simtek34

NFL Changes 2021

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, WBeltz said:

Maybe it’s because I got into football when these uniforms were around, but I like them. 


TalkativeSleepyIsabellineshrike-small.gi

Share this post


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

Leaked draft caps. Not confirmed if these are the designs but if they are, they're just ok. Not great but not bad. 

 

 

Good find; not digging the trucker style. Not sure why the S in Angeles is so bunched up against the E in the front-facing photo (bad production maybe). 

 

They look more like summertime fashion hats. 

 

Last year's were pretty nice (the neon-inspired logos).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Ark said:

I think the Washington Football Team will use that name permanently, and that's a good thing. They will make more people angry than happy with whatever name they go with, so they're better off staying generic. A name like that is unique to the Big 4 North American sports leagues and helmet numbers is a unique detail in the NFL as well.

 

I hope the "Cleveland Baseball Team" becomes the Cleveland Spiders, though.

How about Washington Spiders too? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Ark said:

They will make more people angry than happy with whatever name they go with, so they're better off staying generic.

In the short term, maybe. The thing is brands last a long time. Eventually everyone angry about ditching the slur will be dead and an entire generation will have grown up only knowing the new name. I think basing your identity solely on the city without a nickname would limit how they can market themselves outside their market. For example: there are kids who decide their favorite team based on what nickname they think is the coolest. I know multiple people that picked the Falcons, Titans, Bengals and Lions as their teams despite having absolutely no connection to any of the cities they're in, simply because they like the nickname. I think going generic would limit that effect and hurt their brand in the long run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I kinda like Washington Football Team (but would prefer Washington Football Club). It has a classic, storied feel to it that fits a team that has been around as long as they have and have stuck with classic looking uniforms. But the reason why I don't want them to keep it is because I hate it when announcers and articles call them "the Football Team" rather than just "Washington". I get it in cases of databases where you have to insert a nickname into the database for auto populating websites and such. But in conversation and writing where you can choose to call them Washington it irks me to no end. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, PaleVermilion81 said:

Honestly I kinda like Washington Football Team (but would prefer Washington Football Club). It has a classic, storied feel to it that fits a team that has been around as long as they have and have stuck with classic looking uniforms. But the reason why I don't want them to keep it is because I hate it when announcers and articles call them "the Football Team" rather than just "Washington". I get it in cases of databases where you have to insert a nickname into the database for auto populating websites and such. But in conversation and writing where you can choose to call them Washington it irks me to no end. 

Solely calling them Washington is also annoying. I remember before they dropped the old moniker, some of the more...ah...outwardly virtuous sportswriters would call them only by the city name in protest, and it was clunky. Football Team is also clunky. I like the idea of still calling them the Hogs unofficially, but not having an official nickname is so...European at best, severely awkward at worst. 
 

As an example: if you’re covering, say, the Chicago Bears, you can easily and smoothly switch back and forth between “Chicago” and “Bears” and even throw in “Monsters of the Midway” once or twice. Everyone familiar with the NFL will understand you. 
 

Now imagine that you can no longer call them Bears. You go back and forth between the city name and the unofficial historical nickname. Occasionally you just call them “football team”. It sounds like you’re the commentator on a video game that has NFLPA approval but not that of the league itself. 
 

When you really think about it, some of the team names are already pretty generic. No need to make it more so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MCM0313 said:

Solely calling them Washington is also annoying. I remember before they dropped the old moniker, some of the more...ah...outwardly virtuous sportswriters would call them only by the city name in protest, and it was clunky. Football Team is also clunky. I like the idea of still calling them the Hogs unofficially, but not having an official nickname is so...European at best, severely awkward at worst. 

 

Yeah, it's all clunky. And awkward. Or as I said a few posts up, stupid.

 

Pick a name. Move on. The crybabies will either get over it, or eventually die. Either way, the problem is solved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I highly doubt they’d do it, but would it be worth it to just go by DC instead of Washington?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, MCM0313 said:

Solely calling them Washington is also annoying. I remember before they dropped the old moniker, some of the more...ah...outwardly virtuous sportswriters would call them only by the city name in protest, and it was clunky. Football Team is also clunky. I like the idea of still calling them the Hogs unofficially, but not having an official nickname is so...European at best, severely awkward at worst. 
 

As an example: if you’re covering, say, the Chicago Bears, you can easily and smoothly switch back and forth between “Chicago” and “Bears” and even throw in “Monsters of the Midway” once or twice. Everyone familiar with the NFL will understand you. 
 

Now imagine that you can no longer call them Bears. You go back and forth between the city name and the unofficial historical nickname. Occasionally you just call them “football team”. It sounds like you’re the commentator on a video game that has NFLPA approval but not that of the league itself. 
 

When you really think about it, some of the team names are already pretty generic. No need to make it more so.

 

As a season ticket holder of Minnesota United, I literally have no problem with announcers moving back and forth between a city name and an unofficial nickname. I don't have to imagine any of the scenarios you mention. Hearing "Minnesota" or "the Loons" are just fine when talking about Minnesota United. An announcer doing the same thing with Washington would be just fine with me if they leaned more into the unofficial nickname of Hogs. Call them "Washington" or "the Hogs". That's totally fine with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, oldschoolvikings said:

 

Yeah, it's all clunky. And awkward. Or as I said a few posts up, stupid.

 

Pick a name. Move on. The crybabies will either get over it, or eventually die. Either way, the problem is solved.

Redtails. Honor the military and the historic contributions of the Tuskegee Airmen. Spiffy logo. Maybe a mascot dressed up like a WWII airplane. Same colors. Same helmet shell. Striping that complements the logo (or perhaps a unique helmet incorporating flight motifs). Done. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MCM0313 said:

Redtails. Honor the military and the historic contributions of the Tuskegee Airmen. Spiffy logo. Maybe a mascot dressed up like a WWII airplane. Same colors. Same helmet shell. Striping that complements the logo (or perhaps a unique helmet incorporating flight motifs). Done. 

Wolves work fine IMO too. It keeps the push by fans for Redwolves, but obviously doesn’t emphasize the Red part. You can still have a red wolf logo without a problem too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DNAsports said:

Wolves work fine IMO too. It keeps the push by fans for Redwolves, but obviously doesn’t emphasize the Red part. You can still have a red wolf logo without a problem too.

Too close to Minnesota. I want something unique. 

Share this post


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

I find it difficult to believe that they would really just stick with WFT.

 

 

Because it's stupid.

 

You know what's even more stupid? Allowing the colossal a-hole owner to buy out his owners and take full control of the franchise and drive them further into the ground. Just disband them already and start anew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, guest23 said:

 

You know what's even more stupid? Allowing the colossal a-hole owner to buy out his owners and take full control of the franchise and drive them further into the ground. Just disband them already and start anew.

 

It also makes it easier for him to sell the team.  I'm not sure there's much more driving into the ground that he can do with 80% that he can't do with what he already has..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MCM0313 said:

Too close to Minnesota. I want something unique. 

You’re on to something. If only the Giants, Rangers, Cardinals, Jets, and Kings knew this information

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care about whether there's an "official" nickname or not, but as others have mentioned, the technology currently doesn't support it (at least in North American sports) since there's so much automation that just pulls from the "nickname" field and give you "Eagles vs Football Team", when it would look better as "Eagles vs Washington".  Not an insurmountable hurdle, but there's going to be some awkward times (like there already are.)

 

How does it work for the MLS teams that have non-North-American-traditional names?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DNAsports said:

You’re on to something. If only the Giants, Rangers, Cardinals, Jets, and Kings knew this information

 

You're pulling examples from teams that were created way before marketing and merchandising were anything like where they are now.  I'm not sure any rebrand comparisons from before maybe the late 90s would be relevant.  

 

That being said, I don't think there should be an issue if they were the Washington Wolves.  The Minnesota Timberwolves brand isn't nearly large enough to be infringed on by a team in another sport with different colors using a derivative of their nickname.  Washington Lakers would be an issue though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, DNAsports said:

I highly doubt they’d do it, but would it be worth it to just go by DC instead of Washington?

Not until they're located in DC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Not until they're located in DC.

oh boy, not this again

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.