Falcons New Unis 2020

[Carolingian Steamroller 3,387]

I wonder what material the side stripes are made out of. 

 

A stiffer material might actually work because it won't deform on different body shapes. If they can actually get the panels to line up reasonably well, this could work. If its also super stretchy and deforms weirdly, then it'll look bad. 

 

I agree on the solid red pants. You've made the red stripe the theme of the set, just keep that through line going. Don't worry about jazzing up the one pair of red pants. 

 

I'm slightly more optimistic on these. Thought I'd still prefer the pants stripe to be straight and maybe a white facemask. 

[L10nheart404 1,055]

12 hours ago, VDizzle12 said:

 

Everyone wants the stripes and ATL removed. Then we'd have 3 teams in the NFC South that basically just have a blank jersey with logos on the sleeves. Just seems boring and generic. 

Ironically, people call these uniforms generic. Ain't that something? If we changed to the throwbacks, we'd look like the brothers of Tampa, SanFran, and every other team that has block font and stripes on the pants. The only distinguishable characteristics would be the helmets. It's soulless and cookie cutter stuff.

[daniel75 1,434]

19 hours ago, L10nheart404 said:

Ironically, people call these uniforms generic. Ain't that something? If we changed to the throwbacks, we'd look like the brothers of Tampa, SanFran, and every other team that has block font and stripes on the pants. The only distinguishable characteristics would be the helmets. It's soulless and cookie cutter stuff.

I’m curious what you thought of the Bucs previous set?

[guest23 1,447]

19 hours ago, L10nheart404 said:

Ironically, people call these uniforms generic. Ain't that something? If we changed to the throwbacks, we'd look like the brothers of Tampa, SanFran, and every other team that has block font and stripes on the pants. The only distinguishable characteristics would be the helmets. It's soulless and cookie cutter stuff.

 

I don't think they are generic at all. What they are looks more like an extreme evolution of their current look which happens to borrow nearly every element from texas tech over the last 5 years. To me that is much much worse.

[L10nheart404 1,055]

3 minutes ago, daniel75 said:

I’m curious what you thought of the Bucs previous set?

Had too many moving parts. The set as a whole want the worst, it's just that the number font really dragged it down. Not saying I liked it personally, but it could've at least been a C-  with a regular number font 

[L10nheart404 1,055]

6 minutes ago, guest23 said:

 

I don't think they are generic at all. What they are looks more like an extreme evolution of their current look which happens to borrow nearly every element from texas tech over the last 5 years. To me that is much much worse.

Every element? There's only a side stripe on the jersey and pants, and ATL on the chest. The helmet is satin, not matte, so please don't say that lol. Also the facemask isn't "chrome"... It's more like glossed metal with little to no mirror finish. Beyond that, these uniforms aren't generic at all, but they are very minimalistic when looking at the whole thing. The only thing keeping this from looking like practice uniforms are the side stoops and ATL badge. That's literally it. The numbers are unique, but the more you see them, they look like regular numbers, just squared.

[oldschoolvikings 17,450]

You're doing  excellent work at your official job of never letting a single negative comment about these uniforms go by unchallenged. 

 

[L10nheart404 1,055]

3 hours ago, oldschoolvikings said:

You're doing  excellent work at your official job of never letting a single negative comment about these uniforms go by unchallenged. 

 

It's not the negativity I'm responding to...but on a site where details are King, it's annoying to keep seeing people describe a satin helmet as matte; or to see people say " that uniform has way too much going on", when it's in fact, only two design elements, other than the number font itself. The uniforms are actually pretty minimalistic, is the point I'm trying to make. Don't have a care who likes them lol

[MCM0313 2,689]

14 minutes ago, L10nheart404 said:

It's not the negativity I'm responding to...but on a site where details are King, it's annoying to keep seeing people describe a satin helmet as matte; or to see people say " that uniform has way too much going on", when it's in fact, only two design elements, other than the number font itself. The uniforms are actually pretty minimalistic, is the point I'm trying to make. Don't have a care who likes them lol

Satin or matte, I’m not fond of the idea of a black helmet without a glossy finish, and I know I’m not alone on this. Matte looks like a car with just primer. Satin will look like...primer and one thin coat of paint?

[ramsjetsthunder 1,185]

People outside of this board barely know the difference between satin/matte and chrome/metallic. Its a shame

[L10nheart404 1,055]

2 hours ago, MCM0313 said:

Satin or matte, I’m not fond of the idea of a black helmet without a glossy finish, and I know I’m not alone on this. Matte looks like a car with just primer. Satin will look like...primer and one thin coat of paint?

And that's perfectly fine. As long as it's accurately labeled as what it is, I have no qualms.

[guest23 1,447]

6 hours ago, L10nheart404 said:

Every element? There's only a side stripe on the jersey and pants, and ATL on the chest. The helmet is satin, not matte, so please don't say that lol. Also the facemask isn't "chrome"... It's more like glossed metal with little to no mirror finish. Beyond that, these uniforms aren't generic at all, but they are very minimalistic when looking at the whole thing. The only thing keeping this from looking like practice uniforms are the side stoops and ATL badge. That's literally it. The numbers are unique, but the more you see them, they look like regular numbers, just squared.

 

I said nearly every element. Judge for yourself.

[IceCap 21,965]

I feel like standard gloss would have worked better for the look the Falcons wanted. A giant, bold logo on a gloss shell pops. The satin finish looks...not soft really, just not as bold as it should look. 

[L10nheart404 1,055]

4 minutes ago, guest23 said:

 

I said nearly every element. Judge for yourself.

Lol...The only uniform that'll likely be worn once. But I catch your drift.

[WavePunter 2,374]

4 hours ago, L10nheart404 said:

It's not the negativity I'm responding to...but on a site where details are King, it's annoying to keep seeing people describe a satin helmet as matte; or to see people say " that uniform has way too much going on", when it's in fact, only two design elements, other than the number font itself. The uniforms are actually pretty minimalistic, is the point I'm trying to make. Don't have a care who likes them lol

To be fair, the terms "satin" and "matte" don't exist in Riddell's vocabulary.. they're officially called "anodized" and "flat", and I'd have to consider the folks who manufactured (and named) the finishes to be the authority on what they're called..

Point being, it's not a standard gloss, which is actual issue people have a problem with - regardless of which term they use to describe it.. pointing out that it's "satin" instead of "matte" isn't going to make people suddenly realize they actually like it since it's not technically "matte"..

[L10nheart404 1,055]

8 minutes ago, WavePunter said:

To be fair, the terms "satin" and "matte" don't exist in Riddell's vocabulary.. they're officially called "anodized" and "flat", and I'd have to consider the folks who manufactured (and named) the finishes to be the authority on what they're called..

Point being, it's not a standard gloss, which is actual issue people have a problem with - regardless of which term they use to describe it.. pointing out that it's "satin" instead of "matte" isn't going to make people suddenly realize they actually like it since it's not technically "matte"..

Did you read anything other than me saying satin and matte wasn't the same thing? It's clearly stated, the mislabeling was my issue. Who the hell cares who likes what? I sure don't. But it is in fact erroneous to say the shells are matte, when the sheen is different than an actual matte shell. Those points can't be argued.

[WavePunter 2,374]

2 hours ago, L10nheart404 said:

Did you read anything other than me saying satin and matte wasn't the same thing? It's clearly stated, the mislabeling was my issue. Who the hell cares who likes what? I sure don't. But it is in fact erroneous to say the shells are matte, when the sheen is different than an actual matte shell. Those points can't be argued.

Well, that all depends on who you ask..

As I previously stated, "matte" and "satin" are both nonexistent in Riddell's terminology, so theoretically you can't argue that they're either satin or matte..

But, anecdotally, my Riddell rep once described their "anodized" (satin) finish to me as "matte metallic".. in fact, there is even a bit of crossover, as their "anodized" grey/silver is actually listed as "flat (their word for matte) silver"..

 

So, if anything, you could make an argument that "matte" is actually a more correct term than "satin"..

Although, I think we can agree that it would be foolish to make that argument, as we all collectively know what we mean by "satin" football helmets.. but my main point is that mislabeling something while stating your opinion doesn't invalidate your opinion.. and my other point is that terms are relatively fluid and inconsistent from industry to industry and manufacturer to manufacturer and entity to entity.. 

According to Riddell it would be erroneous to call ANY of their helmets "satin" (or "matte"), and it would be erroneous to call Alabama's helmets "crimson" or South Carolina's alt helmets "garnet" (they wear the same exact color - Riddell calls it "cardinal").. 

So, depending on where you got your initial info regarding color specs or finish terms could influence just how erroneous or accurate something is.. Tampa Bay called their metallic silver facemasks "chrome", but that was erroneous based on the official color per manufacturer's name and the definition of what "chrome" actually is.. but it's accurate if that's what the buccaneers officially name that color, so again, you could make just about any argument within the right context..

 

[ramsjetsthunder 1,185]

Let's get this straight here:

 

Matte

 

Satin

 

Chrome

 

Metallic

 

Metallic w/ Heavy Gloss Finish

 

Standard Gloss

[WSU151 9,509]

7 minutes ago, ramsjetsthunder said:

Standard Gloss

 

Ravens actually use a metallic paint for their helmets.

 

You can see the metallic sheen here (as well as kind of see it above):

 

 

And they've always had it (man I love the original helmet):

 

 

 

 

The only NFL team that uses a standard finish is the Steelers. 

[mafiaman 1,900]

13 hours ago, guest23 said:

I said nearly every element. Judge for yourself.

I can’t wait to see this Falcons train wreck this season.