NFL changes 2019

[hawk36]

22 minutes ago, fouhy12 said:

It would appear that the shoulder number rule doesn't apply to color rush jerseys either.

 

Why this uniform needs a logo instead of numbers on the sleeve, I'll never know. 

I'm more appalled by the shoulder stripe and pant stripe not matching. How is that ok?  

[j'villejags]

Almost looks like they just repurposed the Texans' pants. 

 

[mmajeski06]

Some more views of the Dolphins new throwbacks:

 

 

[BrandMooreArt]

 

 

[El Scorcho]

Those are just gorgeous.

 

The calls for the Dolphins to move to them full time are going to get even louder now that there is a full home and road set to look at.

[Jungle Jim]

This has probably been discussed, but I'm not a fan of the orange on the TV numbers not being cut around the numbers, but instead being a solid sea of orange.  While historically correct, it's doesn't look good.

[THRILLHO]

No stripes on the socks for this set. 

[Sport]

The throwbacks look better than their regular uniforms, because obviously, but I don't love the idea of going back to a throwback full-time without correcting some of the period-specific eccentricities. Those things work in a throwback game because it's accurate, but for your every game uniform take the opportunity to clean those things up. 

 

 

All I'd change is:

1. match the pants stripe to the helmet stripe. It's a better presentation of the colors together and it lets the pants and helmet harmonize. 

2. a normal stroke on the numbers. 

3. cleaned up version of the old logo, which they kind of already did in the late 90's, but do that without using blue. 

[406Cane]

Are the Fins going to be wearing both the home and away throwbacks at some point this year, or just the away (white) ones?

[TBGKon]

Just now, 406Cane said:

Are the Fins going to be wearing both the home and away throwbacks at some point this year, or just the away (white) ones?

I think both are still in play.  Maybe @BrandMooreArt can confirm

[BrandMooreArt]

8 hours ago, Jungle Jim said:

This has probably been discussed, but I'm not a fan of the orange on the TV numbers not being cut around the numbers, but instead being a solid sea of orange.  While historically correct, it's doesn't look good.

 

i believe what makes a good throwback is some sort of quirky element. but i think this was also a practical thing in 66 though im not 100% sure of the reason they were done that way.

 

43 minutes ago, McCarthy said:

The throwbacks look better than their regular uniforms, because obviously, but I don't love the idea of going back to a throwback full-time without correcting some of the period-specific eccentricities. Those things work in a throwback game because it's accurate, but for your every game uniform take the opportunity to clean those things up. 

 

 

All I'd change is:

1. match the pants stripe to the helmet stripe. It's a better presentation of the colors together and it lets the pants and helmet harmonize. 

2. a normal stroke on the numbers. 

3. cleaned up version of the old logo, which they kind of already did in the late 90's, but do that without using blue. 

 

1. the helmet stripe is so wide and the jersey stripe so large, and there are stripes on the socks, i think this would make the uniform worse. not everything needs a stripe, especially a large one on an area that doesnt need attention called to it. i think they got it right in 66

 

2. i like them as they are

 

3. yes, the 66 logo absolutley does not work as a logo. its awful. but to go back and correct things or mix eras, i dont think is a good strategy. id rather see them do a whole new uniform and keep the 66 elements holy. 

 

@406Cane @AstroBull21 yes they will wear the Aqua jerseys twice and the White ones once

 

[Sport]

32 minutes ago, BrandMooreArt said:

 

i believe what makes a good throwback is some sort of quirky element. but i think this was also a practical thing in 66 though im not 100% sure of the reason they were done that way.

 

 

1. the helmet stripe is so wide and the jersey stripe so large, and there are stripes on the socks, i think this would make the uniform worse. not everything needs a stripe, especially a large one on an area that doesnt need attention called to it. i think they got it right in 66

 

2. i like them as they are

 

3. yes, the 66 logo absolutley does not work as a logo. its awful. but to go back and correct things or mix eras, i dont think is a good strategy. id rather see them do a whole new uniform and keep the 66 elements holy. 

 

@406Cane @AstroBull21 yes they will wear the Aqua jerseys twice and the White ones once

 

1. "Not everything needs a stripe" but the pants already have a stripe. I'd argue the exact opposite - my eye is more drawn to the pants specifically because they don't match anything. If you match the helmet to the pants, then the sleeves match the socks and each element has a partner to help balance the whole look, and you don't have one weird element that sticks out. What I'm advocating for here isn't odd in football - There's dozens of teams whose pants stripes match their helmet stripes and they almost universally look better than teams who buck this principle.  

 

2. Personal preference. Having enormous outlines that fill in the digits looks bad to me, even if it's period accurate, which as stated, I'm trying to correct some of those holdovers from a by-gone era if this is to become the every game look.

 

3. I don't think I'd like to mix eras. I suppose I'm suggesting taking the logo from 66 and give it a clean up so it's not as messy for print, social media scaling, and embroidery applications etc, but maintains it essence while also not being a complete cartoon like the late 90's logo. And then we can forget the cruise ship logo ever happened. 

 

essentially the 95 uniforms, but use the more saturated aqua, lose the aqua pants, lose the logo on the sleeves in favor of the big stripes, and stripe the socks. I'm either/or on a gray/teal facemask so long as it isn't white. 

[BrandMooreArt]

1 hour ago, McCarthy said:

1. "Not everything needs a stripe" but the pants already have a stripe. I'd argue the exact opposite - my eye is more drawn to the pants specifically because they don't match anything. If you match the helmet to the pants, then the sleeves match the socks and each element has a partner to help balance the whole look, and you don't have one weird element that sticks out. What I'm advocating for here isn't odd in football - There's dozens of teams whose pants stripes match their helmet stripes and they almost universally look better than teams who buck this principle.  

 

2. Personal preference. Having enormous outlines that fill in the digits looks bad to me, even if it's period accurate, which as stated, I'm trying to correct some of those holdovers from a by-gone era if this is to become the every game look.

 

3. I don't think I'd like to mix eras. I suppose I'm suggesting taking the logo from 66 and give it a clean up so it's not as messy for print, social media scaling, and embroidery applications etc, but maintains it essence while also not being a complete cartoon like the late 90's logo. And then we can forget the cruise ship logo ever happened. 

 

essentially the 95 uniforms, but use the more saturated aqua, lose the aqua pants, lose the logo on the sleeves in favor of the big stripes, and stripe the socks. I'm either/or on a gray/teal facemask so long as it isn't white. 

 

1. yea, i just think it makes it worse really. you're adding color and (larger) shape into the uniform, trying to fill every space. i just see it the opposite way— i think stripes will draw your attention most of the time. i think a lot of the teams that do this dont justify the aesthetic; id like for them to push more towards the Dolphins route and subdue their pants stripe (i liked the Browns plain brown pants because that uni is built on stripes much the same way. i like the resting point). agree to disagree here

 

3. its a tough route— one we explored in a variety of ways. ultimately, i think its best to keep things as they were in 66 or really push to something new. i dont think the middle ground is a good place to be.

 

4. for a new uniform, im against all that, LOL. 

[THRILLHO]

1 hour ago, McCarthy said:

, lose the aqua pants, 

 

The aqua pants and the introduction of blue in the late 90s are the two things I’ve never been able to embrace. 

[AgentColon2]

The first aqua pants prior to the addition of blue were okay. Though I always think of this regarding them.

 

[WSU151]

53 minutes ago, AgentColon2 said:

The first aqua pants prior to the addition of blue were okay. Though I always think of this regarding them.

 

 

The aqua pants always looked great in Buffalo and New England especially for snow games. . Probably due to dichotomy of locations. 

[THRILLHO]

51 minutes ago, AgentColon2 said:

The first aqua pants prior to the addition of blue were okay. Though I always think of this regarding them.

 

Those were the least offensive for sure.  They’ve gotten progressively worse with each iteration.  The current aqua pants are  like a practical joke. 

[BrandMooreArt]

1 hour ago, AgentColon2 said:

The first aqua pants prior to the addition of blue were okay. Though I always think of this regarding them.

 

 

i really like white-over-aqua for those winter road games, but that pants stripe is an absolute unit! its so... not elegant. especially compared to the jersey stripes, the socks, the numbers. no way should a pants stripe be that wide

[THRILLHO]

23 minutes ago, BrandMooreArt said:

 

i really like white-over-aqua for those winter road games, but that pants stripe is an absolute unit! its so... not elegant. especially compared to the jersey stripes, the socks, the numbers. no way should a pants stripe be that wide

Want a wide pant stripe?  Behold 

 

[leopard88]

30 minutes ago, THRILLHO said:

Want a wide pant stripe?  Behold 

 

 

I'll see that wide stripe and raise you.