Jump to content

NFL Changes 2021


simtek34

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, mjd77 said:

 

Ha Ha...ask Marquette fans how well that went over.


Indeed. 😁
 

I’m an alumnus of the grad school (graduated 2018), so I have a bit of familiarity with the controversy. Hilltoppers was and is the best name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WideRight said:

If you ask me, the Rams should not have shown us the new look alongside the inspiration.  

 

Is there anyone who really believes the look on the right is better than the look on the left?  It just reinforces how good the original was and how the new look is just not as tight.  The pant stripes, socks, larger shoulder horns, no stupid name patch, it is all better.  Sorry Rams, you tried, but just returning to the earlier look would have been a better option. 

 

spacer.png

 

Change the colour of the helmet on the left to match the one on the right and you've got the perfect Rams uniform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was on campus in 2005 for the Marquette Gold fiasco.

 

I voted Hilltoppers in the poll but I think it worked out ok.

 

Golden Eagles was never a bad name and this was a really cool logo. 
 

https://www.sportslogos.net/logos/view/4701/Marquette_Golden_Eagles/1994/Primary_Logo

 

I think the longest lasted negative effect of the attempted 2005 rebrand was the eagle logo went away and never came back. 
 

The point is Washington could do a lot worse than “Washington Football Team” with a W mark. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, LMU said:

Much better guys. Now throw everything bone in a pit and never speak of it again.

 

 

 

 

So they put lipstick on a pig.  But it's still a pig and the uniforms are still fugly.

Like painting the Titanic a different color in hopes it will avoid the iceberg,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BBTV said:

 

If this isn't performance hindering, I don't know what is.  Waiting to hear how it's not.

 

1277174444.jpg.jpg

I realize that this is the “hindrance” you’re talking about. What I’m saying is that it if it was this huge, game changing  problem, the players OBVIOUSLY wouldn’t do it with so much money on the line. The coaches would OBVIOUSLY say something, and it just wouldn’t happen. But it seems like getting dragged down by their jerseys isn’t a big concern it terms of performance/dosent happen that much, so oh well 🤷‍♂️ Again, I get your aesthetic problem with it. But pretending you know more about “the distinct performance difference between an untucked jersey and a tucked jersey”, than actual NFL players, is silly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, sleuthpanther said:

I realize that this is the “hindrance” you’re talking about. What I’m saying is that it if it was this huge, game changing  problem, the players OBVIOUSLY wouldn’t do it with so much money on the line. The coaches would OBVIOUSLY say something, and it just wouldn’t happen. But it seems like getting dragged down by their jerseys isn’t a big concern it terms of performance/dosent happen that much, so oh well 🤷‍♂️ Again, I get your aesthetic problem with it. But pretending you know more about “the distinct performance difference between an untucked jersey and a tucked jersey”, than actual NFL players Jabronis, is silly. 

FIFY 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, auguststaley said:

 

But it wasn't even his work he claims the unveiling confirms. It was SportsLogos.net.

 

My main point is that I can't believe a details guy like Lukas thinks the Rams new alternate is the same as the one the autograph company created last week. That one is off-white with yellow sleeve stripes. 

He's a lazy hack who hasn't tried in years and just pushes his merchandise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sleuthpanther said:

I realize that this is the “hindrance” you’re talking about. What I’m saying is that it if it was this huge, game changing  problem, the players OBVIOUSLY wouldn’t do it with so much money on the line. The coaches would OBVIOUSLY say something, and it just wouldn’t happen. But it seems like getting dragged down by their jerseys isn’t a big concern it terms of performance/dosent happen that much, so oh well 🤷‍♂️ Again, I get your aesthetic problem with it. But pretending you know more about “the distinct performance difference between an untucked jersey and a tucked jersey”, than actual NFL players, is silly. 

 

In the last photo here (of Eagles Miles Sanders) even the TV announcers commented that he wouldn't have stumbled up if not for the undershirt.  I think these photos are indisputable evidence that there's some hinderance.  Maybe not for an offensive lineman, but for these guys.  As for why the coaches don't say anything?  I don't know - maybe football coaches aren't as smart as people make them out to be.  They spend too much time trying to draw up plays to exploit mismatches when all they have to do is tell their players to dress like professionals.

 

EDIT: that's actually not the photo of Miles Sanders getting tackled by his shirt, but same point.

 

przu6qgjkuqchobbowyy.jpg

QBJBMYZP6VBWDD7UYNA4MAHJTU.JPG

 

1272510688.jpg.jpg

 

EpNdXoaXcAA072V?format=jpg&name=medium

 

 

1 hour ago, DNAsports said:

FIFY 

 

Do you have some kind of alert set up where you get notified every time I post so that you can follow it up with some dumb meme or some other thing?  Seriously - you don't need to react to every post I make - especially those that don't concern you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

So, no room for the Washington Gold or Washington Golden Eagles? 😉


:lol:

 

Had Marquette wanted to keep “Warriors” thirty years ago, they absolutely could have salvaged it with a new mascot.   I’ve said that before.
 

But it’s the difference between being proactive and holding out until you are finally forced to do the right thing.  Washington has lost any benefit of the doubt by refusing to even acknowledge the problem for a half-century after First Nations representatives initially asked them to. 
 

If Washington had taken these steps in the 1970s, or even in the 1990s as Marquette did, then they could have made the case that “Warriors” was something other than the transparent wink-and-nod that it would obviously be today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DNAsports said:

Rams get an A+ on this jersey, IMO.

 

Sleeves look 10x better on retail jerseys 

spacer.png


can’t be an A+ with thay goofy number style.  
 

B+, maybe.  Which is still far above anything else in their set. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, BBTV said:

 

In the last photo here (of Eagles Miles Sanders) even the TV announcers commented that he wouldn't have stumbled up if not for the undershirt.  I think these photos are indisputable evidence that there's some hinderance.  Maybe not for an offensive lineman, but for these guys.  As for why the coaches don't say anything?  I don't know - maybe football coaches aren't as smart as people make them out to be.  They spend too much time trying to draw up plays to exploit mismatches when all they have to do is tell their players to dress like professionals.

 

EDIT: that's actually not the photo of Miles Sanders getting tackled by his shirt, but same point.

 

przu6qgjkuqchobbowyy.jpg

QBJBMYZP6VBWDD7UYNA4MAHJTU.JPG

 

1272510688.jpg.jpg

 

EpNdXoaXcAA072V?format=jpg&name=medium

 

 

 

Do you have some kind of alert set up where you get notified every time I post so that you can follow it up with some dumb meme or some other thing?  Seriously - you don't need to react to every post I make - especially those that don't concern you.

I mean when you keep regurgitating the same ol “these ‘jabronis’ don’t know how to dress” nonsense, it gets tiresome after a while. Who cares. They get paid millions to do what they love. Look, we all get it. Aesthetically, it looks like crap, but if they want to dress like that to feel comfortable or to (unfortunately) risk injury (which for some reason you’ve been known to wish upon a player), it shouldn’t be your concern.

 

Want to truly stop the undershirt problem? Maybe these defenders should learn how to tackle properly because obviously holding onto a shirt for dear life isn’t the answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Gothamite said:


:lol:

 

Had Marquette wanted to keep “Warriors” thirty years ago, they absolutely could have salvaged it with a new mascot.   I’ve said that before.
 

But it’s the difference between being proactive and holding out until you are finally forced to do the right thing.  Washington has lost any benefit of the doubt by refusing to even acknowledge the problem for a half-century after First Nations representatives initially asked them to. 
 

If Washington had taken these steps in the 1970s, or even in the 1990s as Marquette did, then they could have made the case that “Warriors” was something other than the transparent wink-and-nod that it would obviously be today.


Having read a bunch of period publications on the nickname switch, it was incredibly controversial with a lot of division over the issue by students and alumni. Ultimately, doing it in the ‘90s saved Marquette a heck of a lot of trouble down the line.  Now, I’d argue that there are fewer and fewer Marquette students and alumni who want “Warriors” back. More are concerned with the team consistently underperforming and not living up to the “legacy” of ancient teams.

 

But back to the Rams, I like the design as a modernized take on the “classic” Rams uniform. I’ll even defend the numbers as a bit of fun. Still, a few adjustments might make it better, like getting rid of the number details and patch.

 

Edited by SFGiants58
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/12/2021 at 8:34 PM, Brian E said:

"okay, we thought about it. introducing...the washington redmen. HTTR!!!"

 

spacer.png

 

What about Rams, they should go with that from the beginning instead of that trash bone thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Gothamite said:


can’t be an A+ with thay goofy number style.  
 

B+, maybe.  Which is still far above anything else in their set. 


The goofy number font AND the whole "gel" look.  The whole thing looks dumb.

I didn't really miss the yellow and blue classics when they changed up to blue and gold.  But these putrid things they have now make me yearn for the classic blue and gold which was immeasurably superior to the current set.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Gothamite said:


It would be more insulting as if they used “warriors” pretending that it never had any native connotations in our country. 
 

taking that name off the table is the right call. 

Pretending?  Like Golden State does?     They were able to rebrand the name, but that point keeps getting ignored because of Washington's long history with the word that shall not be named.  Saying it would be different for Washington if it were done years earlier makes no sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/7/2021 at 4:50 PM, Bathysphere said:

Prepared to eat my words, but I’ll bite the bullet and say that this seems fake to me. Like a fashion jersey design half-assedly derived from the home jersey that he ordered from a non-Nike party. If you watch the actual video in his Insta story (which is still up at this moment), you’ll find there are no swooshes visible above the TV numbers. I also question why TV numbers would be included at all at this point when they already decided they were unnecessary within the same design. Maybe to add a smidgen of blue to that area, but if you look at the player cut of the home jersey, the design clearly has no room for TV numbers. They also didn’t include the ‘LA’ logo patch on the back of the collar, which would be a strange discontinuity from the existing jerseys in the set. I feel similarly about the lack of piping within the numbers. Ive been wrong before, and based on what Andrew Whitworth said we may see something similar anyways, but this doesn’t add up.

Sheeshhh, all of this and yall were still taking these as the real deal, and you call yourselves uni nerds. 
 

Also, I see  a lot of folks are celebrating like the Rams “fixed their mistake” as though this is *replacing* the bone as the away, but it’s not (at least not yet). It’s their alternate, and they’re wearing it their allotted three times. One of them is gonna be wasted on the Titans🤢, though it should be a treat matched with Bears homes and the 49ers red throwbacks. That doesn’t mean that fan demand won’t eventually lead to the designations switching, but until then we’re holding our breath on the abolition of bone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gothamite said:


can’t be an A+ with thay goofy number style.  
 

B+, maybe.  Which is still far above anything else in their set. 

 

Since retail jerseys aren't that close to the on-field ones anyway, I wouldn't mind if they put TV numbers on the sleeves (retail only) just to have something there.  

Link to comment
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.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.