good grief, give it up, Ice Cap.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Volt said:

 

Oh good grief, give it up, Ice Cap.  

Look. I’m sorry not everyone buys into your incessant need to white knight for a shoe company. 

Share this post


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

 

I can go running through a corn field bass akwards, but it doesn't mean I should. Even though I'm sure some people on these boards might want me to. If your friend jumps off a bridge, are you going to jump too?

 

 

It looks terrible. The whole point of a number outline is to add more color to a uniform. Adding more of the same color doesn't make the number stand out anymore, nor does it add any value to the overall look of the uniform. It just looks out of place and a design flaw. 

 

Um, just because you feel this way, doesn't make it true.  The pretension around this place is atrocious.  I'd love to meet some of you guys in person just to see if you're as big of dicks in real life as you are online.

 

What some of you are missing is the fact that manufacturers are now using a lightweight stretch twill for numbering and team logos on athletic uniforms.  It's much more lightweight and stretches with the fabric, eliminating the "pucker" of traditional, heavy twill, which has next to no stretch.  This allows for the uniform to be lighter, tighter, and more comfortable for the athlete.

 

The drawback?  It's not quite as durable.  So, unless these borders are being applied with the kiss-cut method, they may be layering 2 layers of lightweight stretch twill.  For the Raiders, who have a 1-color number, this makes them less likely to tear or get small holes in them.  For the Browns, the shadow may be sublimated with the white onto 1 layer of twill, and the outline is the 2nd layer. 

Or, maybe they just like the little bit of texture and outline look they get when adding it.  Who cares. Seriously.  Most people don't even notice it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

Look. I’m sorry not everyone buys into your incessant need to white knight for a shoe company. 


Bro, you're just a bully with a moderator title.  You and a few others around here epitomize the eye roll.  Grow up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Volt said:


Bro, you're just a bully with a moderator title.  You and a few others around here epitomize the eye roll.  Grow up.

I’m a bully, eh? Can you point to a single time when I used my mod abilities in any way to silence you, or anyone else I’ve disagreed with? 

Can you name a time when I’ve used my mod abilities to discipline you or others I disagree with due to your opinions? 

 

Nah man. You’re just throwing out accusations with no basis because you can’t handle that there are people here who don’t kowtow to a corporate entity like you do.

 

As for the need to “grow up”? Look in the mirror. I’m not the one whose sense of self-identity is tied to a corporate brand. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone just take a chill pill for a minute. 

 

First of all, nobody on a board dedicated to discussing in outstanding and preposterous detail the merits of outfits worn by grown men playing children's games should ever tell anyone to "grow up." 

 

Second of all, taking the position that not everything Nike does is inherently awful does not automatically make anyone a "Swoosh-kateer" or a "White Knight." 

 

I like talking about this stuff, what works, what doesn't. Posters going after other posters really takes the fun out of figuring out how to salvage the mess that is the Cleveland Browns. There was a time not too long ago when nobody talked about this stuff and the people who did were branded a bunch of weirdos. We're incredibly lucky to have a place to be this weird and openly enjoy a harmless little subculture with other women and men who feel the same way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, TSHARE18 said:

Get rid of the pants, stitching, go back to standard helmet stripe, and swap the number colors and this is a pretty solid uniform. I even like CLEVELAND on the from for some reason. 

 

I actually don't mind the shoulder stripe an CLEVELAND wordmarks on their own, though I'd taper the sleeve/shoulder stripe to a point instead of having the weird little corner notch and make the CLEVELAND wordmark no more than half its current size. But the pants wordmark and orange numbers (on both the brown and white jerseys) have got to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, DustDevil61 said:

 

I actually don't mind the shoulder stripe an CLEVELAND wordmarks on their own, though I'd taper the sleeve/shoulder stripe to a point instead of having the weird little corner notch and make the CLEVELAND wordmark no more than half its current size. But the pants wordmark and orange numbers (on both the brown and white jerseys) have got to go.

I'd take the  stripe all the way to the collar

Share this post


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

 

Um, just because you feel this way, doesn't make it true.  The pretension around this place is atrocious.  I'd love to meet some of you guys in person just to see if you're as big of dicks in real life as you are online.

 

What some of you are missing is the fact that manufacturers are now using a lightweight stretch twill for numbering and team logos on athletic uniforms.  It's much more lightweight and stretches with the fabric, eliminating the "pucker" of traditional, heavy twill, which has next to no stretch.  This allows for the uniform to be lighter, tighter, and more comfortable for the athlete.

 

The drawback?  It's not quite as durable.  So, unless these borders are being applied with the kiss-cut method, they may be layering 2 layers of lightweight stretch twill.  For the Raiders, who have a 1-color number, this makes them less likely to tear or get small holes in them.  For the Browns, the shadow may be sublimated with the white onto 1 layer of twill, and the outline is the 2nd layer. 

Or, maybe they just like the little bit of texture and outline look they get when adding it.  Who cares. Seriously.  Most people don't even notice it.  

 

When are we going to add a thumbs down button? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just like the pre-uniforms Jaguars thread, it’s getting ugly. It is entertaining though

Share this post


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

 

Point two: Nike seems to be intentionally designing uniforms to highlight the swoosh. The neon green wedges on the Seahawks’ uniform and the “sail” striping on the Vikings’ uniform both frame the swoosh. The Titans’ uniforms are devoid of red save for the red swoosh. 

 

 

To me, the Vikings sleeve stripes look good and don't seem to be intentionally framing the swoosh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Vikings are easily the best of the post 2012 designs and I think it's because the bells and whistles are kept to a minimum and there isn't much extraneous details that distract from the unique sleeve details. 

 

I think that's a good rule of football design, if you have a unique feature, make sure that feature stays the focus by not distracting from it. 

 

For example, the Bengals helmet is a cool, unique idea but the current set has the extra side panels and shadowed numbers that detract from the tiger striping on the helmet. 

 

In the case of the current Jaguars, its tough to single out a particular unique feature. I think if we sat Tom Coughlin down and asked what is the unique element that the rest of the uniform seems to be getting out of the way for, he'd probably say the black/teal color scheme itself. Which isn't a bad idea if the team is wearing teal over white, teal over black, or black over teal. Returns diminish if they just wear black over black. 

Share this post


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

The Vikings are easily the best of the post 2012 designs and I think it's because the bells and whistles are kept to a minimum and there isn't much extraneous details that distract from the unique sleeve details. 

 

I think that's a good rule of football design, if you have a unique feature, make sure that feature stays the focus by not distracting from it. 

 

For example, the Bengals helmet is a cool, unique idea but the current set has the extra side panels and shadowed numbers that detract from the tiger striping on the helmet. 

 

In the case of the current Jaguars, its tough to single out a particular unique feature. I think if we sat Tom Coughlin down and asked what is the unique element that the rest of the uniform seems to be getting out of the way for, he'd probably say the black/teal color scheme itself. Which isn't a bad idea if the team is wearing teal over white, teal over black, or black over teal. Returns diminish if they just wear black over black. 

 

You could argue that it's a good thing it's tough to single out a unique feature besides the black and teal. I'd say there are a few teams with good uniforms you could say that for as well.

 

They do have some unique features though. The socks and sleeve cuffs come to mind and of course the number font. They look like they fit in which I'd consider more important. Nothing as defining as the Bengals helmet but if that means not adding jaguar print anywhere I'm all for it.

 

And just my opinion but I actually like the black/black/black and think its better than any all black set they have worn in the past. I also think its entirely possible they only end up wearing that for the London game. They wear white for early home games, and will wear teal at least twice. I'd say max we see that combo is 4 times a season, not including playoffs of course.

Share this post


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

The Vikings are easily the best of the post 2012 designs and I think it's because the bells and whistles are kept to a minimum and there isn't much extraneous details that distract from the unique sleeve details. 

 

I think that's a good rule of football design, if you have a unique feature, make sure that feature stays the focus by not distracting from it. 

 

For example, the Bengals helmet is a cool, unique idea but the current set has the extra side panels and shadowed numbers that detract from the tiger striping on the helmet. 

 

In the case of the current Jaguars, its tough to single out a particular unique feature. I think if we sat Tom Coughlin down and asked what is the unique element that the rest of the uniform seems to be getting out of the way for, he'd probably say the black/teal color scheme itself. Which isn't a bad idea if the team is wearing teal over white, teal over black, or black over teal. Returns diminish if they just wear black over black. 

 

not even close...Miami knocked it out of the park this year, when they don't wear aqua pants. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe this is nitpicky but I think that Minnesota's look loses points because the yellow sleeve stripe on the white jersey disappears on TV. And it's particularly strange because they managed to avoid this problem on the pants by giving it an extra purple outline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.