Bmac

NHL 2017-18

Recommended Posts

This might just be me, but I don't think the NHL needs one manufacturer for jerseys. If teams had individual manufacturers, There could be a lot more diversity in the designs, and could help smaller companies get some revenue. There also wouldn't be a reason for different teams to wear pretty much the same template.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care for the rounded edges on the numbers. Reminds me of the Reebok Minnesota Vikings numbers. Embroidery details are very spiffy, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, NoE38 said:

This might just be me, but I don't think the NHL needs one manufacturer for jerseys. If teams had individual manufacturers, There could be a lot more diversity in the designs, and could help smaller companies get some revenue. There also wouldn't be a reason for different teams to wear pretty much the same template.

 

There once was a time when there were multiple manufacturers.  CCM, Nike, Pro Player, and Starter.  Beside Nike having a different collar on Nike's jerseys, I don't know how different the jersey templates were from each other.  But, the designs were the same as ever.  Times have changed, but I don't see how different manufacturers will make a difference in having different designs.  If the Blackhawks had a deal with Adidas and the Oilers with Nike, they'll still be similar in design.

 

Plus, the NHL makes the most money from having an exclusive deal with one company.  I think having one manufacturer also assures that the smaller market teams don't get left behind.  The big teams would obviously get a bigger deal if it's everyone on their own.  This way, it's probably better for all the teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

Bauer's the one true hockey company left that still makes sweaters (Reebok/Adidas bought out CCM/Koho years back, and it's what got the latter's foot in the door). It's a shame we won't get to see what they would have done with the opportunity.

 

Adidas sold off CCM some time ago.  They are still using the Reebok templates for the AHL and CHL.  I wonder if they will eventually come up with their own templates again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did the Predators have full range of hip motion with those straight hemlines?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, M4One said:

 

There once was a time when there were multiple manufacturers.  CCM, Nike, Pro Player, and Starter.  Beside Nike having a different collar on Nike's jerseys, I don't know how different the jersey templates were from each other.  But, the designs were the same as ever.  Times have changed, but I don't see how different manufacturers will make a difference in having different designs.  If the Blackhawks had a deal with Adidas and the Oilers with Nike, they'll still be similar in design.

 

Plus, the NHL makes the most money from having an exclusive deal with one company.  I think having one manufacturer also assures that the smaller market teams don't get left behind.  The big teams would obviously get a bigger deal if it's everyone on their own.  This way, it's probably better for all the teams.

 

There was a hell of a lot more manufacturers than that!  Hell I remember when the local sporting goods stores sold authentic "Eagle"-branded Flyers jerseys, complete with large-hole mesh (before they went to the poly-double-knit material kinda like super-thick baseball jersey material, which was popular for a lot of teams before air-knit became a thing.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

There was a hell of a lot more manufacturers than that!  Hell I remember when the local sporting goods stores sold authentic "Eagle"-branded Flyers jerseys, complete with large-hole mesh (before they went to the poly-double-knit material kinda like super-thick baseball jersey material, which was popular for a lot of teams before air-knit became a thing.)

 

When was this?  I'm old, but not that old.  Never heard of Eagle and I can only remember it being CCM, then the others that I mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/26/2017 at 7:55 AM, Gothamite said:

There’s also the simple fact that some of these “innovations” disappear as soon as it’s time for the next rollout.  Meaning their actual function is very much in question.  There is ample evidence that manufacturers design these elements as much to stand out, to advertise their products, as for the performance aspects. 

 

So let’s not pretend that we’re missing the point when we debate their aesthetics.  Those aesthetics are the point. 

 

I dont think anyone’s missing the point, however, if sacrificing aesthetics to improve function is considered naïve (which it should be), then the opposite holds true as well. There’s a balance to everything.

 

7 hours ago, CRichardson said:

Boston's numbers are also partially screen-printed, or at least they were up until this season. They used two-layer twill with the small layer between the two colors screen-printed on and then stitched to simulate an extra layer of stitched twill.

 

I have no doubt that it was meant as a cost-saving measure, as was the move to two-color numbers, since Jeremy Jacobs is a penny-pincher.

 

Boston opted to go with single-layer numbers and lettering, but without the perforations.

 

I’ve seen them using double-layer twill in recent photos I’ve pulled, though, which means they’re probably using their local supplier to letter and number game jerseys, (this is common). This is also the main reason one might see a difference between a team’s retail and game jersey; the team uses a local shop to number and letter its game jerseys and the official production specs and/or digital art may or may not match.

 

2 hours ago, Sodboy13 said:

I don't care for the rounded edges on the numbers. Reminds me of the Reebok Minnesota Vikings numbers. Embroidery details are very spiffy, though.

 

This is always a tough decision to make on throwbacks from this era, since the numbers were hand-cut. Do you just make them perfectly crisp and clean, or do you try to replicate the hand made look, or do you go in between (like this) and just soften them a bit?

 

The typeface in the ARENAS artwork definitely looks too digital age, though (Arial/Helvetica-esque). There aren’t many great photos of the original, but this is one where I think it would be good for them to take a closer look and give a more human feel to the lettering (human in style, not necessarily in execution).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, andrewharrington said:

The typeface in the ARENAS artwork definitely looks too digital age, though (Arial/Helvetica-esque). There aren’t many great photos of the original, but this is one where I think it would be good for them to take a closer look and give a more human feel to the lettering (human in style, not necessarily in execution).

 

I feel the exact same way about this. I know photos of the old sweater have a definite Helvetica vibe, but when it's executed like this, all I see is a 1970s font on a 1910s jersey. It throws me off and feels like more of an anachronism than the chrome shield gleaming from the neck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, M4One said:

 

When was this?  I'm old, but not that old.  Never heard of Eagle and I can only remember it being CCM, then the others that I mentioned.

 

Game worn:

 

20211.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea what brand this one was. It almost looks fake but back then the local sporting good shops did the lettering so there were usually variances. They’re game worn:

 

19549.jpg

 

21133.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back then, it wasn't out of the ordinary for the local sports shop doing the customizing to have its name on the rear hem, too. And if the jersey manufacturer didn't put it there, then the sports shop got the real estate to itself. I know Gunzo's did it for the Hawks, and I think it was Steichens for the North Stars. Custom Crafted may have made a hem appearance as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Scratcher said:

Seeing Nike's olympic jerseys, not so sure of that.

I meant that anyone, except for Nike, would have been a better alternative than Adidas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, andrewharrington said:

I dont think anyone’s missing the point, however, if sacrificing aesthetics to improve function is considered naïve (which it should be), then the opposite holds true as well. There’s a balance to everything.

 

Cards on the table, I don’t actually believe that most of these details are about function at all.  I think they’re almost entirely about creating a distinctive and protectable brand, with a thin veneer of “innovation” as fig leaf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, andrewharrington said:

This is always a tough decision to make on throwbacks from this era, since the numbers were hand-cut. Do you just make them perfectly crisp and clean, or do you try to replicate the hand made look, or do you go in between (like this) and just soften them a bit?

 

The typeface in the ARENAS artwork definitely looks too digital age, though (Arial/Helvetica-esque). There aren’t many great photos of the original, but this is one where I think it would be good for them to take a closer look and give a more human feel to the lettering (human in style, not necessarily in execution).

 

True enough.  It’s a tough balancing act to pull off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

Cards on the table, I don’t actually believe that most of these details are about function at all.  I think they’re almost entirely about creating a distinctive and protectable brand, with a thin veneer of “innovation” as fig leaf.

 

I wouldn’t say that’s true, personally. The act of creating a signature aesthetic in a product is obviously standard practice in all disciplines of design these days. I’d agree that some of the things you see in the uniform world border on purely decorative or fail to provide a measurable or tangible *benefit* in function, but it definitely isn’t design at the expense of function, nor is the intent ever to ignore or prioritize a signature aesthetic over function, at least not in my experience. Generally speaking, it’s more of a “make it do this better *and* make it look like this while doing it” approach, rather than one or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just find it suspicious that Nike, for example, comes out with distinct and recognizable collars for each of their templates.  They extol the virtues and improved function of each collar, then replace it with a different and equally visually distinctive new one a year later. 

 

There may indeed be some function behind each of them.  But I don’t think it’s out of line to suspect that function is not driving the design process.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.