WideRight

The 1992 season of my alt-history USFL simulation is in the playoffs, and with the offseason approaching, the first of the new Nike-designed uniforms is about to be released. 1993 is the first year the league has a league-wide contract with Nike. Only 1 team is being updated this year, the Michigan Panthers. In future years it will be 3-4 per year very likely. Some will be minor modernizations, some will be significant transformations. Here is the old Michigan uniform, and just for the Chris Creamer crowd, the first look at the 1993 Michigan Panthers (with commentary to follow) Pretty accurate to the actual 1983 look. But now here is the 1993 look. You can guess where the inspiration comes from. (If you click on the image and then again, you should get a full size version via Imgur.) Some quick notes. As cited in the image, the new version of the panther is directly from the U. of Houston, which, I feel, has the best panther/cougar logo ever and allowed me to incorporate more white and champagne into the look. The rest of the uniform is basically a version of the NFL Carolina Panthers. Looks like Nike must have jumped on this just before the NFL expansion franchise was official. Of course, with the USFL already having the Panthers, maybe the NFL team in Carolina (if one even exists) will be something else.

The Colts throwbacks are fine, but I think what they need to do is find a way to return to shoulder hoops that actually connect under the armpit. I hate the new version shoulder stripes that just stop at the chest. We need some of these (with or without sleeves, make it happen!!!)

Testing out a possible secondary logo, possible new primary logo for the Tampa Bay Bandits. I went with the seemingly ubiquitous headshot of a cowboy-hat, bandana "Bandit", basing my image on about 10 others out there. Not sure I would ever replace the original rider logo the Bandits used, but as my alt history enters the 90's the rise of 2nd logos seems inevitable. Thoughts on this version of the bandit-head logo motif?

Ugh, firewolves. Pretty sure if you set a wolf on fire it ends badly for the wolf. Why not AcidPanthers, FloodSharks, or HurricaneHippoes?

While I like the mountains in the new one, the older alt hawk is more aggressive and I like the use of the feather pattern in that one better. Both are pretty nice.

I think we have to expect the following: 1. Michigan will not abandon their colors, but might alter/update their logo. 2. The presence of the USFL will alter how the NFL expands in 1995. 3. It is unlikely I will use an NFL logo/identity as a USFL team, but WLAF/NFL Europe is not safe since it won't ever exist in this alt history. Same with XFL, AAF, FXFL, and CFL USA. 4. LA Express will return. 5. 1995 USFL expansion and 1995 NFL expansion will be a race to get to rising markets for both leagues, neither of which really wants to share a city, but may have to in a few cases just due to population and market size.

The Knights have been revealed for 1992, so now it is on to the 1993 and 1994 updates by Nike. Looking at these teams, which do you think is most likely to get a "1996 Broncos" style update? Michigan Panthers Tampa Bay Bandits Philadelphia Stars New Jersey Generals One of them will be the first of the "New Nike" look. All will be updated soon, but some will have a more traditional look than others. Still only mid 1990's, so no total craziness, but when we think about how different the 96 Broncos were compared to all other NFL teams, it was a big shift. Which USFL team makes that shift with Nike?

If you ask me, the Rams should not have shown us the new look alongside the inspiration. Is there anyone who really believes the look on the right is better than the look on the left? It just reinforces how good the original was and how the new look is just not as tight. The pant stripes, socks, larger shoulder horns, no stupid name patch, it is all better. Sorry Rams, you tried, but just returning to the earlier look would have been a better option.

OK, last of the 1992 updates, Pittsburgh Maulers. I toyed with switching them to a metal grey helmet, but never got a look I liked. So, the 1992 update is pretty basic. Changes include: 1. Introduction of purple pants. 2. Shift of helmet stripes from orange bracketing white to white bracketing orange. 3. Matched the purple jersey sleeve stripes to the pattern seen on the white jersey, two thicker stripes outlined in a thinner stripe. 4. Placed the main logo in the striping pattern on the jersey stripes. 5. "Maulers" wordmark on front of jersey. 6. Simplified socks to just purple blocks. 1993 brings in the era of Nike as league uniform provider, with Michigan the first of many significant reimaginings.

Wow, the wordsmiths at their marketing/branding company but every bit of BS into their description of the new logo as they could. Can't someone just release a logo and not tell us why every detail is an homage to the history of the sport or the great people of the city? Just once (and I know Forward Madison did this) I want to see a new logo and have all that BS noted as BS.

And here we go with the first of 2 redesigns by Russell Athletic in their last year with the USFL. The league (in the simulation alt history) just signed a leaguewide contract with Nike, so starting with the 1993 season all uniforms will be Nike, and that means some major changes to some teams beginning in 1993. But, for the last year of the Rusell Athletic contract there are two teams getting modest remakes, Houston and Pittsburgh (Michigan deferred until 1993 to get on board with Nike). Today we present the new look for the Houston Gamblers. Nothing radical but a few worthwhile changes. Creation of a secondary logo which can be seen on the chest and as a sticker on the helmet. Removal of grey as a team color, which means no more grey pants. There is now a black and a white set. Placement of the "Gamblers" wordmark on the chest. Options now for an all-white look or an all-black look, though in most weeks it will be black jersey with white pants and vice versa on the road.

That is a good question. Of course the presence of the USFL and relative success of different markets may cause the NFL to expand differently. Maybe it is not Carolina and Jacksonville, maybe it is Baltimore and Memphis or St. Louis and Carolina. More to come on that a little later on. As for the colors on St. Louis, in part I am trying to stick to a 1990's aesthetic, and that is not always what I would prefer. The gold numbers came from the St. Louis Stallions prototype.

Hey everyone, Here is the reveal of the St. Louis Knights. Won't say how the Knights come to be, but those following the alt history league can probably see the writing on the wall. For the initial look I altered very little from the source material (not USFL but WLAF). As teams develop over time the designs will become more distinct from their original "real world" inspirations. The other 2 teams which will get new looks in 1992 are the Michigan Panthers and Houston Gamblers. What (if any) changes would you envision for a 1992 version of the Gamblers or Panthers?

I could imagine a 12 team USFL where they pick 4-6 big population cities just to make the TV network happy and then go for underrepresented cities that don't have MLB, NHL, NBA to worry about in the spring. Let me try to put together a possible alignment here for a 12-team league. 4 teams that are Top 10 MSA in the country, to keep the TV partner happy 4 teams that have either lost an NFL team or have one but no MLB so they are primed for football in the spring 4 underrepresented markets that have neither MLB or NFL but decent stadiums. Build the league in pairs of cities so that each team has a natural rival EAST New Jersey (Big Market)--Plays in either Red Bull Arena or at Rutgers. Rival for Philly. Original USFL team. Philadelphia (Big Market)--Plays at Franklin Field. Rival for New Jersey. Original USFL team. Columbus (No MLB/NFL)-- Plays at Crew Stadium. Rival for Louisville. Louisville (No NFL/MLB)-- Plays at U. of Louisville. Rival for Columbus. CENTRAL Chicago (Big Market)-- Plays at SeatGeek Stadium. Rival for St, Louis. Original USFL team. St. Louis (Lost NFL Team)-- Plays at new STL FC Stadium. Rival for Chicago New Orleans (No MLB)-- Plays at Tulane Stadium. Rival for Birmingham. Original USFL team. Birmingham (No NFL/MLB)-- Plays at new UAB Stadium. Rival for New Orleans. Original USFL team. WEST Bay Area (Big Market)-- Plays at San Jose State or in Oakland. Rival for San Diego. Original USFL team. San Diego (Lost NFL Team)--Plays at new SDSU Stadium. Rival for Bay Area San Antonio (No NFL/MLB)-- Plays at AlamoDome. Rival for Austin. Original USFL team. Austin (No NFL/MLB)--Plays at new soccer stadium. Rival for San Antonio You still have room to expand eventually to locations like Orlando, Memphis, Salt Lake, Portland, or other large cities if this thing catches on. You also have 7 original USFL locations to revive the names, then you could decide if you want to use any of the other team names for the 5 new cities.

Only because the XFL's Seattle team drew very well, so there may simply be a good portion of the Seattle fanbase who are Seahawk fans but don't care about the Mariners. The AAF was predicated on the fact that a large number of people polled basically say they follow football and no other sport (I follow football and soccer, but not baseball, NBA or NHL, so I likely fit in this group) and that group may be large enough to support a USFL in areas where it is a dominant feeling. I agree, avoiding MLB cities may be as important as avoiding NFL cities, perhaps more, but there may be some outliers where spring football can draw well. If we look at the AAF and XFL 2.0, I think we saw this in places like Seattle, San Diego, DC, Houston, and St. Louis.

Honestly, if the founders of this new USFL, the XFL, the AAF, and the new XFL ownership would all just agree on a league, pool their money and run one league we could actually have something viable for more than 1 season, but these endeavors are always seriously undercapitalized and the owners never seem to understand that it will take at least 5 years of losing $100M each before it catches on and starts getting decent tv and sponsorship money. But, that said, if the USFL were to come back, i would recommend they go with 10 - 12 teams, not 8, and use either stadiums under 40k or cities that we know will embrace a non-NFL option. That means moving some teams to allow for the nicknames to live on. My picks would be: EAST FEDERALS--Washington DC (Audi Stadium) GENERALS--New Jersey/NYC( Red Bull Arena,Princeton or Rutgers, not the Meadowlands) RENEGADES--Orlando (Camping World Stadium) BULLS--Carolina (Duke/UNC/NCState Stadium) CENTRAL BREAKERS--New Orleans (New Tulane stadium) STALLIONS--Birmingham (New UAB stadium) SHOWBOATS--Memphis (Liberty Bowl) BLITZ--St. Louis (new STL FC stadium) WEST\ OUTLAWS--San Diego (New SDSU Stadium) GUNSLINGERS--San Antonio (AlamoDome) STARS--Seattle (UW Stadium) INVADERS--Bay Area (SJSU Stadium) or Sacramento (Sac St. Stadium) That leaves the Bandits, Maulers, Gamblers, Express, Panthers and Wranglers for possible expansion.

OK, 4 Concepts for St. Louis, all using purple and either gold or athletic gold. One uses silver as well, and I do use 2 different purples, depending on the design. So we have the Knights, Monarchs, Surge and Mad Dogs all as options.

Not a fan of the idea of the Jets joining the Giants by putting an "NY" monogram on the helmets. Biggest city in the country and the best their two teams can do is a "NY"? Pretty lame. NFL helmet logos tend to represent the team name rather than the city, and the Jets, if they ditch the "JETS" logo should embrace that. Unlike a giant, which is hard to depict in a logo, the Jets have an easy to depict, exciting, in-motion, aggressive team name and could maximize that rather than being just another NY team to rely on the NY monogram. I grew up on Long Island, and I will openly admit that one of the reasons I am a diehard Bills fan is that when I was a kid I thought the green helmet "JETS" and white on blue helmet"GIANTS" logos on the helmets were boring and lame, so I found the only other NY team and they had a cool charging Buffalo, which was so much cooler. (Add to this Joe Ferguson's hail mary vs the Pats in 1980 and then his playoff game v. San Diego when he played with a broken ankle and I was hooked on the Bills).

I was thinking something similar, blending a WLAF name like Knights or Monarchs with the purple and gold color scheme used by the failed NFL expansion St. Louis Stallions concept. Could work well with either name.

One more feedback question for the site. Within the next couple of seasons St. Louis will be getting a USFL franchise. In keeping with the overall designi plan I have for the "alternate" USFL, the new team will use a design similar to either a WLAF/NFL Europe, CFL-USA, or Arena Football design from the same time period (modified, of course). So, which of these team identities do you see as the best option to modify for a St. Louis franchise? Frankfurt Galaxy NY/NJ Knights San Antonio Riders Sacramento Surge Memphis Mad Dogs London Monarchs I will likely alter either the colors or the logo itself, but the goal is to create a look that is period-appropriate and clearly linked to a "real world" team of the period.

Hey all, Looking ahead at the three teams who will get new looks for the 1991 USFL season. We have the New Orleans Breakers, the Oakland Invaders, and the Arizona Wranglers. These are three looks I really like already, so I am not thinking of major changes to logos, but perhaps some design tweaks. What would you do to improve the look of these three teams? I am using slightly tweaked versions of the 1994 Wranglers, and 95 Breakers and Invaders as the baseline.

I don't think Orlando is done yet. Wait until Nike comes to town, a lot of teams are going to start looking a lot different.

And just because I am itching to get these out. Here are the new Memphis Showboats designs, featuring the introduction of "Silver Sky" a blue-silver metallic color that replaces the light silver used from 1984-1988. Designed to help distinguish Memphis from Tampa better. Major design changes for Memphis include: 1. Replacement of silver with "silver sky" metallic blue-silver. 2. Removal of stripe from the helmet and increase in logo size on helmet. 3. Numbers are now double-outlined 4. Sleeve stripes are replaced by offset color sleeves with a third color sleeve cuff. 5. Logo added to sleeve. 6.Addition of white to thinner red pant stripe.

And here is Denver. The main changes include: 1. Removal of helmet stripe and increase of logo size. 2. New sleeve striping with 1 stripe in two team colors. 3. Dark jersey numbers now are double outlined. 4. Addition of black pant set to go with gold pants. Pants are interchangeable, and gold is used more often. 5. New sock designs. 6. Secondary logo used to market Denver, seen with main logo and as a sticker on the back of the helmet.

So the 1989 USFL Season is wrapping up (I won't say who won the title because we are not yet there on the simulation website) and as we enter the offseason between 1989 and 1990 three more teams are getting updates from Russell Athletic. Two of the three are somewhat minor tweaks, and the third is a bit more. Here is the first of the three, the Orlando Renegades. The basic changes are: 1. Removing the plain text "Orlando" from the logo. 2. Changing up the colors on the tomohawk to emphasize blue, silver and black. 3. Adding black piping as a consistent element separating silver from blue or from white. You will see thin black piping on the helmet, jersey, and pant stripes as well as in the new 2-outline numbers. 4. Adding a blue pant set to go with the white one. Next up, the Denver Gold.