Jump to content

UA's MLB logo placement and the NFL


BJ Sands
 Share

Recommended Posts

Earlier this week, MLB and Under Armour announced their new agreement/partnership. The part that will make this deal stand out is the placement of the UA logo on the upper right chest, which is a major departure from Majestic having its mark on the left cuff.

 

This continues a trend we've seen in pro sports with Nike soon putting its mark on the front of NBA jerseys, a first for the league. My hope is that this means when the Nike deal with the NFL, it moves the swoosh to the chest, where it is in college football.

 

While I believe having the maker's marks in front is an aesthetic downgrade for the NBA and MLB, I think this could be a positive for the NFL. Just look at how Nike has to handle the striping for the Steelers and Lions, and then compare it to Iowa and Ohio State. Because the swoosh is on the chest, Iowa and OSU have fuller stripes that just look better, and I hope that comes to the NFL soon.

 

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cornish1-1040x572.jpgThe issue with stripes is on the teams and not Nike. Look at San Francisco,  so much empty space. I actually prefer Nike keep the logos on the sleeves.  Otherwise the chest will be cluttered during the Super Bowl for some teams. Not as bad as this photo but the space blocked off will be about the same. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NFL's contracts with the apparel companies has always specified logo placement on the sleeves, dating back to when they first inserted the language in the 1990s. The current deal with Nike also has the logo only on the sleeve of all sideline gear, rather than the front. 

 

The difference with football is that there are currently two logos on the jersey, where in other sports there is just one (or, in the NBA's case, none). So the debate would be, is one logo on the front more valuable than two logos? I would say that in football, the sleeve placement is more valuable because in the average photo of a play, you can see many sleeves, but may not see the front/chest of more than one player. I think Nike would choose two logos per jersey over one, regardless of placement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, BRice16 said:

The NFL's contracts with the apparel companies has always specified logo placement on the sleeves, dating back to when they first inserted the language in the 1990s. The current deal with Nike also has the logo only on the sleeve of all sideline gear, rather than the front. 

 

The difference with football is that there are currently two logos on the jersey, where in other sports there is just one (or, in the NBA's case, none). So the debate would be, is one logo on the front more valuable than two logos? I would say that in football, the sleeve placement is more valuable because in the average photo of a play, you can see many sleeves, but may not see the front/chest of more than one player. I think Nike would choose two logos per jersey over one, regardless of placement. 


Great analysis!  Also, with two Swooshes, Nike gets to pull of its "reverse flag on the right side of the uniform" bit with the Swoosh mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of the NBA, the 'no logos' thing will change next year when Nike takes over. I take it will be on left side (if only they hadn't moved the league logo from the left front to the center rear, it'd be placed below it, like the retail jerseys would be).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Steelers’ and Lions’s striping is thicker than Iowa’s or Ohio State’s, but the point is well taken. They’d be wise to alter the size of it to make it fit better. Unfortunately, I don’t know if a chest logo is realistic for the NFL, given the location of the league logo, captain patch, and any special patches added to the uniform (memorial, Super Bowl, etc.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, andrewharrington said:

The Steelers’ and Lions’s striping is thicker than Iowa’s or Ohio State’s, but the point is well taken. They’d be wise to alter the size of it to make it fit better. Unfortunately, I don’t know if a chest logo is realistic for the NFL, given the location of the league logo, captain patch, and any special patches added to the uniform (memorial, Super Bowl, etc.).

 

If a supplier logo has to go on the front, howabout putting it where the shield is now, and moving the shield to above the NOB like how MLB does it?  I'm sure Nike would love that, since it would get their logo placement directly on top of the team wordmarks (for most teams), which theoretically gets people to associate one with the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

If a supplier logo has to go on the front, howabout putting it where the shield is now, and moving the shield to above the NOB like how MLB does it?  I'm sure Nike would love that, since it would get their logo placement directly on top of the team wordmarks (for most teams), which theoretically gets people to associate one with the other.

The NFL would hate it though, because they gotta "protect the shield"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.