nfl New York Jets unveil new uniforms

[Beer Barrel Man]

I love the green helmet and the green color in general is MUCH better. The helmet decal doesn't ruin it, but it does look a little goofy with the unnecessary football. Maybe it'll grow on me, but I would've just gone with the 80's logo to complete the fauxback.

The jersey's are meh to me. They're too modern and I don't care for the sharp points, but it's better than what Nike usually has to offer. The numbers are okay I think. The green is good here as well and I hate the BFBS. 

[tp49]

2 hours ago, insert name said:

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

So were those Mets teams, I remember them as I went to a number of Mets games with my dad even though I'm a Yankee fan.  Truth be told, I actually liked the road jersey from that set although I think their current road is one of the two best in baseball.

[larrypep]

Sorry, but this set is horrific.  

[elevenstraight]

Just had another look at the uniforms.. They still suck... At least they look the part now

[Ken Bannister]

On 4/4/2019 at 7:51 PM, NYUNDERDOGS said:

...it will never end, the pain never ends...

...is this Joe Benigno?

[kroywen]

15 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.

 

I live in New York too. I couldn't care less about what taxes the Jets pay (or more to the point, what state is giving them tax breaks and subsidies). I couldn't care less which side of an artificial border set up in 1664 by an English prince that the Jets play on. They play in the heart of the New York metro area. They play 6 miles from Times Square - closer than Shea Stadium was, FWIW. They're as much a New York City team as the Cowboys are a Dallas team, or the Redskins a Washington team, or the Dolphins a Miami team. I don't know why this argument only comes up about the Jets and Giants when you don't hear anyone crowing about the "Maryland Redskins" or "Arlington Cowboys."

 

Teams represent metro areas, first and foremost. Fandom (at least in pro sports) generally doesn't die at a state line or city line.

[JD1500]

15 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?

 

That's fair.  The irony is that probably the only way both they and the Giants were to stay here -and thus pay those taxes- was if they were gifted those same taxpayer funds for a new stadium.  It goes all the way back to Koch's refusal to work with them when they first left.   

 

So Jersey gets that, but they're also on the hook for that new stadium.  The economics of the NFL now are such that everyone other than the league itself loses.  

[leopard88]

18 minutes ago, kroywen said:

 

I live in New York too. I couldn't care less about what taxes the Jets pay (or more to the point, what state is giving them tax breaks and subsidies). I couldn't care less which side of an artificial border set up in 1664 by an English prince that the Jets play on. They play in the heart of the New York metro area. They play 6 miles from Times Square - closer than Shea Stadium was, FWIW. They're as much a New York City team as the Cowboys are a Dallas team, or the Redskins a Washington team, or the Dolphins a Miami team. I don't know why this argument only comes up about the Jets and Giants when you don't hear anyone crowing about the "Maryland Redskins" or "Arlington Cowboys."

 

Teams represent metro areas, first and foremost. Fandom (at least in pro sports) generally doesn't die at a state line or city line.

 

Actually, this one does come up occasionally.

 

[JD1500]

21 minutes ago, kroywen said:

 

I live in New York too. I couldn't care less about what taxes the Jets pay (or more to the point, what state is giving them tax breaks and subsidies). I couldn't care less which side of an artificial border set up in 1664 by an English prince that the Jets play on. They play in the heart of the New York metro area. They play 6 miles from Times Square - closer than Shea Stadium was, FWIW. They're as much a New York City team as the Cowboys are a Dallas team, or the Redskins a Washington team, or the Dolphins a Miami team. I don't know why this argument only comes up about the Jets and Giants when you don't hear anyone crowing about the "Maryland Redskins" or "Arlington Cowboys."

 

Teams represent metro areas, first and foremost. Fandom (at least in pro sports) generally doesn't die at a state line or city line.

 

I couldn't agree more.  It seems to me this argument is only applied to the Jets and Giants because of the duality of the "New York" name.  Most assume the name means New York State so "Why aren't they called New Jersey because they play there.  Buffalo is the only New York team."  But those who are from here know the name refers to New York City, so like you said, they're playing in as close a proximity to the City as possible without actually being within the five boroughs.

[bleuet]

Bit deception. I'd gone with the concorde shape all over the place, would hve been very speedy and bit retro at same time.

 

But, could have been worst.

[JD1500]

16 hours ago, tp49 said:

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.

 

But what about McNeil, Walker & Toon, the alliteration in their secondary (Donald Dykes, Harry Hamilton, and Lester Lyles) and Joe Walton's backwards hat and picked nose?  Surely those evoke some positive memories, no?  Also, Belicheat told them to go to hell with the white helmets, just sayin'.  

 

What would you have thought about a refresh/modernization of that Concorde logo with this set?

[JD1500]

13 hours ago, WavePunter said:

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

 

14 hours 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.

 

Great call here.  I forgot all about that Met uniform.  I think they had those in that awful Jeff Torborg year.   Jets will probably go 12-4 minimum next year so that's the only parallel I don't see here...

[jws008]

15 hours 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.

Just to be clear, it’s the Mets uniforms from 1993-94 that I’m referencing, not so much the BFBS ones that came later.

Link to “Dressed to the Nines” uniform database

 

[schlim]

Can we get off this Concorde stuff already? There was one fatal accident with it, and it happened in 2000 after the Jets already ditched the green helmets and 80s logo. 

 

But don't let facts interrupt your singular buttfumble vision of the Jets. There are twelve teams who have never even won one Super Bowl, plenty of others (Chiefs in particular) who are just about in the same boat as the Jets. 

 

Surely there's a thread somewhere in Sports in General you can go on about Jets' follies.

 

 

[MCM0313]

3 hours ago, JD1500 said:

 

 

Great call here.  I forgot all about that Met uniform.  I think they had those in that awful Jeff Torborg year.   Jets will probably go 12-4 minimum next year so that's the only parallel I don't see here...

Jets 12-4 minimum next year? They could challenge for a playoff spot, but I don't see 12-plus wins as realistic. They share their division with the  Patriots, a Bills team with a lot of young talent, and a Dolphins team whose current starting QB (Fitzy) seems to win one or two games per year that should be blowout losses - see, e.g., Tampa Bay at New Orleans, week 1 last year. The Jets also play the Raiders, Jaguars, entire AFC North, and entire NFC East. If they can beat both Oakland and Jacksonville, go 3-1 against each of the other divisions, and go 4-2 in their own division, they can get to 12-4, but that seems farfetched. 9-10 wins seems more realistic to me, and even that could be disturbed if the Bills' chemistry develops faster than the Jets'.

[ARTnSocal]

 

Maybe Jets should have gone back to their 1963 uniforms, at least back then they had a jet plane in their logo!

 

 

 

New York at Denver

 

Bears Stadium (Mile High) 

 

Denver, Colorado 

 

17-NOV-1963

 

Jets 14 – Broncos 9

 

 

[JD1500]

25 minutes ago, MCM0313 said:

Jets 12-4 minimum next year? They could challenge for a playoff spot, but I don't see 12-plus wins as realistic. They share their division with the  Patriots, a Bills team with a lot of young talent, and a Dolphins team whose current starting QB (Fitzy) seems to win one or two games per year that should be blowout losses - see, e.g., Tampa Bay at New Orleans, week 1 last year. The Jets also play the Raiders, Jaguars, entire AFC North, and entire NFC East. If they can beat both Oakland and Jacksonville, go 3-1 against each of the other divisions, and go 4-2 in their own division, they can get to 12-4, but that seems farfetched. 9-10 wins seems more realistic to me, and even that could be disturbed if the Bills' chemistry develops faster than the Jets'.

 

Your analysis is much more realistic.  I was just being facetious.  I'm a realist and pragmatist when it comes to the Jets because I've so rarely seen them overachieve in my nearly 40 years of following them.  It's either they're expected to be 4-12 and they go 4-12, expected to be 8-8 and they go 4-12, expected to win 10-11 games and they go 4-12 or expected to go 7-9 and they surprise and go 8-8.   Right now I think their over/under is at 7, so I'm hopeful this Gotham Green will be good for a win by itself which will put them at 8-7-1.  I see a tie with Jacksonville coming.  I love ties, mostly because the NFL hates them.

 

Beyond that the Jets have only put up one 12-win season in my lifetime, so I'd be more fearful of the state of the world if they were to win 12 this year, especially coming off of a 4-12 campaign.  

[MJWalker45]

I actually like these. The helmet logo would be better without the football but it still works. The colors are better too. Not a fan of the black unis but it's only going to be used 2-3 times a year at most. The jersey streak is similar to to the Chargers and only stands out because there's nothing inside it. Had they done two streaks but kept them inside the sleeve caps it would've been pretty clunky. 

[hawk36]

21 hours ago, jn8 said:

This helmet would be awful.

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

Right but my feeling is it would have to be something like this (completely different from anything they'd have to date) to work. The trying to be new while still trying to be old doesn't work at all. Got to go full new to make a break from the past. 

 

[IceCap]

21 hours ago, NYC Cosmos said:

I will never, ever step into their stadium.

This is silly. I get city/state pride but refusing to go to a football game just because it’s technically in New Jersey is a whole other level of New York arrogance.