NFL changes 2019

[oldschoolvikings]

1 hour ago, Dodgeryaqui8016 said:

I wouldn't mind a scenario where the hawks color the feathers lime green and navy on the white pants to be able to pop out more with the navy blue jersey at home.  

 

Those are feathers?

[sisdog]

27 minutes ago, oldschoolvikings said:

 

Those are feathers?

 

Yes. The 12 feathers on the pant leg strip and back of the neck represent the 12th Man. I saw this in a few articles about the Nike revamp.

[Eszcz21]

3 hours ago, oldschoolvikings said:

 

I think the redesigns made during Nike's tenure have been hit and miss. Certainly no better or worse than some of the crap that came out during the Reebok era (Bengals?).

 

Thank you for pointing this out. The Nike era has seen some big mistakes. However people seem to act like everything was okay before Nike, yet the Reebok era birthed the current monstrosities that are the Bengals, Cardinals, and Falcons. Plus how can we forget that previous Bills set which still might be the worst uniform in my opinion.

[Gothamite]

39 minutes ago, sisdog said:

 

Yes. The 12 feathers on the pant leg strip and back of the neck represent the 12th Man. I saw this in a few articles about the Nike revamp.

 

Yeah, but we should never take press release marketing-speak very seriously. 

[Gothamite]

32 minutes ago, Eszcz21 said:

Thank you for pointing this out. The Nike era has seen some big mistakes. However people seem to act like everything was okay before Nike, yet the Reebok era birthed the current monstrosities that are the Bengals, Cardinals, and Falcons. Plus how can we forget that previous Bills set which still might be the worst uniform in my opinion.

 

Literally nobody says that. 

 

Nike takes heat because Nike is the one currently screwing up the league.  We took on Reebok when they were doing it, but now complaining about them seems misplaced. A bit late, like Ike jokes. 

[oldschoolvikings]

54 minutes ago, Eszcz21 said:

Thank you for pointing this out. The Nike era has seen some big mistakes. However people seem to act like everything was okay before Nike, yet the Reebok era birthed the current monstrosities that are the Bengals, Cardinals, and Falcons. Plus how can we forget that previous Bills set which still might be the worst uniform in my opinion.

 

And the Vikings redesign of '06 (*shudder*).

 

The difference is that, for whatever reason, I don't seem to remember that many people pinning those horrible designs as directly on Reebok as we do now on Nike. I think the general feeling was those ideas seemed to be largely a product of NFL Properties. That may or may not have been true, but in the decade that they were exclusive, Reebok definitely didn't put themselves out front and center on every change the way Nike does. Now when there's a new uniform, it's debuted with Nike imagery, and Nike logos, and buckets and buckets of Nike-speak. I'm sure it's true that the teams are just as much to blame/praise for new uniforms now as they were then, but the way it's presented it doesn't always feel that way.

[DCarp1231]

Not that it means anything but the Redskins are using their throwback logo for something at the draft:

[aawagner011]

This isn’t news, just my personal preference:

 

I find the Seahawks uniforms a bit busy but also so close to being a great modern design. I do not like the stripes connecting from the sleeves across the chest, nor do I like the number font. The font is overly complicated with weird angles and the pattern in the numbers clutters things up, especially when paired with the outline. They should either eliminate the pattern and keep the outline or use the pattern sans outline. A simpler font and limiting the design to the sleeve caps would clean this up tremendously. The pants stripes are great. The sleeve caps make me think of these as a cousin of the Falcons, except this set isn’t riddled with generic stripes, panels, and tapered lines. It also helps that these come with meaningful inspiration of the indigenous people whereas the Falcons inspiration is anyone’s guess.

 

 

[gosioux76]

4 hours ago, Clintau24 said:

Whether or not Nike goes out of their way to highlight their logo is one thing, @oldschoolvikings. I think it's more of a discussion that Nike has to leave their mark everywhere they go. Whether it's the FlyWire collar of the Seahawks teardrop. Nike doesn't seem able to restrain themselves from making sure everyone knows it is a Nike uniform. A friend recently purchased a game-used Vapor Untouchable jersey, and noted that the mesh area on the collar is actually sewn over in the back, removing any potential ventilation that Nike could (if they didn't already) claim would boost performance. 

 

I don't think it's all too far-fetched to think Nike does design uniforms with the idea of showcasing the swoosh better stuck in the back of their heads. Nike comes first, then everything else.

 

I'm far from a corporate apologist, but Nike didn't spend $1 billion-plus just for the privilege of outfitting football teams. They bought a branding platform, and that's what they've used it for. I'm not sure why we would expect anything less from it. 

[Sec19Row53]

1 minute ago, gosioux76 said:

 

I'm far from a corporate apologist, but Nike didn't spend $1 billion-plus just for the privilege of outfitting football teams. They bought a branding platform, and that's what they've used it for. I'm not sure why we would expect anything less from it. 

That's an interesting point. I'd be curious if the contract specifies either aspect of that (uniform v platform).

[jn8]

1 hour ago, Gothamite said:

Nike takes heat because Nike is the one currently screwing up the league.  We took on Reebok when they were doing it, but now complaining about them seems misplaced. A bit late, like Ike jokes. 

What’s wrong with Ike jokes?

[oldschoolvikings]

4 hours ago, gosioux76 said:

 

I'm far from a corporate apologist, but Nike didn't spend $1 billion-plus just for the privilege of outfitting football teams. They bought a branding platform, and that's what they've used it for. I'm not sure why we would expect anything less from it. 

 

Well, yeah but to me, that's the whole crux of the problem, even more evident on the college level. This is what happens when the vendor/client relationship gets flipped ass-backwards. Ideally, and the way it worked at one time (I guess a long long time ago), a sports team would have a design (whether it was what they traditionally had always worn, or a new design they presumably contracted out for) and they would then find a vendor to manufacture that design. And the team would pay the supplier. That way, there could be no question as to who was making the decision, and the uniform could exist solely for the benefit of the team's brand, to whatever degree the team wanted it to. But that isn't where we are now.  These days, the supplier pays the client for the privilege to manufacturer their uniform (in reality, just for the privilege of attaching their logo to the uniform), and as you state, they're not doing that just for the prestige. So, obviously, Nike (or whoever) feels it's well within their rights as the entity that's shelling out all the cash, to make it well worth their investment.  I'm not sure there's anything really to be done about it... obviously, we aren't going to put that particular genie back in the bottle, but I reserve the right to bitch about it.  And here's a picture of me doing so...

[Krz]

1 hour ago, DNAsports said:

Not that it means anything but the Redskins are using their throwback logo for something at the draft:

I really like how that looks, less of a picture more of a logo.

[Gothamite]

1 hour ago, jn8 said:

What’s wrong with Ike jokes?

 

Not that Ike.

 

 

And yeah, it does strike me that quoting Steve Martin’s routine about stale material is pretty funny, considering we’re farther away from his stand-up now than he was to Eisenhower at the time.  

 

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

1 minute ago, Gothamite said:

 

Not that Ike.

 

 

And yeah, it does strike me that quoting Steve Martin’s routine about stale material is pretty funny, considering we’re farther away from his stand-up now than he was to Eisenhower at the time.  

 

 

Wow, major respect for referencing classic Steve!

I studied the albums Let's Get Small, A Wild and Crazy Guy, and Comedy is Not Pretty closely, and was amazed by them.  There is nothing remotely like them, even within the universe of classic comedy albums by geniuses such as George Carlin, Richard Pryor, Bob Newhart, Redd Foxx, and Robin Williams.  My favourite Steve joke:  "I just bought my own form of private transportation. Landed it out here at the airport. And it’s not easy landing a station wagon out here at the airport." The emphasis on those words "landing" and "out" — especially "out" — is just beautiful. It’s music.

[MJWalker45]

3 hours ago, DNAsports said:

Not that it means anything but the Redskins are using their throwback logo for something at the draft:

They're probably just running with the 100 years theme. It'd be interesting to see what other logos get used.

[DCarp1231]

It’s a shame we won’t get 10 weeks in the season to celebrate each decade with uniforms

[gosioux76]

3 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

That's an interesting point. I'd be curious if the contract specifies either aspect of that (uniform v platform).

I'm not sure that it's a matter of contractual language. It all comes down to motive and intent. 

 

These uniform deals are similar to TV deals for leagues. They're a cash cow, sold to the highest bidder. And yes, there is an expectation that teams aren't completely walking billboards, but if Nike's primary motivation for doling out seven-figures is to showcase their brand on the NFL's global platform, I can't imagine the NFL standing in their way. That money holds sway.  

[Gothamite]

1 hour ago, gosioux76 said:

These uniform deals are similar to TV deals for leagues. They're a cash cow, sold to the highest bidder. And yes, there is an expectation that teams aren't completely walking billboards, but if Nike's primary motivation for doling out seven-figures is to showcase their brand on the NFL's global platform, I can't imagine the NFL standing in their way. That money holds sway.  

 

There’s also the not-insignificant motivation of selling a -ton of NFL merchandise, too.  It’s not like poor Nike won’t get their money’s worth if they can’t re-dress the league in their image. 

 

And the NFL has all the leverage there.  Nike needs them more than they need Nike’s money. There is absolutely no reason for the league to let a shoe company dictate terms. 

[daniel75]

Are Bucs changing their number font? Noticed their first round picks jersey had a different number (1) font.