Recommended Posts

As an aside, I’d hate to see what the reaction would be if the Raiders introduces their current uniforms today.

“They’re too plain.” 

“They need an outline around the numbers.”

”They need another color for contrast.”

”They need stripes on the sleeves.” 

And so on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, daveindc said:

NFL: OCT 14 Jaguars at Cowboys : News Photo

 

 

Um, I really like this look as well. I do agree with @BringBackTheVet ... the glossy helmet clashes with the uniforms. But, I really like that black/black/teal look -- for me that's a traditional modern look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, AndrewMLind said:

As an aside, I’d hate to see what the reaction would be if the Raiders introduces their current uniforms today.

“They’re too plain.” 

“They need an outline around the numbers.”

”They need another color for contrast.”

”They need stripes on the sleeves.” 

And so on...

 

You’re missing a big factor: context. The Raiders’ identity and uniforms have been their look for over 50 years, with their pre-black/silver looks limited to a few years in the AFL.

 

The Jaguars’ redesign is the latest in a series of redesigns for them, with many of them incorporating stripes, gold, multiple outlines, and other features. Going in such a plain direction is part of why their reception has been mixed on the board and (I presume) among fans.

 

I hate the cliché of “if it came out today, x would have said y.” It negates the context of the original design and the context of any modern redesigns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Jags’ 2009 set had two pros going for it: 1) teal over white was the primary home set for most of its run, and 2) the teal flake helmet was awesome. The cons, however, were too glaring for the whole set to work. The piping was pretty bad and would often look wonky or distorted at different levels from player to player, the number font reminded me too much of the Patriots (if you’re gonna go with a custom font, don’t make it look that close to another teams’ custom font), and the road numbers should’ve been teal instead of black.

 

Overall I think the 2009 set had potential, but tried too hard. The current set does have some flaws, like having black numbers on the whites instead of teal and some combos not working as well as others, but at least its intention of being a simple, classic-looking football uniform is achieved and they’re aren’t trying nearly as hard with this one as they did in 2009. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

You’re missing a big factor: context. The Raiders’ identity and uniforms have been their look for over 50 years, with their pre-black/silver looks limited to a few years in the AFL.

 

The Jaguars’ redesign is the latest in a series of redesigns for them, with many of them incorporating stripes, gold, multiple outlines, and other features. Going in such a plain direction is part of why their reception has been mixed on the board and (I presume) among fans.

 

I hate the cliché of “if it came out today, x would have said y.” It negates the context of the original design and the context of any modern redesigns.

 

So we are supposed to judge this specific uniform based on the fact that they’ve had a number of oversaturated redesigns in the past rather than looking at the current design by itself? That’s a slippery slope.

 

What I’m saying, in its simplest form, is that the Raiders have a great look. If they were the Jaguars in this (darkest) timeline (with a history of overdesigned uniforms in their 25-year existence) and introduced their current look today, we’d still be having this conversation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, FinsUp1214 said:

The Jags’ 2009 set had two pros going for it: 1) teal over white was the primary home set for most of its run, and 2) the teal flake helmet was awesome. The cons, however, were too glaring for the whole set to work. The piping was pretty bad and would often look wonky or distorted at different levels from player to player, the number font reminded me too much of the Patriots (if you’re gonna go with a custom font, don’t make it look that close to another teams’ custom font), and the road numbers should’ve been teal instead of black.

 

Overall I think the 2009 set had potential, but tried too hard. The current set does have some flaws, like having black numbers on the whites instead of teal and some combos not working as well as others, but at least its intention of being a simple, classic-looking football uniform is achieved and they’re aren’t trying nearly as hard with this one as they did in 2009. 

Classic-looking pro football uniforms have stripes, multiple colors on elements that combine well with each other, and defining and unique characteristics. This set has none of those. Where the Jags got the idea that traditional = simple is beyond me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AndrewMLind said:

 

So we are supposed to judge this specific uniform based on the fact that they’ve had a number of redesigns in the past rather than looking at the current design by itself? That’s a slippery slope.

 

Not really. Everything exists within a historical context, which we need to properly judge a work. Is it in line with their old identity? Is it worthwhile to break free from old patterns? 

 

Sure, you can judge it on its own (it’s slightly above average, IMO), but context is needed to get a better understanding of its place in team history and what it means to the franchise’s aesthetics.

 

Also, can fans of the new Jags look not talk down to people who don’t like it? Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

The Jaguars’ redesign is the latest in a series of redesigns for them, with many of them incorporating stripes, gold, multiple outlines, and other features. Going in such a plain direction is part of why their reception has been mixed on the board and (I presume) among fans.

 

I honestly would love to know what the fans think.  Do we have any idea?

Share this post


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

How are the current Jags uniforms any better or worse than the 2009 uniforms? 

 

jags-09-11-teal-zumapress-vert-620x930.j

 

Jacksonville-Jaguars-2012-2013-Away-Road

 

6873780.jpg

It's the two-toned piping. Just a really ugly and inconsistent feature, and a very weak way to show off a teams colors. 

 

Something else I get from these photos is that number outlines are NOT the answer. Particularly on the white and black jerseys, the teal outline is almost invisible and has very little visual effect other than to just blur the edge of the numbers with the base jersey. Even with as few features as that set had, it looked pretty messy. I really like how the current numbers are crisp and untarnished, and how the uniform's colors are overall presented in a way where they aren't fighting for attention, e.g. black shirt, white numbers, teal stripes, gold logo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

Not really. Everything exists within a historical context, which we need to properly judge a work. Is it in line with their old identity? Is it worthwhile to break free from old patterns? 

 

Sure, you can judge it on its own (it’s slightly above average, IMO), but context is needed to get a better understanding of its place in team history and what it means to the franchise’s aesthetics.

 

I think it can be judged in both contexts, to be honest. Does it line up with their history? No. Does it look good independent of that? Yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, BJ Sands said:

Classic-looking pro football uniforms have stripes, multiple colors on elements that combine well with each other, and defining and unique characteristics. This set has none of those. Where the Jags got the idea that traditional = simple is beyond me. 

 

Sure it’s not pro traditional, necessarily, but...

 

maxresdefault.jpg

 

usa_today_11434575.0.jpg

 

77cd50cb-d9c1-41f9-b985-1632bdcd7438-mic

 

The helmets vary of course, but from the neck down the general idea is not all that different. And we still call these uniforms “traditional” or “classic”.

 

I’m not at all saying the Jags uniforms are perfect; what I am saying is that I “get it”. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FinsUp1214 said:

 

Sure it’s not pro traditional, necessarily, but...

 

maxresdefault.jpg

 

usa_today_11434575.0.jpg

 

77cd50cb-d9c1-41f9-b985-1632bdcd7438-mic

 

The helmets vary of course, but from the neck down the general idea is not all that different. And we still call these uniforms “traditional” or “classic”.

 

I’m not at all saying the Jags uniforms are perfect; what I am saying is that I “get it”. 

 

 

The best uniform in your post is Pitt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, BJ Sands said:

The best uniform in your post is Pitt. 

 

Oh Pitt looks amazing, no doubt. That’s how they should look forever.

 

All that said, I wasn’t trying to say “these are the absolute best examples of what a traditional uniform looks like” (although I do really like all three), all I was saying was that there are iconic traditional uniforms out there, even if not at the pro level, that are simple in the same way the Jaguars’ are - perhaps even more so in some cases - and so with that in mind, I can see what the Jaguars may have been going for and where they may have gotten the idea. They may not have explicitly said “let’s look like Stanford” or something, but simple and traditional/classic do coincide in a few notable cases and the Jaguars weren’t wrong in thinking so.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Jaguars' sleeve and sock cuffs are weird. It's like they couldn't decide if they wanted them to be horizontal or not, so they curved it halfway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, AgentColon2 said:

Those examples don’t work IMO. They have better color distribution. 

 

Their point was Jacksonville was inspired by the broader philosophy of traditional uniforms being simplistic. The specifics of what Jacksonville got right or wrong is irrelevant. Those examples work fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, kimball said:

I'd say mainly the piping. It was too inconsistent from player to player. 

 

The piping looked bad even when it fit the uniform as intended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of those are good examples. 

 

Counting white, Stanford and Michigan only have two colors so they utilize their whole pallet on every part of the uniform  

 

Counting white, ND has three, and their numbers are outlined so there’s some tie in to the pants, and their colors are represented on the main part of the uni. 

 

Counting white, Jax has 4, but the jerseys only have 2, while the pants only 1. They claim their main color is teal, but they have jerseys that contain only 0.000001% of it. It looks like they selected jerseys and pants from different bins in the equipment warehouse, and their helmets from yet another. 

 

Nobody hates them for being traditional - but traditional still needs to be done right, and they did not. So screw them and everyone associated with them, and their families too. Hell - screw their pets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Sigh* I must not have explained myself well enough because my point keeps getting missed. @Jack Holmes said what I was going for perfectly. I’ll just direct y’all to his post in its entirety. 

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.