Brave-Bird 08

I'm glad I am not the only one, because I was adjusting my TV set obsessively earlier. They looked piss yellow. I noticed the other day while playing The Show 24 that any of the off-white uniforms look the same garish yellow color in the game, but I was thinking it was either a game-specific thing and/or my TV. Nope, seems the new material just doesn't convey that color well, especially in lighting. When the players stepped into the dugout it would tone down a bit, so there is something about the material that is kind of reflecting the stadium lights and adding to the hue (the grey jerseys seem to be rather reflective as well). Just...so much about this league-wide shift looks like crap.

The Diamondbacks new red helmets I thought looked great, glossy lids need to come back into style in MLB. You're right that the logo gets kind of lost, but that particular logo isn't going to look very good on any dark background. Arizona has such a fascinating identity for me, because between their past and present there's so many styles and color combinations that sound great in theory -- but they just have not put a uniform onto the field that isn't distracting in a long time. The new home breaks that trend for me. I didn't think it when they initially unveiled it, but I thought it looked really nice yesterday (the previous home also looked nice, but I just have not liked the minor league D-Backs scripts)

Jacksonville gonna be like: "what's old is new, the gradients are back"

Is that bizarre? That's part of that specific redesign. That's like saying we are surprised other teams didn't use the weird plastic shoulder things on the V.1 Nike Jaguars uniforms

See: Lesson #2: Know when someone is joking.

CCSLC lesson #3: Unless you are Colorwerx or Teal, you have no credibility

@timjameskohler couldn't have said it better. Almost every NFL uniform has suffered from combination issues the last few years -- not even the 49ers and Cowboys are immune. I am equally concerned that both the Lions and Broncos will be too focused on emphasizing the "iced out" look -- one Detroit seemingly preferred, and Denver seems to be leaning into from a brand perspective -- that will inevitably lead to worse uniforms, no matter the design motif. Same thing that happened with Arizona last year, their uniform pieces are really nice but the all-red and all-white just drags the look down. We're going to be getting more of this, not less. My only last hope is that the trend of throwbacks becoming more prominent as an option will endear more fans to classic styles and eventually we will see a trend back to the norm. But man, the league looks atrocious right now.

accidental double post

Especially for someone with your taste I see your point. But, this image is the one that is seared into my brain. This was the first image of the uniform anyone saw, and it was jarring.

Especially because the way uniforms leak makes a big difference. I'll never get over how the Falcons set started off on completely the wrong foot because the first images were the jerseys hanging on a rack and some random, no-name, non-football playing white dudes wearing the full set in an office setting. Optics matter, and the jokes of "omg no way this is real" and "they look like the longest yard" were already throttling the algorithm before the Falcons media team woke up that next morning. They conceded and gave the go on the unveil the very next day (I think they had over a week left before the unveil date). But the general public had kind of already decided the uniforms were a joke. They looked WAY BETTER on actual players. I think this is exactly why Cal McNair was quick to send off a more polished image of the Texas uniform when that not so great phone snap of someone modeling it came out the other day. If that was the only leak we had right now, would people feel different about the Texans uniforms? Nerds like us would immediately see that image and go, "oh, well, looks like the fit isn't right for the player model." But the average person is going to see that dinky image of a Texans player standing around in that uniform and think "lol these look little league." Because in that image, it does. Casual fans gain most of their feelings towards uniforms on presentation, which is why social posts/videos/graphics for uni reveals have become so paramount and such a big priority for social teams, especially in college ranks where uniforms are changing week to week. We are the EXTRA WEIRD lemmings that will parse through the noise and look for different things on a uniform based on context we have to where we might deduce how it's going to look, and end up with a completely different opinion of someone else. Thsese uni reveal presentations have become just as important as the uniforms themselves. But, leakers gonna leak.

In the social media age we live in, do not underestimate someone's willingness to peddle complete nonsense for short-term attention and dopamine hits while sacrificing the loss of their credibility in the future (especially if you were formerly not a public figure/influencer/whatever and the "loss of credibility" doesn't have any implications for a career, reputation, etc). It's all too prominent in the news world, pop-culture, etc. It happens in these circles too. I don't buy it. Even Paul Lukas' interview last month was what I would consider to be pre-emptive, attention seeking journalism. I love Paul but it was kind of bad form to give that source that much of a platform without being able to verify through other channels the credibility. You can't just say "I believe someone to be credible" and leave it at that. The amount of times I have seen concepts mistaken as leaks, and eventually turned into someone thinking they have seen "new uniforms" is more than I can count. One time some guy tried to show me the "new Falcons uniforms" at a bar and I had to explain to him it was a concept I MADE in 2012, and that the photo he had saved on his phone was from THESE BOARDS and then made its way around the web.

We are all sickos

That Mets jersey is depressingly bad.

I personally don't think I have ever functionally felt like TV numbers were necessary. Usually my brain is looking towards the torso and just waiting for the player to position themselves in a way where I can finally see what number it is. However I am sure that also subconsciously my brain aggregates visuals from the TV numbers and the torso to piece together the number...idk...getting a bit too specific here. But the point I want to make is I've never consciously felt like TV numbers are necessary. Tracking player statistics from a press box was part of my day-to-day work for years, and many of the teams did not wear TV numbers (mostly high school teams), and it never made a difference to me. I can't imagine in the day of HD cameras and zoomed in, multi-camera angle productions that they are more necessary now. With all of that said, uniforms without TV numbers feel naked to me. They just add that extra piece of color and contrast. Use them whenever possible, but if they ever functionally get in the way of a greater design concept then I think they should never be considered necessary. In the Texans case, for example, it lets the horn breathe. In the Panthers case, there's literally no reason to try to squeeze them onto the shoulder like they have. The Rams "bone" jerseys that have an entire shoulder of room for numbers, yet they squeeze skewed numbers into an already busy sleeve cap-- I continue to be completely astonished that those went to production. But like, in the Chargers case, I kind of wish they had them because there's plenty of room. I know a lot of people really like their uniforms, but with the bolt on the sleeve cap and nothing on the shoulders they look kind of incomplete.

The original orientation of the white uniform with navy pants and red socks had great color blocking and looked really nice and colorful, especially in the sun. It was only until their preference of navy or white socks over the last hand full of years that the look became drab. But, I mean, that's the way of the world in the NFL now ... most teams have downgraded because of these same issues.

The Braves blue is slightly brighter but it's very noticeable to me...especially in the photos I have seen of the blue tops, they almost look purple in certain lighting. I can't tell if that is my eyes playing tricks and mixing colors because the piping is now red (red + blue = purple), but the new shade of blue will take some getting used to. What I do kind of like is that the new blue jerseys can plausibly be worn both home and on the road, wheras the previous ones were designed specifically to be worn with grey pants. I wonder if the Braves will ever toy with the idea of wearing those at home? Afterall, while they have worn red alternates since the alternate era began, the most commonly worn Braves shirsey has been blue with red numbers and a red script -- a look that was not part of an on-field jersey until the last few years.

It's just not doing it for me. I mean, it's fine. White "socks" and navy numbers just makes what used to be a vibrant, beautifully color-blocked modern classic road uniform something that is now drab in comparison. Bull horn motif > generic sleeve "slash" is a plus change Every other change is lateral to a minus change for me. Net meh.

What are we doing here folks? There are a hand full of different factors (lighting, projection, material, the camera or medium of the photo) that factor into how colors present. Comparing different photos to make distinct color comparison arguments is silly

Fans agree, too. If you try to buy an Anthony Edwards jersey in this throwback, it's sold out. There's three other ugly options though. Come to think of it, I don't even recall seeing the Wolves play in their standard home or away uniforms this season. It's always either the grey alt, this throwback or the meh city edition.

Do we need to settle this outside? I'll see you at *checks notes* Section 19, row 53! Be there or be square!

I have such a greater appreciation, if not a remorseful longing, for the 90s-2000s Chargers uniforms. I was born in 90, so around the time teams began moving to the piped out Reebok styles at the turn of the century I saw it through the lens of either you had cool uniforms (Patriots, Falcons, Cardinals, Vikings, etc) or you had lame uniforms. Even with the bolt convention, I thought the Chargers uniforms were bland and boring and initially thought the changes they made to them with the switch to white helmets was a clear upgrade. I can't disagree more with my former self. Those uniforms were stupendously good.

If this doesn't get fixed before the regular season... What bothers me even more is I can see MLB and Nike using some type of "material matching challenges" as justification for eventually moving every team off of grey tops for road uniforms, and then phasing out grey pants. Within 2 seasons we will all have teams dressing in colored tops over white pants and/or their gaudy City Connect uniforms because "well, we just couldn't match the grey color" Same thing that has happened with shiny pants in college football and the NFL.

That might explain it, but it is giving bad "chinny" selfie

It's better, but the forcing of the basketball design on top of a ship being forced into a compass is just too much. This league's biggest problem is still having universal rules for logo suites, it's sapping it of creativity. This logo feels like it is trying to hit a checklist more than it is thoughtfully designed. I hate it, I just hate it way less than whatever the crap they had previously was.

I went to my local Dick's Sporting Goods today to see these jerseys in person. Even with my expectations low I was shocked to see something and am wondering if anyone else has noticed this: Not every, but multiple of the new Braves jerseys I saw hanging up had cuff stripes that were not equal width. Old version: Three-stripe piping of blue-red-blue laying on top of the sleeve material, about an inch up from the edge of the sleeve. All three stripes (or you could say, a thin red stripe on top of a thicker blue stripe) are the same width. (above detail is pretty much the convention for stripes on any sports uniform, especially baseball, for decades) New version: The cuff is a single piece of blue fabric (noticeably lighter shade of blue, btw) with a single red strip. However, on some of the jerseys the single red stripe was not centered on the blue fabric, but slightly closer to the edge of the cuff, leaving one blue stripe noticeably thicker than the other. My best guess in how this happened is that there's standard dimensions for the cuff on the end of the sleeve on the new template, but also standard line width for the blue-red-blue Braves stripe, creating a discrepancy to where if the red stripe is low enough for the bottom blue stripe to match up, it's too low for the top. What blew my mind was that this was inconsistent from jersey to jersey -- I was looking at multiple Braves home jerseys that were all in retail purposes the same, but some had equal-width stripes and some did not. These were selling for $175 a pop. Unbelievable.