PaleVermilion81

New Jaguars Uniforms

Recommended Posts

Reminds me of the Bengals helmet I made

DSC_0575.jpg

I spray painted that myself in my basement. Looks better than Jacksonville's real helmets and I would never ever want the Bengals to actually wear this helmet.

that helmet is infinitely better...I also love the classic nfl sheets as they were and continue to be pure awesomeness...did you happen to pull them on a race car bed?

Never had a racecar bed, but I did have these sheets on a set of single sized bunk beds that I slept in until I graduated from high school. Thought they'd make a nice backdrop for the helmet photoshoot. The fact that it's sitting on a browns helmet is a happy accident.

bunk beds was my second guess but I really wanted to swing for the fences on visualizing the ultimate 80's bed. tell me at least you had a football lamp or the coveted sports illustrated football flip phone (which I happened to be a proud owner of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew there couldn't be a Jaguars thread without relocation talk. lol

Well, when the Jaguars are the only ones that don't put their location on their draft caps... :P

My problem with the "Jags" patch is not that it's on the uniform or where it is on the uniform, but rather that it it's ugly, is a mirror-reverse of the primary logo and uses a derivative nickname, which never belongs on a uniform.

You know the location IS on the cap and the picture just got messed up with another cap, Right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it have made a lot more sense to have the tv numbers on the sleeve? That way they aren't obstructing the design on the shoulders.

While I enjoy a lot of what Nike does, in just about every design they do, there is at least one thing that could so easily be fixed that it comes off as dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But there has been no official source saying they couldn't wear the patch there, just people speculating that they'll take it off. I personally don't think they will.

Wasn't it ColorWerx who indicated that logo was marked "not to be used in London" or something similar on the official style sheet?

You're right that they could well keep it there, but the idea they'd remove it wasn't just invented by somebody here.

But there has been no official source saying they couldn't wear the patch there, just people speculating that they'll take it off. I personally don't think they will.

CW said it's mandated in the style guide. For reference:

I stand corrected. I had heard the British meaning, but I assumed the whole "can't use in London" thing was an unconfirmed board legend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it have made a lot more sense to have the tv numbers on the sleeve? That way they aren't obstructing the design on the shoulders.

While I enjoy a lot of what Nike does, in just about every design they do, there is at least one thing that could so easily be fixed that it comes off as dumb.

That's so dead on. They're always like a couple of decisions away from nailing something, but they miss so badly on those incorrect choices they do make.

In this case, there's a big area that's colored differently just sitting there begging for it house something like a logo or numbers. Instead they left it void of a logo and put the numbers on the shoulders crammed with everything else that's going on there. Sorta renders coloring the sleeves a different color as pointless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is it just me, or do we have a disproportionately large number of jaguars fans on this forum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of the Bengals helmet I made

DSC_0575.jpg

I spray painted that myself in my basement. Looks better than Jacksonville's real helmets and I would never ever want the Bengals to actually wear this helmet.

Why wouldn't you want the Bengals to wear that helmet. Don't sell yourself short; It looks awesome!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just added the combos unveiled yesterday to the site.

Yesterday's unveil also showed Teal over white not just teal over black... temp009JagsUniform042313--nfl_mezz_1280_1024.jpg?width=960&height=720

Also the helmet number is centered and not set to the lower right side as you have done.

temp20130321_NikeFY13_NFL_JAGUARS_0604--nfl_mezz_1280_1024.jpg?width=960&height=720

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it have made a lot more sense to have the tv numbers on the sleeve? That way they aren't obstructing the design on the shoulders.

While I enjoy a lot of what Nike does, in just about every design they do, there is at least one thing that could so easily be fixed that it comes off as dumb.

That's so dead on. They're always like a couple of decisions away from nailing something, but they miss so badly on those incorrect choices they do make.

In this case, there's a big area that's colored differently just sitting there begging for it house something like a logo or numbers. Instead they left it void of a logo and put the numbers on the shoulders crammed with everything else that's going on there. Sorta renders coloring the sleeves a different color as pointless.

But it is housing something. Nike's logo. Think about the Seahawks uniform... they designed an area (that lime green triangle thingy) for the absolute sole purpose of displaying their logo. The NFL has told Nike where their logo has to be placed, and how big it can be. The only way Nike can emphasize it is to give it a space of its own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After having 24 hours to digest it...I've decided that the only 2 things about this set that really offend me is the helmet (it's college/arena football quality. They would've been much better off keeping the old helmet shell design (except for putting the new Jaguar head on it, of course.)) & the JAGS patch. Other than that, it's not bad? It's definitely ahead of most of the "modern" looks we saw Reebok churn out. It's definitely an upgrade over their old unis, which just seemed way too boring for a team trying to look modern. If you're gonna go modern, don't half-ass it, which is what their last set did.

Definitely not my favorite, but it's not awful.

I'm curious, are you really offended by these elements or do you just not like them? If you're offended, why? I don't understand why you would find a team's choice of uniforms offensive (unless you are a Native American talking about the Redskins, for example).

Not picking on you; I've seen lots of people on these boards use this or similar language that takes their dislike of a particular logo or uniform and frames it not just as an issue of personal taste but as something they take personally, or something that is hurtful or somehow psychologically distressing to them. I've always wondered if this is just imprecise word choice or if people actually feel this way, and if it's the latter, why that is.

The one (non-racial) scenario I can imagine is if a team dramatically changes a brand that has become synonymous with the franchise--like, if the Packers or Yankees or Celtics made dramatic changes to look like the Seahawks, Marlins or late-90s Rockets, I can understand longtime fans being offended. I'm a loyal Dodger fan and I would feel that way if we were rebranded. But it wouldn't be because of the way the new brand looks, it would be the act of rebranding itself that would offend me, as the Dodgers brand and franchise have become synonymous, and to rebrand would be like chucking the franchise to which I have been a loyal fan for 30 years. They wouldn't feel like the Dodgers anymore in green and gold.

But other than that, I just can't imagine why someone would be offended by uniform elements they didn't like. I'm curious to hear what you (or anyone else) thinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After having 24 hours to digest it...I've decided that the only 2 things about this set that really offend me is the helmet (it's college/arena football quality. They would've been much better off keeping the old helmet shell design (except for putting the new Jaguar head on it, of course.)) & the JAGS patch. Other than that, it's not bad? It's definitely ahead of most of the "modern" looks we saw Reebok churn out. It's definitely an upgrade over their old unis, which just seemed way too boring for a team trying to look modern. If you're gonna go modern, don't half-ass it, which is what their last set did.

Definitely not my favorite, but it's not awful.

I'm curious, are you really offended by these elements or do you just not like them? If you're offended, why? I don't understand why you would find a team's choice of uniforms offensive (unless you are a Native American talking about the Redskins, for example).

Not picking on you; I've seen lots of people on these boards use this or similar language that takes their dislike of a particular logo or uniform and frames it not just as an issue of personal taste but as something they take personally, or something that is hurtful or somehow psychologically distressing to them. I've always wondered if this is just imprecise word choice or if people actually feel this way, and if it's the latter, why that is.

The one (non-racial) scenario I can imagine is if a team dramatically changes a brand that has become synonymous with the franchise--like, if the Packers or Yankees or Celtics made dramatic changes to look like the Seahawks, Marlins or late-90s Rockets, I can understand longtime fans being offended. I'm a loyal Dodger fan and I would feel that way if we were rebranded. But it wouldn't be because of the way the new brand looks, it would be the act of rebranding itself that would offend me, as the Dodgers brand and franchise have become synonymous, and to rebrand would be like chucking the franchise to which I have been a loyal fan for 30 years. They wouldn't feel like the Dodgers anymore in green and gold.

But other than that, I just can't imagine why someone would be offended by uniform elements they didn't like. I'm curious to hear what you (or anyone else) thinks.

Offends their design sensibilities I would think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is it just me, or do we have a disproportionately large number of jaguars fans on this forum?

I think there's about 4 or 5 on here. They just are very vocal (not sure that the proper term for a message board, maybe strong typist?) about their team. Its just in the nature of their fan base, they're all like that. Kinda like Soccer fans in America. I'm personally not one. I just happen to live in an cross area of their market area with my Falcons.

Why so much hate for the JAGS patch? It no different than what Florida does with the gator head over the heart on their football unis. It is just because this is the first time (i think) this has been done in the pros? I really like it. If the Falcons did something like this for us ATL fans i'd be ecstatic. Its even better that they could come up with a secondary logo that perfect fits their fan base and community.

it's remarkably stupid and short-sighted considering they want to be London's team and are prohibited from wearing said patch whilst playing in London. = Redesign fail.

In addition they had to flip the jaguar head from the originally unveiled shield logo. Double fail.

But they're not London's team. They're Jacksonville's team. It doesn't matter if they sell out Wembley once a year when they play there, the Brits are going to come no matter who is playing or what they're wearing. Very restricted supply = stupid high demand. They could come out wearing Seattle's Rave Green uni and the Brits would still love it. That being said, they still play 7 games a year at Everbank Field. If they want the people of Jacksonville to come out and support them then they have to appeal to them. If they Jags want to make a profit and stay in Jacksonville (which is exactly what Khan wants to do) then they need to do things for their fan base, not people with bad dental care. So I have to disagree, the JAGS patch is far from short sighted.

we'll have to agree to disagree...and come on already, the team put out a press release saying they made a long term commitment to play in London to grow the JAG brand which clearly has been fumbled.

one other thing...didn't the OKC ownership say they were committed to Seattle...given that JAX is a small market with an old stadium and a long lease they are always going to be considered a relocation candidate...remember Khan is a businessman first and he paid a ton of money for the franchise.

I'm not dening that they said they're commitment to all that. They were genius to do so. Khan, being the business man he is, saw that nobody had tried to "claim" the London market yet and did so himself. I think he then realized why nobody had, because the logistics of being "London's NFL Team" is crazy. Especially if you haven't even fully tapped into your own natural market area.

I was just getting into the NBA when the OKC move happened but I don't see many similarities between the two. The sonic's ownership didn't do a complete marketing rebrand like the Jags have undergone. Also I don't agree with the old stadium thing. While yes its 15-20 years old, it hasn't become dated like the cookie cutters like RFK and AFCS did. UGA and UF did a great job of working with the city to create a stadium that would be the "Arrowhead" of its generation. The stadium is far from dated and could easily be brought up to the new standard with a simple and fairly cheap renovation. I see Khan getting updated video boards and a new upscale suites area built behind the north endzone. The Jags brand is going to erupt really quickly down here.

I'm not trying to jump on you or anything. Hope it doesn't come across like that. Just trying to have a conversation about it.

Why so much hate for the JAGS patch? It no different than what Florida does with the gator head over the heart on their football unis. It is just because this is the first time (i think) this has been done in the pros? I really like it. If the Falcons did something like this for us ATL fans i'd be ecstatic. Its even better that they could come up with a secondary logo that perfect fits their fan base and community.

It's aping Army-style unit patches in a Navy town for one....

HA! I didn't even think about that. It does look like an ARMY patch i've seen on TV. I'm sure there's a few Naval units that use something like it though?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is it just me, or do we have a disproportionately large number of jaguars fans on this forum?

It ain't just you....something about new logo/uniform announcements and unveilings just seems to bring all the closet fans/n00bs/#teamtrolls up out the woodwork.

In this case, prior to this change first being announced, for the longest time Island_Style, Claystation360, ANGELCAT-IDA (I think), and Brian in Boston were the only real established, bonafide Jaguars fans most of us vets knew about. I don't doubt (in fact I know) several other genuine Jaguars fans eventually found their way to these boards and/or had been lurking in the shadows (!) and finally decided to emerge.

The problem, though, is that at the same time lately this place has been overran with what seems to be the bottomfeeders/n00bs/#teamtrolls from the espn.com comments section, which in my mind has directly led to about some of the absolute dumbest and mind-numbingly immature/idiotic commentary this place has seen in my six or seven years here.

(Oh and...if anyone wants any further evidence of the n00b/#teamtroll thing, just look at some of the usernames that have popped up around here lately.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Union Jax"

How clever. :/

Those socks will probably never be seen on US soil. And probably for the best. Have you seen what happens to stripes socks in modern football?

It's not pretty.

devin-hester.jpg

However, the answer is not to give in and wear solid socks just so players can wear tights under ankle socks. The teams/league need to start enforcing the rules and making guys wear the socks correctly.

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