Sign in to follow this  
JasonFromMiami

Will we ever see more than one uniform manufacturer for teams in the same league

Recommended Posts

Starter Sportswear, they made 3 or 4 NHL game jerseys, belive it was Penguins, Avalanche and Kings, perhaps more. Rest of NHL had CCM... Pro Player was also in the NHL at some point.

-

Could that ever happen again ? Different jersey manufacturers for teams in the same league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would all come down to multiple manufacturers willing to share the field for the major league teams. Leagues have decided that it's better for them to not have competition over multiple team contracts. I'd like to see it again but I don't think we'd see it unless bigger money gets thrown by the big 3 suppliers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leagues can leverage better deals for all teams at once. I don't think you'll see the five major leagues (including MLS) move away from this model anytime soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it could happen, it'd be MLB where despite their revenue sharing model, the teams (some of them) still wield an awful lot of power. If the Yankees (who still don't displY the logo on their sleeves) and / or Red Sox, Mets, LA, etc wanted to do their own thing, they probably (after current contracts expire) could probably make that happen. Not saying it'd be easy, but the lesser teams in MLB don't carry the same weight as the lesser teams in some of the other sports and blocking something like that wouldn't be as straight forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember fondly the early to mid-1990s in the NFL where there were multiple manufacturers. Champion, Starter, Puma, etc. It seemed that teams just contracted with a company to put their logo on the sleeve and that was it. I cannot think of any team that had their manufacturer really put their "stamp" on a uniform until the Nike change of the Denver Broncos. But up until that time, little changed. The Vikings 90s look (My favorite) went through multiple manufacturers before the Reebok contract (Starter and Puma; also maybe one before that?) without being changed at all.

While I enjoyed the 1990s (though not as much as times with no logo on the sleeve), I don't think I'd want to see multiple manufactures today. With Nike (NFL), Reebok (NHL), Adidas (NBA), and Majestic (MLB...or has that changed?) Some of them put their "stamp" on some uniforms (Seahawks; Bucs; Dophins; NHL piping, etc.) but since the respective leagues are "theirs" I think it's kept in better control. I cannot imagine an NFL with Under Armor, Nike, Reebok, Adidas, etc. trying to outdo each other on the big stage. Yes, it would be up to the teams to curtail it but I'd guess the biggest contracts would go to the teams willing to be billboards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right - we'd see the same one-upsmanship of the college game. Hideous.

I cannot think of any team that had their manufacturer really put their "stamp" on a uniform until the Nike change of the Denver Broncos.

Just the numbers - the Bills had a distinctive block number font that was Champion's stock font.

-3e058d94318af345.JPG

The Packers of the early 1960s had several different number fonts, depending on whatever the manufacturer supplied.

c1959-60_celebration.jpgc1959-60_numbervariations.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yeah...that probably started out more organically, i.e. the manufacturers had as you say a "stock font." Nobody really talked about that or probably knew who the manufacturers were.

I would never, ever have known about "Champion font" had I not come to the boards. But I did know of an example (Just not why it happened) when I was a kid. The Bengals had champion font for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

too much money in exclusivity nowadays.

everything is sold to the highest single bidder; uniforms, Sunday Ticket, video games, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right, OnWis. That was a gorgeous uniform. In any of its incarnations, so much better than the current mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it could happen, it'd be MLB where despite their revenue sharing model, the teams (some of them) still wield an awful lot of power. If the Yankees (who still don't displY the logo on their sleeves) and / or Red Sox, Mets, LA, etc wanted to do their own thing, they probably (after current contracts expire) could probably make that happen. Not saying it'd be easy, but the lesser teams in MLB don't carry the same weight as the lesser teams in some of the other sports and blocking something like that wouldn't be as straight forward.

I believe the Yankees tried to do that circa 1997. They intended to have Adidas make their uniforms, but MLB blocked them. I believe they had already signed a contract with such intent with Adidas, but they ended up having to settle for Adidas being allowed to make certain merchandise for them. I'm sure Gothamite can expand on this.

And yes, the Bengals really looked great there, particularly before they added the logo to the sleeves. Also, I LOVE the Champion font. It wouldn't work for all teams or even most, but it was perfect for the Bengals and Bills. I wish the Bills could bring it back today. Also, I "realized" the difference with the Champion font around age 11. It was when I first realized I was "special" in terms of uniform obsessiveness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it could happen, it'd be MLB where despite their revenue sharing model, the teams (some of them) still wield an awful lot of power. If the Yankees (who still don't displY the logo on their sleeves) and / or Red Sox, Mets, LA, etc wanted to do their own thing, they probably (after current contracts expire) could probably make that happen. Not saying it'd be easy, but the lesser teams in MLB don't carry the same weight as the lesser teams in some of the other sports and blocking something like that wouldn't be as straight forward.

I believe the Yankees tried to do that circa 1997. They intended to have Adidas make their uniforms, but MLB blocked them. I believe they had already signed a contract with such intent with Adidas, but they ended up having to settle for Adidas being allowed to make certain merchandise for them. I'm sure Gothamite can expand on this.

And yes, the Bengals really looked great there, particularly before they added the logo to the sleeves. Also, I LOVE the Champion font. It wouldn't work for all teams or even most, but it was perfect for the Bengals and Bills. I wish the Bills could bring it back today. Also, I "realized" the difference with the Champion font around age 11. It was when I first realized I was "special" in terms of uniform obsessiveness.

Ha ha. I don't know when I realized I was "special" but I definitely picked up on it at some point. I think I just remember looking through football cards and saying "WTF; sometimes Boomer has the little block on the bottom of the 7 and sometimes he does not." I did not know what a serif was but I did pick out that the Bengals must have changed "number styles" (I did not know what "font" was either).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right - we'd see the same one-upsmanship of the college game. Hideous.

I cannot think of any team that had their manufacturer really put their "stamp" on a uniform until the Nike change of the Denver Broncos.

Just the numbers - the Bills had a distinctive block number font that was Champion's stock font.

-3e058d94318af345.JPG

The Packers of the early 1960s had several different number fonts, depending on whatever the manufacturer supplied.

c1959-60_celebration.jpgc1959-60_numbervariations.jpg

Back then the bills and jets essentially wore the same champion jersey in different colors. Obviously same number font but both in their original pre-alteration state had the same collar trim and 2 white sleeve stripes with an outline. So basically bills were blue jersey with 2 white stripes outlined in red and jets were kelly green with 2 white stripes outlined in black. Combine those with the champion font and you don't get much more manufacturer generic than that. That bills photo is going to be somewhat misleading as the jersey basically evolved into a single sleeve stripe and ultimately a cuff due to the significant alterations that many players had made to shorten the sleeves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Jets had numbers on the shoulders and, as you said, the Bills look quickly went to a single stripe. Still, they were very similar, yet both looked great! And they didn't look like eachother. Nobody would have confused those two teams, just like nobody would have confused the '60s Lions and Vikings, or '70s Browns and Dolphins. It's fine to use a non-unique striping pattern as long as you do it in a way nobody else is. I much prefer that to teams trying desperately to be unique by coming up with some contrived font.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember players truncating their stripes by cutting off their jerseys back then. However, I always suspected the Bills (unlike the Jets) made an "official" move from two stripes to one stripe. Was I wrong about that? Was it just that every player ended up "cutting" off the bottom stripe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember players truncating their stripes by cutting off their jerseys back then. However, I always suspected the Bills (unlike the Jets) made an "official" move from two stripes to one stripe. Was I wrong about that? Was it just that every player ended up "cutting" off the bottom stripe?

The Bills did make an official move to one stripe because the replicas had a single stripe as early as 1993. The Jets had more room with the numbers on the shoulders, so they retained two stripes on all player jerseys (as far as I know) through the year of Starter and the end of that set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember players truncating their stripes by cutting off their jerseys back then. However, I always suspected the Bills (unlike the Jets) made an "official" move from two stripes to one stripe. Was I wrong about that? Was it just that every player ended up "cutting" off the bottom stripe?

The Bills did make an official move to one stripe because the replicas had a single stripe as early as 1993. The Jets had more room with the numbers on the shoulders, so they retained two stripes on all player jerseys (as far as I know) through the year of Starter and the end of that set.

Yeah I figured something like that was the case. The true overlap was a short window indeed I also agree that both uniforms looked solid on their own and also as you explained, teams in the past have achieved distinct identities utilizing very traditional uniform elements and stripe patterns without using gimmicks that you see today. I think what's gotten lost today is that bold color combinations and the balance of those colors across the uniform are frequently overlooked in favor of overly detailed miss/mashes of dark on dark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Starter was the only replica manufacturer (maybe Nike too, idk) that got the flyers crest right. CCM/Koho had the black outline (but straight wings, so kinda a hybrid of sorts).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this