Gothamite

NFL Changes 2015

Recommended Posts

I LOVE the Dolphin throwbacks, the only bad part is that the game sleeve cuts may not be available to the fans. That game style is an awesome update to the original classic look. I would buy that game style in a heartbeat if it is sold commercially.

The ones they are selling to the public now have very long sleeves and I am seriously considering getting one, having some professional alterations person cut off the striped part and shortening up the sleeves to just above the unmentionable thingy/ mark of the beast to make a 1970-72 style stripeless jersey which would REALLY be accurate.

It is HIGH TIME the Dolphins look like the Dolphins again!!!

I agree with you 100%. When I saw the amount of sleeve space on the replica throwbacks I thought it's too bad they can't make them more like the authentic style jerseys.

When the Dolphins last wore throwbacks in 2003, the TV numbers were on the shoulders. I bought a replica that had the TV numbers on the sleeves like the originals. I wish Nike had done what Reebok did. There's too much blank space. They remind me of the Rawlings kids jerseys I owned back in the 70s, sold in the Sears Christmas catalogs.

I admit if they sell an authentic throwback, I might have to pony up $350 because it looks much better than the $100 and $150 replica jerseys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I LOVE the Dolphin throwbacks, the only bad part is that the game sleeve cuts may not be available to the fans. That game style is an awesome update to the original classic look. I would buy that game style in a heartbeat if it is sold commercially.

The ones they are selling to the public now have very long sleeves and I am seriously considering getting one, having some professional alterations person cut off the striped part and shortening up the sleeves to just above the unmentionable thingy/ mark of the beast to make a 1970-72 style stripeless jersey which would REALLY be accurate.

It is HIGH TIME the Dolphins look like the Dolphins again!!!

I agree with you 100%. When I saw the amount of sleeve space on the replica throwbacks I thought it's too bad they can't make them more like the authentic style jerseys.

When the Dolphins last wore throwbacks in 2003, the TV numbers were on the shoulders. I bought a replica that had the TV numbers on the sleeves like the originals. I wish Nike had done what Reebok did. There's too much blank space. They remind me of the Rawlings kids jerseys I owned back in the 70s, sold in the Sears Christmas catalogs.

I admit if they sell an authentic throwback, I might have to pony up $350 because it looks much better than the $100 and $150 replica jerseys.

I agree.. With all the empty space, I'm tempted to shorten the sleeves myself to make it like a modern QB cut that's more accurate to the on-field version.. An authentic would be ideal though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can certainly agree to disagree on the merit of the original logo, but to attack my other comments and change them around to suit your agenda is poor form..

My "agenda"? We're talking about football logos. I don't have an "agenda" beyond my personal preference for the old logo.

Well, you tried to claim that I let my age dictate my preferences, by grouping me into an entire collective which claims to prefer "modern" due to growing up in a particular era, which was 100% opposite of any claim I made.. I'm from the "modern" era, but prefer traditional uniforms and traditional uniform elements..

Again, I never used my age to justify anything, simply to illustrate my lack of familiarity with one single element of a brief period in Florida's history (which is quite a stretch to try to link the dolphins imagery to that anyway, but that's neither here nor there)..

You used your age as a justification for your ignorance, and thus you used your age as a justification for your preference.

I think I'm around your age, and I saw the Florida roadside attraction connection because I'm aware that those were part of the state's aesthetic history. You don't need to have first hand experience with something to know of it and appreciate it.

If you went "sure, I see it, but I still don't like it" or "sorry, I don't see it" then ok. That's fair. Going "I didn't see those attractions personally and therefore I reject it as a factor" just strikes me as celebrating your own ignorance.

But, when you said I used my age to justify my opinion, that was completely false and it was an attack on me

No, it wasn't. And I'm not sure what to tell you if you took a message board disagreement as an "attack."

but I feel like we actually agree on a pretty large amount of the details involved, but your personal attacks seemed to have gotten in the way of you seeing that..

There was no personal attack, therefore there's no personal attack to cloud my judgment. This is a discussion of the pros and cons of the current and 60s Miami Dolphins logos. You prefer the modern, I prefer the throwback. Maybe there's common ground on the actual uniforms, but this discussion is logo-centric.

If anyone has thrown the discussion off the rails by taking things too personally it's you.

so we can discuss the merits of the old dolphins logo and we can have differing opinions

Ok cool. I like the 60s logo. You like the current logo. Your pictures of dolphins have failed to convince me to change my mind, and my appreciation for mid 20th century Florida kitsch hasn't changed yours. I don't think there's much more to discuss here.

As BrandMooreArt and OldSchoolVikings have stated, it is a blotchy mess that needed to be cleaned up..

I don't always agree with either BrandMooreArt or oldschoolvikings. I find myself in agreement with the latter more often then not, but this is one of those times we disagree. The kitsch factor makes the dated aspects of the 60s Dolphins logo acceptable. Would I like to see it cleaned up if it were adopted full-time? Yeah, but I would certainly be happy if they just opted to bring it back without modification.

LogoTemplate_VintageLogos_MiamiDolphins1

That's perfect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can certainly agree to disagree on the merit of the original logo, but to attack my other comments and change them around to suit your agenda is poor form..

My "agenda"? We're talking about football logos. I don't have an "agenda" beyond my personal preference for the old logo.

Well, you tried to claim that I let my age dictate my preferences, by grouping me into an entire collective which claims to prefer "modern" due to growing up in a particular era, which was 100% opposite of any claim I made.. I'm from the "modern" era, but prefer traditional uniforms and traditional uniform elements..

Again, I never used my age to justify anything, simply to illustrate my lack of familiarity with one single element of a brief period in Florida's history (which is quite a stretch to try to link the dolphins imagery to that anyway, but that's neither here nor there)..

You used your age as a justification for your ignorance, and thus you used your age as a justification for your preference.

I think I'm around your age, and I saw the Florida roadside attraction connection because I'm aware that those were part of the state's aesthetic history. You don't need to have first hand experience with something to know of it and appreciate it.

If you went "sure, I see it, but I still don't like it" or "sorry, I don't see it" then ok. That's fair. Going "I didn't see those attractions personally and therefore I reject it as a factor" just strikes me as celebrating your own ignorance.

But, when you said I used my age to justify my opinion, that was completely false and it was an attack on me

No, it wasn't. And I'm not sure what to tell you if you took a message board disagreement as an "attack."

but I feel like we actually agree on a pretty large amount of the details involved, but your personal attacks seemed to have gotten in the way of you seeing that..

There was no personal attack, therefore there's no personal attack to cloud my judgment. This is a discussion of the pros and cons of the current and 60s Miami Dolphins logos. You prefer the modern, I prefer the throwback. Maybe there's common ground on the actual uniforms, but this discussion is logo-centric.

If anyone has thrown the discussion off the rails by taking things too personally it's you.

so we can discuss the merits of the old dolphins logo and we can have differing opinions

Ok cool. I like the 60s logo. You like the current logo. Your pictures of dolphins have failed to convince me to change my mind, and my appreciation for mid 20th century Florida kitsch hasn't changed yours. I don't think there's much more to discuss here.

As BrandMooreArt and OldSchoolVikings have stated, it is a blotchy mess that needed to be cleaned up..

I don't always agree with either BrandMooreArt or oldschoolvikings. I find myself in agreement with the latter more often then not, but this is one of those times we disagree. The kitsch factor makes the dated aspects of the 60s Dolphins logo acceptable. Would I like to see it cleaned up if it were adopted full-time? Yeah, but I would certainly be happy if they just opted to bring it back without modification.

LogoTemplate_VintageLogos_MiamiDolphins1

That's perfect.
Once again, I didn't use my age to "justify" anything. I never suggested that your logic nor your example of kitschy Floridian roadside attractions were without merit. Perhaps I was using my age to exhibit the reasons for your specific example not weighing heavily on my rationale for tying various forms of imagery to the franchise and thusly playing a small role in my overall amount of preference for each era's logos, but it in no way shapes the entirety of my opinion.. I've also never been to south Florida to experience the many beachfront resorts or taken a cruise to/from the area, so I'm fully aware that you don't need to experience these items first-hand to appreciate their connection to the area/franchise.. I don't discredit your logic for liking the logo, I just don't follow the same course of logic and I feel it's a very weak connection to the team's identity, but again, I see and appreciate the validity of your reasoning, I just choose to hold a different stance.. However, I still prefer traditional, as stated from the start, so there were definitely statements you made that weren't true, which is why I felt you were trying to manipulate my words to support your personal attack on me and my opinion.. We are, in fact, almost the exact same age (1987 too), but I feel like you spent more time dissecting my opinions and statements to disprove them and nitpick my reasons for having the opinions than actually having a discussion about the logo(s), which is why I took offense.. I can have a pleasant disagreement that leads to engaging discussion as well as anyone, but to group me into these kids who blame their broad and general preferences on the era in which they grew up (when I specifically stated my preferences are to the contrary), seemed a bit outside the scope of the discussion and leaning more towards the personal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




As BrandMooreArt and OldSchoolVikings have stated, it is a blotchy mess that needed to be cleaned up..

I don't always agree with either BrandMooreArt or oldschoolvikings. I find myself in agreement with the latter more often then not, but this is one of those times we disagree. The kitsch factor makes the dated aspects of the 60s Dolphins logo acceptable. Would I like to see it cleaned up if it were adopted full-time? Yeah, but I would certainly be happy if they just opted to bring it back without modification.

.



For the record, I never used the phrase "blotchy mess"... I said it would need a bit of clean up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but I feel like you spent more time dissecting my opinions and statements to disprove them and nitpick my reasons for having the opinions than actually having a discussion about the logo(s),

Well in my defence I did lay out the issues I have with the current logo here...

http://boards.sportslogos.net/topic/102225-nfl-changes-2015/?p=2478664

That is what this ultimately comes down to. You state your opinion and give your reasons, I do the same. It may be best to just move on if neither is convincing the other.

seemed a bit outside the scope of the discussion and leaning more towards the personal

I apologize if it came off as a personal attack. It was meant as a broader comment on the nature of attitudes prevalent in these sorts of discussions that I thought had a place in the conversation given that the age factor was raised. It wasn't intended to be a personal attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but I feel like you spent more time dissecting my opinions and statements to disprove them and nitpick my reasons for having the opinions than actually having a discussion about the logo(s),

Well in my defence I did lay out the issues I have with the current logo here...

http://boards.sportslogos.net/topic/102225-nfl-changes-2015/?p=2478664

That is what this ultimately comes down to. You state your opinion and give your reasons, I do the same. It may be best to just move on if neither is convincing the other.

seemed a bit outside the scope of the discussion and leaning more towards the personal

I apologize if it came off as a personal attack. It was meant as a broader comment on the nature of attitudes prevalent in these sorts of discussions that I thought had a place in the conversation given that the age factor was raised. It wasn't intended to be a personal attack.

Perfectly understandable, the issue I had with the comment(s), was the way you elaborated and basically referred to those who do made statements regarding their age and why their era has impacted them and their opinions, when I had stated my age as (partly) a way to illustrate my general ignorance regarding your very specific example AND to state that IN SPITE OF my age, I'm still very much a traditionalist with regard to sports aesthetics.. So, when you claimed that I "like modern because I'm an 80's/90's kid, etc", it very much felt like you were skewing my words to aid your vocal stance against that sort of comment/mindset.. I'm very much in agreement with you regarding another comment you made - you basically said something along the lines of "no, you like it because that's what you like" which I completely agree with.. Each of our opinions may have various and numerous influences, but overall, each influence forms only a fraction of our opinion as a whole, and at the end of the day, we like what we like because, well, that's just what we like.. So, I apologize if I got "pissy", but when the context and intention/meaning behind my comment got skewed so severely and then used against me, it felt like it was a deliberate attempt to make personal jabs rather than discuss our differences in opinion.. I'm sure you can see why I might think that now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I LOVE the Dolphin throwbacks, the only bad part is that the game sleeve cuts may not be available to the fans. That game style is an awesome update to the original classic look. I would buy that game style in a heartbeat if it is sold commercially.

The ones they are selling to the public now have very long sleeves and I am seriously considering getting one, having some professional alterations person cut off the striped part and shortening up the sleeves to just above the unmentionable thingy/ mark of the beast to make a 1970-72 style stripeless jersey which would REALLY be accurate.

It is HIGH TIME the Dolphins look like the Dolphins again!!!

I agree with you 100%. When I saw the amount of sleeve space on the replica throwbacks I thought it's too bad they can't make them more like the authentic style jerseys.

When the Dolphins last wore throwbacks in 2003, the TV numbers were on the shoulders. I bought a replica that had the TV numbers on the sleeves like the originals. I wish Nike had done what Reebok did. There's too much blank space. They remind me of the Rawlings kids jerseys I owned back in the 70s, sold in the Sears Christmas catalogs.

I admit if they sell an authentic throwback, I might have to pony up $350 because it looks much better than the $100 and $150 replica jerseys.

I agree.. With all the empty space, I'm tempted to shorten the sleeves myself to make it like a modern QB cut that's more accurate to the on-field version.. An authentic would be ideal though

Most dry cleaners can do this.

I had that done with a couple jerseys I bought a few years back. They had the sleeve cuffs at the bottom and looked ridiculous with 9" sleeves that hung down to my elbow. Both were Ohio State jerseys. I still have one of them. I've though about doing this if I buy the newer Browns jersey, specifically because the sleeves are so high on the replicas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK - a few comments here (and I know I am in the minority).....

1. I don't like the old Dolphins logo - I like the new one much better (but I still think it can be improved)

2. I HATE the stripes on the Dolphins throwbacks. IMHO, stripes only ever look good at the bottom of a sleeve and when they 100% encircle the sleeve. I HATE the no-sleeve stripe like some of the linemen wear, And I strongly dislike the half-wrap. It looks cheesy. There is absolutely no reason that all sleeves cannot be uniform in style, i.e., going down at least 1/3 to the elbow if not 1/2 way down. That's why it's called a UNIFORM. So everybody matches.

3. I like throwbacks/alts in general, but they better be done right. E.g., don't try to stick Bucco Bruce on a pewter helmet. That's just wrong. (But then, it is cheap and silly for the NFL to even have a 1 helmet rule. I mean seriously - issue 4 helmets a year to a player that are all identical in brand and size. Then they can't complain that the helmets are "different". Sheesh. How may helmets do the Oregon ducks were every year? 5? 6?)

4. Where does it say color vs color means monochrome vs monochrome? Could it not mean color jersey w/white pants?

=================

OK - let's just say that by 2016, every team does have to have a "clash monochrome" kit, then here is what I think they should use (IMO):

NFC East - Cowboys/silver // Eagles/charcoal // Giants/red // Redskins/mustard

NFC South - Bucs/pewter // Falcons/black // Panthers/silver // Saints/gold

NFC North - Bears/orange // Lions/silver // Packers/yellow // Vikings/gold

NFC West - Rams/gold // 49ers/gold // Seahawks/grey // Cardinals/black

AFC East - Dolphins/orange // Jets/black (hate this) // Bills/red (ewwwww) // Patriots/grey (unless they go throwback red)

AFC South - Colts/white (no choice) // Texans/battle red // Titans/powder blue // Jaguars/leopard print (I'm making the exception here)

AFC North - Steelers/gold (no bumblebee madness) // Browns/orange // Bengals/orange // Ravens/black (purple is the primary, right?)

AFC West - Broncos/orange // Raiders/silver // Chiefs/yellow(!) // Chargers/powder blue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Dolphin logo immediatley prior to the current cruise line logo was fine. Good modernization - I think it needs the dark blue in there. The proposed modernization posted above works too, except for the spikes in the sun.

I'm in the minority of not only dislikeing the logo (which many people do), but also disliking the new uniforms (which seem to be pretty popular around here, except for the lack of orange.) Even if the orange was made thicker, I don't like the numbers or the pants. I also dislike the new aqua, prefering (by far) the throwback shade.

I thought the Jay Fiedler era set was totally fine - but if you take that throwback jersey and use the Fiedler helmet / logo, that would be perfect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those Dolphins throwbacks are so much better than what they've been wearing the last two years. Good thing bergan's not around to tell us all how wrong we are.

I'd even take that blotchy, overly detailed logo over the characterless, corporate mark that's currently on their helmets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get why people dislike the new way stripes are on jerseys. It really doesn't bother me that they get cut off. Sleeves aren't returning to football jerseys anytime soon so if this is how we keep traditional stripes then so be it. Also I hate the idea of stripes going on the undershirts. Even if they made every player wear one I still think it would look bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get why people dislike the new way stripes are on jerseys. It really doesn't bother me that they get cut off. Sleeves aren't returning to football jerseys anytime soon so if this is how we keep traditional stripes then so be it.

i do agree, the way they are being applied today is about the best ppossible way to keep the old stripe design around. there's not much you can do because of the issue at hand. that is, those stripes were a graphic solution to an entirely different problem. they were designed to wrap around a sleeve, not stretch across a shoulder and they now have a shoe-horned application. so thats the problem with them. what should be happening with new designs is what Nike has done with Oklahoma State or the Vikings: designing a new sleeve element for modern cuts. but when it comes to preserving the old stuff, i think we're just stuck with the hack jobs that are there. what i don't accept though, is the complete bastardization of the stripe as with the Steelers, 49ers, and Lions. those are some issues that need to be solved; they look terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get why people dislike the new way stripes are on jerseys. It really doesn't bother me that they get cut off. Sleeves aren't returning to football jerseys anytime soon so if this is how we keep traditional stripes then so be it.

i do agree, the way they are being applied today is about the best ppossible way to keep the old stripe design around. there's not much you can do because of the issue at hand. that is, those stripes were a graphic solution to an entirely different problem. they were designed to wrap around a sleeve, not stretch across a shoulder and they now have a shoe-horned application. so thats the problem with them. what should be happening with new designs is what Nike has done with Oklahoma State or the Vikings: designing a new sleeve element for modern cuts. but when it comes to preserving the old stuff, i think we're just stuck with the hack jobs that are there. what i don't accept though, is the complete bastardization of the stripe as with the Steelers, 49ers, and Lions. those are some issues that need to be solved; they look terrible.

I understand the evolution of the equipment, but the "less is more" mentality regarding sleeves is really only meant for the linemen.. Most well-designed and high-budget programs have the skill cut, which actually still has a decent amount of sleeve (at least enough that there is a true "cuff" at the end, which wraps completely around the arm).. When I played in high school and college, this was the standard sleeve cut.. For skill players, I think this should still essentially be the cut off their sleeves.. Sure, they'd need to snug them down to the shoulder pads a tiny bit more, but that doesn't mean capping them off and leaving nothing but a shoulder cover either.. A good example that comes to mind is AJ McCarron's sleeves while at Alabama.. They're essentially the same cut I experienced as a player, just more fitted.. This is a fine length to still display traditional sleeve striping while marrying it to a modern cut.. Allow the linemen to keep their ultra-modern cap sleeves, adjust the QB's to the Matt Ryan cut (or the AJ McCarron cut if they choose), and give all other skill players the AJ McCarron cut.. It would revert the ability to pull off a traditional aesthetic to a decade ago (the last time traditional elements fit their original/intended roles), without sacrificing function or setting the evolution of the actual uniform back.. These are 3 modern sleeve cuts, which are still in use and available, but it keeps the high-profile players in sleeve cuts that can actually support traditional design elements.. It would require a little more attention to detail through the ordering process, but the final result would be so much better aesthetically on the skill guys..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At least they're committing to it?

But should they? Their own fans (the real ones not the couple douche kids who think everything black is fire) think the black is out of place. Also, the fact that it's the Raiders main color doesn't help at all...

Yeah, I was being sarcastic. I think it's pretty silly for a team with a classic look to :censored: with it. Although I sorta just laugh when I see how far that Seahawks' rival has fallen since the peak Harbaugh-Kaepernick days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get why people dislike the new way stripes are on jerseys. It really doesn't bother me that they get cut off. Sleeves aren't returning to football jerseys anytime soon so if this is how we keep traditional stripes then so be it.

i do agree, the way they are being applied today is about the best ppossible way to keep the old stripe design around. there's not much you can do because of the issue at hand. that is, those stripes were a graphic solution to an entirely different problem. they were designed to wrap around a sleeve, not stretch across a shoulder and they now have a shoe-horned application. so thats the problem with them. what should be happening with new designs is what Nike has done with Oklahoma State or the Vikings: designing a new sleeve element for modern cuts. but when it comes to preserving the old stuff, i think we're just stuck with the hack jobs that are there. what i don't accept though, is the complete bastardization of the stripe as with the Steelers, 49ers, and Lions. those are some issues that need to be solved; they look terrible.

It's time to consider rotating the stripes vertically, and maybe even dropping TV numbers.

Or............. go with MTL Canadiens style jerseys with the strips across the midsection, and in the Steelers case, just slap a black (home) or white (away) outline around the number to make it more legible.

Share this post


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