FroznYogurt

LA Rams 2018 Uniform Discussion

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

Not really? The secret ballot was a move to counter Spanos.

The owners felt they “owed” Dean Spanos, and the secret ballot allowed them to all vote for Kroenke’s superior plan for the LA market without having to publicly put their name on it. So as to not offend Dean’s gentle soul or some such BS. 

 

It just worked better than expected, allowing nearly the entire league to vote for Kroenke’s proposal. Probably because, when you get right down to it, it was the superior option in nearly every respect. 

 

Why some people, outside of St. Louis loyalists, insist on casting Stan Kroenke as the villain is beyond me. 

Dude bought the team with his own money. Bought land for a stadium in the market of his choosing with his own money. And is paying for a new stadium. With his own money. He’s not asking for, or taking, tax money he doesn’t need. 

 

He’s basically handling the Rams’ quest for a new building the way we’d wish all billionaire owners would. 

 

That said? The insistence on waiting for a new building to unveil new uniforms is stupid. Factor in the likelihood that whatever they come up with will probably be inferior to any of their throwback options? And yeah. They should have gone with the royal and athletic gold throwbacks they already had on tap full-time immediately upon returning to LA. 

 

You'd think that such good businessmen like Kroenke and the league office would have been able to negotiate a compromise had they really wanted to.  There always seems to be room to give on both sides in situations like this, and I'm sure they could have made something work - if they really wanted to.  I honestly don't think that the Rams cared much about their look in the interim - at least not enough to do anything other than ask if they could wear the throwbacks, get told no, and then say "OK sir, sorry to have disturbed you."

Share this post


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

 

You'd think that such good businessmen like Kroenke and the league office would have been able to negotiate a compromise had they really wanted to.  There always seems to be room to give on both sides in situations like this, and I'm sure they could have made something work - if they really wanted to.  I honestly don't think that the Rams cared much about their look in the interim - at least not enough to do anything other than ask if they could wear the throwbacks, get told no, and then say "OK sir, sorry to have disturbed you."

The Rams have admitted, I think, that they underestimated LA’s desire to see new uniforms. So they had to scramble for the “half pregnant” look they rolled out last year. After it had become evident that fans just didn’t give a crap about the St. Louis threads. 

 

I think there hasn’t been a compromise because in the NFL’s mind? There already was. Teams usually need to give a two-year heads up that they’re changing, but the NFL was willing to wave that for the Rams and allow them to go to the LA Rams throwbacks immediately upon returning. 

The team, underestimating the market’s desire to see new unis, opted to wait for the new stadium. 

 

So now the league’s like “hey we were willing to wave the rules for ya, sorry you said no.” 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, oldschoolvikings said:

Already been said 3 or 4 times in this thread, but here I'll say it again.  This is the fault of the Rams entirely.  I know it's second nature for some to blame the League for... oh, pretty much everything ("Rahh, stupid rules! Rahhh, one helmet!!! Rahhh, NFL stands for No Fun League, and I just thought of that!!").  To quote Gothamite... Nonsense. The Rams are not dealing with any 5 year rule restrictions... they could've changed their uniforms when they moved, they could've changed their uniforms last year, they could've changed them this year.  They could, at any time during an off-season, officially make the throwbacks into the primary and be done.  But if they did that, then they will be stuck in  the 5 year window, and THEY wanted to roll out something new and make a big splash at the same time they moved into their new stadium. (And I'm willing to bet this new uniform will have extraneous crap on it making it significantly inferior to the throwback, by the way.)  On top of that, they are the geniuses who decided to fiddle with every part of their current uniform except the jersey... they could've just sat tight and waited.  So... it is NOT the NFL's fault they wanted to wait, and it's NOT the NFL's fault they went drunk design on their current uniform. I'm glad the powers that be are forcing them to take the field looking like idiots... they deserve it. 

 

(One piece of good news from this article... the Rams seem to be very clear on the fan base's desire to have the traditional blue and gold back.  Although I don't have a ton of confidence that they'll be restrained and tasteful with the overall design, at least they'll get the colors right.)

 

Exactly. It seems like they were so set in their decision to wait, then balked, did the fan vote and changed part of the uniform to cash in for some extra buzz (which worked, it’s just all negative buzz). It pains me to know that there are creative compromises that give each party the best of both, but they’re either not being explored or they’re not being permitted. This is a marketing professional’s nightmare. Just a mess any way you slice it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NFL probably doesn't want asterisks next to their uni rules. I supported LA's choice to integrate blue/white to test the waters for merch, but if they're really just going with yellow/blue after all, it seems like a wasted effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rams really shouldn't have waited until the new stadium opening. The blue and yellow should have been worn from day 1 in LA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, C-Squared said:

The NFL probably doesn't want asterisks next to their uni rules. I supported LA's choice to integrate blue/white to test the waters for merch, but if they're really just going with yellow/blue after all, it seems like a wasted effort.

 

There already are asterisks, like in the case of new ownership.  it's in the doc that Mac posted in another thread.  These aren't laws, they're just rules put in place by the league office, which is essentially governed by the owners themselves, so it's not like an amendment to the constitution of the USA is needed to get around it - if anyone really wanted to.

 

As already stated, they had their chance, turned it down, realized they Fd up, came crawling back, were rejected, and are now pointing fingers and playing the blame game to save fact to their fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't make sense to do a temporary helmet change to blue and white.  I assume the intent was simply to banish gold, and blue/white served to do that.   I'd prefer a slightly modernized version of the old rams blue and white look (yellow swooshes and sock option), with the royal blue and yellow brought out twice a year for evening home games in prime time.  White at home for day games makes sense in LA, at least until they can cover the stadium. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know what their jersey sales look like? What jerseys sell the most/what player? I would honestly think the white jerseys are best selling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MJWalker45 said:

Bring back gold pants and logos, grovel to fans about how mean the NFL is, then bring out the new gear in 2 years. Done. 

 

1 hour ago, C-Squared said:

The NFL probably doesn't want asterisks next to their uni rules. I supported LA's choice to integrate blue/white to test the waters for merch, but if they're really just going with yellow/blue after all, it seems like a wasted effort.

 

In no particular order...

(1)  The Rams should've brought back the L.A. blue and gold.  And they should've said "that's the new gear, period."

(2)  Going back to blue and white is a ridiculous idea that should be resolutely resisted at all levels.  Virtually no one alive who's a Rams fan remembers going to games and seeing the blue and white, and reverting to it is akin to the Philadelphia Phillies going to those all-crimson uniforms they wore for one night:  blue and white was a blip on the team's historical radar.

(3)  The Rams could have rebranded in connection with the relocation if they wanted.  The NFL's constitution, bylaws and resolutions provide expressly for that option, granting relocating teams waivers of the "5 year rule."  For whatever reason, the Rams didn't do it.  Therefore, it's on them, not the league.

(4)  Whatever is being cooked up behind the scenes, it will prove an abomination compared to the blue and gold the Rams wore during the 40's, 50's, 70's, 80's and 90's.  I'm far from a Rams fan but I know that was a look Georgia Frontiere completely screwed with for no good reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Mac the Knife said:

I'm far from a Rams fan but I know that was a look Georgia Frontiere completely screwed with for no good reason.

 

I wouldn't say for no reason. At the time, the yellow/blue color scheme felt a bit "campy" in an era defined by darker, more detailed uniforms. Of the teams that made that trendy jump, the Rams set was probably one of the best. We will definitely look back on their first few years back in LA as vagabond years (like the Oilers in Memphis) in a color scheme that should probably have never left St. Louis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Rams don't want to look like hore :censored: they shouldn't have changed the helmets and pants prematurely. This is their fault. If people like us can understand the league's uniform rules, why can't they?

Share this post


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

 

They did follow relocation protocol, though.  Despite Goodell's attempts to keep them in St, Louis, the Rams held his feet to the fire by playing by the rules.

 

Everything in these two sentences is incorrect.  I was living in St. Louis at the time, so:

 

1) The Rams didn't come close to following the relocation protocol, on good faith, bad faith, any faith;

2) The NFL did everything possible to poison the St. Louis well;

3) The only feet-to-the-fire the Rams did was the St. Louis region.  Had them spend millions on a new facility plan, financing plan, etc. when Kroenke always wanted to own Los Angeles.  That's why he opted into taking ownership of the team after Georgia Frontiere passed away.  The Rams were almost owned by Shad Khan.  When Kroenke exercised his ownership clause, that's when Khan focused on Jacksonville.

 

But the #1 reason why the Rams left?  St. Louis was dumb enough to give the team the ability to leave when they agreed to the original TWA Dome/Edward Jones Dome 20-year lease.  The Rams simply made a business decision.  They didn't do it in the best possible way, but it was available to them, so they did it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever they do I hope when they do a revamp they have a white horned alternate. Best helmet ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mac the Knife said:

 

 

In no particular order...

(1)  The Rams should've brought back the L.A. blue and gold.  And they should've said "that's the new gear, period."

(2)  Going back to blue and white is a ridiculous idea that should be resolutely resisted at all levels.  Virtually no one alive who's a Rams fan remembers going to games and seeing the blue and white, and reverting to it is akin to the Philadelphia Phillies going to those all-crimson uniforms they wore for one night:  blue and white was a blip on the team's historical radar.

(3)  The Rams could have rebranded in connection with the relocation if they wanted.  The NFL's constitution, bylaws and resolutions provide expressly for that option, granting relocating teams waivers of the "5 year rule."  For whatever reason, the Rams didn't do it.  Therefore, it's on them, not the league.

(4)  Whatever is being cooked up behind the scenes, it will prove an abomination compared to the blue and gold the Rams wore during the 40's, 50's, 70's, 80's and 90's.  I'm far from a Rams fan but I know that was a look Georgia Frontiere completely screwed with for no good reason.

 

2 hours ago, Brave-Bird 08 said:

If the Rams don't want to look like hore :censored: they shouldn't have changed the helmets and pants prematurely. This is their fault. If people like us can understand the league's uniform rules, why can't they?

@Mac the Knife this is what I meant. If you can't go royal blue and athletic gold, bring out the old gold pants again and suck it up. Or just forget trying to save a look for a stadium that's already a year behind and bring it out now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Blackjack76 said:

The Rams didn't come close to following the relocation protocol, on good faith, bad faith, any faith;

 

I understand that probably felt that way in St. Louis,  But the arbitrator ruled otherwise.

 

2 hours ago, Blackjack76 said:

the #1 reason why the Rams left?  St. Louis was dumb enough to give the team the ability to leave when they agreed to the original TWA Dome/Edward Jones Dome 20-year lease.  

 

Well, that and then failing to live up to their end of the lease.  Again, as decided by the neutral arbitrators.  

 

Meanwhile Goodell forced the Rams to postpone an extra year before even applying for relocation.  He then worked quietly with St. Louis on their response to Kroenke.

 

There may well be hard feelings on Roger's end that make him less likely to give the Rams any slack, having very publicly defied his wishes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NFL is waaaaay too micro managed. Just let them wear blue and yellow what’s the big :censored:ing deal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They forced the white horns on the helmets, thus relegating the ever popular blue and gold unis to secondary status. Had they been a little patient and instead of rushing into this quick decision they would have seen this coming. 

 

All the fans of the Deacon Jones era are likely too old or passed on. There are still fans of the Rams who were around during the Dickerson era up to before they left LA. That's who they should cater to. Deacon Jones era for throwbacks, and make the Dickerson era the permanent. 

 

Dumb Rams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, still, even if this is the Rams fault, it's petty and self-deprecating of the league to 'look bad' literally. This is just a factor in how the league runs today and the way most fans feel miffed with all the bureaucracy of it.

 

The big problem, though, was if the Rams temporarily went with the yellow/blue throwbacks on the move, would the NFL have kept them stuck on a 5-year freeze before introducing new uniforms? If the answer is yes, and the Rams were expecting to make a giant splash with their new stadium in 2019 with all new uniforms ready to be unveiled and sold with the thrill of the new stadium, then it makes sense that they'd want to be able to make the change then.

 

The problem is the NFL admits they can change everything in one year (on a relocation), but wants to maintain a multi-year heads-up notice and a 5-year freeze on changes to avoid being NCAA or like soccer teams the world over with constant tweaks. They can fix this if they want to. The truth is, the league doesn't want to.

Share this post


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

The problem is the NFL admits they can change everything in one year (on a

relocation)

 

...

 

They can fix this if they want to. The truth is, the league doesn't want to.

 

That’s not actually in evidence here.

 

The league can make quick changes in extraordinary circumstances like a relocation. But we don’t know what the costs of something like that would be. We don’t know if those costs would be so high as to overwhelm the potential benefit of introducing a new uniform set so quickly.  Relocations are still so relatively rare that they can be clear exceptions to standard practice.

 

So no, I don’t think it’s clear at all that this rule is really the result of some preference of the league, and that only that preference keeps them from changing it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not let them wear the throwbacks? This is so dumb on both sides. They already have the home set, just make the away unis and you're done.

The Rams are dumb for getting impatient and throwing together a mismatched set and the NFL are dumb for not letting wear the throwbacks more often. At least make it for home games only. 

I get that the Rams want to do some big change once the new stadium's built but that won't happen for a while so you might as well change now. The Rams are such an eyesore to look at because of how mismatched they are and I can't understand why anyone let them play like that. 

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