Los Angeles NFL Brands Discussion

[dont care]

2 hours ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

 

The drop shadow is weird, the extended shoulder stripes are silly, and "CLEVELAND" is unnecessary, but these will forever be awesome to me:

 

I just threw up in my mouth

[SFGiants58]

14 minutes ago, AFirestormToPurify said:

 the NHL has been pushing vintage white/heritage white/dirty white down our throats for about a decade now? So I'm used to that color I guess.

 

 

Note the key word here being "vintage." Put it on a modern set, like the Rams, and it looks terrible.

 

14 minutes ago, AFirestormToPurify said:

And I do think it looks better on green turf than on a crisp white sheet of ice.

 

I'd say the opposite, as it just looks filthy and brings down the uniform set a lot. Just eliminating bone would go a long way into making it better.

 

14 minutes ago, AFirestormToPurify said:

TLDR version: hockey fan here, I think bone looks good and there is no way this is the worst uniform of all time compared to the 00s Bills or Alarm Clock Bucs or current Cardinals. Football traditionalists need to chill with the knee jerk reaction to the Rams uniforms lol

 

The '00s Bills never did true monochrome (always had red socks) nor did they engage in gradients. The Alarm Clock Bucs are much worse, I'll give you that. The current Cardinals at least use real white and didn't mess too with the only "classic" part of their set (the helmet). I'd take the Reebok Cardinals over the Bone Rams any day.

[AFirestormToPurify]

15 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

Note the key word here being "vintage." Put it on a modern set, like the Rams, and it looks terrible.

That's a good point. The hockey teams that use vintage white at least try to make the jersey look old school. But then again, that's kinda what I like about that Rams jersey. It looks bone white rather than just dirty white. Looks like they did it on purpose, if that makes sense

15 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

I'd say the opposite, as it just looks filthy and brings down the uniform set a lot. Just eliminating bone would go a long way into making it better.

Well let's agree to disagree here. At least on the football field, there is no huge playing surface to compare the bone white to, which makes the bone stand out a bit less

15 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

The '00s Bills never did true monochrome (always had red socks) nor did they engage in gradients. The Alarm Clock Bucs are much worse, I'll give you that. The current Cardinals at least use real white and didn't mess too with the only "classic" part of their set (the helmet). I'd take the Reebok Cardinals over the Bone Rams any day.

You're right about the Bills, BUT even without the mono pants and socks and gradients, they still managed to look worse than the Rams imo. The Rams also don't use piping and vertical stripes either which should never, ever be on hockey or football jerseys. The Cards and Bengals should leave those to basketball teams. Somehow, I think it works for the Broncos though. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree once again. Again, could just be my hockey background that makes me say that. Kinda like when people who I'm guessing are football fans say they like white hockey pants, they just don't get it lol. And neither do I, probably. But I still feel like of all the things you could dislike about the Rams unis, the bone color is the one that is the least offensive to me. Then again, I don't like any other jerseys the Rams have used in the past. Just my outsider 0.02$

[Ridleylash]

9 minutes ago, AFirestormToPurify said:

At least on the football field, there is no huge playing surface to compare the bone white to, which makes the bone stand out a bit less

Unless you have bone gray next to stark white on your own damn jersey, like the Rams do;

Look at the difference between the white on the sleeves and the body's bone gray. It's pretty friggin' obvious.

[colortv]

What's wrong with these? Ojectively speaking?

 

 

[Ridleylash]

1 minute ago, colortv said:

What's wrong with these? Ojectively speaking?

The gradient numbers and stripes are pretty damn awful, and the split horn will always be pretty crummy. I mean, having white touch yellow also breaks a rule of tincuture, which doesn't help.

[colortv]

Just now, Ridleylash said:

The gradient numbers and stripes are pretty damn awful, and the split horn will always be pretty crummy.

 

"damn awful" and "crummy" aren't objective.

[SFGiants58]

All of this subjective, that’s the beauty of it. “Objectively good” and “objectively bad” do not belong in these discussions.

[AFirestormToPurify]

3 minutes ago, Ridleylash said:

Unless you have bone next to stark white on your own damn jersey, like the Rams do;

Yeah, I never said it was the perfect uniform. Doesn't look that bad to me, I know some people have a theory that certain colors shouldn't touch, I tend to agree, except in this case, I don't think it looks that bad. Probably looks different on the field with natural lighting conditions or with stadium spotlights though

[The_Admiral]

I'll reiterate my old argument, which is that trying new things is for mid-market expansion teams. I want teams in all leagues to push their respective envelopes so that we have full spectrums of timeless to modern, but Los Angeles is not a place to mess around. The other old-line L.A. teams, the Lakers and Dodgers, look more or less the same now as they always have, as do the Bears, as do, to an extent, the Giants (not to mention the Packers and Cowboys, America's Teams). To be sure, one could argue that the team leaving and coming back to a city where the NFL's popularity has taken a tumble effectively makes the Los Angeles Rams a mid-market expansion team, but I would argue that the whole drama of leaving and coming back gives them all the more reason to respect the continuity of the franchise and look recognizable as the L.A. Rams, an old team in a big city.

[guest23]

Just like the old jags, browns and bucs the rams uniforms are objectively bad because they are too f-ing busy. They all reek of a design team and clients that were too eager to slap on too many contemporary features simply because they were available in the parts bin. The result in all instances created a huge eyesore and the three teams mentioned have immediately corrected back to familiar looks that represent professional football (jags overcorrected). What makes the rams especially egregious is that their uniforms over time were classic but also very forward thinking in their design elements by incorporating the horns. If there was a team that should have exercised some constraint in the design process it's the rams and they failed.

[Ridleylash]

9 minutes ago, the admiral said:

I'll reiterate my old argument, which is that trying new things is for mid-market expansion teams. I want teams in all leagues to push their respective envelopes so that we have full spectrums of timeless to modern, but Los Angeles is not a place to mess around. The other old-line L.A. teams, the Lakers and Dodgers, look more or less the same now as they always have, as do the Bears, as do, to an extent, the Giants. To be sure, one could argue that the team leaving and coming back to a city where the NFL's popularity has taken a tumble effectively makes the Los Angeles Rams a mid-market expansion team, but I would argue that the whole drama of leaving and coming back gives them all the more reason to respect the continuity of the franchise and look recognizable as the L.A. Rams, an old team in a big city.

Exactly. People would be furious if the Dodgers announced a complete redesign where they aped a bunch of design trends because Dodgers fans, the people the team markets to, don't want "trendy" and "hip", they want things that look and feel like the Dodgers. Same with the Rams; people don't want some gimmicky trashheap with gray and split horns and gradients and all this other crap, they want the classic LA Rams;

 

Like, this is one of the best looks in all of football. Change the helmet color all you like, but the Rams should've just made these jerseys their main set, maybe made some new logos and been done with it. Instead, we got a gimmick-loaded and over-designed mess of a uniform that won't last past it's obligatory five years. This is an elder statesman franchise, not a 2016 expansion team.

[ManillaToad]

1 hour ago, dont care said:

The drop shadow is weird, the extended shoulder stripes are silly, and "CLEVELAND" is unnecessary, but these will forever be awesome to me:

 

 

This is a cool idea for a team like the Jags or something, but the Browns? No thanks

[AFirestormToPurify]

1 hour ago, Ridleylash said:

Exactly. People would be furious if the Dodgers announced a complete redesign where they aped a bunch of design trends because Dodgers fans, the people the team markets to, don't want "trendy" and "hip", they want things that look and feel like the Dodgers. Same with the Rams; people don't want some gimmicky trashheap with gray and split horns and gradients and all this other crap, they want the classic LA Rams;

 

Like, this is one of the best looks in all of football. Change the helmet color all you like, but the Rams should've just made these jerseys their main set, maybe made some new logos and been done with it. Instead, we got a gimmick-loaded and over-designed mess of a uniform that won't last past it's obligatory five years. This is an elder statesman franchise, not a 2016 expansion team.

Again, probably just my outsider opinion, but I don't get what is so great about those uniforms. The horns look good, but the lack of white on the jerseys really bothers me, makes the pant stripes look out of place. I'm guessing the helmets are supposed to be royal blue but they couldn't due to the one helmet rule?

[jp1409]

1 hour ago, ManillaToad said:

 

This is a cool idea for a league like the XFL or something, but the NFL? No thanks

 

FTFY

[dont care]

4 minutes ago, AFirestormToPurify said:

Again, probably just my outsider opinion, but I don't get what is so great about those uniforms. The horns look good, but the lack of white on the jerseys really bothers me, makes the pant stripes look out of place. I'm guessing the helmets are supposed to be royal blue but they couldn't due to the one helmet rule?

At the time the uniforms were first worn there was only 2 options for blue shells, navy, and “royal” blue that was more close to powder that the Broncos use to wear.

[AFirestormToPurify]

1 hour ago, dont care said:

At the time the uniforms were first worn there was only 2 options for blue shells, navy, and “royal” blue that was more close to powder that the Broncos use to wear.

Oh okay so just an old timey quirk basically? Like the Cowboys and their mismatching silvers? Yeah this bring the uniform down a couple more notches for me, unfortunately

[guest23]

13 minutes ago, AFirestormToPurify said:

Oh okay so just an old timey quirk basically? Like the Cowboys and their mismatching silvers? Yeah this bring the uniform down a couple more notches for me, unfortunately

 

A quirk but origin is essentially the opposite case. The cowboys intentionally chose the pants to be a different color because tex schramm thought in the mid 80's that the current silver green looked like a better match with the silver blue helmets on tv. According to the GUD, they moved away from a standard matte silver (aka gray) to the matte silver blue in the mid 70's and ultimately settled on silver-green when the shinly stretch nylon pants (aka dazzle) became popular. So in effect they created custom colored pants to go with the helmets which were much more of a neutral or stock color. On the other side of the coin you had the giants and rams which opted to go with stock navy shells and royal uniforms in the early 80's because the other blue option was the robin egg blue that the broncos was sold as royal back in the day.

[AFirestormToPurify]

9 minutes ago, guest23 said:

 

A quirk but origin is essentially the opposite case. The cowboys intentionally chose the pants to be a different color because tex schramm thought in the mid 80's that the current silver green looked like a better match with the silver blue helmets on tv. According to the GUD, they moved away from a standard matte silver (aka gray) to the matte silver blue in the mid 70's and ultimately settled on silver-green when the shinly stretch nylon pants (aka dazzle) became popular. So in effect they created custom colored pants to go with the helmets which were much more of a neutral or stock color. On the other side of the coin you had the giants and rams which opted to go with stock navy shells and royal uniforms in the early 80's because the other blue option was the robin egg blue that the broncos was sold as royal back in the day.

As a hockey gear nerd who doesn't know much about football and even less about football gear, this was very interesting. Thank you

[colortv]

On 1/26/2021 at 4:07 PM, SFGiants58 said:

All of this subjective, that’s the beauty of it. “Objectively good” and “objectively bad” do not belong in these discussions.

 

Exactly, so maybe everyone should stop acting like their opinions are facts.