2021-2022 NHL Jersey Changes

[TBGKon]

13 hours ago, Kevin W. said:

As a collector, I'm torn. I hate this but I will most likely get the patches to make sure any jerseys I get are accurate, especially considering that the replicas aren't worth buying anymore and it's not worth having an authentic jersey if it's not done correctly.

True, but if anything they’ll follow the NBA approach and only the jerseys sold by the team itself at the arena will have the ad patches.

[BadSeed84]

27 minutes ago, TBGKon said:

True, but if anything they’ll follow the NBA approach and only the jerseys sold by the team itself at the arena will have the ad patches.

 

I was in a JCPenney and they had a flyers fanatics replica for $170 and the crest feels so cheap and thin now, its insane they can still charge alot for it.

[pepis21]

17 hours ago, Survival79 said:

 

Anyone still believes that pandemic was the reason of helmets ads? Because it wasn't, it was excuse a very good excuse.

[Chromatic]

Honestly I'm actually surprised the NHL got here before the Junior leagues.

[Survival79]

All ads cost the same amount and other teams get the first shot at purchasing them.

 

[BadSeed84]

2 hours ago, pepis21 said:

 

Anyone still believes that pandemic was the reason of helmets ads? Because it wasn't, it was excuse a very good excuse.

 

Once the NBA did it first, sadly we knew it was only a matter of time before the NHL joined in.

[GFB]

14 hours ago, BBTV said:

It's perfectly reasonable to lament ad creep in the 'sports logos' forum.  Any "you're not a fan" nonsense doesn't belong here.  Frankly, I'm not even sure if debating the financial aspect of it belongs in a forum dedicated to logos, uniforms, and general aesthetics, but I'm no mod.  

 

That's a great word choice, BBTV.  There's nothing wrong with being saddened by news like this and taking a moment to note that we're losing something intangible without slipping into extremes at either ends. This won't "ruin the game" or make me less of a fan, but I do value aesthetics more than most other fans and this endless endeavor to monetize every :censored:ing aspect of a sport I love so already wealthy owners can be even more rich just flat-out sucks.  

 

Nothing is untouchable and everything has a price and this is the way the world works and it bums me out.

 

On a semi-relevant sidebar, there's been a subtle belief that has crept into the public over the last few decades with taxpayer-funded stadiums and  CBA lockouts that owning a professional sports team is supposed to be a profitable endeavor.  If you're wealthy enough to own a sports team, the benefit to ownership should be in the joy and perks of owning the team, just like the joy of having your name on a building at your alma mater, having a fleet Lamborghinis in your garage, or owning a villa in Ibiza would be. But like all of these things, owning a professional team should be treated like owning a very expensive toy, not like owning a very expensive business. 

 

No one is forcing owners to carry these expensive burdens and there are plenty of other rich people who would love have these toys that they could sell for wild profits, so I need owners to stop crying poor at every convenient turn. Thanks in advance.

 

21 hours ago, RichardWitham said:

the sky is not falling folks. the end of the world is not here. welcome to  modern sports. the NHL will not be european soccer. if ya think that, you should go touch grass

 

22 hours ago, philly97flyer said:

Yes I am SHOCKED that the masses are not rushing to the streets to protest…(checks notes)…ads on NHL jerseys. Also the people who are complaining about this were probably the most pro-lockdown people over the last year+, so guess what? That lost money has to be made up somehow. Welcome to the real world, bud.

 

18 hours ago, EddieJ1984 said:

Sorry but if you've stopped watching MLB because of a Nike swoosh on the jersey (Oh no how DARE I say the name of the company!) you weren't a real fan of the sport to begin with.

 

Posts like these are the worst.

 

Everyone is entitled to feel however they want to. If you want to complain about it, great! This is probably one of the best places to do that because you're probably talking to someone else who cares.  If you're personally unaffected, that's also awesome; you'll take every bit of this and future news in stride and never miss a beat! But you can also do that without demanding that the people who are bothered shouldn't be for *reasons*  

 

You can be a grim, cynical realist without being a condescending  to everyone who isn't.  

 

 

 

[Sec19Row53]

12 hours ago, Mr. Krabs said:

All I really hope is that the ads on the jerseys will not have serious color clashes on any of them.

You don't really understand branding if you think this is remotely possible.

[Sport]

My stance is the same as when the NBA started using ads, MLB put the Nike logo on the chest, the NHL started using the helmets logos - I get not caring because there's a lot of things people are passionate about that I couldn't give two farts about, but I do not understand people arguing FOR ads on jerseys. That is weird. 

[Chromatic]

18 minutes ago, Sport said:

 but I do not understand people arguing FOR ads on jerseys. That is weird. 

I personally avoid any clothing with the brand's label front and centre on it. I see people wearing a giant 'NIKE' on their T-Shirt and I think they look absolutely ridiculous, but they think they look awesome. I've got a friend who loves Nike and wears nike stuff everywhere he goes and thinks he looks awesome having that logo plastered 23 times across his clothing.

 

I think it might be like that. To each their own.

[Chromatic]

5 hours ago, TBGKon said:

True, but if anything they’ll follow the NBA approach and only the jerseys sold by the team itself at the arena will have the ad patches.

If the ads go on the retail jerseys I'm never purchasing another one.

[LMU]

[Kevin W.]

29 minutes ago, Chromatic said:

I've got a friend who loves Nike and wears nike stuff everywhere he goes and thinks he looks awesome having that logo plastered 23 times across his clothing.

That's an absurd over-exaggeration and you know it.

 

I wear Nike shirts and shorts when I run. Do you know how many Nike logos are visible on the clothing? Two. One each.

[Brian E]

32 minutes ago, Chromatic said:

If the ads go on the retail jerseys I'm never purchasing another one.

 

that's cool. NBA jerseys can be purchased with or without. and guess what? some people actually want the ad patch bc it adds to the authenticity. 

 

i, too, would rather buy a retail jersey without an ad patch on it. but surprisingly, some people want them, hard as that may be to believe.

[Chromatic]

11 minutes ago, Kevin W. said:

That's an absurd over-exaggeration and you know it.

 

I wear Nike shirts and shorts when I run. Do you know how many Nike logos are visible on the clothing? Two. One each.

Oh so you've met my friend who goes out wearing a nike hat, hoodie with a giant nike logo across the chest, nike shorts, nike socks, nike shoes and nike pack with the logos running across the strap.

 

You're right I was lying. Its actually probably 22 logos instead of 23. I should have known I'd never fool you with your omniscient knowledge of the fashion sense of everyone in the world.

[gosioux76]

20 minutes ago, Chromatic said:

I personally avoid any clothing with the brand's label front and centre on it. I see people wearing a giant 'NIKE' on their T-Shirt and I think they look absolutely ridiculous, but they think they look awesome. I've got a friend who loves Nike and wears nike stuff everywhere he goes and thinks he looks awesome having that logo plastered 23 times across his clothing.

 

I think it might be like that. To each their own.

 

1 minute ago, Kevin W. said:

That's an absurd over-exaggeration and you know it.

 

I wear Nike shirts and shorts when I run. Do you know how many Nike logos are visible on the clothing? Two. One each.

 

I don't think it's that absurd. I think there's a distinction be made between wearing performance apparel like running shorts with a small brand mark and casual wear in which the sole purpose is to display the brand, which is what I think @Chromaticis referring to here. It's like how Under Armour-branded hoodies were a thing for a while.  Like him, I'd much rather wear something non-branded, or that has a small brand mark, then one that's so in-your-face about it. I don't care for the idea of willfully becoming a walking advertisement for a multi-billion-dollar corporation and paying $100+ for the right to do so.  

 

I also recognize that saying this makes me a hypocrite every time I wear apparel of my favorite sports teams. But I think it comes down to what you're comfortable endorsing and whether those brands are meant to say something about you personally.

 

[BadSeed84]

It doesn't bug me to wear whatever, but yea I'm not loyal to just one brand, but then again....

https://www.nike.com/t/react-miler-womens-running-shoes-0mgX0d

 

You wear these thats 8 visible nike swooshes alone on your feets lmao.

 

Also again my comment earlier was more geared towards the extreme of "and this is why I'm not watching baseball anymore".  I am fine with people complaining though about ads being on jerseys and nike's swoosh being on front.

[NYRFan]

On 8/17/2021 at 2:30 PM, TBGKon said:

Since hockey jerseys tend to use the upper left and right chest spots for C/A patches and team related patches (anniversary/memorial/Cup Finals/All Star/etc), my gut thinks we may see the patches located where the NHL Centennial patches were at on the sleeves.

 

Hoping  

[philly97flyer]

2 hours ago, GFB said:

 

That's a great word choice, BBTV.  There's nothing wrong with being saddened by news like this and taking a moment to note that we're losing something intangible without slipping into extremes at either ends. This won't "ruin the game" or make me less of a fan, but I do value aesthetics more than most other fans and this endless endeavor to monetize every :censored:ing aspect of a sport I love so already wealthy owners can be even more rich just flat-out sucks.  

 

Nothing is untouchable and everything has a price and this is the way the world works and it bums me out.

 

On a semi-relevant sidebar, there's been a subtle belief that has crept into the public over the last few decades with taxpayer-funded stadiums and  CBA lockouts that owning a professional sports team is supposed to be a profitable endeavor.  If you're wealthy enough to own a sports team, the benefit to ownership should be in the joy and perks of owning the team, just like the joy of having your name on a building at your alma mater, having a fleet Lamborghinis in your garage, or owning a villa in Ibiza would be. But like all of these things, owning a professional team should be treated like owning a very expensive toy, not like owning a very expensive business. 

 

No one is forcing owners to carry these expensive burdens and there are plenty of other rich people who would love have these toys that they could sell for wild profits, so I need owners to stop crying poor at every convenient turn. Thanks in advance.

 

 

 

 

Posts like these are the worst.

 

Everyone is entitled to feel however they want to. If you want to complain about it, great! This is probably one of the best places to do that because you're probably talking to someone else who cares.  If you're personally unaffected, that's also awesome; you'll take every bit of this and future news in stride and never miss a beat! But you can also do that without demanding that the people who are bothered shouldn't be for *reasons*  

 

You can be a grim, cynical realist without being a condescending  to everyone who isn't.  

 

 

 

I’m not being condescending to anyone. I’m simply pointing out that stuff like this is going to happen no matter what we all think of it. We don’t make the rules, and the reality is we make up a VERY small percentage of the population. It’s not being “grim”, either. I get annoyed at people like the original 1 or 2 posters that blame people like me for this happening. Lol. It is no “fault” of any fan. Breaking, News at 11: Business Finds A New Way To Make Money. Tale as old as time. Oh, this isn’t being a “bootlicker” either. Some of you should look up the definition. Pointing out realities doesn’t automatically equal support.

[spartacat_12]

2 hours ago, GFB said:

On a semi-relevant sidebar, there's been a subtle belief that has crept into the public over the last few decades with taxpayer-funded stadiums and  CBA lockouts that owning a professional sports team is supposed to be a profitable endeavor.  If you're wealthy enough to own a sports team, the benefit to ownership should be in the joy and perks of owning the team, just like the joy of having your name on a building at your alma mater, having a fleet Lamborghinis in your garage, or owning a villa in Ibiza would be. But like all of these things, owning a professional team should be treated like owning a very expensive toy, not like owning a very expensive business. 

 

I feel like a more apt metaphor is when a celebrity/public figure buys a restaurant/bar/club. They aren't buying it because it's a wise, safe investment, they want to have a fun place where they can hang out with their friends and enjoy all the perks that come with being the owner. Most of them aren't using it as their primary income source, but at the same time they won't want to sink their money into it for too long.

 

1 hour ago, Chromatic said:

I personally avoid any clothing with the brand's label front and centre on it. I see people wearing a giant 'NIKE' on their T-Shirt and I think they look absolutely ridiculous, but they think they look awesome. I've got a friend who loves Nike and wears nike stuff everywhere he goes and thinks he looks awesome having that logo plastered 23 times across his clothing.

 

I think it might be like that. To each their own.

 

There's a difference between people wanting to wear apparel from an athletic/lifestyle brand that displays the logo and people wanting to wear apparel with the logo of a bank or airline slapped on it.