2012-13 NBA Logo & Uniform changes

[McCall]

These are photoshops. They are often inaccurate. What you saw the players modeling is what you will see on the court.

Those are from the NBA store website. 2012 Knicks Jersey Launch

The white background and floating jerseys let's you know they're just a picture. The players wearing the garments let's you know they're actual uniforms. Those photoshops are a plain blue tee and plain jersey (trimming isn't photoshopped though). Notice how the wordmark and numbers don't wrinkle with the jersey? That's because it's a created image placed onto the shirt.

[C's]

You know when I first saw the Knicks new unis I didn't like them at all. Now I think they look pretty good. The arm stripes still suck, but I like the scrappy look of everything else.

[SmoothieX]

You know when I first saw the Knicks new unis I didn't like them at all. Now I think they look pretty good. The arm stripes still suck, but I like the crappy look of everything else.

I fixed that for you.

[andrewharrington]

Whoever said that they look like knock-offs of themselves was right. I do not understand the solid-color waistband at all. It is visually jarring when compared to the rest of the trim. I don't think the Celtics comparison applies at all since they're only working with the same two colors everywhere in the uniform.

I have to think that this is the result of a "committee" and not a design team. If it's the latter, I would love to hear the explanation behind this. Gray could have been used to really add something to these uniforms, instead it's used so sparingly that it almost looks like a mistake. The new wordmark is (as someone said) different enough to be noticeable, but not different enough to look intentional, so basically like a knock-off. The waistband simply doesn't go with anything else, and the use of that logo on the shorts is weak (though I guess that's just my own preference for the Knick-ball.)

I don't understand how anyone can say that they like how they added "modern touches" to this uniform. If you're going to modernize it, you can't keep those number fonts and the other uber-traditional elements. The mixing clashes, kinda like (but not as bad as) the Sixers going with modern side gussets and collar with their single-color-block everything else.

When new uniforms come out, I usually am able to put aside my personal tastes and preferences and can rationalize most of the design decisions, but I can't do it (at least yet) with these. I just don't get it.

You could be right. The first time I saw these uniforms, they had side stripes on the shorts and no grey, so somewhere there was a change of heart. I personally loved their old lettering, but I like how the solid waistband makes the whole thing feel retro here. It's not something we see often. Maybe that's why I like it. I can at least understand not liking the contrast of old and new with the waistband and the arm trim, but I love combining old and new in my own work.

I don't agree that you can't use block fonts on a modern uniform. The definition of what's modern has to evolve. When design starts trending in a clean, yet 'inspired-by-the-past' aesthetic, those types of block lettering styles become modern, and I think that's where we are. Single color, simple lettering is modern because that's where design is. What most people consider 'modern' design is no longer modern. It's dated because it's fallen out of favor at the forefront of design.

As for some of the previous criticisms, the numbers themselves don't look any thinner than, say, the Bucks' numbers. I think the thinness of the numbers actually makes them look quite a bit more modern. I never understand the hatred for collar slogans, either. That's the most harmless bit of design there possibly can be on a uniform, because it's never visible. It's just something that adds a local detail to a team's jersey in a way that's completely unobtrusive to the aesthetic of the uniform.

[nuordr]

Not being a New York Knicks fan, I am curious what did they change because they look like the same to me. Heck, every Knick uniform has looked the same over the last 20 years.

[Discogod]

Not being a New York Knicks fan, I am curious what did they change because they look like the same to me. Heck, every Knick uniform has looked the same over the last 20 years.

http://news.sportslogos.net/2012/09/06/new-york-knicks-unveil-new-uniforms

[Math2]

Bleh. I like the script actually but everything else made me just want to cover my eyes. Horrible jerseys. Everything seems off. I like what I had seen in the 2k13 videos, but it looks so much worse in truth.

[Delux247]

Suns have a new logo up on their website. That one flew under the radar.

[spockEars]

Suns have a new logo up on their website. That one flew under the radar.

Yeah, saw that. There have been a few posts discussing it a few pages back.

[Lights Out]

Still think this color scheme would look FANTASTIC for the Knicks:

[henburg]

Suns have a new logo up on their website. That one flew under the radar.

Yeah, saw that. There have been a few posts discussing it a few pages back.

That Suns logo is a small, but really good change. I wish that they could have made the outline of the basketball purple instead of black.

Oh, and it looks like a new script on the site as well.

[Old School Fool]

Still think this color scheme would look FANTASTIC for the Knicks:

No.

[Fifty8_Black O]

Have the suns changed from a wishbone collar? I saw this image on their site. I thought it may be an old picture but I don't recall them ever wearing a v-neck jersey...

(see Jared Dudley)

[BBTV]

Whoever said that they look like knock-offs of themselves was right. I do not understand the solid-color waistband at all. It is visually jarring when compared to the rest of the trim. I don't think the Celtics comparison applies at all since they're only working with the same two colors everywhere in the uniform.

I have to think that this is the result of a "committee" and not a design team. If it's the latter, I would love to hear the explanation behind this. Gray could have been used to really add something to these uniforms, instead it's used so sparingly that it almost looks like a mistake. The new wordmark is (as someone said) different enough to be noticeable, but not different enough to look intentional, so basically like a knock-off. The waistband simply doesn't go with anything else, and the use of that logo on the shorts is weak (though I guess that's just my own preference for the Knick-ball.)

I don't understand how anyone can say that they like how they added "modern touches" to this uniform. If you're going to modernize it, you can't keep those number fonts and the other uber-traditional elements. The mixing clashes, kinda like (but not as bad as) the Sixers going with modern side gussets and collar with their single-color-block everything else.

When new uniforms come out, I usually am able to put aside my personal tastes and preferences and can rationalize most of the design decisions, but I can't do it (at least yet) with these. I just don't get it.

I don't agree that you can't use block fonts on a modern uniform. The definition of what's modern has to evolve. When design starts trending in a clean, yet 'inspired-by-the-past' aesthetic, those types of block lettering styles become modern, and I think that's where we are. Single color, simple lettering is modern because that's where design is.

I'm talking about that specific block font. Not the varsity block (or whatever the word is for the block that the Celtics wear) font. The Sixers font (not sure if the same or no) is just as egregious. It looks like the default number font that the guy on the corner used for the local little league jerseys.

[Eye]

Whoever said that they look like knock-offs of themselves was right. I do not understand the solid-color waistband at all. It is visually jarring when compared to the rest of the trim. I don't think the Celtics comparison applies at all since they're only working with the same two colors everywhere in the uniform.

I have to think that this is the result of a "committee" and not a design team. If it's the latter, I would love to hear the explanation behind this. Gray could have been used to really add something to these uniforms, instead it's used so sparingly that it almost looks like a mistake. The new wordmark is (as someone said) different enough to be noticeable, but not different enough to look intentional, so basically like a knock-off. The waistband simply doesn't go with anything else, and the use of that logo on the shorts is weak (though I guess that's just my own preference for the Knick-ball.)

I don't understand how anyone can say that they like how they added "modern touches" to this uniform. If you're going to modernize it, you can't keep those number fonts and the other uber-traditional elements. The mixing clashes, kinda like (but not as bad as) the Sixers going with modern side gussets and collar with their single-color-block everything else.

When new uniforms come out, I usually am able to put aside my personal tastes and preferences and can rationalize most of the design decisions, but I can't do it (at least yet) with these. I just don't get it.

I don't agree that you can't use block fonts on a modern uniform. The definition of what's modern has to evolve. When design starts trending in a clean, yet 'inspired-by-the-past' aesthetic, those types of block lettering styles become modern, and I think that's where we are. Single color, simple lettering is modern because that's where design is.

I'm talking about that specific block font. Not the varsity block (or whatever the word is for the block that the Celtics wear) font. The Sixers font (not sure if the same or no) is just as egregious. It looks like the default number font that the guy on the corner used for the local little league jerseys.

The Sixers, Jazz and Knicks all use that rec league number font; the Celtics' font is more of an American football number font, and is way better.

[azfallguy21]

Have the suns changed from a wishbone collar? I saw this image on their site. I thought it may be an old picture but I don't recall them ever wearing a v-neck jersey...

(see Jared Dudley)

They wore the v-neck before the current wishbone. My authentic (and now hurtful to even mention) Nash jersey has the v-neck on it. Wishbone will last through this year but hopefully change next year with new uniforms.

[colortv]

I am the only one who thinks the Knicks have gradually lightened the orange since the first set of Ewing era uniforms to look more like the Reed-Frazier orange? They always seemed more red than orange:

Perhaps a leftover from when the Knicks added maroon to the color scheme? Lightening the orange has been a change far for the better IMO.

[WSU151]

Perhaps a leftover from when the Knicks added maroon to the color scheme?

Umm...what? The Knicks added maroon at one point?

[TruColor]

I am the only one who thinks the Knicks have gradually lightened the orange since the first set of Ewing era uniforms to look more like the Reed-Frazier orange? They always seemed more red than orange:

...

Perhaps a leftover from when the Knicks added maroon to the color scheme? Lightening the orange has been a change far for the better IMO.

No - you're not the only one (!)...here are the various shades of Orange that the Knicks have used over the years:

Technically, they used two shades of Orange in the 2011-2012 season - one on the uniforms, and the current one for the marks/logos.

[The_Admiral]

Pre-Ewing uniforms had dark red, yeah.