hawk36 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 28 minutes ago, Gothamite said: In an ideal world, sure. But that's not the choice the Rams were given. But the NFL should use this as a learning experience and address the issue before it happens again. Design Hovie Studios Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sec19Row53 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 3 minutes ago, hawk36 said: But the NFL should use this as a learning experience and address the issue before it happens again. What makes you think the NFL is unhappy with how this is going? I haven't heard a peep about this other than in this here funhouse we call the CCSLC. It's where I sit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 Yeah, I don't think the NFL really sees a problem here. And as was said before, if this process ends well, with a uniform the fans love, then these couple years will be a minor blip and easily forgotten. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk36 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 I find it very hard to believe that a league that fines players for having their socks too low isn't very aware at how bad this is making them look visually. My guess is the Rams found a loophole that they exploited (like the Chargers) that the NFL, behind closed doors, isn't happy with. My best guess is the NFL had hoped the Rams would keep their St. Louis look until the move to the new stadium. Of course the NFL will never admit that since they want to make it seem like they are in total control, but to think a league that is as image conscious as the NFL doesn't care about a mismatched look, I feel is simply incorrect. Design Hovie Studios Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leopard88 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 14 hours ago, duxrcool048 said: Not sure if anyone has seen this. But something I saw on the Ram's facebook. It's a picture with potential free agents. Interesting that they're using unsigned players . . . during the "tampering" period. Most Liked Content of the Day -- February 15, 2017, August 21, 2017, August 22, 2017 ///// Proud Winner of the CCSLC Post of the Day Award -- April 8, 2008 Originator of the Upside Down Sarcasm Smilie -- November 1, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hugevolsfan Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 18 minutes ago, hawk36 said: I find it very hard to believe that a league that fines players for having their socks too low isn't very aware at how bad this is making them look visually. My guess is the Rams found a loophole that they exploited (like the Chargers) that the NFL, behind closed doors, isn't happy with. My best guess is the NFL had hoped the Rams would keep their St. Louis look until the move to the new stadium. Of course the NFL will never admit that since they want to make it seem like they are in total control, but to think a league that is as image conscious as the NFL doesn't care about a mismatched look, I feel is simply incorrect. You are aware of the Jags helmet right! That makes the Rams look like the best dressed of the NFL. My Fictional Football League Version 3 My Fictional Football Leagues WebsiteMy Church Website Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandMooreArt Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 n/a GRAPHIC ARTIST BEHANCE / MEDIUM / DRIBBBLE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk36 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 1 hour ago, hugevolsfan said: You are aware of the Jags helmet right! That makes the Rams look like the best dressed of the NFL. Great point although the League could be "teaching a lesson" to the Jags (and the Bucs with their numerals). Dare to wear something ridiculous and you will look ridiculous for 5 years. Who knows. I'd love to be a fly on the wall and hear what the insiders actually think. I think the lesson to be learned is if you are unsure, make your jersey as bland as possible (NY Giants). Then add personality from year to year with your helmet and pants that, apparently, can be changed whenever. Design Hovie Studios Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont care Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 21 minutes ago, hawk36 said: Great point although the League could be "teaching a lesson" to the Jags (and the Bucs with their numerals). Dare to wear something ridiculous and you will look ridiculous for 5 years. Who knows. I'd love to be a fly on the wall and hear what the insiders actually think. I think the lesson to be learned is if you are unsure, make your jersey as bland as possible (NY Giants). Then add personality from year to year with your helmet and pants that, apparently, can be changed whenever. Pants definitely can be changed about as often as they wish because they really aren't sold or marketed. Helmets though require more coordination because of all the marketing materials that feature them (otherwise the jags probably would have changed by now, but that's also assuming they want to) and also helmets can be sold, just much less often than the jerseys which makes them virtually untouchable outside of nameplate colors and at her minor tweaks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceCap Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 5 hours ago, hawk36 said: I find it very hard to believe that a league that fines players for having their socks too low isn't very aware at how bad this is making them look visually. My guess is the Rams found a loophole that they exploited (like the Chargers) that the NFL, behind closed doors, isn't happy with. My best guess is the NFL had hoped the Rams would keep their St. Louis look until the move to the new stadium. Of course the NFL will never admit that since they want to make it seem like they are in total control, but to think a league that is as image conscious as the NFL doesn't care about a mismatched look, I feel is simply incorrect. The NFL is certainly brand-conscious but a few things need to be noted. The first was what @Gothamite brought up. If the Rams go with an update of the blue and athletic gold look that everyone loves in two years then this two year "mismatch" will barely be a footnote in the overall history of the Rams franchise. If anything it'll probably be remembered fondly in twenty years' time as this weird but endearing thing that was barely around. Secondly, being brand-conscious does not equate to having the same fondness for detail that we have. We're a niche group. Most people don't really pay much attention to uniform and logo details other than wanting to buy new gear when there's a change. So take the minority of people who do pay attention to this stuff. Well we are the tiny subset of that group willing to talk about it on the internet. No one's losing sleep over what a bunch of CCSLC geeks think about the Rams' decisions to play mix and match. As far as the NFL is concerned? The jerseys (which are the centrepiece of a team's merchandise catalog) aren't being tinkered with, so Nike can continue to sell old stock while a new design is worked on for 2019. From the NFL's perspective? Brand cohesion has been successfully maintained. PotD 26/2/12 1/7/15 2020 BASS Spin the Wheel, Make the Deal Regular Season Champion 2021 BASS NFL Pick'em Regular Season Champion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyst13 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 21 hours ago, duxrcool048 said: Not sure if anyone has seen this. But something I saw on the Ram's facebook. It's a picture with potential free agents. Seeing it like this, I don't mind the mismatch as much, except for the logo on the sleeves. I think it's because of the horns mismatch, and the gold in the logo ends up being just a bit more than I can tolerate. If they could switch that for the navy and white version, I don't think it would look half bad. As is, you do you, NFL. Imagine if the Rams were to win the Super Bowl with this look? Then it would have a place in sports history and show up every year in highlights, and it may even have some fondness from fans after that. What if they were the road team and forced to wear the navy uniforms instead? Fortunately, I don't think the Rams are at risk of playing in a Super Bowl any time soon, and this can just be a blip in their history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk36 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 1 hour ago, Ice_Cap said: Secondly, being brand-conscious does not equate to having the same fondness for detail that we have. We're a niche group. Most people don't really pay much attention to uniform and logo details other than wanting to buy new gear when there's a change. So take the minority of people who do pay attention to this stuff. Well we are the tiny subset of that group willing to talk about it on the internet. No one's losing sleep over what a bunch of CCSLC geeks think about the Rams' decisions to play mix and match. I'd agree (that we notice more) but then why not allow the team to remove the gold from their jerseys since 99% of the fans will buy the old jerseys with gold trim and never notice they are different? Likewise, it would be interesting to see if they sold fashion jerseys without the gold, how they'd sell in comparison to the ones worn on the field. Design Hovie Studios Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceCap Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 16 minutes ago, hawk36 said: ...but then why not allow the team to remove the gold from their jerseys since 99% of the fans will buy the old jerseys with gold trim and never notice they are different? Because Nike has leftover St. Louis Rams stock they need to move. PotD 26/2/12 1/7/15 2020 BASS Spin the Wheel, Make the Deal Regular Season Champion 2021 BASS NFL Pick'em Regular Season Champion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk36 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 3 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said: Because Nike has leftover St. Louis Rams stock they need to move. Right, I get that. But my point to your point was that if most people won't notice, why not let the actual team look great (without the gold), and continue to sell the gold trimmed jerseys to the public? My guess is that the general public would actually notice and be demanding the gold-less jerseys in shops. Don't you think? Design Hovie Studios Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 There's a difference between "people won't notice that the jerseys have an accent color not on the pants or helmet" and "people won't notice that the retail jerseys aren't the same as the onfield." The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschoolvikings Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 8 hours ago, hawk36 said: I find it very hard to believe that a league that fines players for having their socks too low isn't very aware at how bad this is making them look visually. My guess is the Rams found a loophole that they exploited (like the Chargers) that the NFL, behind closed doors, isn't happy with. My best guess is the NFL had hoped the Rams would keep their St. Louis look until the move to the new stadium. Of course the NFL will never admit that since they want to make it seem like they are in total control, but to think a league that is as image conscious as the NFL doesn't care about a mismatched look, I feel is simply incorrect. Wow. I wish we actually lived in a world where a sports league cared this much about the aesthetics of uniforms beyond making a buck. Here's my guess on how this all went down... Rams: "hey, can we change our uniform now and then again in two years?" NFL: "nope, against the rules." Rams: "ok, well, can we do a few other things?" NFL: "are these other things against the rules?" Rams: "no." NFL: "ok, knock yourselves out." At which point everyone but us kinda stopped thinking about it. http://dstewartpaint.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ltjets21 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Are the Rams producing any new Navy and Gold merchandise? Just how much rams stock is there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk36 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 17 hours ago, oldschoolvikings said: Wow. I wish we actually lived in a world where a sports league cared this much about the aesthetics of uniforms beyond making a buck. Here's my guess on how this all went down... Rams: "hey, can we change our uniform now and then again in two years?" NFL: "nope, against the rules." Rams: "ok, well, can we do a few other things?" NFL: "are these other things against the rules?" Rams: "no." NFL: "ok, knock yourselves out." At which point everyone but us kinda stopped thinking about it. I'd follow along until your last line where the NFL saw it. My guess is they thought, crap, can we do anything about this and found out no, the Rams were within the letter of the law. Granted it's not horrible (like the Jags and Bucs) but I bet inside closed doors, there are at least some who are thinking "why the hell didn't they just keep the gold accents for 2 more years". Design Hovie Studios Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 I really doubt that anyone at the NFL considered it a problem. We've seen plenty of uniforms where not all colors are on all elements, and that's never raised any issue. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 On 3/7/2017 at 6:18 PM, ltjets21 said: Did the Chargers say they would be changing their uniforms anytime soon? No. The Rams did from the start, but the Chargers never have. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.