nfl New York Jets unveil new uniforms

[tp49]

Looks like they didn't completely blow it...but they didn't knock it out of the park either.  Typical Jets.  I'm going to bet that the BFBS jersey is going to remind me a lot of the BFBS 49ers jersey.  Jets gonna Jet.

[panthers_2012]

3 hours ago, Old School Fool said:

Dude, they gotta fix the alignment on the NEW YORK part. It's going to bother me until they change it. They couldn't move it down a bit towards the JETS part? Maybe enlarge it a little?

 

I agree with you...ING CENTER THE NEW YORK!!! Since their social media post are focusing on the NY, put that instead of "New York".... Or better yet, just drop "New York" and keep Jets with the football in the football shaped oval.

[Around the Horn]

Jets are gonna Jet SMH

 

(or this is an elaborate April Fool's ruse, which if so bravo)

[Htown1141]

(NOTE: whenever a second-person pronoun is being used, that means the Jets)

I genuinely cannot get over how objectively terrible the new Jets logo is from any sort of perspective. To anyone saying “oh it’s fine they’ll have an alternate logo that they can put on a helmet”, I’m sorry but you’re wrong. Primary logos should ALWAYS be used on a helmet, the main use of a team’s logo of any kind on a football uniform (there are exceptions of course, such as Alabama, Philadelphia, Minnesota, Cincinnati etc.), and if you’re putting an alternate or secondary logo there, then you’re devaluing the main thing that people should associate with your brand. Now onto reasons why this logo is bad:

• Jesus christ they kept the most uninspiring wordmark in pro football. I could understand it in the previous logo, as it was an update of the 60’s mark, but with an apparent full rebrand upon them, they decide to keep it? Stylistically, there are so many other fonts that are better at not only saying “Jets” or “New York Jets”, but look more aesthetically pleasing.

• THEY ADDED A FULL ASS “NEW YORK” ABOVE WHAT THE YOU’VE GOT TO BE KIDDING. Going back into the primary logo-on-helmet rant for a minute, but that logo should be identifiable from a ways away, right, so when you add “NEW YORK” in a tiny font above “JETS”, you’re actively diluting your scalability factor AND its readability from distance. If you really think that it’s SO goddamn important to make sure that your New Jersey based team is in New York, there are more creative ways to do it while still remaining a good LOGO (I pulled an all-caps because I don’t mean illustration, as mentioned in a few pages back, I mean logo). Also it looks dumb and like it’s just there to fill up space. And if a key design element in your logo looks like it was add to fill up space, heads up you might have a bad logo.

• (I’m writing this in a word doc set to MLA format and at this moment, I’ve exceeded one page)

• Speaking of key design elements, unless your logo is a monogram, a la the NY Giants, Bears, a few others and all of MLB, your primary mark shouldn’t use text as the most important feature of your logo. Period. End of Statement.

• What about this says “Jets” to not only a hardcore football fan, but also the average consumer (besides the incompetence)? But seriously, literally nothing in your logo indicates what your mascot is besides the boring-ass font spelling out what it is. I mean we get that it’s a football team (s/o to the designers who let us know that it was a football team by overlapping a football onto a wordmark and putting that inside of a larger football), but there are exactly ZERO visual clues telling us what you are or what you’re trying to convey through design. Except, of course, that you are a football team that plays football.

• What’s with the two footballs anyways? You’re one of the biggest teams in the league, just based on what market you’re in alone, and you feel the need to put 2 damn footballs in your logo because of tradition that was brought back arbitrarily in the late 90’s??? You’ve got to be kidding me. We get it, Joe Namath existed.

• Note that I’ve gone this far without talking about the jets logos sandwiched between the iterations  this idiotic excuse of a brand. That’s because I wanted to provide concrete, rational reasons to call this logo out for being complete horse without going too much into the thing everyone’s been clamoring for when these rumors started around a year and a half ago.

  • These rumors started a year and a half ago and THIS was the best they could come up with??

• Back to the point of the previous mini-tangent. The logo from when the team was terrible is somehow still popular with fans and logo enthusiasts alike because of one thing: it’s good design. We all talk about it as if it’s the pinnacle of Jets logo design, and I, as well as many others, used the main design element (streaking Jet, for anyone wondering) in the logo as the basis to which we proposed uniform concepts. It bucks the trend of “success of the team breeds success of the logo”, and it really is a shame that this organization couldn’t take notice. People love the 78-97 logo because it’s badass, and screams “J-E-T-S! JETS! JETS! JETS!” And “we’re a goddamn menace upfront and you best be getting out of the way”, even without the history attached to it that the inferior Namath logo has.

• This was a waste of time, energy, and money by everyone involved. This entire thing was a farce, and to be honest, the people hoping for neon green deserved this. But not Jets fans, they’ve endured enough.

Alas, my dear readers, I give you this post from the mothership, under the 98-18 Jets logo. 

 

[MN Wilkings]

It appears to me that the NFL standard for logo changes is to make changes so subtle that most people don’t even realize that the logo changed.

[_DietDrPepper_]

It’s not that bad? I don’t understand the hate, I get the frustration with the italicization, but I can over look it. It’s a simple modernization of the look the teams had forever. I didn’t grow up in the 80s andearly 90s, I prefer this over the even more awkward J-E-T-S script with the triangle tbh. Is it the the best logo in the league no, but that’s not what they were going for, they wanted a brand that’s relative to the jets and that screams jets, something familiar yet new, and I think they did okay at it. 

[FinsUp1214]

I think I lean into the camp of liking this. It’s not perfect; as stated, it’s a very good example of the difference between mechanical and optical centering and has a bit of awkwardness to it in that regard, but I feel I’d much rather them take this route than get too cutesy or overboard with an aggressively modern jet or something. It’s a safe move, yes, but sometimes it’s better to be safe than sorry when it comes to this stuff. They easily could’ve gone too far with something then gone back to something just like this in 5-7 years to make up for it anyways, so might as well cut the long mistake you’re stuck with out, right?  Half joking, but my overall point is that this seems like the good kind of safe move to me logo-wise and I get it. 

 

There’s still uniforms to come, too. Who knows what we’re getting there, it could be anything. In terms of Nike changes, my best guess is that it may land somewhere near Vikings on the spectrum, but we could very well get Titans or Bucs area out of this too. We’ll just have to see how the whole package turns out.

 

[LakeShow24]

Finally it's April, I wanna see those new uniforms! For better or worse.

[AgentColon2]

I’m not sure which I dislike more. The logo or the shade of green. I’m sure both will soon be eclipsed by the uniform.

[AstroCree]

This is bugging me. All I see is “well, it wasn’t Nikefied. I guess it’s ok then.” NO! A trash logo is still trash!!! Just because we didn’t get an overly detailed Jet flying above NYC doesn’t mean what was handed to us so still good. 

[DC in Da House w/o a Doubt]

It's a pretty clean logo.  I'm sure a lot of casual fans won't even notice the difference.  The main thing that is bugging me is the football partially covering the E and the T.  It looks like there is room where it could have been moved down, but maybe they thought that looked too cluttered.

 

This gives me hope that the uniforms will be fairly subdued.  Successful or not, the Jets are a classic team and shouldn't be dressed in a Titans esque clown suit.  

[CS85]

There's nothing to really criticize here.  I'm 100% indifferent until I see what they did with the uniforms, the whole branding, really.  I give a crap what they put on a draft hat.

[DC in Da House w/o a Doubt]

Here's a quick Paint edit of what it could of looked like if the ball was lower and not covering the E and T, vs the actual logo:

 

  vs 

[Brian E]

7 hours ago, BellaSpurs said:

It’s not that bad? I don’t understand the hate, I get the frustration with the italicization, but I can over look it. It’s a simple modernization of the look the teams had forever. I didn’t grow up in the 80s andearly 90s, I prefer this over the even more awkward J-E-T-S script with the triangle tbh. Is it the the best logo in the league no, but that’s not what they were going for, they wanted a brand that’s relative to the jets and that screams jets, something familiar yet new, and I think they did okay at it. 

 

yeah, i'd best describe it as, "fine." also, let's not pretend like we pretty much knew this was going to be the logo almost two months ago. not really going to get too bent out of shape about it one way or the other.

 

1 hour ago, AgentColon2 said:

I’m not sure which I dislike more. The logo or the shade of green. I’m sure both will soon be eclipsed by the uniform.

 

this is the bigger issue to me: the green. obviously, we can't tell much with that lighting, but it seems much darker than i was hoping for. i'm sure it'll be an improvement, but enough to contrast against whatever black elements they have? i'm not so sure.

[mmajeski06]

It isn't terrible - but feels like someone made a Jets concept that plays it safe.

[BJ Sands]

13 hours ago, Gothamite said:

But godsdammit, somebody needs to fix that ing Wikipedia page.  This is not the NYC flag:

 

 

The real flag doesn’t have any text on the seal.  And the seal is not round.

I was hoping the Jets would fix the JETS word mark. It's italicized (angular) and the E and T have sharp corners which work with the orientation. But the J and S have rounded corners, which really sticks out when next to the angular letters, like where the J and E meet on the bottom and the T and S meet on top.

[Brian E]

FWIW, all draft caps are up on fanatics, with the exception of the jets.

[BJ Sands]

The Bears' hat does not use the helmet logo, which could be relevant here.

 

 

 

[UnclearInitial]

Well that was unnecessary. And not done particularly well either. It they wanted to minimally modernize the old logo they should have just removed the football and changed the Serif NY to the Italics NY. I don’t like the J being the same height as ETS, the New York on top makes it even more complicated, and the football is completely useless now that the logo is football shaped

[WSU151]

9 minutes ago, BJ Sands said:

The Bears' hat does not use the helmet logo, which could be relevant here.

 

 

 

 

I have a feeling that the Jets' helmet logo will be different than the primary logo.  

 

All that text on a helmet will look pretty bad.