• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by andrewharrington

  1. I think white pants would look fine with it. Gold and white are sprinkled pretty evenly around that uniform, and there’s enough of both to not make one or the other look odd. Dark blue as their primary color never really did it for me, but I don’t have a preference between the light blue or the medium blue. They both look great and the team shuffled back and forth between light and medium blue throughout their early years. They just need to pick one and form a clear identity.
  2. Can you give an example of a jersey template that is “full-baked” and/or an “actual creation?”
  3. The best part about this was changing the bolt’s light blue outline to dark blue, giving the logo a crisper, bolder look.
  4. It might look better, but does it really “work?” Those Ns look like solid rectangles at a distance. The A is practically filled in as well.
  5. Probably to get rid of the little shards and tight intersections where the serifs of the U meet the angles of the A. You’ll also notice that they didn’t actually move the A up. They actually moved it down (check how the serifs of the A meet the curves of the U), but then they made the U a little shorter so the two characters are the same height (the U was much taller than the A before, which is kinda strange if you think about the hierarchy). I think you have to be careful about moving the A too low in their logo because there’s a tipping point where it starts to read as UA rather than AU. Someone brought it up above, and I agree the end result of this update is that the characters don’t read as individual letters quite as well, but I think that’s okay. A monogram isn’t necessarily intended to be read like a word. It’s intended to exist as a distinctive shape and/or composition that happens to be made of the pertinent character(s). I think the changes they made here result in a much more clean and concise composition and form without sacrificing the equity and recognizability for the average person.
  6. This is not an actual redesign, by the way; just a designers’ idea.
  7. That’s one of adidas’ brand fonts (though it shouldn’t be horizontally squashed like that). I bet there’s something with a similar look out there, but I’m not sure what.
  8. The fabric is vibrant. It’s the helmet that’s washed out!
  9. I’m not sure. It could be a league thing, or it could be a design preference to keep the toolbox tidy and concise for the factory who makes the garments. I like to do custom nameplate lettering, but there’s no doubt it’s less efficient than having a small set of league-wide standards. Think of trim elements on uniforms like separate SKUs in a store’s inventory. Every single thing (graphic, patch, team lettering, player lettering, numbers, etc.) that has to be printed on or otherwise attached to anyone’s uniform is catalogued so that it can be generated (or ordered from another supplier) when the time comes to create or decorate the jersey.
  10. The coaches typically have carte blanche when it comes to “custom” stock uniforms like this. Technically, they’re not supposed to be using gold as a fill color for numbers and type, either (only the W), but there’s not always a process in place to make sure these things follow the rules, so to speak.
  11. The Bills immediately come to mind, but I could be wrong.
  12. The main italic wordmarks will remain for media, marketing, environmental graphics, and merchandise. Even at a full eleven or twelve inches wide, you can only get those wordmarks about an inch and a half tall on a jersey, and the typeface itself doesn’t take trim very well (lots of fill-in and clumsy intersections). On top of that, each sport had freewheeled its own versions, with varying degrees of success (standard italic for women’s basketball, arched/non-italic for softball and baseball, a taller version for men’s basketball, etc.). They lack versatility and frankly just aren’t well-suited for uniforms. The new uniform wordmarks were designed to maximize the height and presence on a jersey, taking signature design cues from the existing wordmarks and fusing those with classic block letter characteristics (and the structure of the W) to create something sharper, more traditional, and flexible across all sports.
  13. I think that’s a bit of a stretch. The lettering around the logo is maybe a lateral move (it’s a more appropriate typeface, but the monospace-style I is pretty weird in the context, there are a couple clunky letters, and it’s not set on the arc very well). The numbers, however, are much better, as is the illustration of the bridge, and while the nameplate lettering may not be everyone’s cup of tea, it’s a better stylistic complement to the rest of the identity and more functional for long names.
  14. Block numbers aren’t exactly a good match to the rest of the team identity or the style of the uniform. They only “work” because they’re ubiquitous and generic, which is good if your team has the same “classic sport Americana” look and not much else (like the Celtics or Giants, for example), but otherwise tends to look a bit default and/or undercooked. Personally, I think the Jazz bring a little more polish and personality to the table with their identity, and a block number feels a bit antiquated in the context. Their identity pieces are a mix of curves, high contrast forms, angled terminals, and a support typeface for the word UTAH. The numbers match the support typeface, bringing a little roundness to the corners and angled terminals to support the graphic elements in the ball, the note, and the Zs, respectively. Distinctive type is one of the best ways to increase the versatility and potential of your identity, though you have be careful not to overdo it because it can quickly turn into a disaster. I think the Jazz are toeing the line quite well with their pieces (thanks to our very own Ben Barnes, who is the creative director in Utah).
  15. Believe it or not, that was a request from the university.
  16. I definitely don’t prefer shorthand city names on jerseys, but Phila has such a history as the Sixers’ “thing” that I don’t mind it. I actually kinda like it because it feels less forced than many of the other shorthand jerseys (ATL, Motor City, The Land, etc.). Philadelphia is pretty cumbersome on a jersey because of its length, and there’s something charmingly quirky in having shorthand forms on both jerseys (Phila and Sixers).
  17. A team called the Patriots, whose identity is inspired by symbols of the American Revolution and whose home region was the epicenter for said event, should not wear a red jersey. I thought we established this like 15 years ago.
  18. It’s essentially the Jaguars’ number set with a few modifications made to simplify it. The 4 looks way too heavy and compact compared to the other numbers, though. That’s a shame.
  19. It still is done that way, to a degree. It’s funny you used Montréal as an example; the reason they’re the only team currently wearing a two-eyelet lace up instead of the standard version is because they insisted on it. Same with Dallas’ “cowboy cut” shoulder yoke. The challenge is always balancing form, function, efficiency, and versatility that works for as many teams as possible. Even given the challenging base design, I still contend there exists a good solution to coloring up every team’s collar. For example, I think the contrasting center tab creates the problem for a team like Chicago (the dress shirt look). A white center tab would have looked a lot better in my opinion (I’m not a fan at all of half-colored collars).
  20. I definitely understand where you’re coming from (and agree for the most part), but I also think that team identity and brand positioning are important to the discussion. Not every team is the Giants, Bears, or Packers, and I think the vibe that some newer teams are cultivating make monochrome uniforms more appropriate in that context. I think there’s also something to be said for variety. A homogeneous look among 16 teams is a lot different than a homogeneous look among 32, like we have today. Do the Seahawks look great in blue over white or grey? Yes, but I don’t think they look odd in all blue. They pull it off because of their identity and the brand they’ve built with it, and there are a handful of teams that can pull it off for the same reasons. It obviously goes wrong when heritage brands are forced into something like Color Rush, but ultimately, I think the debate should focus more on brand context than a very subjective blanket statement like all professional teams should wear contrasting pants because that’s how they’ve always done it. Some teams have no interest in the past and their brand strategy reflects that. It would be just as silly to arbitrarily force those teams into historically conventional aesthetics “just because.” If I were shopping for car, I’d expect the “professional” employees at a midwestern Cadillac dealer to dress and present themselves differently (more traditional, white shirts and ties, etc.) than the employees at a Subaru dealer in Seattle (more casual, outdoorsy, etc.), and that’s simply because of branding and regional culture. I don’t see why sports teams have to be any different.
  21. I know people aren’t happy they’re moving across the bay, but they’d be pretty stupid to completely eliminate Oakland from their identity. That said, keeping this jersey around comes across (to me) as a fairly hollow attempt to stay in the good graces of their former town. They’re basically in a no-win situation with all that.
  22. Not hinting, just explaining that a reactionary aesthetic fix isn’t realistic. Once these things are designed, they’re developed for mass production and integrated into an elaborate schedule, often involving coordination between multiple suppliers and locations. Short of a complete performance emergency like the NBA jerseys bursting open or the drippy soccer fabric from a few years ago, the earliest you’ll ever see a change is the next redesign cycle.
  23. For reference, I never really loved the standing version, so I updated the “stiff arm” one: Let’s just say I’ll be livid if they botch this again.
  24. There’s not much you can do with that helmet. The giant ridge and the snap placement are so obtrusive that it’s almost comical; in my opinion a very transparent example of corporate ego seizing control of the design. It’s “form over function” (essentially a backward approach) at its finest, going overboard on a distinctive, disruptive look and completely inhibiting the ability to decorate the helmet in a conventional way.
  25. By the time a base uniform style hits the field/ice/court, the next one is typically already in the early stages of design. Basically, petitioning would be a waste, as the uniform wheel can only turn so fast.