2020-2021 NHL Changes

[Ridleylash]

The black only looks good because of nostalgia, honestly. If the Avs were an expansion team in 2020 with black breezers and pants in an otherwise black-less jersey, people would be ripping them over it; you'd see people saying "Oh, nice beer-league equipment, dweebs!" and the like. But because they won a lot in that, it's just associated with success despite looking kinda bad visually; the blue makes more sense since their design has always been far more blue than black.

 

I always felt it was just slapped into the Avs' jerseys because black was a trendy color in the 90's. The burgundy is fine as the dark contrast color. The only change I could think of is maybe using navy over slate, but either blue works a lot better than black.

[AFirestormToPurify]

49 minutes ago, SSmith48 said:

As a native Coloradan, it will take some getting used to but it feels much more cohesive than black did. I dig it. I'm not sure how it will look with the white jersey though...

 

Lots of people, at least on social media, brought up the inconsistency with the blue helmets. It looks like the steel blue shade the Avs use is really hard to replicate, as expected. Not as big an issue from distance, but most, if not all, of the helmets end up looking more royal than steel blue. Reminds me of the Vikings shade of purple when they first came out with their newest set. Still an upgrade though.

 

EDIT: Here's a better look at a more "steel blue" helmet. Still some inconsistencies.

 

Ha. I knew it. Looks like regular royal blue. Oh well. The blue gear doesn't look objectively bad or anything, but it doesn't feel like I'm watching the Avalanche yet. It might take a while until I get used to it. They look good, but it almost has a 3rd jersey feel to it. No sure how to put that into words, hope that makes sense

[AFirestormToPurify]

14 minutes ago, Ridleylash said:

The black only looks good because of nostalgia, honestly. If the Avs were an expansion team in 2020 with black breezers and pants in an otherwise black-less jersey, people would be ripping them over it; you'd see people saying "Oh, nice beer-league equipment, dweebs!" and the like. But because they won a lot in that, it's just associated with success despite looking kinda bad visually; the blue makes more sense since their design has always been far more blue than black.

 

I always felt it was just slapped into the Avs' jerseys because black was a trendy color in the 90's. The burgundy is fine as the dark contrast color. The only change I could think of is maybe using navy over slate, but either blue works a lot better than black.

Can't remember where I read that and it could have possibly just been a lie lol, but I recall reading that the black gear was supposed to be temporary. They probably figured, what the hell black gear doesn't look that bad, let's keep it

[fouhy12]

The blue gear looks normal to me. The fact that they ever wore black is weird. 

[nash61]

42 minutes ago, Ridleylash said:

The black only looks good because of nostalgia, honestly. If the Avs were an expansion team in 2020 with black breezers and pants in an otherwise black-less jersey, people would be ripping them over it; you'd see people saying "Oh, nice beer-league equipment, dweebs!" and the like. But because they won a lot in that, it's just associated with success despite looking kinda bad visually; the blue makes more sense since their design has always been far more blue than black.

[Bayne]

4 hours ago, ChiCity95 said:

It's almost as if people don't understand that the NHL (like pretty much any business on the planet) lost revenue last year and they needed ways to recover it. I'm not hopped up about 'em either, but I understand the reasoning behind it.

 

(First line of my reply not directed at you, but rather at the general outrage)

 

Yeah, I mean why would anyone on here would be hopped up about them and defend them is baffling to me, but I can accept them for the inevitable yet unintrusive addition that they are.

[Ridleylash]

Here's another look at the helmet. I think it's fine, personally, just might take some getting used to for some people because we're so used to the Avs having black equipment.

[chcarlson23]

I personally like the blue gear. I mean I think they could be a little bit darker, and that’s why the black gear worked ok. But what’s  most off-putting is the lack of maroon on the gear. I understand the helmet, but there could be some maroon stripes around the leg cuffs, and the gloves definitely need maroon on them. It looks like the Avs are borrowing another teams’ gear with those gloves. I mean, why they chose to emphasize blue and white, over maroon, is a little odd. 
 

I’m also disappointed that there wasn’t more of a change for any of the jerseys. I guess we’ll see about the road, which needed the most work, but it would have been nice to see the silver collar wrap all the way around...

[mcj882000]

10 hours ago, Ridleylash said:

I said that when I was watching the Leafs' scrimmage; the helmet ads are barely even noticeable on the standard game camera angle. If something this minor is what it took to even have this season, then so be it.

 

8 hours ago, ChiCity95 said:

It's almost as if people don't understand that the NHL (like pretty much any business on the planet) lost revenue last year and they needed ways to recover it. I'm not hopped up about 'em either, but I understand the reasoning behind it.

 

(First line of my reply not directed at you, but rather at the general outrage)

A couple of things: 
-As has been noted already, of course they're small and minor now, starting small is how they - or anything else "weird" or "unusual" for that matter - gets normalised; 
-I've heard a couple of times elsewhere that this program was not a way for the league to get extra revenue but instead was a free make-good for the sponsors themselves. Maybe that's not accurate, but if it is then no, in fact, helmet ads weren't "what it took to even have this season", they're just the league apologising to their corporate partners for lost exposure - something the league didn't necessarily have to do to survive, but did anyways to keep them happy. (I think that would actually explain why the vast majority of them have just been each team's arena's sponsor - that company isn't actually paying extra for the privilege!)

I guess the latter point would also answer the question I was gonna ask to those still Devil's Advocating for uniform ads: if they're really that necessary for the season to even operate, then why are teams like the Ducks, Kings & Islanders (at time of writing) still holding out? And furthermore why's it those teams in particular holding out, and not teams like the Habs, Leafs & Rangers; those most capable of weathering the storm? (Yeah, the Islanders' president is a staunch traditionalist, but if the extra revenue from helmet ads was the difference between the team/league playing the year and folding, you think ownership wouldn't overrule him?)

[O.C.D]

4 hours ago, nash61 said:

I feel like the Avs black gear is the NHL equivalent of grey facemasks in the NFL.

[daniel75]

Love the blue, the Av’s look complete now. 

[_RH_]

9 hours ago, Justpassingby said:

I’ve figured out my major problem with it. The blue on the lower part of the sweater blends with the blue of the pants and you’ve got a team that looks like they’re wearing higher wasted pants than Kylo Ren in The Last Jedi.

Personally I like that continuity between sweater and pants (just like the team they played, StL)

 

My biggest objection that I haven't seen mentioned here is that burgundy and blue will touch on both home and road. The whole reason grey exists for them is to separate the two main colors, but they've failed to account for that IMO.

[SCL]

Can't the Avs paint these helmets like the NFL does? Players rocking royal blue looks worse than black.

[NYRFan]

Edmonton going with the navy alts on opening night. 

 

Can those be tossed in the 🗑 next year?

[CreamSoda]

The Avs blue look will take some time to get used to for sure.   But when I see photos of them in black equipment now it really looks out of place.  
 

I do wish the helmets were more steel blue and not as shiny.  

[gosioux76]

8 minutes ago, CreamSoda said:

The Avs blue look will take some time to get used to for sure.  

 

I couldn't help but think that the blue looked oversaturated on TV last night. It might be, as @CreamSoda said, just something that will take time getting used to. Maybe it's more to do with the burgundy and blue touching without separation, as @_RH_ mentioned.  

 

But I didn't see it as this cathartic righting of a wrong as many of you did.

[CreamSoda]

12 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

 

I couldn't help but think that the blue looked oversaturated on TV last night. It might be, as @CreamSoda said, just something that will take time getting used to. Maybe it's more to do with the burgundy and blue touching without separation, as @_RH_ mentioned.  

 

But I didn't see it as this cathartic righting of a wrong as many of you did.

it absolutely was over saturated on TV. If you compare video from broadcast to photos, the blue on TV basically just looked like royal.  Not sure if anything will change their but it was a big difference. 

[jp1409]

The CCM helmets are fine, Bauer ones are way too royal. The Bauer one is the same shade as the Blues shoulder yokes, lightning isn't the issue...

 

 

[B-mer]

The blue was definitely strange to watch, but the one thing that stuck out to me was how dark it made the silver look, and i'm not sure why aside from probably just lighting.  When trying to look at the set objectively the silver stands out to me now in a weird way that i want it to be lighter or white. 

[CreamSoda]

20 minutes ago, jp1409 said:

The CCM helmets are fine, Bauer ones are way too royal. The Bauer one is the same shade as the Blues shoulder yokes, lightning isn't the issue...

 

 

Noticed the same thing.  The CCMs looked great, the Bauer’s and Warriors looked too royal.