Kiltman

Yeah it’s fun to think about, hopefully something happens there. No part of the identity they just got is worth saving. It’s a cool sounding name, and I loved the Union in Philly leaning into that a bit. But yeah, especially with what side of things every general was in Virginia…probably a non-starter ha. I wonder if the Jags would move down there once their Stadium “needs” replaced. Or if they move out of state at that point, would Orlando get a bump in expansion talk (which seems like it’s on the mind of the league again)

A) 1. Think they’ll stick with Washington but maybe add in DC in whatever branding. At this point I don’t think they’d shift to Virginia, but would be interesting to lean into that and/or NOVA (though I guess why limit it to just the DC metro area). 2. Only obvious thing would be some version of Hogs or something to get easy clout with the fanbase. Wolves, any of those that actually were liked. Other than that throw a dart and you’ll hit something better. 3. Would be cool to see them slide to maroon, yellow/gold and white. It’s close but something different. Do a throwback that’s maroon and tan with a fauxback W logo based in the teams history. b ) 1. I doubt they’d ditch DC, would be a big market to leave. But if they did San Antonio seems the most primed for it. No bad blood like San Diego and St. Louis. Growing market in a state that love football. Would make the Rivalry with the Cowboys a little bigger. 2. Feel like the simplest thing would be pick an animal that doesn’t have representation in the league, bonus points if it’s also not in the other big leagues. Wolves again, Snakes (Rattlers, Copperheads, etc) Arachnids (Spiders, Scorpions, Tarantulas, Widows / Widowmakers). All of them would just be the usually head logo or a silhouette. Could see specialized ones like a side view of a scorpion tail that looks like an S. Easiest to avoid the Alamo stuff or any overdone desperado like names. 3, Honestly they could keep the color scheme for any of them, with varying degrees of black. But going with a Maroon / Ath Gold or Orange look would be nice here too. If they weren’t in the same division as the eagles I’d say dark green and powder blue or purple white and red. Two color schemes that don’t get used a ton.

Would be nice to see them do that and do a slight refresh brand wide. Like minor tweaks, there is room to “evolve it” a bit.

Since I don’t think they’ll ever drop the black… I hope at some point they redesign the blacks to match the retro look design wise / use Kelly. Would allow for some mixing around too. Midnight green on black has never been a great look together.

They’ll keep stuffing the ballot now more than ever, gotta filibuster the rugby sneak from getting banned ha.

* Unless their attempt to get the league to allow third helmets is permitted.

There is a Reddit user who talked to @TruColor, person allegedly has seen the whole thing. @TruColor himself has seen the actual helmet

I’ll try to find it a clip of it, but straight from Lurie’s mouth last year. they mention it here https://www.nbcsports.com/philadelphia/eagles/eagles-reveal-black-alternate-helmets-2022 edit: he talks about it here at his press conference last year. uniform talk starts at like 3:30. First what the Kelly greens will look like for 2023, then the black helmet and how they’d try to keep it for 2023 as a third helmet.

Yeah I don't think any of those announced last year are permanent rotational options, unless it was a classic style. I'd expect teams to switch up and/or tweak their alternate looks more often than not Lurie and the Eagles are pushing, or said they’d be pushing, for at least 3 helmets so they can keep the Black. But yeah I agree it’ll probably be rotating thing in the league. Especially if 3 does get approval.

Gotcha, tough to tell where everyone is coming from on it. I pointed out the tan stuff because it was a color in their design/striping way back beyond just the pants (which was their next update. Yeah ultimately end result will be the only thing that matters.

I think comparing the Cards to either of them is a stretch. Chiefs have maintained their AFL heritage look for most of their existence. The Steelers uniform became iconic with the success post merger. Colts and Raiders also in those tiers. When did the Cardinals look ever move into that zone? Beyond just like simplicity and retro vibes in a uniform are they really an iconic team look wise that is worth the ire? Especially since they ditched the design part of that. If you really want to look at success the times they’ve actually been relevant have been when they have additional colors in their scheme. Tan at the beginning, black and a bit of yellow in the last 18 years. I totally get wanting to stick to the old, especially here where most people slant that way, but seems like an odd hill to die on when that simple just red and white uniform died almost two decades ago. And by a giant margin when it was what they wore they were one of the worst franchises in the league.

They have like double the history but a fraction of the tradition. Even before the Reebok pipe fest, can never recall it being lauded the way other traditional looks have. Once they did that they broke from the little bit they were hanging onto. With slight nudges along the way with striping attempts, most notably the Arizona flag stripes. Tradition and History really point to the same thing, but influenced by success. One is a judgement, the other is a fact. I think anyone who says it doesn’t have the tradition is pointing to that. Schrödinger’s tradition, does it exist if no one pays attention to it?

A fair point, obviously kickers/punters are important. But it’s impossible to deny they are often separated/relegated to the bottom of things. Visually there is a disparity purely on the amount of plays say a Linebacker has a game to the amount of time either specialist is on the field. That, plus it being obvious who they are when they are on the field is why using it as a form of uniformity doesn’t have much need beyond “that’s how it was”, which is what I was saying. I agree there was a certain something to the old rules. Drafting a guy and wondering what number he’d go with in the range he could chose from was a staple of the post draft week. I think there was room to evolve it more thoughtfully than the “do whatever the hell you want” outcome we basically ended up with. Opening up kicker numbers to me made sense within the old and new rules, could just be personal bias of not really holding onto that one with much care.

It was, Lurie just likes to get his flowers over stuff like that.

I think there is a middle ground with some of them, like LBs basically being in the double digits is a change I was for. there’s a lineage to it with the sport, I think of like #11 at Penn State, lots of those Bama backers in the 30s. Visually it still looks “right”. As the rules stand now, I’m fine with them essentially bumping the P/Ks down to what will probably be the 30s/40s for most guys. They are a lone player in a prominent position visually speaking. Don’t really need a number system to recognize them. Aside from pro tradition there isn’t much reason to keep it the same. I don’t think teams are going to want to give any of them anything in the 90s. So many teams have retired numbers there and the DL already has a tough time getting numbers they want at the start of their career.

Think it was just an oversight. throwing in the P/K rule adjustment seems like them bending to what was happening around the league of those now premium numbers being occupied by punters and kickers. sucks for some of them because they were able to cash in on guys buying the number from them ha. You’ll have a mainstay grandfathered generation of P/K who stick with their team, then they’ll probably mostly be in the 30s and 40s. Unless they are in their first camp with a new team, in which case they can jump back up to any cut player’s number. I think them going up to the 90s is goofy, but I suppose it just sets the rule at it’s max.

Often it’s just not the same people making those decisions that teach kids anything outside of sports, but yeah it certainly just goes unchecked. For the last decade+ I’ve worked with a company part time doing sports fields for schools and it’s been so interesting to see how little these schools sometimes think of branding. I’m on the presentation side so usually what the ADs and others actually see. Often times they rarely even have the files for their logos ready and available. Have had to get good at quickly sketching over pixelization and other issues to make vectors. Which is super fun on 200x200 jpegs of a logo from 30-45 years ago. So in that instance the stealing they do actually makes my job easier since the svg files are often on wiki or I already remade a logo for another school. Obviously I don’t condone what they do, but sort of just have to roll with what they have. But have had a few wins over the years of getting them not to put certain things actually on the fields. Or developing a new Wordmark/ font for them, so at least they aren’t stealing that too. Sending them extra concepts with that, and like school colored turf in the outside areas / track seem to get some decision makers happy enough to go another way. But yeah you usually are just talking to the Athletic Department and the admin building (which will be more or less involved depending on the type of superintendent they have). Lots of times the logo was at some point dictated by coach of the football team or other popular sport and the rest just roll with it. Or a lot of them have like 5+ versions from various colleges/pros spread across the school athletics, with no official school one.

’We wanted the Jaguar to be appearing from the shadows.’ Was my favorite line drop from that reveal event.

Added some flexibility, but yeah where they drew the lines seemed a bit of a partial measure. Like why not broaden K/P numbers? DL numbers? Adding 0 at this point is fine, it always looks a little goofy and I’m sure it will vary Team font to Team font.

Love the Legacy look. Nice precise update on a uniform that’s hard to stray too far with. was going to say the multiple oranges look a bit odd (especially on the away), but I think it’s just the template lighting.

Lions losing the silver would be a shame, almost like a full a concession to Nike not putting in the work to bring back metallics. Hope the alt is just a color flipped helmet HBlue, silver stripes and silver lion, since they are doing it.

I only know they still exist because they constantly try to get me to pay for old stuff I had on there.

Yeah I imagine it’ll just be the number helmet look. I guess the biggest departure I could see would be them doing sorta the white tiger look the bengals did. Just white and brown.

Would be nice. Wonder if they would be more or less inclined to do it since there will be silver pants for the throwbacks this year. I hoping this year or next when they add the new wordmark that an overall tweaked update comes with it.

Wonder when we’ll hear about the Eagles’ petition for more than two helmets.