nfl New York Jets unveil new uniforms

[upperV03]

5 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

They can't even keep their corporate BS straight!  Notice how 'New York brought to the forefront' on the top logo WITHOUT SAYING NEW YORK.

 

smdh

Those are @hugevolsfan‘s concepts. He just edited the logos on the actual explainer graphic, which can be seen here:

[hugevolsfan]

18 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

They can't even keep their corporate BS straight!  Notice how 'New York brought to the forefront' on the top logo WITHOUT SAYING NEW YORK.

 

smdh

I guess I should have redid that to say Jets Edge Inspired by Relentless Speed. I am guessing Nike originally had a logo similar to this but Jets management shot it down which would explain the mismatched helmet & jersey...

[hawk36]

1 hour ago, MCM0313 said:

Yeah, that's my only real gripe here. The old script would have worked better  on that (gorgeous) helmet. I guess their reasoning was probably along the lines (pun intended) of the striping being the jet representation. I guess the resemblance of the shoulder stripes to airplane wings, and the vaguely jetlike nature of the pants stripes, are why I don't mind said striping as much as some seem to. My only real issue with the stripes is that I wish the shoulder ones wrapped around for a contrast-colored nameplate, as I've already mentioned. Still, it would've been nice to use the old script or at least a modernized version of it, and the helmet seems like it would've been the most obvious place to put that. 

Or simply use the line on the helmet. I mean it already says NEW YORK large on the front of the jersey.

 

[tp49]

1 hour ago, Bucfan56 said:

You know, the more I see of that old 90s Jets logo, the more I kinda hate it. I seriously didn’t even realize the weird slash above the word Jets was supposed to be a plane until recently. That made it a cooler logo to me, but it’s still pretty clunky. Plus, the Concorde was discontinued because it was expensive as hell to run and unnecessarily dangerous. Imagine all the Jets jokes we’d get if they had a logo that was a plane known for bursting into flames mid flight. It was a good move leaving that in the past. 

The old logo would be a perfect representation of the Jets as a franchise at several points in their history.  Now those jokes could be MAX-8 instead of Concorde or some combination of both.  When I see the 70's-80's Jets wordmark I'm reminded of Rich Kotite, Ken O'Brien, Dennis Byrd, Gastineau and his issues, and Belichek telling them to go to hell after taking their HC job for 30 seconds.  I agree it was best left in the past.

[jn8]

11 minutes ago, hawk36 said:

Or simply use the line on the helmet. I mean it already says NEW YORK large on the front of the jersey.

 

This helmet would be awful.

The triangle works as stripes on the jersey, but it’s not a logo.

[AdAstraKC]

15 minutes ago, hawk36 said:

Or simply use the line on the helmet. I mean it already says NEW YORK large on the front of the jersey.

 

I don't hate this, but I can already hear all the people mocking the New York Triangles.

 

[NYC Cosmos]

4 hours ago, AgentColon2 said:

 

Easy Rutherford is part of the NYC Metropolitan market. Same as Camden, NJ being part of the Philadelphia Metropolitan market.

 

Also this is comedy gold.

 

Really? So you mean because I was born and raised in Queens (and attended games in the old Shea Stadium, and suffered through the 70s with them) and live in Brooklyn, I wouldn't know this? Sorry. Jersey is Jersey. want to use the NYC name? Come practice here. Pay taxes. Then you can use the name New York. The Jets' offices are in Jersey. So is their practice facility. So is their stadium. Case closed. I will never, ever step into their stadium.

[NYC Cosmos]

4 hours ago, JD1500 said:

 

Wow, this "New York" thing needs to end.  The "New York" in Jets, Giants, Knicks, Yankees, Mets and Rangers always has and always will refer to "New York City", NOT New York State.  The fact that the Jets and Giants happen to play across state lines in New Jersey is no different than Buffalo playing in Orchard Park or Dallas playing in Irving, and now, Arlington.  They play in a near suburb of the city they represent, and the city they were born in.  The fact that New York City counts as its suburbs parts of two other states is irrelevant. 

 

I'm a Nassau County guy, and New York City is my city the same way it is for someone from the Hudson Valley or North New Jersey, or southern Connecticut. 

Pay NYC/NY State taxes and we're good. If the Bengals played across the state line in Kentucky, what would you say?

[DCarp1231]

38 minutes ago, NYC Cosmos said:

Really? So you mean because I was born and raised in Queens (and attended games in the old Shea Stadium, and suffered through the 70s with them) and live in Brooklyn, I wouldn't know this? Sorry. Jersey is Jersey. want to use the NYC name? Come practice here. Pay taxes. Then you can use the name New York. The Jets' offices are in Jersey. So is their practice facility. So is their stadium. Case closed. I will never, ever step into their stadium.

[mmajeski06]

Has anyone mocked these up with the 90s Jet logo?

[Denver_The_Sinaloa]

1 hour ago, charliehustle said:

I don't hate this, but I can already hear all the people mocking the New York Triangles.

 

i thought that was the 2016 Knicks name?

[jws008]

1 hour ago, mmajeski06 said:

Has anyone mocked these up with the 90s Jet logo?

Better question: Has anyone taken their new “Gotham Green” and mocked it with the old uniforms?

[MattMill]

Wow. I may reserve total judgement on these helmets until we see them in different lighting situations

http://news.sportslogos.net/2019/04/04/new-york-jets-take-flight-unveil-new-logo-and-uniforms-for-2019/

Photos 10-12 look like they are black

 

Indoor games. Night games. Overcast games. Occasionally a sunny game. That candy apple chrome metallic look is definitely new school by nature. But I just don't see it ever really blending in with the jerseys green elements. 

 

8 minutes ago, jws008 said:

Better question: Has anyone taken their new “Gotham Green” and mocked it with the old uniforms?

The above link has a side by side with old green and New green on the actual logo. It's a few shades difference there. I'm suspecting the same would hold comparing jerseys. 

 

[jws008]

To be serious for a moment, and to make an analogy with their New York expansion brethren, these uniforms really strike me as the Jets version of the Mets “swoosh” tail uniforms — trying to evoke the past (but not really), while trying to be modern in a tacky way. For the Mets, the tacky was a silly swoosh; for the Jets it will be this silly triangle/wedge thing or the city name on the chest (or both). 

 

Hopefully, the Jets will realize with their next uniform update that they already have their signature look — it just needed proper shoulder stripes and a single green.

 

Given the choice between a “fixed” version of the last set, their 80s and 90s set, and this new one, I’ll take the first option every time.

[MJWalker45]

2 hours ago, NYC Cosmos said:

Pay NYC/NY State taxes and we're good. If the Bengals played across the state line in Kentucky, what would you say?

The Bengals still suck. Why should a team have to deal with more headaches just to be in New York proper? 

[AgentColon2]

2 hours ago, NYC Cosmos said:

Really? So you mean because I was born and raised in Queens (and attended games in the old Shea Stadium, and suffered through the 70s with them) and live in Brooklyn, I wouldn't know this? Sorry. Jersey is Jersey. want to use the NYC name? Come practice here. Pay taxes. Then you can use the name New York. The Jets' offices are in Jersey. So is their practice facility. So is their stadium. Case closed. I will never, ever step into their stadium.

 Congrats, I live here too and disagree with you.

[WavePunter]

17 minutes ago, jws008 said:

To be serious for a moment, and to make an analogy with their New York expansion brethren, these uniforms really strike me as the Jets version of the Mets “swoosh” tail uniforms — trying to evoke the past (but not really), while trying to be modern in a tacky way. For the Mets, the tacky was a silly swoosh; for the Jets it will be this silly triangle/wedge thing or the city name on the chest (or both). 

 

Hopefully, the Jets will realize with their next uniform update that they already have their signature look — it just needed proper shoulder stripes and a single green.

 

Given the choice between a “fixed” version of the last set, their 80s and 90s set, and this new one, I’ll take the first option every time.

You forgot the BFBS similarity as well!

 

But seriously, I don't disagree here.. a consistent green, proper shoulder stripes, and an updated logo is all the previous set really needed

[4_tattoos]

• Like the new shade of green, especially the on the helmets
• Don't like the pants stripe at all
• Indifferent to the black alternates, but would probably like them better with green numbers outlined in white
• Like the big NEW YORK wordmark on the jerseys.
• I'm okay with the jersey stripes
• I'm slightly curious how the helmets would look with white facemasks, but white mask would stand out badly when paird wit the all black uniform
• Think they'll end up adding a second pair of green pants with black stripes at some point to be worn with the black jerseys
• Until a team actually does it, I'm still convinced that NFL teams are not allowed to wear plain white socks. With that said the Jets green pants would probably look best if/when paired with their black socks

 

SN: The youth football club I played for wore/wears Kelly green, black and white. So needless to say I may find myself rooting for the Jets for that reason alone

[LakeShow24]

So far I really like the helmet. Uniforms will take a long time for me to get used to. Don't really hate them, it's just between the middle.

[AstroCree]

1 hour ago, jws008 said:

To be serious for a moment, and to make an analogy with their New York expansion brethren, these uniforms really strike me as the Jets version of the Mets “swoosh” tail uniforms — trying to evoke the past (but not really), while trying to be modern in a tacky way. For the Mets, the tacky was a silly swoosh; for the Jets it will be this silly triangle/wedge thing or the city name on the chest (or both). 

 

Hopefully, the Jets will realize with their next uniform update that they already have their signature look — it just needed proper shoulder stripes and a single green.

 

Given the choice between a “fixed” version of the last set, their 80s and 90s set, and this new one, I’ll take the first option every time.

My thoughts exactly. Many people don’t even remember the mid-90s set the Mets had. It was that forgettable.