NBA switching to Nike in 2017

[WSU151]

I'm confused why everyone is up and arms about the swoosh being on the jersey. This is nothing new in basketball. The swoosh has been on many jerseys in college basketball with schools that have Nike as their athletic supplier.

Even though NCAA basketball is different from NBA basketball, we have all seen this before in American basketball.

People are up in arms because the NBA has never had any corporate logos on jerseys. College is different than the NBA. There are different standards because one is "amateur" and the other is professional.

[mbannon92]

So? The NFL is a pro league and has had manufacturer logos on jerseys for decades, and no one throws a fit about that. MLB has the Majestic logo on the sleeve and the swoosh on the collar of the undershirt, and the world gets along just fine. It has nothing to do with corporate greed. It's a common and perfectly acceptable way for a sports league--a business--to make more money. And that's the primary goal of any business.

And as I mentioned earlier, if the swoosh on the chest means one less spot for a potential 2x2 ad, I'm all for it.

[MJWalker45]

I don't think the swoosh is the iissue more than the idea that an AT&T patch will sit on the other side. Any pro league that refuses a way to make money would be laughed at. I'm actually surprised to not see the NHL embrace this idea before the NBA. I wonder how much input Nike will have with sock designs since the NBA will have official game day socks starting next year.

[WSU151]

So? The NFL is a pro league and has had manufacturer logos on jerseys for decades, and no one throws a fit about that. MLB has the Majestic logo on the sleeve and the swoosh on the collar of the undershirt, and the world gets along just fine. It has nothing to do with corporate greed. It's a common and perfectly acceptable way for a sports league--a business--to make more money. And that's the primary goal of any business.

And as I mentioned earlier, if the swoosh on the chest means one less spot for a potential 2x2 ad, I'm all for it.

None of the logos are on the front of the jersey as they would be in the NBA. They're all on sleeves, or on the back in the NHL.

[mbannon92]

So? The NFL is a pro league and has had manufacturer logos on jerseys for decades, and no one throws a fit about that. MLB has the Majestic logo on the sleeve and the swoosh on the collar of the undershirt, and the world gets along just fine. It has nothing to do with corporate greed. It's a common and perfectly acceptable way for a sports league--a business--to make more money. And that's the primary goal of any business.

And as I mentioned earlier, if the swoosh on the chest means one less spot for a potential 2x2 ad, I'm all for it.

None of the logos are on the front of the jersey as they would be in the NBA. They're all on sleeves, or on the back in the NHL.

So you want the NBA to keep the sleeved jerseys? ?

Kidding aside, I really don't see why people are mad about this. It's such a common thing in sports. And if it weren't for David Stern, the manufacturer logos would have been on the jerseys years ago.

[Gothamite]

Yes, but the fact that they weren't is important in understanding the reaction today.

And when you have a commissioner bound and determined to put sponsor ads on the jerseys, then you can decry his decision to start with manufacturer ads.

[TheOldRoman]

Yes, but the fact that they weren't is important in understanding the reaction today.

And when you have a commissioner bound and determined to put sponsor ads on the jerseys, then you can decry his decision to start with manufacturer ads.

Yes. And also important, basketball jerseys have by far the smallest amount of real estate of any sports jerseys. The other sports have more "natural" places to put manufacturer logos where it seems reasonable like "Okay, they made the jersey, so they get to put their mark." Sleeve logos on the football and baseball, hem or neck logos for hockey. Those are hugely different from a logo on the player's chest.

[Derek94]

Like I said if we have to put a brand logo on our NBA jerseys then by God let it be the swoosh.

There's not another mark that looks less abrasive on a uni.

But being a NBA fan for 25 years nearly I will miss them being the last holdout of logos on their attire.

[Red Wine Pirate]

We saw this coming, but the NBA today said Nike would outfit the NBA over eight years starting in the 2017-18 season.

LINK

Kidding aside, I really don't see why people are mad about this. It's such a common thing in sports. And if it weren't for David Stern, the manufacturer logos would have been on the jerseys years ago.

99.9999% aren't mad. Only a select few on their own personal blogs or on internet forums are complaining. But those same people usually complain about everything.

[Kevin W.]

Like I said if we have to put a brand logo on our NBA jerseys then by God let it be the swoosh.

There's not another mark that looks less abrasive on a uni.

That and all the other apparel won't be covered in the three stripes.

[Gothamite]

99.9999% aren't mad. Only a select few on their own personal blogs or on internet forums are complaining. But those same people usually complain about everything.

Are you absolutely sure you're on the right forum?

[JPDesign]

I'm excited for Nike to take over if for no other reason than for the fan apparel. Adidas stuff never fit me very well.

But, the thing I'm most worried about with Nike is the cut of the uniforms. Whatever garbage they gave Kentucky/Duke during March Madness looked like a women's jersey with how tight it was, and how small the shoulder fabric was. You can criticize Rev30 all you want, but at least the silhouette still looked like a basketball jersey (as long as you squint so you don't see all the mesh holes ).

Also: say goodbye to trim. While Adidas did indulge in the semi-trim with the Knicks, Nike seems to remove all neck/arm trim at any given opportunity. It'll be interesting to see what happens to the first team to get new uniforms under Nike.

[mbannon92]

I'm excited for Nike to take over if for no other reason than for the fan apparel. Adidas stuff never fit me very well.

But, the thing I'm most worried about with Nike is the cut of the uniforms. Whatever garbage they gave Kentucky/Duke during March Madness looked like a women's jersey with how tight it was, and how small the shoulder fabric was. You can criticize Rev30 all you want, but at least the silhouette still looked like a basketball jersey (as long as you squint so you don't see all the mesh holes ).

Also: say goodbye to trim. While Adidas did indulge in the semi-trim with the Knicks, Nike seems to remove all neck/arm trim at any given opportunity. It'll be interesting to see what happens to the first team to get new uniforms under Nike.

I'd love to argue that, like other pro leagues, there will be much less experimentation than in college. BUT, the NBA forced sleeved jerseys on all of us, so it may be best to expect the worst.

[Maximus89]

I do hate the no trim look. Maybe for a few newer teams, that's fine. I like the tight jersey look. Reminds me of the 60's era with the wife beater look. Loved that. The biggest thing i worry about is those awful baggy shorts. Tight jersey with huge baggy shorts looks so ridiculous. Does the NBA have a rule on short length? No lower than the knees? Wish it was 2 inches above the knee.

Curious to know why some of these teams moved forward with redesigns or rebrands knowing Adidas was out and if there are teams who opted to wait for Nike to take over and design their rebrand/uniform updates. Is it because it's not just Adidas people who are working on the logos and uniforms? Can an NBA owner hire a design artist he likes instead of someone who works for Adidas? Is the only thing to worry about is if the new design fits the new fabric/cut that Nike will make?

[mbannon92]

I do hate the no trim look. Maybe for a few newer teams, that's fine. I like the tight jersey look. Reminds me of the 60's era with the wife beater look. Loved that. The biggest thing i worry about is those awful baggy shorts. Tight jersey with huge baggy shorts looks so ridiculous. Does the NBA have a rule on short length? No lower than the knees? Wish it was 2 inches above the knee.

Curious to know why some of these teams moved forward with redesigns or rebrands knowing Adidas was out and if there are teams who opted to wait for Nike to take over and design their rebrand/uniform updates. Is it because it's not just Adidas people who are working on the logos and uniforms? Can an NBA owner hire a design artist he likes instead of someone who works for Adidas? Is the only thing to worry about is if the new design fits the new fabric/cut that Nike will make?

The Hornets uniforms were done by Jordan Brand, so it's not required that Adidas be involved. (At least throughout the design process—we learned from the Bucks rebrand that fabric color can be an issue, so Adidas has to be involved there.)

[JPDesign]

I'm excited for Nike to take over if for no other reason than for the fan apparel. Adidas stuff never fit me very well.

But, the thing I'm most worried about with Nike is the cut of the uniforms. Whatever garbage they gave Kentucky/Duke during March Madness looked like a women's jersey with how tight it was, and how small the shoulder fabric was. You can criticize Rev30 all you want, but at least the silhouette still looked like a basketball jersey (as long as you squint so you don't see all the mesh holes ).

Also: say goodbye to trim. While Adidas did indulge in the semi-trim with the Knicks, Nike seems to remove all neck/arm trim at any given opportunity. It'll be interesting to see what happens to the first team to get new uniforms under Nike.

I'd love to argue that, like other pro leagues, there will be much less experimentation than in college. BUT, the NBA forced sleeved jerseys on all of us, so it may be best to expect the worst.

Nike's work in the NFL with the Seahawks, Jaguars, Bucs, and Browns was enough to stifle any hope for restraint in light of the "pro league" status.

[seattlesonicsofsacramento]

I do hate the no trim look. Maybe for a few newer teams, that's fine. I like the tight jersey look. Reminds me of the 60's era with the wife beater look. Loved that. The biggest thing i worry about is those awful baggy shorts. Tight jersey with huge baggy shorts looks so ridiculous. Does the NBA have a rule on short length? No lower than the knees? Wish it was 2 inches above the knee.

Curious to know why some of these teams moved forward with redesigns or rebrands knowing Adidas was out and if there are teams who opted to wait for Nike to take over and design their rebrand/uniform updates. Is it because it's not just Adidas people who are working on the logos and uniforms? Can an NBA owner hire a design artist he likes instead of someone who works for Adidas? Is the only thing to worry about is if the new design fits the new fabric/cut that Nike will make?

The Hornets uniforms were done by Jordan Brand, so it's not required that Adidas be involved. (At least throughout the design process—we learned from the Bucks rebrand that fabric color can be an issue, so Adidas has to be involved there.)

And the Bucks' new look was developed by a designer headed by a friend of the owner's son, right?

[orangefaniniowa]

My personal wish when Nike goes back to being the apparel company of the NBA is to go back to the Dri-Fit technology that they did back in the early 2000s. Those were good looking and better maintained jerseys and shorts. In fact when Adidas first got the NBA contract, they kept the Dri-Fit look up until the 2010-11 season when of course they went extremely downhill when they decide to do things their way and went to a thing called "Rev 30" and became an eyesore to watch, and will be for two more seasons.

I know its wishful thinking but I always loved the Dri-Fit uniforms that Nike, Reebok, Champion, Adidas, etc. created 12 years ago in NBA and college sports.

[orangefaniniowa]

I wonder which teams will get a Nike refresh when they come...or maybe even who's going to hold out on a rebrand now until Nike comes? For some reason I could see Minnesota getting a good one then. Denver could sure use one. I love Portland as they are, but wouldn't be surprised if they shake things up a bit with that opportunity.

I know it's probably too early for that kind of speculation, but I could really see this deal effecting new designs and rebrands in the next couple of years. Not that I'm saying we won't see any until then, but hey, if I'm a team owner and can hang on a couple of years if it means seeing what Nike has to offer, it might be worth holding off until then.

The Houston Rockets definitely need a rebrand. The current uniforms was probably Adidas' (or maybe Reebok's) brainchild. Long overdue for a change!!

[Teal]

I wonder which teams will get a Nike refresh when they come...or maybe even who's going to hold out on a rebrand now until Nike comes? For some reason I could see Minnesota getting a good one then. Denver could sure use one. I love Portland as they are, but wouldn't be surprised if they shake things up a bit with that opportunity.

I know it's probably too early for that kind of speculation, but I could really see this deal effecting new designs and rebrands in the next couple of years. Not that I'm saying we won't see any until then, but hey, if I'm a team owner and can hang on a couple of years if it means seeing what Nike has to offer, it might be worth holding off until then.

The Houston Rockets definitely need a rebrand. The current uniforms was probably Adidas' (or maybe Reebok's) brainchild. Long overdue for a change!!

Agreed.