Buc

Tampa Bay Buccaneers Unveil New Uniforms

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, _DietDrPepper_ said:

I really didn't think this would be an unpopular opinion but the mockups look good, nothing like the Falcons at least in my eyes, and comparing them to the Jags is a funny because the Jags look really good right now, the best they've looked in 20 years


If it’s unpopular, at least I share it with you. Logos still suck but the uniforms are a huge improvement.  And I’d take modern Jags over a lot of their precious looks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, IceCap said:

The Paul Lukas hate has eclipsed Paul Lukas' actual writing in terms of annoyance.

 

I know you didn't quote me but just wanted to clarify that I am completely indifferent on the guy. I only come here for uniform/logo news and have never really read enough of his articles over the years to formulate any kind of opinion. I used what may be an unflattering photo that I felt could put off some 'dark alley' vibes if used in the right context, and sprinkled some crack on his lips to remain true to the original skit. I'm not one to make fun of anyone's appearance and didn't mean for it to go there. My apologies if the meme came across any differently since it was only intended to make a few people exhale air rapidly out their noses. 😅

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, oldschoolvikings said:

I think this change is going to have another similarity to the Jaguars change... we're gonna see people who dislike it try to claim the one it's replacing "wasn't that bad"... which is nonsense. After the Jags' change, we got a bunch of posts about how "except for the two-tone helmet" the old uniform was better.  That's going to happen here with people claiming they only needed to fix the number font.  Ridiculous.  Don't kid yourself... the Jags 2013-2017 and the Bucs 2014-2019 were both garbage for numerous reasons, and boring is always better than butt-ugly.

I hate this kind of narrative, I happen to think both the jags and Bucs set minus font were better. Please don’t tell me my opinion and others are ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, IceCap said:

So I was against the Bucs mixing eras, because I didn't think the creamsicle look mixed well with pewter. I was wrong. That's hot.


I like it, too. It’s the mix of those three colors that breathes life into the identity and makes it feel distinctly theirs. I think Bruce would benefit from a bit of simplification in this context since the white keyline adds a lot of noise on a dark background, but there’s definitely promise there.

 

4 hours ago, IceCap said:

[Snipped long post for space.]

 

Re: Pewter being a last minute addition/alteration... I think you might be on to something. At the very least, it appears very plausible to me that they designed the set purposefully so they could just switch out the pant and helmet colors without disrupting the rest of the design much, as if to say, “We know you’re comfortable here since you’ve always worn white helmets, but you could also go with silver or even this cannonball color if you want to take a risk and make a bigger splash.”

 

Re: Similar designs for different teams... There are probably a couple things going on here.

 

One, trends. Teams (especially ones that are relatively young or ones that don’t have a ton of equity in their look) see other teams do stuff, they see the buzz, they want to replicate it, and those things tend to be cyclical and copycatty. In general, teams aren’t really thinking of design in the same terms or with nearly as much depth as we all do.

 

Two, uniforms used to be considered primarily identity or branding, but they seem to shift more toward becoming just another product to sell every single year. 😞 In that school of thought, there might be a top-down brand philosophy that drives the creative director running the project, and that brand philosophy typically evolves as well (either as a reactive response to capitalize larger design trends or as a proactive attempt to set them), so I think that’s another reason why we sometimes see teams follow similar paths on separate projects.

 

Three, I think people who do this kind of work for five, ten-plus years is the exception more than the rule, so we might also be seeing the actual designers’ styles, tastes, and interpretations cycling through several short eras. A new designer might come in and the uniforms suddenly start to look different for a few years. The same could happen with a new director, though I tend to think people in those positions stay a little longer because they’re more senior positions and don’t have as much room to move up.

 

Either way, I think That supports what I was trying to say. Every league has its own structure and relationships that dictate its base process, and the individualities of each team and brief dictate the unique path of each project. The NFL seems to do most of its own branding, then hands off the golden briefcase and lets its outfitter handle the apparel phase. The NBA tends to use a small, trusted pool of agencies to do its branding, then allows its teams and outfitter to riff pretty freely on uniforms. We typically do the whole shebang as a single, concurrent process for NHL projects. It all varies.
 

1 hour ago, CrookedThumb said:

Off-topic with respect to uniforms, but I have a Bucs logo question.

 

Does anyone know when exactly the detailing of the Bucco Bruce logo change?  And why it's not recognized as an actual logo change?

 

I remember when the throwbacks were introduced in 2009 and thinking, "his face is different," and then seeing that face in pictures from the 1976 season. I remember trying to research when this happened, but I couldn't find anything at the time.  I know that 1976 is the only year that exact uniform and color scheme existed (except for the throwbacks), so maybe same goes for the logo?

 

BUCS_LOGO.jpg1041.gif


The original was certainly done by hand. The more finely detailed one may have come about when someone digitized the original artwork, possibly a “copy of a copy” or “game of logo telephone” situation. It’s also possible the detailed one is the original, and the sloppier one is the copy that was recreated for the helmet back then (I distinctly remember seeing some old game helmets with Bruce physically painted on the helmet; no decal). Either way, back then there was little media coverage even for major changes, so there was absolutely no reason to publicize a change like this. I’d argue there still isn’t, because the most likely outcome is pissing people off and having to backtrack (see Auburn’s new monogram last summer). 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, j'villejags said:

I know you didn't quote me but just wanted to clarify that I am completely indifferent on the guy. I only come here for uniform/logo news and have never really read enough of his articles over the years to formulate any kind of opinion. I used what may be an unflattering photo that I felt could put off some 'dark alley' vibes if used in the right context, and sprinkled some crack on his lips to remain true to the original skit. I'm not one to make fun of anyone's appearance and didn't mean for it to go there. My apologies if the meme came across any differently since it was only intended to make a few people exhale air rapidly out their noses. 😅


Yeah, but it was just a pretty stupid joke.  And you explicitly did make fun of his appearance with the words you chose.
 

Better to take the L and move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, daniel75 said:

I hate this kind of narrative, I happen to think both the jags and Bucs set minus font were better. Please don’t tell me my opinion and others are ridiculous.

Except the jags current unis are kinda ugly too. They havent looked good since the early 00s. Each look since hasn't been near as good as that set. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

Yeah, but it was just a pretty stupid joke.  And you explicitly did make fun of his appearance with the words you chose.
 

Better to take the L and move on.


That's fair. My bad, guys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, daniel75 said:

I hate this kind of narrative, I happen to think both the jags and Bucs set minus font were better. Please don’t tell me my opinion and others are ridiculous.

It's all subjective, but at the same time? You're clearly in the minority. And like someone who likes a movie most people think is bad? You need to own the fact that you're in the minority on the subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, j'villejags said:

 

I know you didn't quote me but just wanted to clarify that I am completely indifferent on the guy. I only come here for uniform/logo news and have never really read enough of his articles over the years to formulate any kind of opinion. I used what may be an unflattering photo that I felt could put off some 'dark alley' vibes if used in the right context, and sprinkled some crack on his lips to remain true to the original skit. I'm not one to make fun of anyone's appearance and didn't mean for it to go there. My apologies if the meme came across any differently since it was only intended to make a few people exhale air rapidly out their noses. 😅

I mean it's all cool.

I'm mostly talking about the guy who complains about Lukas at every opportunity, without reason. Yeah, Lukas released these supposedly accurate mockups on his site, so the legitimacy of his claims is fair game. @EddieJ1984 complaining about Lukas' dislike of players claiming to be "blue collar" though? What does that have to do with anything? It's got nothing to do with the topic, and it's just shoehorned in because someone who we know doesn't like Paul Lukas saw his name and wanted to let us all know. It's borderline topic derailment to hammer home a point we all get by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul Lukas is no better or worse than the gaggle of eccentrics who post on this board, he just has a bigger platform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, IceCap said:

It's all subjective, but at the same time? You're clearly in the minority. And like someone who likes a movie most people think is bad? You need to own the fact that you're in the minority on the subject.

Smh. It doesn’t make my or others opinion ridiculous or that we’re fooling ourselves. And yeah I’m well aware I’m in the minority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The tale of the two Bruces is a fairly straightforward one...in 1994 the team refreshed its look to include orange pants, orange collars (on the white jerseys), tackle-twill #s, and a much larger and ‘cleaner’ Bucco Bruce on their helmets.  The 1994-1996 set may also be one of the earliest examples of a team going color-on-color pants/socks (orange/orange) as part of their standard look.  
 

As for today’s rendering, the purported lack of orange, if true, is a substantial development— sure the shades and use have changed over the years, but the color orange has been a part of the team’s branding for nearly 45 years.  It would be a shame to lose it entirely.  That being said, if the final product gets us in the ballpark of the ‘97-‘13 set, I’m going to kick back with a cold one from Cigar City (not Big Guava) ;)

Edited by Frank Pillow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, the admiral said:

Paul Lukas is no better or worse than the gaggle of eccentrics who post on this board, he just has a bigger platform.

I don't know about that, I followed uniwatch for years and he consistently came across as smug and pompous. Everyone on here trashes and praises uniforms but he made it seem like his opinions were facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ltjets21 said:

I don't know about that, I followed uniwatch for years and he consistently came across as smug and pompous. Everyone on here trashes and praises uniforms but he made it seem like his opinions were facts.

I only wish people would pay for my opinion on logos and uniforms. Not sure what he's like in reality but I can appreciate that he's built a platform for himself to have a voice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Volt said:

 

Gold Swooshes on the Jags' unis would've probably been all they needed to have some balance.  Works for the Titans.

 

So basically make the swoosh an official part of the uniform.  Game.  Set.  Match.  Nike.  

 

It's clear who you work for.

 

4 hours ago, EddieJ1984 said:

 

Such a creepy lookin dude, his latest thing has been whining about teams/players saying they have a blue collar attitude. How its offensive to blue collar workers and it offends him, Umm you never worked 1 day in your life at a blue collar job either lmao.

 

I also think it's silly that $30M/year guys claim they have a "blue collar attitude" or that teams say they represent "Blue collar cities" (when 90% of the people in their arenas are white-collar guys).  The phrase "blue collar" is absolutely nothing more than pandering.  I find it amusing when I hear guys in an office say "yeah, this is a blue-collar town", like they even know what that means  Every town has a blue collar class.  Literally every one.  Just like every town has a white collar.  This isn't the '50s where 90% of people in Pittsburgh were working at the mills.  It's 2020, where 90% of people in Pittsburgh are working at PNC or for CMU or PITT.

 

3 hours ago, IceCap said:

The Paul Lukas hate has eclipsed Paul Lukas' actual writing in terms of annoyance.

 

Honestly it should be suspendable.  It derails threads.  Just call it "belligerence to the moderating team" and give people a week.  Despite that passive-aggressive dig, I mean that - it should be in the same category as the native-American and politics bans.

 

1 minute ago, ltjets21 said:

I don't know about that, I followed uniwatch for years and he consistently came across as smug and pompous. Everyone on here trashes and praises uniforms but he made it seem like his opinions were facts.

 

It's a blog.  BY DEFINITION IT'S AN OPINION.  Of course the opinions are no more or less valid than anything that's posted here, but I'd suggest that anyone that finds him "smug" or "pompous" is insecure.  I'm not sure how a writer of a uniform and lifestyle blog can offend you that much.  Serious question - do you, or does anyone, preface everything they say with "in my humble opinion..."?  Of course not.  So then, is everyone else making it seems like their opinions are facts?

 

Grow the F up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ridleylash said:

Those mockups look really bad. At that point, they're just the Falcons with pewter and they're further distancing themselves from the unique color scheme they should be embracing. We have enough red teams in sports, especially the NFL where the Niners, Skins, Chiefs, Cardinals and Falcons all already use red as a primary color. Orange was unique to the Bucs, this literally looks like a Falcons uni with pewter replacing white.


Except that’s not true. The Bears, Browns, Bengals, and even the Dolphins have all worn (non-throwback) orange jerseys since the last time the Bucs wore an orange jersey as either their primary or alternate jersey. Their use of orange within their color scheme was unique to them, yes, but I’m uncertain if that was the point you were trying to make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, andrewharrington said:


The original was certainly done by hand. The more finely detailed one may have come about when someone digitized the original artwork, possibly a “copy of a copy” or “game of logo telephone” situation. It’s also possible the detailed one is the original, and the sloppier one is the copy that was recreated for the helmet back then (I distinctly remember seeing some old game helmets with Bruce physically painted on the helmet; no decal). Either way, back then there was little media coverage even for major changes, so there was absolutely no reason to publicize a change like this. I’d argue there still isn’t, because the most likely outcome is pissing people off and having to backtrack (see Auburn’s new monogram last summer). 🙂


The “copy of a copy” and logo variations has always fascinated me. With the mass digitization of these graphics in the early-mid 1990s, I have my doubts about the quality of the sources.

 

Think about it like film restoration for a blu-ray. Generally, you want to go back to the original camera negatives for the best quality image, without any of the imperfections and distortions from later generation prints. With later generations of prints (e.g., an interpositive, an IB technicolor release print, or an LPP print seen in theaters) you have various flaws introduced, like less highlight and shadow detail, along with scratches and jitter. I’m assuming that a lot of these digitizations came from “later generation” sources.
 

This would explain the reason why this stuff exists:

 

spacer.png

spacer.png

spacer.png

spacer.png

...alongside attempts at “standardization” that fell flat:


spacer.png

spacer.png

spacer.png

 

These are just a few examples and I’m sure you can think of more, @andrewharrington. I’m sure at least one of those Bruce logos is a “copy of a copy” that received digitization. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, j'villejags said:

If we are to continue jag-jacking (jagging?) this thread, it's amazing how much gold does for the uniforms. This would be my favorite uniform in the league. 


aIn5pfI.png

 

 

Just a little bit of gold makes those unis look amazing!

 

8 hours ago, Survival79 said:

 

9wVCHBp.png

 

 

That doesn't look half bad.

Share this post


Link to post
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.