XFL 2023 Logos, Names and Uniforms

[MJWalker45]

5 minutes ago, LogoFan said:

Gotta disagree on that one. I think the black a perfect contrast color with the sky blue and it's unique, especially with minimal red accents.

 

I think keeping black to the sleeves and the trim on the pants is just enough. Especially since the away pants and jerseys have none there.

[HOOVER]

10 minutes ago, HOOVER said:

I doubt they'll scrap the uniforms after just one season, but the helmets would be an easy redesign as they'll undoubtedly recondition them.  They seriously need to just go back to the original Renegades helmet.

 

The current Home uniform is nearly perfect: 
 

 

But the Away uniform, without Black, does not look great at all.

 

 

They should keep the exact same pant striping from the Home (Light Blue) pants (Black, Red line, Light Blue, Black) and put it on the Away (White) pant, pairing it with Black socks.

I hate the odd shoulder stripes on both; they should probably get rid of them completely and find some other way to use Black on the upper jersey that uses the Red line as a highlight (without doing full-on yoke colorblocking, like the originals).  They could add Black to the collar, for example, keeping the thin Red line on the edge of the collar as the highlight, continuing that theme.  

Then, they can just change the coloring of the UA logo, wordmark, and numbering to achieve a balance of Black, Red, and Light Blue for those on the White jersey.  What really bothers me in that 2nd photo above is that the player name is Red, but the team name on the front is Light Blue.  Stupid and unbalanced.

They could probably use a same exact number font, just with Black fill, Red hightlight line inside the number, and a Light Blue outside border and it would end up balanced.  

Absolutely quick & dirty Photoshop of what easily would've made more sense:  

 

[HOOVER]

Does anyone have updated Nike & UA football uniform templates in .psd that they're willing to share?  I'd like to try to mock this White version of the uniform up in a better way.   Or, if someone is willing to do the mock-up....gracias.

[BengalErnst]

Those white renegade uniforms are clean. I love those. If only they slapped the cowboy head onto those. 

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

2 hours ago, BengalErnst said:

Those white renegade uniforms are clean. I love those. If only they slapped the cowboy head onto those. 

 

On the sleeve, maybe.

 

But the R logo is beautiful on the helmet.  And it looks outstanding on a cap.

 

 

 

...as do the letter-based logos of the Bears, Packers, 49ers, and Giants, and also that of the Chiefs, whether with or without the arrow head.

 

The R logo is a strong, solid mark.  That dignified letter logo is far superior to the clipart cowboy logo (which is derivative of the AFL's Dallas Desperados, anyway).

 

The only thing wrong with the Renegades' helmet is that goofy stripe that gets wider towards the front.  The Renegades' original helmet got the stripe right.

 

 

 

That stripe would go great with the team's cool number font.

 

[McCall]

26 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

On the sleeve, maybe.

 

But the R logo is beautiful on the helmet.  And it looks outstanding on a cap.

 

 

 

...as do the letter-based logos of the Bears, Packers, 49ers, and Giants, and also that of the Chiefs, whether with or without the arrow head.

 

The R logo is a strong, solid mark.  That dignified letter logo is far superior to the clipart cowboy logo (which is derivative of the AFL's Dallas Desperados, anyway).

 

 

No.

[MJWalker45]

55 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

On the sleeve, maybe.

 

But the R logo is beautiful on the helmet.  And it looks outstanding on a cap.

 

 

 

...as do the letter-based logos of the Bears, Packers, 49ers, and Giants, and also that of the Chiefs, whether with or without the arrow head.

 

The R logo is a strong, solid mark.  That dignified letter logo is far superior to the clipart cowboy logo (which is derivative of the AFL's Dallas Desperados, anyway).

 

The only thing wrong with the Renegades' helmet is that goofy stripe that gets wider towards the front.  The Renegades' original helmet got the stripe right.

 

 

 

That stripe would go great with the team's cool number font.

 

The Renegades logo looks better than the AR letter does. I agree the helmet stripe makes no sense with the rest of the uniform. 

 

[WideRight]

On 5/15/2023 at 2:11 PM, HOOVER said:

I doubt they'll scrap the uniforms after just one season, but the helmets would be an easy redesign as they'll undoubtedly recondition them.  They seriously need to just go back to the original Renegades helmet.

 

The current Home uniform is nearly perfect: 
 

 

But the Away uniform, without Black, does not look great at all.

 

 

They should keep the exact same pant striping from the Home (Light Blue) pants (Black, Red line, Light Blue, Black) and put it on the Away (White) pant, pairing it with Black socks.

I hate the odd shoulder stripes on both; they should probably get rid of them completely and find some other way to use Black on the upper jersey that uses the Red line as a highlight (without doing full-on yoke colorblocking, like the originals).  They could add Black to the collar, for example, keeping the thin Red line on the edge of the collar as the highlight, continuing that theme.  

Then, they can just change the coloring of the UA logo, wordmark, and numbering to achieve a balance of Black, Red, and Light Blue for those on the White jersey.  What really bothers me in that 2nd photo above is that the player name is Red, but the team name on the front is Light Blue.  Stupid and unbalanced.

They could probably use a same exact number font, just with Black fill, Red hightlight line inside the number, and a Light Blue outside border and it would end up balanced.  

 

This is what fascinates me about this message board. 

One person can look at the Arlington uniforms and call them "nearly perfect" and  I look at them and think they are a hot mess of steaming crap that should be buried at the ocean floor and never seen again.

 

Why? you ask.  (OK, you didn't ask, but I am going to say anyway.)

 

• The "I'm wearing overalls" stripes on the shoulders that serve no purpose.
• The ultra wide helmet stripe
• The lame 1-color monogram logo on both sides in just plain white. 
• The bad number font, that does not work on the blue jersey and is just horrible on the white jersey. 
• The lack of black on the white uniform despite black being a primary team color on the dark uniform

 

If it were not for Houston's absolutely comical uniforms, I would call these the worst in the XFL.  

 

And yet, I fully recognize that someone else may love them.  It is just weird the way that works. 

 

I hate Oregon's nike monstrosities, but I am also not a fan of the nap-worthy Penn State and Alabama uniforms. 

I know both of those extremes have fans. 

 

I consider the Tennessee Titans uniform a complete downgrade from the McNair era, but others prefer them. 

 

There is, as the saying goes, no accounting for taste.  It is just subjective.  Which is why this message board is a constant source of both frustration and joy for me.  

 

 

[Sec19Row53]

2 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

On the sleeve, maybe.

 

But the R logo is beautiful on the helmet.  And it looks outstanding on a cap.

Calling it an R logo is either being blindly selective or blindly ignorant. It's a DR for Dallas Renegades that should have been re-designed when Arlington demanded that their name be used rather than Dallas.

I agree with a good deal of what you are saying, but the problem is that the logo ISN'T an AR or an R, it's a DR. That's a showstopper.

[HOOVER]

27 minutes ago, WideRight said:

 

This is what fascinates me about this message board. 

One person can look at the Arlington uniforms and call them "nearly perfect" and  I look at them and think they are a hot mess of steaming crap that should be buried at the ocean floor and never seen again.

 

Why? you ask.  (OK, you didn't ask, but I am going to say anyway.)

 

• The "I'm wearing overalls" stripes on the shoulders that serve no purpose.
• The ultra wide helmet stripe
• The lame 1-color monogram logo on both sides in just plain white. 
• The bad number font, that does not work on the blue jersey and is just horrible on the white jersey. 
• The lack of black on the white uniform despite black being a primary team color on the dark uniform

 

If it were not for Houston's absolutely comical uniforms, I would call these the worst in the XFL.  

 

And yet, I fully recognize that someone else may love them.  It is just weird the way that works. 

 

I hate Oregon's nike monstrosities, but I am also not a fan of the nap-worthy Penn State and Alabama uniforms. 

I know both of those extremes have fans. 

 

I consider the Tennessee Titans uniform a complete downgrade from the McNair era, but others prefer them. 

 

There is, as the saying goes, no accounting for taste.  It is just subjective.  Which is why this message board is a constant source of both frustration and joy for me.  

 

 

I actually agree with you on 4/5 points.  The shoulder stripes, helmet stripe, helmet logo, and lack of Black on the White uniform are all major misses.

However, the XFL/UA effort here looks committed to the shoulder stripe usage on the AG2 (ArmourGrid 2) template, so I wasn't going to go through the hassle of mentioning they should change it, because they've used the the template as a design element with every team, and I assume that was intentional.  In a perfect world, I'd remove those, but they don't make the uniforms disastrous, in my opinion.

 

My proposal to fix the Renegades uniforms is to revert back to the old helmet, with the original Renegades logo and stripe that 100% compliments their number font, and then doing the color change I quickly mocked-up above for the White uniform. 

I actually posted a Photoshop a few pages back of the old helmet on the new Home uniform:

@Ted Cunningham did too:

[HOOVER]

2 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

On the sleeve, maybe.

 

But the R logo is beautiful on the helmet.  And it looks outstanding on a cap.

 

 

 

...as do the letter-based logos of the Bears, Packers, 49ers, and Giants, and also that of the Chiefs, whether with or without the arrow head.

 

The R logo is a strong, solid mark.  That dignified letter logo is far superior to the clipart cowboy logo (which is derivative of the AFL's Dallas Desperados, anyway).

 

The only thing wrong with the Renegades' helmet is that goofy stripe that gets wider towards the front.  The Renegades' original helmet got the stripe right.

 

 

 

That stripe would go great with the team's cool number font.

 

Could not disagree with you more.  Original Renegades logo was far superior, and added both Red & Black to the sides of the helmet, which worked better.   The stripe, as I've mentioned elsewhere and again below, is far superior to the current design.

The current logo is White, which shows poorly on the Light Blue background due to lack of contrast, and with the horrible wide Black stripe, both leave absolutely ZERO Red on the helmet, which is ridiculous when you realize that the jersey has ZERO White, but does have Red.  

Just seems like two different people made the decisions on the helmets & uniforms, and without consulting one another.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

7 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Calling it an R logo is either being blindly selective or blindly ignorant. It's a DR for Dallas Renegades that should have been re-designed when Arlington demanded that their name be used rather than Dallas.

I agree with a good deal of what you are saying, but the problem is that the logo ISN'T an AR or an R, it's a DR. That's a showstopper.

 

The problem with the theory that the logo is a DR (which, admittedly, it does look a bit like) is that this logo didn't exist last season when the team was actually called Dallas Renegades.  It's really just an R.

 

Still, that said, the name Dallas Renegades is much better than the name Arlington Renegades, for the same reason that Los Angeles Angels is a better name than Anaheim Angels.  Plenty of teams play outside the city limits; but that's no reason to name a team for a minor municipality that pales in significance as compared to the nearby major city.  Alas, this is the name that the team has gone with. Anyway, the R is appropriate, no matter what locality name is used.

 

Add to that its beautiful styling, and its sharp one-colour presentation, and you have a winner of a logo here in the R.  As I mentioned before, football has way too few letter logos.  This is why I strongly approve of D.C.'s new helmet logo (even though the old logo is good as a secondary).  I also liked the logos of the LA Wildcats last season, and those of the New York Hitmen, the Chicago Enforcers, and the Las Vegas Outlaws in the first season.

[Sec19Row53]

1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

The problem with the theory that the logo is a DR (which, admittedly, it does look a bit like) is that this logo didn't exist last season when the team was actually called Dallas Renegades.  It's really just an R.

 

When was this logo created? When did  they announce the name change to Arlington from Dallas?

[MJWalker45]

2 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

When was this logo created? When did  they announce the name change to Arlington from Dallas?

Last October was when it was released, and the change to Arlington was made. 

https://www.dallasnews.com/sports/other-sports/2022/10/31/xfl-announces-new-franchise-names-logos-for-2023-reboot-including-arlington-renegades/

[Sec19Row53]

7 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

Last October was when it was released, and the change to Arlington was made. 

https://www.dallasnews.com/sports/other-sports/2022/10/31/xfl-announces-new-franchise-names-logos-for-2023-reboot-including-arlington-renegades/

So the logo was in development long before the name change to Arlington. Saying it only LOOKS like a D-R doesn't mesh with reality based on this timeline (not at you, @MJWalker45)

[MJWalker45]

4 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

So the logo was in development long before the name change to Arlington. Saying it only LOOKS like a D-R doesn't mesh with reality based on this timeline (not at you, @MJWalker45)

I would say so, but it does have the characteristics of an AR or just R depending on how you look at it. Same for the DR that some people feel it has as well.  

 

[walkerws]

I have always read it as a DR and you can't get me legally drunk enough to see an A anywhere! 

[DCarp1231]

[Sykotyk]

7 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

Last October was when it was released, and the change to Arlington was made. 

https://www.dallasnews.com/sports/other-sports/2022/10/31/xfl-announces-new-franchise-names-logos-for-2023-reboot-including-arlington-renegades/

That article is from October. This article is from July where the league announced their deal with Arlington to be the 'hub' and also what cities would host teams..

 

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/sports/xfl-introduces-cities-joining-league-announces-arlington-as-football-operations-hub/3030683/

 

Either they had been working on the identities before July (extremely likely) OR they created the D/R logo AFTER agreeing to change to Arlington and call the team Arlington.

 

If it's before, then they simply liked the logo too much after the wheels were greased by Arlington and Arlington became the name.

 

OR

 

The logo was created AFTER this announcement and the subsequent city name was chosen, as an easter egg for Dallas, the chief city in the area most people know. Similar to a TC logo for the Twins. Not officially anything related to the team.

 

Either way, I just don't like it as a logo. Partly because too many clamoring for the old single letter logos of the past (Bears C, etc). Are that they were a monumental change from the older looks where teams didn't wear any sort of logos. It was colors/striping, etc that signified the teams. Logos were simple and hand painted onto the leather helmets or baked into the plastic shells. They had to be simple.

 

They're not great because they were simple. They're simple because the teams generally were already well established before logos became a thing on the uniforms.

[gosioux76]

I don't know how anybody looks at that logo and doesn't see the clear intent to combine both a D and R. Knowing the XFL 2020 team was called the Dallas Renegades makes it even easier to draw a conclusion about the sequence of events here. 

 

But regardless of how it happened, the fact that the debate between whether it's just and R or a D/R exists is evidence enough that this is muddled branding.

 

I'll agree with @Ferdinand Cesarano on one point: It is a very nice logo — but for a team named Dallas Renegades. It's otherwise not a strong enough "R" on its own.