Patriots Unveil New Uniforms

[FiddySicks]

6 hours ago, Sport said:

 

It's a great logo for a football helmet! 

 

dynamic, chargers forward, fits the space. It's one of the only places where the logo works. 

 

It's a bad logo for anything else. 

 

 

unbalanced, very horizontal, leaves a lot of empty space on the left side, and difficult to visually center. 

 

When I first saw that logo I absolutely HATED it. My uncle gave me a Pats hat with the new logo right after it came out (he’s a bit of a new logo junkie like us, but he’s a bit more closeted about it ), and even though it was a cool hat, I didn’t wear it because the shape of that logo bugs me so much. This was WAY before the dynasty, too. I wouldn’t wear a Pats hat nowadays but for totally different reasons. 

 

 

 

But, after seeing it on helmets for so long, I’ve basically ended up right where you’re at. It’s a bad logo overall as a primary mark, but it does work kind of perfectly as a helmet logo. I feel like they could use that logo like the Eagles and Rams do. Build a more detailed primary mark, and just use the Flying Elvis head on the helmets. 

[Digby]

14 minutes ago, WavePunter said:

The jersey has silver outlines on the numbers and in the logo.. that's pretty substantial imo

 

Logo, sure, but the outlines look invisible on the blue jersey and a mistake on the white jersey ... either way they don't play off the pants to me, not the way the old shoulder stripe did. There's always going to be some silver with the logo, and the helmet ... but this reveal is making me realize I don't really mind if the helmet doesn't match jersey fabric elements, especially since metallic silver seems like a nice default helmet color.

[AustinFromBoston]

The only thing that has really bothered me about the Flying Elvis is that I really hate how thick the white outline for it is. 

 

I think it honestly looks better without it. 

[Brian in Boston]

4 minutes ago, IceCap said:

 It's hardly bad though. It's just sort of there...

If I'm being completely honest, this is the way I feel about the majority of NFL team primary marks. Hell, the majority of pro sports primary marks. A lot of the logos adorning pro sports franchises are... serviceable.  

[WavePunter]

1 hour ago, Digby said:

 

Logo, sure, but the outlines look invisible on the blue jersey and a mistake on the white jersey ... either way they don't play off the pants to me, not the way the old shoulder stripe did. There's always going to be some silver with the logo, and the helmet ... but this reveal is making me realize I don't really mind if the helmet doesn't match jersey fabric elements, especially since metallic silver seems like a nice default helmet color.

I guess my main point is just that the jersey doesn't have to feature copious amounts of the helmet color or pants color for everything to work.. silver pants would be the most acceptable option for the Patriots imo, with the silver helmet, regardless of jersey and trim color.. 

[The_Admiral]

2 hours ago, Brass said:

As for a 17,000-seat arena, I don't see how that would fit where they put the current Convention Center to accommodate what they needed. I really don't. They would have had to expand closer to the river and that would have cut off one of the busiest areas of commuter traffic for however long it would have taken to build the stadium. NHL arena? Sure. They could have done it.

 

Is that a yes or a no? 17,000 is about the low end of capacity for the NHL, minus the Winnipeg and Nassau outliers.

[Brass]

3 hours ago, the admiral said:

 

Is that a yes or a no? 17,000 is about the low end of capacity for the NHL, minus the Winnipeg and Nassau outliers.

 

Ah, shucks - I misread your original comment about that. At first I thought you meant a 17,000 NFL stadium, because apparently to my brain, that makes sense.

 

17,000 NHL arena, yes. Couple parking garages in the vicinity and you could do it. Honestly, the convention center sort-of-kind-of looks like an NHL arena from the highway. I'll try to snag a picture from Google Earth or something. NFL stadium in the same plot? No.

 

EDIT: Here's an ok view.

 

[Meshmaster101]

honestly the pats could have switched over to pat patriot and it would have been an improvement. i think that the biggest thing that ties the flying elvis with the rest of the uniforms is the unique number font that the old unis had. now that they've changed it, it kinda just feels like its there by itself. if they moved back to pat patriot, it would have been a better logo, and in general more beloved by fans and would have been a further return to tradition as the uniform itself was already going back to the past patriot uniforms a bit, borrowing things like the shoulder striping and number font

[JayMac]

14 hours ago, IceCap said:

Yeah. I'm with @Brian in Boston on this one. I won't pretend the Pats' logo is amazing, because it's not. It's hardly bad though. It's just sort of there? Which is strangely fitting for the dynasty it represents I suppose. 

 

I'm not the biggest fan of it, and I'm open to alternates (I love the old rejected logo @the admiral mocked up) but for what it is? It's fine. I certainly don't get the hate at all. It's better than the poorly drawn cartoon character that was Pat the Patriot. 

I liked it much more than Pat Patriot when it came out in 1993 and I still like it more in 2020. I know white helmets dominate the AFC East but I'd love to see them do a white helmet with the current logo.

[ahowe6464]

16 hours ago, Brian in Boston said:

You see Elvis... a lot of New Englanders see "The Old Man of the Mountain".


 

As a New Englander... I can't say I've ever seen this. But it is really cool!

[Digby]

Oh I always thought that was intentional from the start. I still get a little sad every time I drive through New Hampshire and see all the state highway signs, that stupid rock face was the only thing that state had going for it.

[bosrs1]

18 hours ago, FiddySicks said:

 

When I first saw that logo I absolutely HATED it. My uncle gave me a Pats hat with the new logo right after it came out (he’s a bit of a new logo junkie like us, but he’s a bit more closeted about it ), and even though it was a cool hat, I didn’t wear it because the shape of that logo bugs me so much. This was WAY before the dynasty, too. I wouldn’t wear a Pats hat nowadays but for totally different reasons. 

 

 

 

But, after seeing it on helmets for so long, I’ve basically ended up right where you’re at. It’s a bad logo overall as a primary mark, but it does work kind of perfectly as a helmet logo. I feel like they could use that logo like the Eagles and Rams do. Build a more detailed primary mark, and just use the Flying Elvis head on the helmets. 

 

Maybe that's a compromise everyone could live with. Elvis on the helmets (and jerseys if they ever bring him back there). Pat brought back on a primary logo (because it has to be stated that he was a piss poor helmet logo). 

[BBTV]

18 hours ago, IceCap said:

I certainly don't get the hate at all. 

 

While I don't "hate" it, I really dislike it, mostly for reasons that have been beaten to death here.  

1) It doesn't center well since it's very heavily weighted to the right.  In many applications, it looks like a mistake was made.

2) it's so horizontal that it looks bad in small applications, like scorebugs, icons/avatars, football cards (if those still exist), etc.

 

18 hours ago, IceCap said:

It's better than the poorly drawn cartoon character that was Pat the Patriot. 

 

Oh for sure.  I took a messy corn-and-wine-influence dump this morning that was probably more aesthetically pleasing than Pat.

 

[Brave-Bird 08]

WHY do people prefer Patriot Pat over Flying Elvis?

 

Logos are supposed to be abstract, and the current Patriots logo as another poster said is perfect for a football helmet -- forward facing logos just flat out work. There isn't anything in the design that you can argue is fundamentally bad, it's just not some people's cut of tea. 

 

How is that miles worse than a logo that can't be embroidered, isn't  facing and includes shades of brown? 

 

The absolute marriage people have with old, inferior logos blows my mind. There are a lot of BAD modern applications of logos out there but Flying Elvis is one of the best and now one of the most iconic.

[FinsUp1214]

55 minutes ago, Brave-Bird 08 said:

The absolute marriage people have with old, inferior logos blows my mind.

I promise I’m not saying this to be an a$$, but in most cases it’s really not that hard to understand and isn’t that mind-blowing: It’s nostalgia. And I’ll fully admit that nostalgia has an influence on some of my preferences from logo to logo. I’d argue it would for a whole lot of us.
 

Nostalgia is easy to shoot down and disregard, but in contrast I believe it to be a very important factor to consider in branding; emotional response is a good thing. I’m not saying something that’s deeply flawed in craft has to come back as-is just because fans have feelings for it, but I see nothing wrong with taking the idea of something nostalgically loved and cleaning it up to make it fit for the present day. I assume that’s why many collegiate mascot logos with sailor hats and/or sweaters have survived to the present day in modernized forms. 

[monkeypower]

4 hours ago, Digby said:

Oh I always thought that was intentional from the start. I still get a little sad every time I drive through New Hampshire and see all the state highway signs, that stupid rock face was the only thing that state had going for it.

 

Hey, I happen to really like New Hampshire. I've actually become a fan of New England*, or at least four of the states because I haven't been to CT or RI, after spending most of the last two summers there. I'm supposed be there again this summer, but I don't know if I'll be able to because of the border closure.

*Obviously referring to the area, definitely not the Patriots

 

That said, I do agree a bit and find it kind of funny that the major symbol for New Hampshire is something that fell apart. I also love the state motto being "Live Free or Die" because that's so overly aggressive, especially me coming from a place that has "Wild Rose Country" on the licence plates.

 

23 hours ago, the admiral said:

I was thinking of that concrete atrocity of a city hall.

 

EDIT: I thought the city hall building was pretty cool looking. I wouldn't call it a concrete atrocity. I was thinking of the State House. Upon Googling, yes, the city hall is a concrete atrocity.

[Pizzaman7294]

23 hours ago, Brian in Boston said:

You see Elvis... a lot of New Englanders see "The Old Man of the Mountain".



Truth be told, the Patriots' current  logo is part of a pack of middle-tier NFL team primary marks. Not great, not horrible... just meh.

 

 

The old proposed logo was probably even closer to the Old Man on the Mountain. #RIPIP

 

[Hat Boy]

On ‎5‎/‎1‎/‎2020 at 4:06 PM, monkeypower said:

EDIT: I thought the city hall building was pretty cool looking. I wouldn't call it a concrete atrocity. I was thinking of the State House. Upon Googling, yes, the city hall is a concrete atrocity.

For reasons I can't understand, Boston City Hall is the darling of the architectural set.

https://architizer.com/blog/inspiration/stories/worlds-ugliest-building-wins-major-architecture-award/

 

I don't know anything about architecture, so the only way I judge a building is "does it look good?"  With City Hall, the answer is, "No.  No it does not."

[henburg]

2 hours ago, Hat Boy said:

For reasons I can't understand, Boston City Hall is the darling of the architectural set.

https://architizer.com/blog/inspiration/stories/worlds-ugliest-building-wins-major-architecture-award/

 

I don't know anything about architecture, so the only way I judge a building is "does it look good?"  With City Hall, the answer is, "No.  No it does not."

 

Brutalism is probably the most divisive style of architecture there is. Personally, I think that buildings in this style have a wide range from really cool in a science fiction sort of way to very prison-like and ugly. Boston's City Hall is probably closer to the former for me.

[The_Admiral]

Brutalism is architecture for architects. Lay people correct identify it as hideous.