NFL 2020

[simtek34]

I know this has been stated many times in the past, but remember this. The Patriots were going to do, along with Silver Pants, have no Sleeve logo and were going to put the TV Numbers there. Again, they were very close with this redesign, but ultimately didn't pass. https://uni-watch.com/2020/04/30/exclusive-pats-considered-silver-grey-pants-in-new-uni-set/

 

 

Would also love to have seen a Red Socks option for when wearing Navy pants, but the NFL forgot how bad mono sucks, unfortunately.

[_DietDrPepper_]

41 minutes ago, simtek34 said:

I know this has been stated many times in the past, but remember this. The Patriots were going to do, along with Silver Pants, have no Sleeve logo and were going to put the TV Numbers there. Again, they were very close with this redesign, but ultimately didn't pass. https://uni-watch.com/2020/04/30/exclusive-pats-considered-silver-grey-pants-in-new-uni-set/

 

 

Would also love to have seen a Red Socks option for when wearing Navy pants, but the NFL forgot how bad mono sucks, unfortunately.

Replace the logo for shoulder numbers on the white and that's a perfect look for the Pats. Whoever had the final word on the decision to pass up on this design made a mistake. 

[Gobbi]

1 hour ago, _DietDrPepper_ said:

Replace the logo for shoulder numbers on the white and that's a perfect look for the Pats. Whoever had the final word on the decision to pass up on this design made a mistake. 

I'd go one further and say keep the old number font too. The thin horizontal portions of the old numbers is instantly recognizable as Patriots to me.

[Sec19Row53]

2 hours ago, simtek34 said:

I know this has been stated many times in the past, but remember this. The Patriots were going to do, along with Silver Pants, have no Sleeve logo and were going to put the TV Numbers there. Again, they were very close with this redesign, but ultimately didn't pass. https://uni-watch.com/2020/04/30/exclusive-pats-considered-silver-grey-pants-in-new-uni-set/

 

 

Would also love to have seen a Red Socks option for when wearing Navy pants, but the NFL forgot how bad mono sucks, unfortunately.

Repeat after me: unlike those of us on a site specializing in logos and uniforms, the NFL doesn't care about mono.

[oldschoolvikings]

1 hour ago, _DietDrPepper_ said:

Replace the logo for shoulder numbers on the white and that's a perfect look for the Pats. 

 

Almost perfect.  Add white socks with a stripe that matches the stripe from the white jersey, and wear them with the dark pants, then it's perfect.

[fouhy12]

I didn't even notice until now that that version has TV numbers at home but not on the road. The Rams have them on one jersey but not the other, too. Why? Apart from a different jersey design, I can't think of a reason for that to be the case. 

[SSmith48]

3 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Repeat after me: unlike those of us on a site specializing in logos and uniforms, the NFL doesn't care about mono.

NFL and College teams absolutely love mono-looks, to the point where the marketing for them is very annoying, especially when they pull out stuff like:

"ICEY WHITES "

"BLACKOUT  "

"CODE RED "

 

Honestly, I don't think most mono looks are that bad if they make sense. Ravens all-black, any white on white (especially w/ traditional teams), Seattle all-navy, Cardinals all-red are all examples of solid mono looks. A number of them are definitely bad though.

 

[63Bulldogs63]

On 9/28/2020 at 5:34 PM, phutmasterflex said:

Replace the Elvis on the sleeve with the numbers and we are good. Never been a fan of a sleeve logo being the same as the helmet logo. 

Nah better yet ditch the stripes and put a Giant elvis on the shoulders. Or atleast give me the damn throwback already.

[gosioux76]

16 hours ago, _DietDrPepper_ said:

Replace the logo for shoulder numbers on the white and that's a perfect look for the Pats. Whoever had the final word on the decision to pass up on this design made a mistake. 

 

Asking this out of curiosity, not because I disagree, but what is the conventional wisdom behind preferring shoulder numbers over a shoulder logo? Is it because the logo repeats on the helmet? 

 

It would seem like, from a merchandising standpoint, that having the logo on the shoulders would make more sense. Then it's easily identifiable as streetwear. Unless you wear a helmet in public, then this becomes a whole different thing.

[Indigo]

10 hours ago, SSmith48 said:

NFL and College teams absolutely love mono-looks, to the point where the marketing for them is very annoying, especially when they pull out stuff like:

"ICEY WHITES "

"BLACKOUT  "

"CODE RED "

 

Honestly, I don't think most mono looks are that bad if they make sense. Ravens all-black, any white on white (especially w/ traditional teams), Seattle all-navy, Cardinals all-red are all examples of solid mono looks. A number of them are definitely bad though.

 

N-n-n-n-n-n-no. Especially not against the (Football Team) who wore RED PANTS!!!

[MJWalker45]

31 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

 

Asking this out of curiosity, not because I disagree, but what is the conventional wisdom behind preferring shoulder numbers over a shoulder logo? Is it because the logo repeats on the helmet? 

 

It would seem like, from a merchandising standpoint, that having the logo on the shoulders would make more sense. Then it's easily identifiable as streetwear. Unless you wear a helmet in public, then this becomes a whole different thing.

I think it's because you're dealing with less space for logos on the shoulder than when they were used in the early 90's. 

9 hours ago, 63Bulldogs63 said:

Nah better yet ditch the stripes and put a Giant Elvis on the shoulders. Or at least give me the damn throwback already.

I'd prefer the throwback over simply recoloring the primary from navy to scarlet. 

[gosioux76]

2 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

I think it's because you're dealing with less space for logos on the shoulder than when they were used in the early 90's. 

So in that case, it would seem like having neither numbers nor a logo on the shoulders would be the best alternative.

 

This is why I like what the Chargers have done. Yes, I know the bolt is the logo, but it's shape is unique enough that it can exist on the shoulders of a modern-cut jersey in ways that other logos cannot. I know some here have argued that the uniform seems bare without shoulder numbers. I'd much prefer they slightly beef up the size of the bolt.

[MJWalker45]

4 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

So in that case, it would seem like having neither numbers nor a logo on the shoulders would be the best alternative.

 

This is why I like what the Chargers have done. Yes, I know the bolt is the logo, but it's shape is unique enough that it can exist on the shoulders of a modern-cut jersey in ways that other logos cannot. I know some here have argued that the uniform seems bare without shoulder numbers. I'd much prefer they slightly beef up the size of the bolt.

I'd agree with a number on the sleeve because you have enough space to move the manufacturer logo inside the bolt. People get mad about stuff like that but I've said for years that if the Steelers did that with Starter there's no reason they can't do it with Nike. 

[_DietDrPepper_]

55 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

 

Asking this out of curiosity, not because I disagree, but what is the conventional wisdom behind preferring shoulder numbers over a shoulder logo? Is it because the logo repeats on the helmet? 

 

It would seem like, from a merchandising standpoint, that having the logo on the shoulders would make more sense. Then it's easily identifiable as streetwear. Unless you wear a helmet in public, then this becomes a whole different thing.

I mean I just think football uniforms need TV numbers, and I do think repeating the Elvis logo is a bit unnecessary. The design should be focused on how it would look on the field, not on the fans. 

The Chargers by pass this need for TV numbers though with the numbers on the helmet, which is why I don't quite have a problem with their uniform. 

[JOEYxFRESCO]

11 minutes ago, _DietDrPepper_ said:

I mean I just think football uniforms need TV numbers, and I do think repeating the Elvis logo is a bit unnecessary. The design should be focused on how it would look on the field, not on the fans. 

The Chargers by pass this need for TV numbers though with the numbers on the helmet, which is why I don't quite have a problem with their uniform. 

It’s also silly that they have the logo on the jerseys THREE times if you count the word mark on the chest 

[Lights Out]

19 hours ago, simtek34 said:

I know this has been stated many times in the past, but remember this. The Patriots were going to do, along with Silver Pants, have no Sleeve logo and were going to put the TV Numbers there. Again, they were very close with this redesign, but ultimately didn't pass. https://uni-watch.com/2020/04/30/exclusive-pats-considered-silver-grey-pants-in-new-uni-set/

 

 

Would also love to have seen a Red Socks option for when wearing Navy pants, but the NFL forgot how bad mono sucks, unfortunately.

 

I'll never understand why the Patriots are so reluctant to wear silver pants on the road anymore. Even in this alternate universe where they never ditched the silver pants, they were still going to wear white-over-navy on the road.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

I really don't like the Patriots but I do like silver over blue over silver and am confounded as to why they didn't do it. Though I guess, given the organization using old numbers on new uniforms, they probably just didn't want additional work. Though, to that end, silver pants would have been a better across-the-board choice than blue pants.

[throwuascenario]

I guess it's an unpopular opinion here, but I MUCH prefer the logo on the sleeve to the numbers. The logo shows up nowhere else on the jersey, but the number is on both the front and back. How is it the logo that's redundant? It also just adds to the uniqueness of each uniform. It only works with certainly shaped logos though. (Panthers, Patriots, Eagles, etc.)

[Sec19Row53]

3 hours ago, throwuascenario said:

I guess it's an unpopular opinion here, but I MUCH prefer the logo on the sleeve to the numbers. The logo shows up nowhere else on the jersey, but the number is on both the front and back. How is it the logo that's redundant? It also just adds to the uniqueness of each uniform. It only works with certainly shaped logos though. (Panthers, Patriots, Eagles, etc.)

Each NFL uniform is already unique without adding the logo to it. TV numbers serve a purpose for some of us in identifying players.

[nuordr]

10 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Each NFL uniform is already unique without adding the logo to it. TV numbers serve a purpose for some of us in identifying players.

I agree and with the logo already on the helmet, there should not be another one right below it.