XFL 2023 Logos, Names and Uniforms

[BBTV]

8 hours ago, Volt said:

$80 replicas now for sale.  Generic AF.

 

 

not sure you know what “generic” means. 

 

6 hours ago, GDAWG said:

The rumor on Twitter is that Adidas is going to be the official uniform supplier. 

I hope their logo doesn’t make it on the actual jersey. It’s refreshing to see a jersey that actually represents the team, and not an apparel brand. 

[GFB]

Dallas, New York, and DC are the clear winners for me. Seattle is maybe the most bizarre professional football uniform I’ve ever seen in terms of color balance from home vs. road perspective.

[Gothamite]

 

Quote

I hope their logo doesn’t make it on the actual jersey. It’s refreshing to see a jersey that actually represents the team, and not an apparel brand. 

 

Absolutely. 

 

It’s ironic that the reason they don't have a manufacturer logo is not because they’re strong enough to have the power to protect their brand, but because they’re not worth the bother for a manufacturer to put it there. 

[HOOVER]

22 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

not sure you know what “generic” means. 

 

 

I sell every major athletic & printable apparel brand on the planet, except for adidas & Riddell.  Pretty sure I know what generic is.

[DC in Da House w/o a Doubt]

For the Defenders I think I see a hidden DC in their logo, but it might be a stretch.  What do you guys think:

 

[HOOVER]

9 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

 

Absolutely. 

 

It’s ironic that the reason they don't have a manufacturer logo is not because they’re strong enough to have the power to protect their brand, but because they’re not worth the bother for a manufacturer to put it there. 

 

Another one that doesn't understand the power of athletic branding.  Pairing with a brand manufacturer and utilizing their product & brand value provides perceived value to the company you are building.  It's why every major athletic team in the nation, regardless of league or sport, all the way down to high school and even some middle schools, chooses to wear brand name uniforms & apparel.

You know who doesn't?  People who are cheap; rinky-dink, backwoods youth/AAU//bush league ventures; and people who just don't get the power of branding.

 

Outside of the perceived value that the brand partnership brings, it also is a major boost to merchandise sales.  The majority of the public is more inclined to buy a team apparel item if it's Nike, UA, or Adidas.  They'll buy it, even at a higher cost, before Starter or Gildan or private label, because it's perceived to be more legitimate.  Which is exactly what this league needs:  legitimacy.  Failure to partner with a known brand is a failure.

[Maroon]

15 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

Often times uniform supplier deals are just glorified ad placement deals. The CFL, for example, kept the same supplier when they changed from Reebok to New Era. It's just that the factory started stitching New Eras logos in place of the Reebok logos. You see this in the NFL too. The Packers didn't want to give up their traditional uniform cuts and fabrics, so their uniforms remain entirely unchanged from the same factory they had under Reebok. It's just that now the factory stitches the Nike swoosh onto the uniforms. 

 

I'm not sure what factory is supplying the XFL's uniforms, but chances are that whoever signs on as the league's "official" supplier won't actually take over production. They'll just get their logo added to the uniforms at whatever factory is churning these out.

 I was not actually aware of that. Thanks for the information.

[Gothamite]

43 minutes ago, Volt said:

Another one that doesn't understand the power of athletic branding. 

 

You're right - condescension and personal attacks totally covers up the lack of a substantive argument.

 

Quote

Pairing with a brand manufacturer and utilizing their product & brand value provides perceived value to the company you are building.  It's why every major athletic team in the nation, regardless of league or sport, all the way down to high school and even some middle schools, chooses to wear brand name uniforms & apparel.

 

No, every major athletic team wears a brand logo because the brand pays them to do it. 

 

If it was the other way around, as you describe, then the NFL wouldn’t have blocked Nike from purring their swoosh on the front, as Nike so desperately wanted.  The NBA wouldn’t have held out as long as they did, and MLB would have eagerly accepted New Era’s flag on the side years ago.

 

Arsenal didn’t put the three stripes on their sleeves because they wanted to soak up some of that Adidas cred.  They did it because Adidas pays them $78,000,000 every year to do it.  Similarly, the Patriots don’t wear the Nike swoosh because they think it makes them look more professional, or because it’ll sell more jerseys.  They wear the swoosh because Nike pays them an enormous amount money for the privilege. 

 

Manufacturers want to be associated with major teams, not the other way around. The proof of that is in the money. 

 

Now, some minor players do eagerly want that logo on their uniforms, to make them look more like the major teams.  But those people have to pay to get it.

 

Quote

Outside of the perceived value that the brand partnership brings, it also is a major boost to merchandise sales.  The majority of the public is more inclined to buy a team apparel item if it's Nike, UA, or Adidas.

 

[citation needed]

 

The claim that the Packers would sell more jerseys branded by Nike than they would jerseys devoid of manufacturer’s logos is ludicrous on its face.  

 

Quote

They'll buy it, even at a higher cost, before Starter or Gildan or private label, because it's perceived to be more legitimate.  Which is exactly what this league needs:  legitimacy.  Failure to partner with a known brand is a failure.

 

Because this league is a relative non-entity.  A minor league fueled by ego.  That’s what’s ironic about it; the XFL actually does need the credibility of branding, unlike major leagues. 

[Gothamite]

2 minutes ago, Maroon said:

 I was not actually aware of that. Thanks for the information.

 

That’s what is so offensive about the new Nike/MLB deal; the jerseys are exactly the same, made with the same materials on the same templates by the same craftspeople in the exact same factories as last year.

 

Nike just has them sew on a different logo, and then charges fans an extra $119 for it.

 

 

[HOOVER]

11 minutes ago, DC in Da House w/o a Doubt said:

For the Defenders I think I see a hidden DC in their logo, but it might be a stretch.  What do you guys think:

 

 

Perhaps, but this should've been their logo, with either a White helmet or the satin Silver helmet that Houston is wearing, along with these uniforms:

 

[Gothamite]

1 minute ago, Volt said:

Perhaps, but this should've been their logo, with either a White helmet or the satin Silver helmet that Houston is wearing, along with these uniforms:

 

 

Then you lose the connection to the DC flag. 

 

 

I think Washington’s color scheme is one of the things they actually got right.

[Maroon]

Wasn't able to be online as they were being rolled out apart from the Defenders. This is pretty simple for me.

1 & 2. NY and DC - Great uniforms. These are classic and well done.

3. Dallas - I see a lot of split opinions of these on here. I'm in the camp of people who think these look like how the Titans SHOULD have done their jerseys. These are great.

4. St. Louis - Like them, don't adore them. The helmet is exactly the kind of direction I was hoping for, but the wings look awkwardly too high up to me for some reason. Would rather the logo start lower, with the wings taking up more of the side of the helmet rather than the top.

5. LA - Still think the overall brand identity is weak (Wildcats is a terrible pro football nickname), but the jerseys aren't half bad. Like the homes more than the roads, which is not true for most of the kits.

6. Tampa Bay - The overall package is okay but a lot of problems/flaws that bring it down. Unlike some others, I like the V fang logo on the helmet.

7. Houston - Not good.

8. Seattle - Hate, hate, hate the homes. Like the away jerseys just fine.

[MJWalker45]

1 hour ago, DC in Da House w/o a Doubt said:

For the Defenders I think I see a hidden DC in their logo, but it might be a stretch.  What do you guys think:

 

Hmmmm, If you broke up those bolts it would stand out bright as day so i think you're on to something.

 

[HOOVER]

14 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

Then you lose the connection to the DC flag. 

 

 

I think Washington’s color scheme is one of the things they actually got right.

 

I disagree with you on most things, but on this, I do agree, as their uniform is fairly nice and it at least has a pertinent local connection.  However, as far as national appeal goes, how many people know what DC's flag looks like?  A "Red, White & Blue" team in DC would resonate with Americans across the country.  If the league survives, they could take a competitive shot and call them the "real America's team".  That'd be Vince-esque.  
 

Additionally, Red is the #1 color associated with socialist & communist movements.  While that make sense for many swamp things in DC today, it's not what'd I'd choose (on its own) to represent a Washington, DC football team!

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

2 hours ago, AgentColon2 said:

Here’s a reminder of the last round of this.

 

Most of that was garbage.  But Las Vegas looked superb, which is amazing considering that the helmet logo was the team's second, after the first one was thrown out for highly dubious reasons.

 

San Francisco had a very creative helmet logo.  But the best helmet logo was that of the Hitmen.  And that team's sleeve stripes that go all the way around the sleeve provide a contrast to the awkward truncated stripes of the Guardians' uniform.

 

 

[DC in Da House w/o a Doubt]

4 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Most of that was garbage.  But Las Vegas looked superb, which is amazing considering that the helmet logo was the team's second, after the first one was thrown out for highly dubious reasons.

 

 

 

 

I don't remember this, what are you referring to

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

5 minutes ago, DC in Da House w/o a Doubt said:

10 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Most of that was garbage.  But Las Vegas looked superb, which is amazing considering that the helmet logo was the team's second, after the first one was thrown out for highly dubious reasons.

 

I don't remember this, what are you referring to

 

 

This was the original announced logo for Las Vegas.

 

 

 

 

 

But some people claimed (in my opinion baselessly) that this logo resembled a swastika.  It is to the Las Vegas team's credit that it came up with such a good one so quickly to replace this.

 

[MJWalker45]

Looking at some of these I can see ways to fix them pretty easily.

 

Houston - Lose the side panels and place the wildcatter logo on the sleeves instead of the stars. Use a blockier font number.

LA Wildcats. Take that part of the pants stripe that min=mics claw marks and place it on the sleeve caps. Drop the side panels.

Seattle - swap blue and green around. Add some type of scales on the sleeves. Fix the helmet logo, go with a different color helmet. 

DC - swap pants around.

Dallas - Swap jersey and yoke colors on the home jerseys. Recolor numbers as well.

Tampa Bay - Swap pants, lose side panels. 

St. Louis - change number font.

New York - Swap pants. 

 

 

 

[HOOVER]

Quick Photoshops, but this is what Houston SHOULD have looked like, not Dallas.  Would choose a bolder number font, i'm just using what 3-color font is currently available with Nike Team in their builder for illustration purposes.  Ditto with team name font which ideally would match the logo wordmark if designed properly.  Their helmet (current Dallas) is an absolute stunner so that would remain unchanged.  If the logo was too much like the Oilers with this color scheme and needed to be avoided legally, I would've just kept the Renegade logo but put it here and have the Houston Renegades.  On the Light Blue pants, there would be a solid Black side panel.  On the White pants, there would be a solid Light Blue panel. A single, thin 1" red line could potentially be added to those side panels to give a unique pant stripe look and a bit more color pop on the pant and tie into the sleeve/sleeve band color balance.

 

[WSU151]

23 minutes ago, Volt said:

 

I disagree with you on most things, but on this, I do agree, as their uniform is fairly nice and it at least has a pertinent local connection.  However, as far as national appeal goes, how many people know what DC's flag looks like?  A "Red, White & Blue" team in DC would resonate with Americans across the country.  If the league survives, they could take a competitive shot and call them the "real America's team".  That'd be Vince-esque.  

 

What DC doesn't need is another red white & blue team. I'm not sure it's the XFL's DC team's responsibility to resonate with Americans across the country and be America's team. 

 

It's DC's team.