Jacksonville Jaguars Unveil Stripped-Down Uniforms

[BBTV 18,732]

9 hours ago, jp1409 said:

 

Pretty much everyone told me I was over reacting at first and that we would never notice such a "small detail" but I seriously think this is the worst element of this dumpster fire...

 

This is simply not true. The colored stitching was not popular, and definitely looked upon negatively by an overwhelming majority of the board, including me. 

 

When th template changes, the actual jersey design changes since the stitching accents the template, not the team’s identity.  It’s one of Nike’s shady design elements and screw them, and screw the idiotic browns ownership for going along with it. 

[leopard88 3,017]

The jersey color outline isn't unprecedented.  The Orioles have a black outline on the wordmark and number on their black jersey.

 

 

For the record, it was hard to find a picture where you could see the outline very well.

[PaleVermilion81 1,953]

The Raiders do this same thing with black stitching on the silver numbers numbers.

 

[Gr3g3 479]

6 hours ago, Cosmic said:

It obviously doesn't work here, but I think there's a scenario where maybe it could look good? It's not the place to use it on every seam when there's 25 frickin' panels to the jersey.

 

I think contrast stitching can look good in certain places (like on a car seat). I don't believe it can ever look good on a uniform. 

[Claystation360 661]

The orange stitching is one of the worst design elements that I can recall on a uniform. 

[Lights Out 4,475]

As far as the Swoosh is concerned... let's not pretend that other manufacturers haven't been just as guilty of making their logos stand out on the jerseys.

 

 

 

If anything, both of these examples are worse than what people are complaining about with the Swoosh. The Wilson logo features a color (metallic gold) that doesn't appear anywhere else on the Dolphins' uniform - as well as a black outline that further contrasts with Miami's color scheme. And the Adidas logo uses two different colors at the same time to really draw attention to it. But people will complain more now because it's Nike.

[Carolingian Steamroller 3,385]

Raiders home jerseys. 

 

[Cosmic 6,276]

So why can the Raiders match black jersey to black thread, but the Jags can't?

[Gr3g3 479]

12 minutes ago, Cosmic said:

So why can the Raiders match black jersey to black thread, but the Jags can't?

 

1.) We're looking at pictures of replica's from snapchat & IG, they almost certainly have filters on them.

 

2.) Jaguars outline might be a bit fatter.

[Ajarzebra 47]

9 minutes ago, Gr3g3 said:

 

1.) We're looking at pictures of replica's from snapchat & IG, they almost certainly have filters on them.

 

2.) Jaguars outline might be a bit fatter.

 

Also I don't think the Raiders retail "game" jersey has the stitching screen printed as an outline. I guess that's what we are seeing in photo?

 

I wouldn't expect it to look that way on the actual uniform.

[IceBurgs70 356]

As a Titans fan, I would much rather have a toned-down, simplistic looking football uniform like the Jaguars have than the "sword costumes" the Titans just released.  Simple, bold football uniforms stand the test of time (Raiders, Packers, Bears) and a team like Jacksonville that has had numerous uniform looks within the last 10 years could really benefit from having a solid, bold look for the foreseeable future.  Sure, there are things you could tweek with their new unis but overall their look is starting to grow on me and I think it'll end up being one of the best looks in the NFL.  We just have to wait and see how they look on the field first.

[El Scorcho 425]

I think the outline stitching being the same black as the jersey is a cool textural effect and will help the numbers pop.

 

No idea why it would be considered such a faux pas

[Ajarzebra 47]

25 minutes ago, IceBurgs70 said:

As a Titans fan, I would much rather have a toned-down, simplistic looking football uniform like the Jaguars have than the "sword costumes" the Titans just released.  Simple, bold football uniforms stand the test of time (Raiders, Packers, Bears) and a team like Jacksonville that has had numerous uniform looks within the last 10 years could really benefit from having a solid, bold look for the foreseeable future.  Sure, there are things you could tweek with their new unis but overall their look is starting to grow on me and I think it'll end up being one of the best looks in the NFL.  We just have to wait and see how they look on the field first.

 

I agree with you and its why I think the Jaguars can keep this look for a long time and are one of the few teams in recent years to sucessfully update their image.

 

The new Titans uniform really feels like the 2013 Jaguars update. The "jaguar stalking in the shadow" helmet and military patch jersey are fine concepts, but an NFL uniform is not the right application for those ideas. And trying to combine a bunch of unrelated ideas leads to a really messy uniform, and you end up with a costume. Nike made the same mistake trying to add swords to the titans and bucs.

 

 

[NikeRuinsEverything 121]

1 hour ago, Cosmic said:

So why can the Raiders match black jersey to black thread, but the Jags can't?

 

I can go running through a corn field bass akwards, but it doesn't mean I should. Even though I'm sure some people on these boards might want me to. If your friend jumps off a bridge, are you going to jump too?

 

15 minutes ago, El Scorcho said:

I think the outline stitching being the same black as the jersey is a cool textural effect and will help the numbers pop.

 

No idea why it would be considered such a faux pas

 

It looks terrible. The whole point of a number outline is to add more color to a uniform. Adding more of the same color doesn't make the number stand out anymore, nor does it add any value to the overall look of the uniform. It just looks out of place and a design flaw. 

[Carolingian Steamroller 3,385]

I think this is the first time in a decade that the Jaguars haven't had some feature on their uniforms that isn't obviously and painfully offensive. 

[Claystation360 661]

38 minutes ago, Carolingian Steamroller said:

I think this is the first time in a decade that the Jaguars haven't had some feature on their uniforms that isn't obviously and painfully offensive. 

Well you would have to have features to be offensive in the place.

[Carolingian Steamroller 3,385]

12 minutes ago, Claystation360 said:

Well you would have to have features to be offensive in the place.

 

Exactly. 

[IceCap 21,790]

12 hours ago, O.C.D said:

It wouldn't take that many tweaks to make this jersey/uniform look good

Every change you could make to make it look good would just push the look closer to the classic Browns set it replaced. 

Which begs the question “why did they even bother?”

 

4 hours ago, Lights Out said:

As far as the Swoosh is concerned... let's not pretend that other manufacturers haven't been just as guilty of making their logos stand out on the jerseys.

 

 

 

If anything, both of these examples are worse than what people are complaining about with the Swoosh. The Wilson logo features a color (metallic gold) that doesn't appear anywhere else on the Dolphins' uniform - as well as a black outline that further contrasts with Miami's color scheme. And the Adidas logo uses two different colors at the same time to really draw attention to it. But people will complain more now because it's Nike.

And you’ll continue to carry water for Nike because you’re a Swooshkateer with a baffling sense of loyalty to a shoe company that justifies poor design with “alchemy!” 

 

Anyway your argument falls flat here on two points. 

Point one: You assume we’re ok with the Adidas and Wilson examples above but not ok with Nike. You are incorrect. I find them all egregious.

What you’ve done here is construct a strawman of someone who is ok with the Adidas/Wilson examples but not ok with Nike. It’s not an opinion I’ve seen anyone here express, and constructing said strawman usually means you know you’re working with a weak argument. 

 

Point two: Nike seems to be intentionally designing uniforms to highlight the swoosh. The neon green wedges on the Seahawks’ uniform and the “sail” striping on the Vikings’ uniform both frame the swoosh. The Titans’ uniforms are devoid of red save for the red swoosh. 

 

What we have now is different. This differs from Adidas, Reebok, Wilson, Russel, or Puma just slapping their logos on uniforms made by Ripon in Winsconsin. This is Nike designing and manufacturing uniforms from the ground up with the intent to sacrifice team brands to highlight Nike’s. 

[C-Squared 2,886]

18 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

This is Nike designing and manufacturing uniforms from the ground up with the intent to sacrifice team brands to highlight Nike’s. 

 

Lately, I am beginning to question how big a "sacrifice" is actually taking place.

 

If any sports franchises conclusively lose value specifically due to a lack of uniform continuity, I will change my tune, but the only hard evidence linking cross-branding appears to be positive (in the form of the 90's merch boom and its sustained success)

[IceCap 21,790]

1 minute ago, C-Squared said:

 

Lately, I am beginning to question how big a "sacrifice" is actually taking place.

 

If any sports franchises conclusively lose value specifically due to a lack of uniform continuity, I will change my tune, but the only hard evidence linking cross-branding appears to be positive (in the form of the 90's merch boom and its sustained success)

To me it goes back to an admittedly nostalgic view of how things worked up through the early 2000s. When uniform manufacturers did just that, manufacture. When the team brands were the draw, not the manufacturer’s brand. 

 

So in my mind? Nike tweaking any team’s brand in such a way as to highlight the swoosh is getting into dangerous territory. I want to see a Seattle Seahawks uniform. Not Nike Presents the Seattle Seahawks.