FormerLurker

NFL 2020 Changes

Recommended Posts

My main problem with the Seahawks (besides their love for mono of course) are the chest stripes. Remove them and throw the wordmark under the collar and it's a passable middle of the pack uniform. The gray and white pants both need some green as well.

 

I also don't understand why the helmet log points down when it connects at the back when the actual logo points up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the Seahawks uniform isn't that the look itself is fatally flawed, its that there are so many little details that bring it down. The tiretrack on the helmet, the off placed word mark, the chest stripes, the way the pattern is implemented on the shoulder looking like it was designed as a pedestal for the nike mark, the goofy collar, you fix most of these and the look is fine, but all of them add up to make me dislike it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, oldschoolvikings said:

 

Let's just streamline this.

 

Disagree (as usual).  This is a pretty good look.  Like anything, stripeless can work in some cases.  This was one.  It even made their short-lived-crappy side panels less crapy since there was no misalignment. 

 

Stripeless black / navy / brown pants?  Hell no.  White?  GTFO.

 

faulk.jpg?w=1000&h=600&crop=1  51694693.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, WSU151 said:

 

Bring back the beige pants if going stripeless is the plan.  

 

Uni Watch: The history of the wishbone-C logo | Society for ...

 

White stripeless pants don't really belong in the NFL, IMO. 

 

I was at that game. I believe the Browns shutout the Cards?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, PittsburghSucks said:

 

I was at that game. I believe the Browns shutout the Cards?

 

Browns with a 32-0 win. That was the year Belichick had the Browns playing really well - they beat the Patriots twice (reg season and playoffs)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

Disagree (as usual).  This is a pretty good look.  Like anything, stripeless can work in some cases.  This was one.  It even made their short-lived-crappy side panels less crapy since there was no misalignment. 

 

Stripeless black / navy / brown pants?  Hell no.  White?  GTFO.

 

faulk.jpg?w=1000&h=600&crop=1  51694693.jpg

I think stripeless pants can work if they are made of dazzle fabric. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, oldschoolvikings said:

 

 

Boom.

 

spacer.png

Now, just get rid of the "whiskers" protruding from the bright, white beak, and we could be onto something! Granted, I cannot take credit for pointing that out, considering I once read that from someone online. Whoever that was, and wherever I stumbled across it, they were referring to the lifelike meeting/overlapping of feathers & beak that the creators of the primary logo were obviously going for — a la real ravens — as such, and thus, I have since not been able to un-see those strokes as whiskers! Unfortunately, one solid shade throughout the logo is boring — or even a more charcoal-esque appearance to the beak color instead of white, much like mascot Poe or an actual raven (especially in many photographs) — plus an idea along those lines simply never seems to look right on concepts, not to mention tends to get lost on a dark-colored helmet.

Additionally, as a fan of the far superior (IMHO), front-facing version, something I have often pensively pondered & wondered about — and that I have oddly never seen noticed/addressed by others before — is how the 1999-present version is not symmetrical, at least pertaining particularly to the keyline, I should clarify. Whereas on the other hand, the original one prior to 1999 — the one that lacked purple, as did seemingly all of the pre-1999 logos (albeit admittedly, the Maryland flag "Coat-Of-ArmShield" initially had slightly more purple, since there was some on the 'B' and 'R', respectively, which was eventually removed when said logo was tweaked) — was able to be made symmetrical. A little while ago, I actually attempted to fix that quirk, as I will demonstrate via visual aids below:

Official 1996-1998 front-facing head logo (sans full/winged body)
spacer.png

 

Official 1999-Present front-facing head logo
spacer.png

 

My own, slightly tweaked/sloppily fixed version of the 1999 alternate logo with SYMMETRICAL keyline (inspired by symmetry of original one from 1996)
spacer.png
 

Since it has been a while, I do not recall the image source origin. If I recollect correctly, I probably sought out the logo via some random search engine query, then subsequently utilized the chosen material for my novice-style, reworked render via copy/paste functions in 'MS Paint' (LOL). I clearly must not have borrowed from this here site, what with the emblem's extremely evident, far-from-vibrant appearance of dull & faded colors. Still, I feel it at least gives the proper gist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JayMac said:
13 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

faulk.jpg?w=1000&h=600&crop=1  51694693.jpg

 

 

Don't really realize how much you miss something until it's gone. That was an awesome update at the time--and a radical one, with the Rams eschewing pants stripes and all. When worn as intended--and with the richer gold color--that was an outstanding look. (We all know what eventually ended up happening, though...)

 

As for the Cardinals, here's where I break with the crowd [unpopular opinion alert]...I don't think a "traditional" uniform would be right for the identity they're attempting to forge out there, neither do I agree with the assertion that just because they're the oldest continuously operating franchise in the league means they have to have old-school traditional uniforms. Now I definitely ain't trying to see them in some Titans-esque hackjob, but something sleeker, somehow faster without getting so cutesy. 

They already have the bones for a great brand as it is; only add as much meat as is necessary and not one ounce more. (And I could take or leave a gray/cardinal red facemask...just saying.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do tend to think the Cards could pull off the cream or off white look and it would pair well with the cardinal red. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ll throw my $.02 in on the Cardinals here. I don’t necessarily thing they need to have “traditional” uniforms, but the Cardinals should be wearing simple uniforms. They’ve worn simple uniforms for pretty much their entire history up to the current duds, which are decidedly not simple. 


Now I’m just brainstorming here:
I actually think something like the latest Wazzu update would be a good place to start.

spacer.png

I think I’d probably keep the grey facemasks. White would do, but not red. I don’t need any stripes on the sleeves or shoulders. Single color numbers with TV numbers on the sleeves, not shoulders, of both the white and red jerseys in a block-ish font. Maybe it would be too much, but a red yoke on the white jersey might be a sharp look, or they could have a plain white jersey and a white jersey with the yoke. I don’t know, I’m just throwing stuff at the wall here.


Maybe put the flag patch on the chest, but whatever. I think I’d go with with white and red pants with a double stripe running down each leg as well.

 

Now here’s where it gets crazy. Their logo is damn near flawless, but I’d change one thing. I’d swap out the yellow beak for copper.

 

I’d also include a pair of alternate copper colored pants to be worn at home. I think it would be a sharp look and a nice faux back sort of look to the tan canvas pants worn in the early years of the Cardinals.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone find an image of Falcons, Raiders or Bucs draft hats? They are now out on multiple sites but those 3 teams are missing from all of them. We know Tampa and ATL are changing uniforms but maybe this means the logos will be tweaked too.

 

And whats up with Vegas, are the Raiders changing logos?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bowld said:

And whats up with Vegas, are the Raiders changing logos?

Raiders logos will remain the same. Any script logos which previously used "Oakland" were directly changed to use "Las Vegas" instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bowld said:

Anyone find an image of Falcons, Raiders or Bucs draft hats? They are now out on multiple sites but those 3 teams are missing from all of them. We know Tampa and ATL are changing uniforms but maybe this means the logos will be tweaked too.

 

And whats up with Vegas, are the Raiders changing logos?

 

1 hour ago, bwburke94 said:

Raiders logos will remain the same. Any script logos which previously used "Oakland" were directly changed to use "Las Vegas" instead.


wZxv1pE.png


3z8adKF.png

 

rRGNhqQ.png

 

oFwLlFB.png

That's really it.  No changes to the primary from what I know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So where's the hat then if no logo change?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m wondering if the Cardinals could pull off something similar to Oregon State:

spacer.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, WSU151 said:

 

Browns with a 32-0 win. That was the year Belichick had the Browns playing really well - they beat the Patriots twice (reg season and playoffs)

Beating the pats at that time wasn’t an accomplishment at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bowld said:

So where's the hat then if no logo change?

It’s already been posted awhile ago. Around March 15th but I can’t find the picture that showed all the league minus the 2 LA teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.