Jump to content

Falcons New Unis 2020


BlazerBlaze

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, FinsUp1214 said:

I guess something I’m wondering is, what if a logo is well crafted (in terms of lines connecting, no sloppiness in construction, no random notches, etc), but is poor in execution? If the argument against it has nothing to do with its craft but how well it executes the concept, subject, theme, etc, then that’s still a valid argument right? Or no? Because I see a lot going on about craft here, and yes, craft is absolutely essential. But in my opinion, a well-crafted logo still doesn’t automatically make it good on its own; there’s more that needs to be executed than just the construction. 
 

I haven’t seen any diagrams magnifying and dissecting the Falcons logo’s craft, so assuming Brandon is a fan of it I’ll take that as validity that it is indeed well-crafted. That’s fine. Problem is I don’t think it’s executed very well, despite that.

 

(The rest snipped for space, but very valuable nonetheless...) 


This is fantastic! I think you nailed some great points here.

 

One, I think many (myself included) typically say “execution” when we mean “craftsmanship,” but you’ve addressed an important distinction; execution has multiple facets.

 

Craftsmanship is execution, but only in the technical or artistic sense. Effective communication of the main idea is also execution, but only in the conceptual sense. Delivering on the brief (the vision and goal of the client or team) is also execution, but that’s more ambiguous. I don’t really know what to call it because no matter what the client’s or team’s vision is, I feel it’s the designer’s duty to interpret and balance that through the lens of the audience. The brief is a starting point or maybe a guardrail, but I feel it’s the piece that’s most easily manipulated if you can convince the client or team that they need to pivot a little to really capture their audience.

 

Either way, I think all of the things you brought up qualify as individual criteria that can be independently evaluated to determine how well a design can do or is doing its job. While they are separate qualities and warrant separate discussions and considerations, I also think they creep into each other, they overlap, and they create cause/effect relationships with one another (if you do this, you achieve that, but you might lose the other thing, so you have to decide what’s more important). There are many logos that get their point across but are not well crafted (or at least could be technically improved without drastically changing the idea that’s being communicated). There are just as many beautifully crafted logos that don’t really communicate anything other than “B” or “S” and several decades of equity. My opinion is that every logo has something that can be explored, either technically, conceptually, or both, and that’s okay. It will always be that way, and I think it’s great for discussion and artistic progress.

 

Honestly, it’s exceedingly rare for an identity to nail all the criteria. We strive for perfection, but it’s so, so elusive because of the variables. Maybe you hit the brief, but the fans don’t like it. Maybe the fans are attached, but the ownership still wants a fresh start. I know I sound like a broken record when I pick apart bézier curves and visual composition and other “losing the forest for the tree” qualities in a logo, but the reason I value craftsmanship so much is because it’s the one thing I know the designer can always control, while communicating the idea and delivering on the brief are often at the whim of the client/team and their tastes. I’ve been through it enough to know that my vision doesn’t always match what the client or the audience thinks, but the very least I can do is provide a well-drawn version of what they want, if that makes sense.

 

Ultimately, we all participate in this because we’re interested in the process or we’re interested in making it better, and the more knowledge and familiarity we accumulate through the process or the act of being interested in it, the more we can share with each other the things we learn along the way. Making sense of that knowledge and forming it into an opinion or philosophy is the logical next step, and whether we agree with each other or not, part of healthy discourse is to open our minds to others’ opinions and use them to season our own pot of wisdom. The beauty of it is we still get to decide whether the dish tastes better, but at least we know we sampled the alternative. 

 

5 hours ago, infrared41 said:

 

First off, I don't consider myself an expert. I'm just a guy who worked in the field for 25 years. Experienced? Yes. Expert? Nah. FWIW, every award on my shelf was a complete team effort. I'd love to say I was the reason we won them, but again, I was just a guy who was part of the production. My name may have been listed first on one or two, but all that means was that I held the position of producer or director. 

 

From a production standpoint, Blair Witch is not great. All the shaky camera stuff, poor lighting, horrible shot composition, rough audio, I could go on, but you get the idea. It broke just about every "rule" of production. That being said, I thought it was a very entertaining and very well done movie. That it broke pretty much every rule in "conventional" film making is what made it work. The point being, you can go way off the art reservation and still produce good art. There are people out there (I know a few of them) who will never give Blair Witch a bit of credit simply because they can't get past how screwy the production is. It's too bad because they're letting their adherence to the rules of production keep them from enjoying a cool movie. 

 

5 hours ago, dont care said:

I truly love this. One of the things I live by is give credit in success and take blame for failures. Has it hurt me professionally giving too much credit, taking blame the few times it happened? Maybe, in fact probably seeing some brown nosers that have gotten promoted faster than me. But I take pride in myself of seeing those people I had under me get promoted and move on to bigger and better things, and consistently having a group that can out perform anyone else. 


I just want to point out how insightful both of these takes/philosophies are. Well said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably nothing but figured I’d pass it along. The Falcons put out a video on social media using the logo and motion graphics. The bird looks slightly different. The red wing streaks are now red with white tips and the streak inside the claw is now only white. Do you think this is simply an error with the motion graphics or something to this?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That looks like it may just be an error, or at least I hope it is--switching the color of the claw is lateral, but I can't see any decent reason for adding white tips into those red wing streaks

 

On the subject of the new Falcons uniforms, I've been stewing over this for a while, and I'm pretty much convinced, especially after seeing what Arthur Blank had to say regarding "mixing and matching", and given the NFL's most recent Nike-led identity revamps (The Browns, Titans, Jaguars and Jets), that the new Falcons' uniforms WILL 100% include, for the first time in Falcons' history, red pants, to go along with black and white ones, along with a black, white, and red jersey.  (Each of the four previously mentioned uniforms have this in common.) Three different colored tops, three different colored pants, all will be featured in monochrome when the new uniforms are first unveiled, and it'll make for nine different combo possibilities.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Buc said:

 

On the subject of the new Falcons uniforms, I've been stewing over this for a while, and I'm pretty much convinced, especially after seeing what Arthur Blank had to say regarding "mixing and matching", and given the NFL's most recent Nike-led identity revamps (The Browns, Titans, Jaguars and Jets), that the new Falcons' uniforms WILL 100% include, for the first time in Falcons' history, red pants, to go along with black and white ones, along with a black, white, and red jersey.  (Each of the four previously mentioned uniforms have this in common.) Three different colored tops, three different colored pants, all will be featured in monochrome when the new uniforms are first unveiled, and it'll make for nine different combo possibilities.

 

 

Yeah, I think you're right, and for some reason I believe that if there are red jerseys and pants in the rotation, that means the helmet will almost certainly be black.  I'm not sure why I think this, but I do. I can see them doing a "modern, clean" (read: plain) monochrome all black, but not all red. 

 

I think the only shot we had for a red helmet was if they were doing a retro/throwback inspired design, but based on Blank's comments, that's not what I see coming.

 

 

Of, course, I've been wrong before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/30/2020 at 8:51 PM, aawagner011 said:

Oh, boy. As a fan, this quote from owner Arthur Blank isn’t getting me excited. This reads more like a Bucs, Titans, Jags Nike 1.0 rather than a Vikings, Lions, Jags 2.0. We need to revert to tradition rather than reinvent the wheel here. Contemporary with flair, player input, and lots of combinations never sounds like a good mix.

 

https://www.atlantafalcons.com/news/q-a-with-arthur-blank-2020-expectations-draft-free-agency-salary-cap-uniforms
 

Q: Speaking of the fans and speaking of excitement, I've gotten a ton of emails from fans who are just beyond excited about the first major uniform redesign in 17 years. Without giving anything away, what was your first reaction when you first saw the new duds and how excited are you to unveil a new look?

 

 


The irony of where the Falcons have wound up is that the 2003 updates were 100% designed to be mix and match. The black and white jerseys had the same piping as their respective pants. In the first year, the team wore 5 distinct combinations, a figure not surpassed. 
 

The problem was that the team fell in love with the red jersey and out of love with the black pants. 
 

They have the combos they just don’t wear them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My bet is red, white, black jerseys, to match with white, black, and grey (hopefully silver) pants.

 

A sliver helmet would look the best, but wouldn't make any sense.  It has to be black, because if it's red, the black jerseys wouldn't look great.  There's no need for white pants in their set, but teams aren't good at turning down options these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A requiem for the Falcons modern uniforms:

 

They have the core of a really forward thinking idea. With sleeve space shrinking to non-existent, the Falcons came up with a pattern: vertical black-white-red-white-black blocks of color. The pattern stays the same on all three jerseys. The only change is the piping. 
 

You don’t have to like it and frankly it’s aged rather poorly, but the idea of finding a non-traditional, abstract pattern is the direct ancestor of the Vikings, Seahawks, Titans, and Jets designs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DNAsports said:

I know it’s Nike we’re talking about, but would it be out of the realm of possibility for them to do some type of horizontal or diagonal striping on the shoulders as opposed to the sleeves?

Like they did with Oregon State? I know their uniforms are sharp, but I'm tired off eccentric striping patterns on the falcons. I've learned to suppress my expectations, but I know there's a few new elements that will be unique to only the Falcons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2020 at 11:26 PM, Carolingian Steamroller said:

A requiem for the Falcons modern uniforms:

 

They have the core of a really forward thinking idea. With sleeve space shrinking to non-existent, the Falcons came up with a pattern: vertical black-white-red-white-black blocks of color. The pattern stays the same on all three jerseys. The only change is the piping. 
 

You don’t have to like it and frankly it’s aged rather poorly, but the idea of finding a non-traditional, abstract pattern is the direct ancestor of the Vikings, Seahawks, Titans, and Jets designs. 

It's also associated with electrocuted dogs and the worst collapse in Super Bowl history. 

 

I know you're talking purely about design (the panels and piping look aged horribly as you said) but things do not exist in a vacuum. 

All of the praise for the identity on academic grounds won't change the non-aesthetic associations. 

 

It's the other side of the coin to the argument "the Yankees' uniforms would be called plain if they debuted today." Yeah maybe, but context beyond the aesthetic matters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, IceCap said:

It's also associated with electrocuted dogs and the worst collapse in Super Bowl history. 

 

I know you're talking purely about design (the panels and piping look aged horribly as you said) but things do not exist in a vacuum. 

All of the praise for the identity on academic grounds won't change the non-aesthetic associations. 

 

It's the other side of the coin to the argument "the Yankees' uniforms would be called plain if they debuted today." Yeah maybe, but context beyond the aesthetic matters. 

 

Well yea.

 

I'm not regretting that they're going away. I don't think that they're a hidden gem. Just noting their importance aesthetically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2020 at 12:22 PM, Buc said:

That looks like it may just be an error, or at least I hope it is--switching the color of the claw is lateral, but I can't see any decent reason for adding white tips into those red wing streaks

 

On the subject of the new Falcons uniforms, I've been stewing over this for a while, and I'm pretty much convinced, especially after seeing what Arthur Blank had to say regarding "mixing and matching", and given the NFL's most recent Nike-led identity revamps (The Browns, Titans, Jaguars and Jets), that the new Falcons' uniforms WILL 100% include, for the first time in Falcons' history, red pants, to go along with black and white ones, along with a black, white, and red jersey.  (Each of the four previously mentioned uniforms have this in common.) Three different colored tops, three different colored pants, all will be featured in monochrome when the new uniforms are first unveiled, and it'll make for nine different combo possibilities.

 

 

 

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2020 at 6:27 PM, BringBackTheVet said:

My bet is red, white, black jerseys, to match with white, black, and grey (hopefully silver) pants.

 

A sliver helmet would look the best, but wouldn't make any sense.  It has to be black, because if it's red, the black jerseys wouldn't look great.  There's no need for white pants in their set, but teams aren't good at turning down options these days.

I disagree about the red helmet. The Falcons had a red helmet early on in their inception until like 1991. Red helmet is where it's at.

22 minutes ago, Buc said:

^ I stand corrected. I never even knew the Falcons wore those--what year was that, and was that a one-time color rush set? 

That's the color rush jerseys that they've worn all of once against the Saints in 2017. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.