VDizzle12

The inconsistencies make no sense. Wordmarks, nameplates, gradient patterns/no gradient patterns, use of black, striping, number font. It's like every single uniform is it's own separate design and doesn't make any sense with the others. I think they just sat in a room, saw a bunch of concepts and said "Nice. Let's do it all." Feels like the Rams design, but worse. I will say this makes me feel better about the Guardians rebrand. Although at least Washington didn't make it's logo a football wearing a helmet or something cheesy like Cleveland did. If I can give any advice to Washington fans, you'll get used to it eventually.

I was wondering the same thing. They don't play enough games to need 3 different uniforms. Also doesn't make sense for team USA to have two blue ones. Just seems like a waste.

That name/number font is definitely going to take some time to get used to. So much of this brand bothers me, but the G+ball logo and weird curves on the side of the C make no sense. Both have an unnecessary cartoony/minor league feel. Only thing missing is a Guardian statue swinging a baseball bat and we'll be in full Brandiose mode.

The Avs are definitely trying too hard to give blue and maroon equal weight in the brand. It's better since they removed the unnecessary black, but still could be simplified. They should never let blue and maroon touch, outline all numbers in gray and the pants/gloves should always match the color of the mountains. Sure this thinking would create a maroon-heavy white set. But honestly I don't think that's a bad thing.

Packers vs Browns throwbacks on Christmas seems like a no brainer. All white vs all green? Sign me up.

The logos all feel very generic. Very similar to some of the "create-a-team" logos in video games. As we saw in Cleveland, no matter what they do people are going to complain. There's the "never should have changed it stop being woke" people, the "that's the best they could come up with?" people and those that had their own favorites that didn't get picked. I feel like I've been asked a hundred times what a Guardian is and why they would go with that. I'd assume a large amount of people have no idea who the Redtails were.

Not sure what's worse. The Giants throwbacks being a uniform they wore last season or when the Chiefs wear a throwback, but it's just changing the facemask from white to gray.

The blue pants work with the maroon jersey because the mountains are blue. It flows well. The easiest solution would have been to go with maroon pants and gloves with the white jersey. At least that would create some consistency and they could have make the numbers maroon. As of right now the blue just seems forced. Better than black, but still forced and out of place.

These reactions made it all the way up to ownership. JW's response in an interview was to laugh it off and say "we were here first." Honestly I wish they didn't even acknowledge it, because it is so absurd. You'd either have to be blind or a complete idiot to think the Browns copied off the Bengals.

Seems like everything they've done from 2020 on has been perfect. Field design and graphics for this season are improvements too. Just hope they figure out how to have a real logo one day...

I remember they claimed that custom fonts make it more difficult for counterfeiters. Obviously it hasn't stopped them because every stadium is still filled with fake jerseys regardless of the number fonts.

I guess this is why I brought it up. In an era where everything wants to be tight, breathable, light, streamlined, etc. It doesn't make much sense just throw giant shirt on underneath everything. Especially when the purpose of these photoshoots is to show off a new uniform. Usually you want the presentation to make the product look as good as possible. But everyone is entitled to their own options. Personally I like monochromatic looks, don't mind black alternates and embrace unique and modern looks. Things that tend to be hated by the majority here.

Can the "baggy t-shirt under tight jersey" trend go away. It's such a dumb look and I can't believe players are actually doing this for photo shoots. Every photo the Rams posted has this. Makes no sense...

Get rid of the "bone" and all gradients. Surprised they got Dickerson. He seemed pretty vocal about hating the new logos and uniforms. Maybe they already realized their mistakes and are attempting to correct them. I'm assuming this will eventually be elevated to a primary uniform.

After all this time the Chip Kelly Oregon connection is still be mentioned? I don't understand why everyone thought (and still believes) that just because Kelly was hired by the Eagles that he wanted them to look like Oregon. Did the 49ers have crazy uniforms when he coached there? Better yet, has UCLA done anything crazy? Chip Kelly just happened to coach at Nike's flagship school. NFL coaches have virtually no impact on uniform designs. Maybe they decide which colors will be worn, but ownership, the NFL and Nike is behind every redesign. It also takes 2 years for a full rebrand like this. If this was proposed in 2012 it would have been in the works since 2010. Unless the Eagles knew back then he would be their next coach and secretly had him working on uniforms.

Translation: You've already seen the jersey. Download this app and you'll see it on a person! The Browns have a way of building up hype, just for the normal fans to say "that's it?!"

Definitely a step in the right direction for the Rams. The bone uniform seems even more out of place now that the white and blue jerseys look to be the same design. It's almost like the bone uniforms were designed as an alternate and at the last minute they thought it was a good idea to make them their primary light jerseys.

The pants and number font ruins the look for me. Anything would have been an upgrade, but they definitely could have done much better.

I'm still seeing an orange swoosh on white jersey. At least that's what it looks like on the left side of the photo. Someone posted this in the replies: Looks like a more standard block font too. That 5 is definitely different. Although the 7 looks very similar to the new font, just without the slightly rounded corners. Feel like they used orange lighting to throw people off...

Making everyone wait another 19 days to see a uniform that already leaked? Seems like a waste of time. Anyway I wonder if they intentionally tweaked this image to throw people off. The numbers look really bright, especially since they are going to be brown with an orange drop shadow.

Did the Bengals really photograph all the rookies in the wrong combo? https://www.instagram.com/p/CQyPYQ4FKqt/?utm_medium=copy_link Why they didn't just have the whole stripe black and orange is beyond me. Such a dumb mistake.

Yeah we obviously notice more than ordinary fans. But it's like people don't even understand the rule. Why post a picture of the 2020 Dolphins or Bills wearing throwbacks and say you're pumped to see this? It's the same damn uniforms and helmets those teams have worn for literally the past like 15 years. It's just common sense. It's the same idiots who, after the Browns unveiled new uniforms said "lolz what changed literally same uniforms poverty franchise "

Blows my mind the number of "normal" fans that just have no idea what this rule means. Any post on social media about it is just filled with ridiculous comments. People are just like "can't wait! This is going to be " and post a picture of the Dolphins throwback or Browns orange helmet with a white facemask.

Definitely the 1960? Raiders. Looks like they wore black helmets for their first few seasons. They just don't look right in black and gold.

The official memo says it "must only be worn" with a throwback or alternate. So we'll only see these alternates a max of 3 times and not with "normal" uniforms. If paired with a throwback it must be historically accurate. If it's an alternate, it must include a logo/colors used by the team or used in the alternate uniform. So no random colors added or new logos. Like the Vikings or Chiefs randomly adding a black helmet.