VDizzle12

The rule hasn't changed. No team has an alternate jersey or helmet color that isn't present on a primary uniform or used by the team in the past. Houston's use of lighter blue is just an accent color so it was never against the rules. The Colts and Commanders are close. But they added black to their white jerseys to get around the rule.

The colors are superior and would distance themselves from the Bears. But the throwbacks aren't anything special either. Striping inconsistency drives me nuts and with this set there are 4 different variations.

So you're telling me that the red pants have blue and white stripes. Yet the red jersey and helmet doesn't have white in the "horns'? Why on earth would they do this. There are so many inconsistencies and easy fixes in this set.

Same. While I'm in the minority here, I think variety is good. I can also understand the worry that it can turn the league into a free-for-all like college. But that means team switching helmets every week. As it stands now I have no problem with teams wearing alternates 3 times a year. Out of the "big 4" major leagues in America the NFL is still far behind everyone else and has shown the most restraint. I'm completely okay with "city" uniforms in other leagues but can agree that it's not necessary in the NFL. If the H-Town unis are the closest we get to that, I'm fine. Like it or not this is the way the world of sports branding has gone.

The Seahawks helmet works because it just creates a subtle two tone pattern. The Saints and Broncos put small icons on a contrasting background. From far away it just turns into a weird off color like brown or in the Broncos case, peach colored stripe.

They aren't horrible and a decent improvement over their last set. I'll give them credit. They are modern enough but still feel like the Broncos. If that makes sense. The helmets are definitely the biggest swing and miss. White helmets are unnecessary. Pairing that with navy jerseys and pants is a horrible look. All-white would have been the only combination I can see working. Kind of dumb that the Bengals were granted permission to pair an alternate helmet with a white uniform, but no other team will? Maybe they should asterisk that rule a bit. Let teams wear an alt helmet if it's shell color matches the jersey? Still keep uses to 3x. Has anyone here claimed yet that Nike specifically designed this uniform to have the mountain peak pointing right at the swoosh?

I like these a lot but it would be way better if the "NY" and "NYC" were purple. That and the bridge across the front of the cap seems unnecessary. I'll never understand the appeal of dark lettering + white outline on a dark background. Probably my least favorite trend of the past decade, and it's everywhere.

It's so odd to me that so many teams are doing away with pants stripes. My only thought is maybe they want to be able to mix and match with different jerseys. So lack of stripes keeps the consistency there? For the Lions, I'm surprised how much I like the blue/black/blue set and that's a good example. Blue pants with silver stripes definitely would have looked odd there. When neither the helmet nor jersey have silver stripes. While we have some duds every offseason. Slowly I think some teams are gravitating towards their best looks. Lions, Bucs, Cardinals, Browns, Jets, etc are perfect examples. Just need to wait out the disasters and they join them soon enough.

It would be more fitting of the Texans to show a porta-potty knocked over with all of the contents leaking out the side.

The fact that some fans are suggesting a gray, cream or black (why?) helmet for the Browns tells me that they haven't learned anything. Personally I think the plain all-brown color rush look is gone for good. The fans do love orange and have wanted the orange jerseys to return. Maybe a new color rush that is all orange, but paired with a brown helmet might work. Because orange head-to-toe is too much IMO.

The Browns VP was on their radio show today talking about the facemask change. Didn't say anything about the uniforms changing this season. He did mention exploring adding a third helmet into the mix next season. Specifically said brown and no logos. Seems unnecessary and honestly I only see it working with the brown color rush (which is atrocious) or some new alternate. I would assume that nothing major, uniform-wise happens until next season.

I think anyone who designs anything for a living knows exactly this. I have almost never had a project go from start to finish without a client putting their fingerprints all over it. Usually the more cooks you have in the kitchen, the worse the end result will be. Especially when you have someone pushing for "new, innovative, cutting edge". At the end of the day they are the one's paying the bill and will get whatever they want. Not everything we do as designers works. But sometimes we don't deserve all the blame. I've never worked with a company like Nike or a league like the NFL. But even on a smaller scale I used to take criticism personally on social media and message boards. I've learned to just focus on the positives and appreciate the work being done. Regardless of how some people on the internet feel. When it comes to the NFL and Nike. One positive is that most of the time teams recognize their failures and eventually go back to what works. The Browns, Bucs, Chargers, Cardinals, Jets, etc all have nice sets now after trying way too hard to modernize everything.

The Browns have done such a good job fixing their branding in the past 4 years. But the logos still seem to be the one spot that they just can't get right. An illustration of an outdated piece of equipment is not a logo, regardless of how iconic it may seem. It makes even less sense now that the team uses two different helmets. I've never owned anything with the helmet logo on it and never will. A dog is fine for the Dawg Pound and Brownie is fine for throwback merch. But the team needs a legit logo. Something as simple as a CB monogram is the best move.

Has to be the worst kept secret for such a small change. One of the local radio stations in Cleveland has been using a backdrop with the new "logo" for weeks. Just make it official already.

Good point. Guess it's a lot different than the Colts or Commanders adding black out of nowhere. Hopefully the black pants are never paired with anything other than the black jersey.

So how did the Jets get away with an all-black alternate uniform? As far as I can tell there's no black anywhere on the green or white set.

I'm starting to get a bit worried that the Jim Brown 32s are on all the jerseys given to new players. Hopefully it's just the equipment staff being lazy and those patches aren't going to be around this upcoming season.

I keep going back to the post office site. It just makes so much sense, but again would require the city to foot some of the bill. Regardless both sides will benefit from a new indoor stadium. Especially since it will almost guarantee major events coming to the city all year round. Not just Browns games and a handful of summer concerts.

The city has been playing hardball this whole time and I hope it bites them in the butt. They already control all of the development around the stadium, parking, etc. So the Browns only revenue on gameday comes from tickets, food and merch sales inside the stadium. The team is missing out on a ton of money and the city wants to keep it that way. They want to keep throwing a few million to polish that turd on the Lakefront and have no interest in the Browns building a stadium anywhere else in the city or county. There are rumors that they were eyeing land near Progressive Field and Rocket Mortgage Fieldhouse, and the city shot that down. The current stadium is a pain to get to, parking sucks and there's not much to do around it. I've sat through so many miserable games there and not only because of the team on the field. The Browns need a stadium with a roof and the city needs to work with them to make it happen. If not, I say the Browns are free to build wherever they want.

Everyone on the internet nowadays wants to be right and say "I told you so!" Back in 2012 everyone was convinced that Nike was going to turn the NFL into Oregon. That idea was even more prominent here, especially among traditionalists. Every year since, people post about the "slippery slope" and "Here we go! It's happening now!" But after almost 12 years, no NFL team has reached the Oregon level. No NFL team is randomly adding colors like volt green into their uniforms. No team has "city connect" uniforms. No team is wearing a different helmet every week.

There's so much wrong with that helmet. Black and gold don't fade into each other well at all. Not only was it not a gradient, but they used matte paint on the front and glossy on the back. On top of that they claimed that the Jaguar was coming out of the shadows. Yet he's going from a light background into dark. Gradients on helmets can work in some applications. But the Jaguars helmet was one of the worst design decisions in NFL history.

Unless the rules have changed, the black alternate wouldn't be allowed. Because black doesn't appear anywhere on the primary home/away options. Also alternate helmets aren't allowed to be paired with the primary jersey options.

Everyone here is losing their minds for nothing. Just assuming the NFL will become a free-for-all where every team has multiple helmets and wears a different uniform every week. Is it too much to ask to just wait and see what happens? There's literally no reason to start freaking out because of hypothetical situations that may never come to fruition. Just because the NBA, MLB and NHL have been going nuts with uniforms lately, doesn't automatically mean the NFL will follow suit. As far as we know teams are still limited to 3 alternate uniform/helmet uses and all alternates are required to tie in with the overall branding and colors of the team. So no, crazy "city connect" uniforms are not happening.

People have been warning about every team in the NFL becoming Oregon since Nike took over. After all this time it still hasn't happened. As long as teams are still limited to 3 alternate uses per season, I don't see the big deal.

I agree. Oregon didn't bother me and now that I know the reasoning, South Carolina doesn't bother me either. As long as there's a legit reason for the added color, why not try it? TCU adding red is another cool example and it compliments their purple/black color scheme really well. They aren't just schools adding random colors like volt/highlighter green, silver, charcoal/anthracite just to be cool and follow the trends.