Recommended Posts

Hey, I was wondering, which teams have unveiled at least one new jersey for this upcoming season?

Browns

9ers

Packers

Dolphins

Ah, thanks a ton man, I really appreciate it. Are there any teams that we are still waiting to see new uniforms from?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Here is my solution to tone down the black a bit Boom. Thats all the black they need.

thanks for the credit shout out! let me clear some things up about this. . . 1.) don't buy the bootlegs! they're traced by n00bs and it looks like crap. BUT because it's been asked about and bootlegge

Nope, that's it. As confirmed by the catalog leak last November, those are the only four teams with new jerseys this year.

2016_NFLcatalogue_BoysGirls_3.png

As I said to Sportzfan, thanks a ton man, I really appreciate you re-posting this. It's too bad the Bucs and the Jaguars didn't make any changes, especially the former, my goodness. XD Actually, something has caught my attention. This list shows the Throwback Lions jersey as their alternate but they didn't wear it this past season. Are they wearing it this season? I really hope that they do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly hope the hell not. The champion will get a special second trophy, though:

50_trophy.jpg

Hideous.

The Bucs and Jags have uniforms less than five years old, so they couldn't make any changes even if they wanted to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone else think the league might change to a 3 year rule about uni changes? To sell more merchandise? I 'd rather see this than say, wearing 5 different alts a year.


The Bucs and Jags have uniforms less than five years old, so they couldn't make any changes even if they wanted to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone else think the league might change to a 3 year rule about uni changes? To sell more merchandise? I 'd rather see this than say, wearing 5 different alts a year.

The Bucs and Jags have uniforms less than five years old, so they couldn't make any changes even if they wanted to.

No they want to build their brand, and you can't do that when the uniforms are always changing, at least with it being 5 years you get a decent amount of time (longer than most people spend in highschool or college) of seeing the same thing before a change.
Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone else think the league might change to a 3 year rule about uni changes? To sell more merchandise? I 'd rather see this than say, wearing 5 different alts a year.

The Bucs and Jags have uniforms less than five years old, so they couldn't make any changes even if they wanted to.

They can make minor changes (I'm thinking something along the lines of removing the reflective material from TB's numbers, going from 5 sleeve stripes to 3 like GB did several years back, Vikings using matching numerals for left/right, etc).. I have no idea what constitutes a "minor" change, but I'm guessing anything that would look pretty much the same from any sort of distance would be ok.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Somewhere on here I believe.. If anyone has access to the official rule and it's exact verbiage, I'd appreciate it.. I don't know if I've ever read the actual rule or not.. Perhaps I just gleaned that from something, I'm not sure.. I could definitely be wrong, but for some reason I've been under the impression that only minor changes, if approved, could be made

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right minor changes are like the how the Rams changed the numer font and removed the gold side panels from their uniforms in 2001 and 2002 within 2 years of debuting their current uniforms in 2000.

well how long has the "5-year rule" been in effect? The Eagles also made changes each of the first three years of the midnight-green era, before a more substantial (but still negligible in many peoples' eyes) change in 2003, but that was probably right at the beginning of when branding was becoming what it is today.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to remember that the picture vs the Vikings was from the 1973 season, which the uniform slightly changed from the 1966-1972 uniforms.......

Very nice... but the pants stripe in inaccurate.

Csonka,Larry32.jpg

All the same, this so many times greater than their current uniform, it's a bit embarrassing. Match the pants stripe to the helmet stripe and its a damn near perfect Dolphins uniform.

This new throwbacks are the 1966 uni, which indeed did have aqua-orange-aqua pant striping.

but now I'm noticing the font on the "5" is different

105967446-august-8-1966-sports-illustrat

110927_Boca.jpg

I stand corrected. I'd never seen a picture with the aqua/orange/aqua stripe before. Pretty cool. I wonder why they ever switched to orange/aqua/orange anyway?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right minor changes are like the how the Rams changed the numer font and removed the gold side panels from their uniforms in 2001 and 2002 within 2 years of debuting their current uniforms in 2000.

Yeah, that's the "minor" change" that's usually brought up. I'd be willing to bet the 5 year rule is older than 2002 (I feel like I've heard it discussed previous to that, although I can't be certain).

Also, there was the Jaguars' switching to a bad uniform in 2009, and then switching to a horrible uniform in 2013, 4 seasons later. That's usually explained away as a special case because of Nike's inaugural season, but it still always struck me as am odd relaxing of the rules on the part of the NFL.

I'm with Goth... I don't have any problem with the NFL's stringent uniform rules. If anything, I wish they were a bit more hard core. Just look at the absolute clusterfrack you get on a nightly basis with the NBA and MLB. Teams have so many whacked out alternative uniforms, throwback uniforms, throwbacks to different leagues and/or franchises, tributes to whatever... I'm not exaggerating when I say I've literally lost interest in those sports based on the fact that can't count on what I'll see when tuning in. Some MLB teams have supposedly primary uniforms they barely wear.By losing the feeling of brand consistency, they might be gaining a bit of instant flash, but I believe it'll cost in the log run. (Think of it this way... in the long term... not just today, or even this year, but over 15, 20, 25 years... who's visual brand would you rather have, Oregon's or Texas'?)

The NFL is smart to keep their thumb down on this... The (perfectly reasonable) one helmet rule was most likely put in place for somewhat cynical legal reasons, but it's having a side benefit of keeping the NFL (for now) from looking like the NCAA. Scroll through a few pages of the NCAAF '15 thread, if you've got a strong stomach. These days, college football uniforms are the stuff of nightmares. Sure it's a shame the one-helmet rule is costing us some cool throwback looks... I liked the faux leather helmet, the creamsickles, and especially the awesomely amazing Falcons throwback, but truthfully... small price to pay.

If it were up to me, I'd institute much tougher alternative uniform rules in the NFL. I want a declared primary uniform combination... jersey, pants, and socks that need to be worn at least 6 home games. No more mix and match with three pairs of pants, except for a couple games. And alternate jerseys can only be worn once during the regular season, once during preseason, and never in the playoffs. Also, never on Sunday nights or Monday nights...decide what is your best look and wear that. And if the primary uniform isn't your best look, then it shouldn't be your primary.

(Wow... didn't plan on a grumpy rant, but...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right minor changes are like the how the Rams changed the numer font and removed the gold side panels from their uniforms in 2001 and 2002 within 2 years of debuting their current uniforms in 2000.

Yeah, that's the "minor" change" that's usually brought up. I'd be willing to bet the 5 year rule is older than 2002 (I feel like I've heard it discussed previous to that, although I can't be certain).

Also, there was the Jaguars' switching to a bad uniform in 2009, and then switching to a horrible uniform in 2013, 4 seasons later. That's usually explained away as a special case because of Nike's inaugural season, but it still always struck me as am odd relaxing of the rules on the part of the NFL.

I'm with Goth... I don't have any problem with the NFL's stringent uniform rules. If anything, I wish they were a bit more hard core. Just look at the absolute clusterfrack you get on a nightly basis with the NBA and MLB. Teams have so many whacked out alternative uniforms, throwback uniforms, throwbacks to different leagues and/or franchises, tributes to whatever... I'm not exaggerating when I say I've literally lost interest in those sports based on the fact that can't count on what I'll see when tuning in. Some MLB teams have supposedly primary uniforms they barely wear.By losing the feeling of brand consistency, they might be gaining a bit of instant flash, but I believe it'll cost in the log run. (Think of it this way... in the long term... not just today, or even this year, but over 15, 20, 25 years... who's visual brand would you rather have, Oregon's or Texas'?)

The NFL is smart to keep their thumb down on this... The (perfectly reasonable) one helmet rule was most likely put in place for somewhat cynical legal reasons, but it's having a side benefit of keeping the NFL (for now) from looking like the NCAA. Scroll through a few pages of the NCAAF '15 thread, if you've got a strong stomach. These days, college football uniforms are the stuff of nightmares. Sure it's a shame the one-helmet rule is costing us some cool throwback looks... I liked the faux leather helmet, the creamsickles, and especially the awesomely amazing Falcons throwback, but truthfully... small price to pay.

If it were up to me, I'd institute much tougher alternative uniform rules in the NFL. I want a declared primary uniform combination... jersey, pants, and socks that need to be worn at least 6 home games. No more mix and match with three pairs of pants, except for a couple games. And alternate jerseys can only be worn once during the regular season, once during preseason, and never in the playoffs. Also, never on Sunday nights or Monday nights...decide what is your best look and wear that. And if the primary uniform isn't your best look, then it shouldn't be your primary.

(Wow... didn't plan on a grumpy rant, but...)

I agree with wearing your best look all the time with minimal use of alternate uniforms, but as far as brand identity and brand strength, I don't think either are legitimate concerns (although the NFL's stance on the matter would suggest otherwise).. The more stuff you make available to the masses, the more revenue you bring in.. Wearing multiple uniforms, etc creates a sort of "need" within the fan base to purchase multiple versions, colors, etc.. I love traditional uniforms, simplified designs, true "primary" uniforms, great logos, etc, but I also love football, so I'm gonna watch it regardless of what they wear. I'm gonna love my team regardless of what they wear too, but if I prefer my team's alt to their primary, I may prefer to purchase it even if I had already decided not to buy the primary.. It's a way for teams to reach an additional market. That's why teams wear throwbacks as their alt so often.. It allows them to reconnect with prior generations who either opposed the changes from the uniform of their era, or they have nostalgia from that bygone era they'd like to recapture.. If multiple alts were allowed, Seattle could wear a throwback to the royal, which many people prefer, but also the rarely worn wolf grey and maybe find even another demographic by reintroducing a lime green set.. I'm not advocating for something like that, but I can see the benefit..

As far as the 1-helmet rule, I personally think it is ridiculous nonsense. Firstly, there is a lifespan on all helmets of 10 years from initial season of competition, regardless of use or condition (unless broken obviously). Putting a life span on helmets tells me that a helmet's structural integrity and safety effectiveness becomes increasingly jeopardized with use. Therefore, if increased use can cause a helmet to become unsafe more quickly, then forcing players to wear a single helmet for everything is constantly increasing their risk of injury due to wearing a constantly deteriorating helmet. By eliminating practice helmets, alternate helmets, etc, which would help to distribute the "wear and tear" across multiple shells, they're forcing players to concentrate all the impacts and damage onto a single helmet shell.. That defies logic..

The only logical reason for the rule is to avoid putting players in helmets that are not properly "fit" to each player. It's not difficult to check the exact air pressure in a player's helmet and replicate that in another helmet. The biggest issue with helmet fit is adjusting the chinstrap correctly to ensure proper fit (which is why many pros have the top snap riveted to their helmet, so that it can't loosen up over time.) Again, measuring the strap length on riveted chinstraps to ensure identical fit is not difficult.. For chinstraps that are not riveted to the helmet, simply transfer that chinstrap to the new helmet and, voila - problem solved.. A bigger issue I have with this 1-helmet nonsense is that players can change their chinstraps and adjust the air in their helmets as they like.. In my opinion, those two things present a much bigger issue than a second helmet would. Additionally, if proper "fit" truly is the rationale, they could simply transfer the air bladder and padding from one plastic shell to another, which would provide the exact same fit and protection since it's the same padding.. There are so many ways to avoid the issues presented by using multiple helmets, but there's really no way of addressing the issue of wearing out your helmet shell with repeated use.. On top of all this, how does the NFL monitor the use of a single helmet? Tom Brady and Eddie Lacy both toyed around with multiple helmet models within a single season.. If an entire team wore brand new helmets for each game that all looked identical, would the NFL know? Would the team be penalized in any way?

I believe very strongly that the 1-helmet rule is just the NFL's way of controlling brand identity, and they were able to get a doctor somewhere to back them up with some silly "improper fit" nonsense..

In summation -

I like each team having a "signature look" that they wear the vast majority of the time.

I also feel the NFL should tighten up in general on uniforms, but more on a player by player basis (such as socks not having consistent striping and color locations from one player to the next)

I like alternate jerseys, but like you said, once or twice a year is plenty - no need for more than that.

I'm not opposed to teams having only 1 helmet design, because again, like you said, if it's your best look, then wear that.. but I am opposed to the 1-helmet rule on principle alone.

The only time an alternate helmet design should exist is when dictated by a throwback, not to add a second "normal/contemporary" helmet design to the mix.

In my perfect world, each team would have 1 home, 1 away, 1 alt, and 1 throwback. Alt and throwback would each be worn once per session. Alt would be team's current uniform design, but using the secondary/tertiary color instead of the primary color for the base, and would be worn with the normal helmet. Throwback would be a throwback to a previous look, an attempt to remain accurate to the original should be made, and helmets should change from the primary if necessary to stay true to the throwback look.

Sorry for the long-winded diatribe regarding the one-helmet rule, but I just unpacked 159 reconditioned helmets and I was mentally in the helmet zone.

Edit: it was actually 163 (4 got rejected, but we always get those painted anyway as "trying e helmets" to give away or sell to alumni and boosters.

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