oldschoolvikings

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

Also, those old Seahawks blue uniforms were mostly worn in the dull-sterile-soulless Kingdome, so they in turn also looked dull.  You almost never saw them under bright-natural light, where admittedly they looked significantly better.  I only rarely got to see them live on TV, because the Seahawks were practically never in any national game, but used to collect football cards in the '80s and remember thinking how dull they looked compared to some of the other teams that also wore a royal-ish blue.

 

Between the bad lighting of those old trash baggy-roof domes and the pre-HD televisions, a lot of people remember those old 80's and 90's uniforms as being darker/duller than the often were. The Viking message boards are full of people complaining about the new Vikings throwback because they aren't "the old darker purple",  but if you look at the actual game jerseys from that time in person, and compare them to the current jerseys, the colors aren't that different... certainly not as different as they appear in old videos (or in peoples memories).  Back then the Vikings helmets were definitely darker and bluer, but in person the jerseys were not much different from the current purple.  Maybe not exactly the same, but closer than most people are probably picturing.

The Seahawks' 80's and 90's uniforms are suffering from the same phenomenon, I'm sure.

5 hours ago, Brave-Bird 08 said:

 

 

Also LOVE the Ohio State alternates, those are kind of a no-brainer and surprised it took them this long to roll them out, but I am annoyed they are wearing them against a team that will be in all-white. 

 

I would prefer that alternate for them to be a road option, but I understand them wanting to wear it at home. Would have picked an opponent that was likely to be in colored pants and helmets though.

Or...

1 hour ago, HOOVER said:

That's your opinion, but the current colors rejuvenated this franchise, which came off the previously even duller Blue and minimal Lime Green.  When Seattle retired this Throwback look in 2002, it was a very dated look. 

 

While I'd agree that this Throwback is great, and the colors certainly work, I think you'd find a great deal of other opinions that would disagree with you.  The Seahawks brand has never been stronger since the 2012 refresh.

Nostalgia is great.  But making permanent decisions from nostalgic sentiment isn't always the best choice.

Well, yes, that is just my opinion.  That’s why I wrote IMO.  I’m definitely not claiming any of it as fact.  I just really love that particular color scheme and I always have. Hartford Whalers, original Timber Wolves, Vancouver Canucks.  All look amazing.  
 

But I’m going to take issue with the “nostalgia” business.  A few pages back I was told that same basic thing about my excitement over the Vikings throwback.  I think I speak for more than a few of us who get tired of being told that our opinions are based on nostalgia or hatred of anything new or just liking it cause it’s old, or whatever else gets trotted out as a way of dismissing someone else’s opinion.  (I’m not saying you’re necessarily doing that here but it’s close enough to that particular put down that it makes me think of it.)

Honestly, unlike the Vikings’ spectacular throwback, I’m not even that crazy about the Seahawks overall design, which I think is a bit clunky. The pants stripes are awkward and I’m not a fan of the sleeve logo.  I never really need to see the same logo repeated on both the helmet and the jersey.  So it isn’t nostalgia for that design, it’s just the colors which are flat out beautiful.  Because they are.  
 

Also, I think you might get some arguments about how strong the current Seahawks brand is.  Five or six years ago yes, but now a lot of people are feeling like it’s really showing its age.  There’s a reason people are going crazy for this throwback, and it can’t just be dismissed as nostalgia.  

26 minutes ago, walkerws said:

Nike has a good template, none of the teams wanted to use it. 

Oh, sure. Nike has a good template, but no one wants to use it.

Makes sense.

18 minutes ago, j'villejags said:

I made that graphic. In my initial post, I had suggested royal as the primary and navy as an alternate, because I also prefer the throwback colors. However, I think navy has a place moving forward with the team given their Super Bowl runs in that color scheme. A navy alt would be better than a black or green alternate in my eyes. Or worse, a ‘throwback’ to the current set. Just my opinion.

Yeah, I remembered that you liked the throwback colors, I was just reacting to others coming in to say the new colors worked.  Surprised me. 

1 hour ago, NH4 said:

Navy goes back to the Roger Staubach era for their new uniforms  Very good choice

And once again UA pulls off the shoulder loops about 100 times better than Nike.  

I'm not sure why anybody would advocate for a uniform that combines the throwback template with the current colors.  IMO, the current colors are pretty bad. That dull navy blue and that ugly slime green?  No thanks.  And the throwback colors are the best thing about the older uniforms. Royal blue and kelly green are gorgeous together.   The colors are the best thing about the throwback.

This really does look like something a mid-level college team would do. Out nowhere black helmet, cheesy  monochrome, pointless textured fabric… it feels like they raided Arizona State’s idea book.

Embarrassing.  

2 hours ago, gosioux76 said:

 

The Vikings are one of the few franchises that succeeded in blending classic with modern, which should be the goal in any new uniform design. This should be celebrated.

 

My suspicion is that any suggestion to replace the current look is more about wanting change for change’s sake than actually preferring an inferior (though still very nice) set to what they have now.

I think you’ve been posting on these boards long enough to know that anytime you suggest the “real” reason for someone else’s opinion you’re going to ruffle some feathers.  
 

So, for the record, no… your suspicion is wrong. It has zero to do with wanting “change for change’s sake”.  It has to do with feeling like the throwback uniform is blatantly more visually appealing.   And also… no, wait… there is no also. That was it.  

10 minutes ago, BBTV said:

 

There's a well-documented 2-year lead-time rule.  Not sure when the cut-off is, so it may even be too late to declare for 2025.  Can it be waived?  Anything is possible.  But, for example, the Eagles can't have their new wordmark on their jerseys until next season (so they'll have played 2 seasons with the old one) because of said rule.

Yeah, there's a two year wait from the time you declare your intention to redesign until that uniform can be worn, but in this case they'd just be taking two uniforms they're already wearing and flipping the status of which is the primary.  I dunno, maybe that's still the rule, but I don't remember that happening when the Broncos made their orange alternate into their primary.  Did the Broncos have to petition the NFL in 2009 to make that switch in 2011?  And I'm pretty sure the Rams made that decision to make their throwback into their primary in 2018, when they were planning on changing their whole look 2 years later. For that matter, the Rams flipped the status of the alternate uniform (the white) and their primary road (the bone) one year into their redesign, so it wouldn't even have been possible to give 2 years warning.

It's all pretty confusing.

21 minutes ago, BBTV said:

 

wouldn't it have to be 2 years?

Hmmm... I don't know. Why would it be 2? 

I guess my thinking is, the current uniform is well past the 5 year mark, so there's no barrier there. And we've seen teams flip a throwback to a primary (the Rams did it) and an alternate to a primary (both the Falcons and Broncos did it) with no more warning than an off-season decision to do so.  I might be forgetting some other rule, but my thinking is if this look proves to be especially popular they could decide during this off-season to make it their primary. Although how that would work with a road uniform I have no idea.

32 minutes ago, Cujo said:

 

These will be the Vikings primaries in five years.

Doesn’t have to be 5 years.  They’ve been wearing their current uniforms since’13. They can switch to this as soon as next year.  
 

I’ve generally been happy with what the Vikings have been wearing since they dumped the side panel mess.  As far as modern designs go it’s pretty cohesive.  But for whatever reason it’s seemed to get a little tired looking to me in the past couple of years. Maybe it’s the random monochrome outings, maybe the dopey color rush look, definitely the matching socks have hurt.  I dunno, I used to love it but recently I’ve been open to a change.  This throwback feels like a breath of fresh air.  The modern helmet finish and brighter looking Nike fabric kicks the whole look up just enough that it doesn’t feel like a clunky tribute uniform, at least not to me.  Stick the updated horn on the helmet and this is pretty much the perfect home uniform for the Vikings IMO. 

1 hour ago, Pigskin12 said:

According to pretty much everyone, no team should have a throwback uniform because every team’s throwback should just be its permanent uniform.

 

https://twitter.com/Vikings/status/1681355653045194752?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1681355653045194752|twgr^9586bba609e029cedaae5287becf16440f5a650a|twcon^s1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailynorseman.com%2F2023%2F7%2F18%2F23799020%2Fvikings-unveil-throwback-jerseys-for-2023-season

38 minutes ago, OnWis97 said:

Love that Vikings jersey.  Perfect color balance. 

 

I want that to become the full-time uniform with a UCLA-striped white jersey for the road (with purple pants. I said what I said).

 

I know that UCLA style road uniform is beloved, but personally, I'd rather see it left in the past.  As discussed on these boards ad nauseam, the current cut off version of those stripes leaves a lot to be desired. The disconnect between the gold trimmed home numbers and the non-trimmed road number bugs me, too.  And then there's the fact that it's just straight up LSU's jersey. But mostly, the below version from the 60's is just so gorgeous.

14 minutes ago, OnWis97 said:

Jersey: Absolute perfection.

Pants: The right move.

Socks: Whatever. Thumbs up.

Older-style logo: The right move for a throwback*

Gray facemask: Also the right move for a throwback**

Overall grade: A. 

 

*Unpopular opinion (I suspect)  but I like the updated horn better because it visualizes the horns going up better. And if it were up to me, they'd keep this jersey permanently but with updated helmet logo.

**Polarizing opinion but I don't like gray facemasks and I while it's the right move for a one-game throwback, I want them to have purple facemasks for standard uniforms.

 

That all said, I had no idea this was coming. What I great surprise.

I agree with you pretty much on the helmet horn. It was a jarring change at first, but now the older plainer, version just looks kind of... I dunno... unfinished to me.

I disagree about the facemask. (I know, I know.)  When I advocate here that every team in the league switch to gray masks, I'm kidding. (Well, mostly kidding.  Or at least, sometimes kidding.) But in this particular case, like the Colts, like the 49ers, like what the Browns should be wearing, it just looks so perfect with the uniform's overall aesthetic. 

If I had the call, I'd make this the permanent primary uniform, with the only change being the new detailed horn. I even like the current helmet color and finish with it... it works great.  

19 minutes ago, simtek34 said:

YES! YES! 
 

 

My Lord, that is beautiful.  I'm so happy I could cry.

2 minutes ago, nuordr said:

They are the same pants and they don't match the helmet. But I'm fine with that. I'm just happy they used a brown facemask. 

 

Sure, because brown facemasks were all the rage back in 1946.

So if that's he same throwback pants as before, the stripes on the helmet won't match the stripes on the pants?

No like.

1 hour ago, VDizzle12 said:

 

This might be one of the most boring helmet unveilings we'll see. But it makes sense when paired with the throwbacks. 

 

 

 

It would be great to see them go with a white helmet with fake leather details. 

Sort of a white version of this...

2 hours ago, dont care said:

Vikings don’t have a throwback, or alternate “dark purple” helmet

Lot of rumors...

https://www.si.com/fannation/bringmethesports/vikings/are-the-vikings-bringing-back-purple-people-eaters-uniforms

Standard home and road, playoff throwback, and a more OSUish "black" alt...

I tried to find some alternate looks... no go. 

Flag free Maryland... let's get  turtle on there...

I've done Big Ten football concepts before, but I usually get new ideas and I have a new template, so...

Moving east to west, starting with Rutgers.