Ted Cunningham

We've been past "dazzle" fabric (is that the actual term for it, or just our colloquialism?) for long enough now that when I see it (like in those pictures of the Eagles uniforms, or on UCLA's pants or whatever) that it looks dated. The same kind of dated that an original Riddell Revolution gives off now. Not ancient history by any means, but also not at all modern. Kind of in that gap between old school/throwback and modern: it just looks old. While I think some teams might benefit from going back to that look, it would also take a while to get used to seeing it again, if the entire garment were made of the same even shine that pants and jerseys were made from in the 90s/2000s. It would also take some getting used to seeing a new iteration of the dazzle/shiny concept too, like the trim on the hockey uniforms in the above posts if that were translated to full garments. But for me, anyway, that might be easier to stomach simply because I could see that as more of an evolution instead of going back to something that is associated with a time when football uniforms were bulkier and seemed clunkier or even slower (because of their size). Kind of a stream of consciousness there, but my overall point is dazzle as we knew it looks dated now.

There's something kind of 60s-restaurant-sign about this that I like. I understand what you're going for here, but I think I get it only because I know that Tampa Bay uses a sword on a flag already. In a vacuum it doesn't read that way. I realize it would probably take some doing to keep the simple, angular look while also working it more toward looking like a flag. But connecting the T portion with the B portion would help. Also, there are several inconsistencies that could be cleaned up, like the lighter stroke weight on the hilt and handle, the fact that you can see a little tiny bit of the blade under the hilt (on the right), and the end of the blade coming close to, but not lining up with, the top of the flag. Tighten that up and get the flag looking a bit more like a flag, and you've got something fun going.

Though, to be pedantic, and while the above is very nice, the NFC South never really gave us any of that. That would be mostly the NFC West with some Central mixed in. The NFC South has always felt like a lot of black and silver (of varying shades) with some nice accent colors mixed in.

YES. I searched high and low for that graphic. I was going to post it with no comment for the old heads around here. But I couldn't find it.

I'm frankly surprised the conversation was allowed to continue as long as it did before someone brought up the point less reel line mint thread.

I really like the Mystics and Liberty uniforms. That Liberty verdigris/patina green is a really nice color.

This may be better suited for one of the 1,000 iterations of "right uniform for right player" threads over in Sports Logo General Discussion (and I know you're being facetious), but my immediate and reflexive reaction to that was "Hey, AJ McCarron's correct jersey is only a Battlehawks jersey now". Haha.

Thanks, I made it myself!

Though if they want to stick with the R/D/whatever letter logo, I think they could fix the helmet to better fit the overall look of their XFL 3.0 uniforms. Just make the logo black and add the thin red stripe to both the helmet stripe and the logo.

It's rough, but it conveys the idea.

I applaud Maryland for going through so many iterations of their uniforms combining red, white, black, and gold. And I am generally on the side of using the flag motif, as they are the flagship state university (so why not) and Maryland's flag is memorable and popular. But the helmet design shown above highlights something that I think Maryland has done fairly well when they've employed it: using two pairs of colors somewhat separately and in parallel. This is the ideal example of this concept: black and gold elements on the helmet and pants, red and white on the jersey (and if they had socks, red and white could carry to the socks as well). I really like this tandem approach. It employs all four colors without becoming overly busy (e.g. multiple outlines on the numbers just to fit three of the four colors in, etc.). My ideal Maryland uniform would employ the state flag imagery, the general idea of running these color pairs in tandem, and the Terps script. (Typing all that makes me realize how dumb the idea sounds, but I think execution works):

Interestingly enough, this exact thought was posited back before the Falcons' latest rebrand was revealed, and I mocked it up in that discussion:

I've watched significant parts of (if not all of) all five games so far. While the viewership numbers and lack of vision don't seem great for the league's long-term viability, the games have been entertaining. I'm not sure what the metrics are for sustained success as far as return on investment, viewership, and so on, but if the parity remains the same and the games stay close, this is fairly easy football to watch.

Same. I've seen that logo several times, and the first time I saw it was when I responded to Cujo an hour or two ago.

While I'm sure there isn't hard data to back up any claims of which identities were most memorable, I think @Cujo makes a great point at least based on anecdotes and memory: The Las Vegas Outlaws identity is likely the most recognizable identity from the first iteration of the XFL if for no other reason than Rod Smart's HE HATE ME jersey. When I think XFL1, that's what I think of: that name and the colors black, red, and gold.

These posts are excellent examples of the differences between using script typefaces (Beaufort and Wright State) and an intentionally designed script (Nebraska). Those Nebraska jerseys are class. Also, why is Wright State's no. 6 wearing different socks than everyone else?

Interesting how these opinions fall: I agree that the throwback look is better than the current one. But if a blend would be on the table, I'd take the throwback set in the current colors. That shade of aqua, especially in the sun, is unbeatable.

Ohhhhhh. Details are important. (Haha.) Even with that, though, I think I stand by what I said: Kind of generic/out of the catalog style.

All of those jerseys just look kind of like knock-offs, somehow. I don't even really hate the designs. But they just look off-brand, somehow; like uniforms for a semi-pro league or something, made by a local manufacturer.

Wow. Basically everything Nike did with Cal was bad and/or a garish example of the trends of the times. (Though I was reading through various tweets and saw that someone said the Denver/WVU/swooshy design in 03 was actually Nike's take on Adidas's version from 02? So perhaps characterizing at least the first part of Nike's designs to be as much about trends would be better than just saying they were flat bad on their own.) That brings me to a related but much broader, general point: I think my least favorite era of uniforms, generally, is the 2000s. There were a lot of designs that I feel like came about simply because the technology existed to execute them. That, coupled with a trend toward adding navy or black to every color palette (or just generally darkening existing colors) and the equipment itself (pads, helmets) being clunky and still overly big, but not in a sturdy, classic 70s/80s kind of way really made football aesthetics in the 2000s bad.

I feel like the test here is whether it can be identified as what the rights-holder claims it is, and that was my first impression: Hey, that's the old Cleveland C with a lightning bolt on it. And while I know we talk about how, collectively, we on the boards notice things that people not plugged into our interests wouldn't notice. But MLB cap logos are an exception; that's arguably one of the most recognizable sets of logos out there. So many people would likely recognize it as the old Cleveland C. And then as you all pointed out, this guy is pretty obviously ripping off other marks as well. I'm not sure if he heard somewhere the old tale about "Well, if you change the logo 20%, then it can't be infringement" or whatever, or if he otherwise just thinks he's the smartest guy in the business and thought he could get away with it or what.

I think one thing I really like about the UNC throwbacks is the contrast between the navy and columbia (carolina?) blues. And one treatment on the throwbacks that really brings that out is how thick some of the navy stripes/accents are. QB sleeve-weirdness aside, the thicker stripes and the drop shadow (as opposed to just a run-of-the-mill keyline around each number) help bring out that contrast in a way that's both pleasing and non-intrusive.

These two jerseys as an away/home combo come off as very WFL or something similar with the darkest color for the pants, and the bottom half of the combinations being the same between the two. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. (Specifically, I'm thinking of the Florida Blazers of the WFL; a fairly similar look.) Really, at this point, I just hope for a difference in pants and jersey colors (except for white over white, which really doesn't bother me; that's just how away uniforms work sometimes).

That's where it's headed, I'm sure.

And I would argue (perhaps unpopularly) that the 2022 iteration looked better than the 1971 game, at least from a match-up standpoint. And that's all down to the brighter aqua the Dolphins use now. An aside: If the Dolphins go back to a throwback look, they should keep the current aqua.