NFL 2017 changes?

[mightyduck]

On 1/23/2017 at 10:32 PM, crosfam said:

I think the piping and uneven stripes makes the current look already outdated.  I'd go with the 2016 worn throwbacks, but a red helmet instead.  Could pull it off with either logo.  Road white jersey (red numbers), and road red pants with classic black and white stripes.  Add an alternate red jersey, and maybe a third set of black road pants with classic red/white stripes.  No need for silver pants.  No colored sleeves.  Win the SB and make the change please.  

 

Sign me up for this.  I think the uniform with a red version of the helmet would look stellar.

[BrandMooreArt]

16 hours ago, FinsUp1214 said:

Regarding the Falcons, Super Bowl ring or not, it's high time for a change. It's been high time for probably 6-7 years. I've got some thoughts on this that which have mostly materialized over the last week. Hopefully I can express my thoughts in a way that make sense! And it may be a bit long, so bear with me  

 

I'm going to start off with the logo, and possibly an unpopular opinion regarding it: even with its little flaws here and there and a lack of animation, I still think the original is a bit more imposing, or at least should be, and is the better design. How so?

 

It doesn't look like much when you look at it at first glance, but really think about the falcon's proportion with regards to it's wings:

 

 

 

Those wings are huge! That's a big flippin' bird! I'd be pretty captivated with a falcon that size. As opposed to the current:

 

 

Retains the idea and it's certainly sleeker, but the proportions actually make it look like a smaller wingspanned falcon. The wings aren't as big in comparison to the head, and the only things really all that imposing about it are that it looks angry and that's the most jacked-up thick muscular talon I've ever seen. Otherwise it just looks like a really thick bird with short wings as opposed to a large, imposing one with a great wingspan. I appreciate the idea; it isn't necessarily a bad logo by any stretch and for now is serviceable. However, all the modernization and sleeking up gives it a bit too much of a comic book cartoon look and takes away from the natural imposition the original had. Certainly more aggressive, but less captivating in my eyes. In short, it modernized and angered the falcon a bit, but the extent to which it went wasn't necessary.

 

Of course that's not saying the original is perfect; there's much cleaning up to do in the face and wings especially, and you could stand to perk it up a little bit. But I'd rather have something closer to the original than the current bird.

 

 

i'll defend the current logo

 

what you've laid out as a case for being a better logo would make for a better illustration or drawing; but not a better logo. first, think of how the logo lives in its primary context, on the side of the helmet. and when you see how the two logos occupy that space, the current logo has a much stronger presence. the old logo is far too tall. 

 

the current logo is built to suggest speed. (this is also reflected in the uniform design). the forward lean, small spikes in the wings, and red lines help form that idea. even the variation in the keyline helps as well. the old logo feels very stationary, even as it tries to depict a bird in motion. the biggest difference, is the old logo leans more to "drawing what it is" and the current more to "drawing what its doing". 

 

the lines work of the old is about as sloppy as you will find. most notably, the lines in the wings are carelessly pasted on, where the current logo handles that same idea by forming the lines to the curve and angles of the wings– it looks like its all part of the same thing rather than different pieces slapped together. 

 

honestly, i can't find one thing that the old has over the current. they went from a dated, clumsy, goofy bird to a real Bird Of Prey. old logo: 2/10. new logo: 9.5/10 

[Sport]

I have never liked the old Falcons logo. It's far too tall. The head and talon are crude and it's very static. While I'm not a fan of the uniforms it was paired with I think the updated logo was an incredible improvement. Two reasons: 1. it actually looks like it's flying. 2. It wasn't until the debut of the new logo that I was made to understand that it's supposed to be an F and that's why the bird is in profile. The new one looks like an F. No matter how hard I squint I can't get the old to look like an F. So the new one is better in two capacities: it's got dynamism and it's readable as the letter form while still maintaining its abstraction. 

 

Plus I think it fits better on the side of a football helmet. 

 

edit: What Brandon said. 

[BBTV]

The new one has certainly grown on me, and passes all of my tests for what a good logo is, however the old one, despite its flaws, was legitimately iconic IMO.  Everyone knew what that logo represented, even though the Falcons have been an afterthought for the overwhelming majority of their existence.  It's also been copied by more HSs than pretty much any other logo I can think of.

 

I used to think that it made an F, but now I think that's just an old wives' tale.  

 

I'd really like to see a Seahawk's / AZ Cards type update to the old logo - something like the new one, only less agressive / dynamic.

 

I'm totally fine with the new one (though I agree that re-coloring the outlines is needed), but there's something more dignified about the old one.

[BrianLion]

the forced insistence on the talon being separated from the rest of the falcon has always bothered me. Clean that up and it looks better and also looks like the intended "F"

[TBGKon]

The Falcons logo could use a simplification along the lines of what the Nashville Predators did when the brought on the yellow home unis.

 

For the Falcons, remove the red accents on the wings, body, and talon.  Outline the logo in red.

[Huntr]

A new topic, do you know if the Nike will change the NFL uniform style for 2017?  Will the Elite 51 uniforms replace with the current style such as vapor untouchable, the one the current Pro Bowlers are wearing?  Reason for me asking is the firewire collar is getting old (5 years) and is getting an eyesores.  Surprisingly, most college teams are way ahead with the NFL with the advance uniform technology. 

[AstroCree]

Those collars really downgrade the uniform. 

[FinsUp1214]

1 hour ago, BrandMooreArt said:

 

i'll defend the current logo

 

what you've laid out as a case for being a better logo would make for a better illustration or drawing; but not a better logo. first, think of how the logo lives in its primary context, on the side of the helmet. and when you see how the two logos occupy that space, the current logo has a much stronger presence. the old logo is far too tall. 

 

the current logo is built to suggest speed. (this is also reflected in the uniform design). the forward lean, small spikes in the wings, and red lines help form that idea. even the variation in the keyline helps as well. the old logo feels very stationary, even as it tries to depict a bird in motion. the biggest difference, is the old logo leans more to "drawing what it is" and the current more to "drawing what its doing". 

 

the lines work of the old is about as sloppy as you will find. most notably, the lines in the wings are carelessly pasted on, where the current logo handles that same idea by forming the lines to the curve and angles of the wings– it looks like its all part of the same thing rather than different pieces slapped together. 

 

honestly, i can't find one thing that the old has over the current. they went from a dated, clumsy, goofy bird to a real Bird Of Prey. old logo: 2/10. new logo: 9.5/10 

 

Hey, I'd said I knew my opinion would be unpopular! I get it! ?

 

Maybe "better logo" wasn't the right way to put it...a better depiction, maybe? As I alluded, I wasn't sure if I'd be able to explain my thoughts right. I certainly agree that the original has composition flaws and needs a lot of cleaning up, and it could stand to be invigorated a bit. But I don't think they had to go as far into doing so as the current did. All the changes they made to update it just gave it the appearance of a really fast but really squat and stocky falcon. I understand too your "illustration vs logo" argument, but to me personally the way the current is composed just bugs me too much in that it distorts the falcon too much for my personal taste. The original just looked more like a falcon to me.

 

This is isn't a perfect picture, as I couldn't find one that was oriented the same way and at the same angle as the original, but here's a little of where I'm getting at:

 

 

The size of the wing in comparison to the head isn't too far off from the original, and so I don't find the original's shape to be too far-fetched. 

 

They absolutely couldve gone the Arizona route, as BringBackTheVet suggested, and perked it up enough to be with the times and add aggression, but stay truer to the old. I disagree that the original is "too tall"; it looks plenty fine on a football helmet to me, so you can stand to retain the shape while still sharpening, refining, "angering" if you will, and angle it a bit to still give it the speedy, swoopy look that is desired. In short, there are certainly ways to clean up and perk up the original that will convey the same message the current does, but without having to dump an energy drink on it and inject it with steroids and pre-workout  Again, the current isn't bad in my eyes. I even find it okay. It's just a bit too modernized to me.

 

But hey, the beauty of logo design is that different kinds speak to different people, even if it may not speak to others! No one's wrong or right here, just different tastes!  

 

 

[sartori]

My main problem is that both the old and the more recent logos look nothing like falcons. The original logo looks vaguely like a crow, while the current one looks like a hawk, which it should never do as there is an NBA team in ATL named after hawks.

 

A new, well designed logo should look like an 'F' shaped falcon!

 

 

 

[BrandMooreArt]

3 hours ago, Huntr said:

A new topic, do you know if the Nike will change the NFL uniform style for 2017?  Will the Elite 51 uniforms replace with the current style such as vapor untouchable, the one the current Pro Bowlers are wearing?  Reason for me asking is the firewire collar is getting old (5 years) and is getting an eyesores.  Surprisingly, most college teams are way ahead with the NFL with the advance uniform technology. 

 

First, i don't have any proof or insider knowledge on this. BUT, it is my speculation that there will be a 2017 Vapor Untouchable option for all teams. the Color Rush unis were the VU this past season and Nike has had enough time now to move from just servicing the business, to providing the NFL with their best uniform

 

2 hours ago, FinsUp1214 said:

 

Hey, I'd said I knew my opinion would be unpopular! I get it! ?

 

Maybe "better logo" wasn't the right way to put it...a better depiction, maybe? As I alluded, I wasn't sure if I'd be able to explain my thoughts right. I certainly agree that the original has composition flaws and needs a lot of cleaning up, and it could stand to be invigorated a bit. But I don't think they had to go as far into doing so as the current did. All the changes they made to update it just gave it the appearance of a really fast but really squat and stocky falcon. I understand too your "illustration vs logo" argument, but to me personally the way the current is composed just bugs me too much in that it distorts the falcon too much for my personal taste. The original just looked more like a falcon to me.

 

This is isn't a perfect picture, as I couldn't find one that was oriented the same way and at the same angle as the original, but here's a little of where I'm getting at:

 

 

The size of the wing in comparison to the head isn't too far off from the original, and so I don't find the original's shape to be too far-fetched. 

 

They absolutely couldve gone the Arizona route, as BringBackTheVet suggested, and perked it up enough to be with the times and add aggression, but stay truer to the old. I disagree that the original is "too tall"; it looks plenty fine on a football helmet to me, so you can stand to retain the shape while still sharpening, refining, "angering" if you will, and angle it a bit to still give it the speedy, swoopy look that is desired. In short, there are certainly ways to clean up and perk up the original that will convey the same message the current does, but without having to dump an energy drink on it and inject it with steroids and pre-workout  Again, the current isn't bad in my eyes. I even find it okay. It's just a bit too modernized to me.

 

But hey, the beauty of logo design is that different kinds speak to different people, even if it may not speak to others! No one's wrong or right here, just different tastes!  

 

 

 

to sum it up, a very good creative director once told me "you don't have to make it 100% perfect, it just has to be believable". that's the side i've always gravitated towards

[FiddySicks]

I originally liked it when the Falcons added more red and then switched their home jerseys to red, but after about a decade of that same look, it's pretty stale. I wish they would demote the red to an accent color like it was on the previous set. Black and white is very striking and kinda perfect for the Falcons. 

[hawk36]

16 hours ago, dont care said:

Then you are losing the "F" the logo makes. Logos, especially abstract ones don't need to be to scale.

The "F" is something that drives me crazy. No need for it, especially when it's a backward "F" on one side of the helmet and jersey. Give up trying to force an "F" shape and make a better looking logo. 

 

[TBGKon]

1 hour ago, Bucfan56 said:

I originally liked it when the Falcons added more red and then switched their home jerseys to red, but after about a decade of that same look, it's pretty stale. I wish they would demote the red to an accent color like it was on the previous set. Black and white is very striking and kinda perfect for the Falcons. 

And separates them from looking remotely like Tampa.

[Dynasty]

I really want to see the Falcons go with red helmets, black jerseys, and red pants (with the occasional white pants). Their logo looks better on a red background than it does black, going with black jerseys would separate them from another bird team that wears red jerseys (Arizona), and red pants would just simply look good when paired with a black jersey.

[Cosmic]

I agree that the old logo wasn't good, but I do like that it wasn't trying to be super angry. Though I do sort of like the new one, I don't like how it's halfway between an angry bird and a fighter jet.

[Jt0323]

thought this was interesting. Rams officially make the change?

[dont care]

15 minutes ago, Jt0323 said:

thought this was interesting. Rams officially make the change?

It's been that way all year

[BrandMooreArt]

^ he's probably posting for the CHargers? using the helmet bolt logo there

[IceCap]

19 minutes ago, BrandMooreArt said:

^ he's probably posting for the CHargers? using the helmet bolt logo there

The bolt never stopped being the primary logo.