Cincinnati Bengals New Uniforms

[AstroCree]

There was something unique about every team having their own manufacture. I just missing seeing different brands other than Nike and Adidas in US sports. If the NFL never went with 1 sole manufacture, I wonder if more teams would have different uniform templates? Kinda like what goes on in College Football. 

[guest23]

33 minutes ago, insert name said:

There was something unique about every team having their own manufacture. I just missing seeing different brands other than Nike and Adidas in US sports. If the NFL never went with 1 sole manufacture, I wonder if more teams would have different uniform templates? Kinda like what goes on in College Football. 

 

Given the nature of franchises there is likely some leeway that each club could use outside design resources unless the agreement with nike explicitly states otherwise. Using the packers as an example, as long as the on field product has a swoosh on it and it's approved by nfl properties you can do your own thing. Where I see the exclusive supplier agreements being more problematic is on the apparel/merch side of things where a single supplier ends up creating bland templated product because creating customized merch offerings for 32 clubs requires too much overhead.

 

With that being said, nike has a very outsized influence where clubs that don't have a strong brand/retail sales will be much more influenced to go with the market leader and trust their designers to be on trend and improve their brand. In some instances like the broncos and seahawks you could see that partnership as successful, looking at the bucs and jags you could easily argue that nike added no value.

[MJWalker45]

1 hour ago, guest23 said:

 

Given the nature of franchises there is likely some leeway that each club could use outside design resources unless the agreement with nike explicitly states otherwise. Using the packers as an example, as long as the on field product has a swoosh on it and it's approved by nfl properties you can do your own thing. Where I see the exclusive supplier agreements being more problematic is on the apparel/merch side of things where a single supplier ends up creating bland templated product because creating customized merch offerings for 32 clubs requires too much overhead.

 

With that being said, nike has a very outsized influence where clubs that don't have a strong brand/retail sales will be much more influenced to go with the market leader and trust their designers to be on trend and improve their brand. In some instances like the broncos and seahawks you could see that partnership as successful, looking at the bucs and jags you could easily argue that nike added no value.

I think Nike is trying o have everyone switch over to Nike specific templates. Vapor Fusion is supposed to be coming into the league next year. That might be a good template for Cincinnati to use with the new design.  

[guest23]

2 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

I think Nike is trying o have everyone switch over to Nike specific templates. Vapor Fusion is supposed to be coming into the league next year. That might be a good template for Cincinnati to use with the new design.  

 

The latest template is great for marketing and if you can use a redesign to feature a new template like den/sea that's even better to promote. As far as templates go I think nike hit peak template with the current iteration as it has minimal seams and near uniform cut between positions (sleeve caps aside), additionally inserts and customizations seem to fit really well. The only problem is that the current version is so efficient nike can't show off any funky seams or panels so they have to make it more complicated....I mean feature rich.

[BBTV]

18 minutes ago, guest23 said:

 

The latest template is great for marketing and if you can use a redesign to feature a new template like den/sea that's even better to promote. 

 

Promote to who?  Who's purchasing templates?  I realize that back in the day, these innovations might mean something to colleges or high schools that were debating between spending x$ on Local Sporting Goods Jersey Co. jerseys or x$ on Nike, but in 2021, does it even matter?  Is anyone at any level making decisions based on the templates that are available by Nike vs anyone else?  It just comes down to (for colleges) what kind of apparel deals they can cut, and (for high schools) probably just simple dollars and cents.

 

I can't imagine that any normal person is like "yo, when's that vapor-untouchable force unlimited version three template dropping?"

[guest23]

4 hours ago, BBTV said:

 

Promote to who?  Who's purchasing templates?  I realize that back in the day, these innovations might mean something to colleges or high schools that were debating between spending x$ on Local Sporting Goods Jersey Co. jerseys or x$ on Nike, but in 2021, does it even matter?  Is anyone at any level making decisions based on the templates that are available by Nike vs anyone else?  It just comes down to (for colleges) what kind of apparel deals they can cut, and (for high schools) probably just simple dollars and cents.

 

I can't imagine that any normal person is like "yo, when's that vapor-untouchable force unlimited version three template dropping?"

 

Brands gotta market because that's all they know. There is absolutely no reason for them to update from the current template but nike very much uses planned obsolescence as an integral part of their go to market strategy. So why your practical logic makes sense, the vp of team sports marketing needs to put out an catalog and needs something new and innovative to sell to justify that cushy gig.

[joekono]

11 hours ago, insert name said:

There was something unique about every team having their own manufacture. I just missing seeing different brands other than Nike and Adidas in US sports. If the NFL never went with 1 sole manufacture, I wonder if more teams would have different uniform templates? Kinda like what goes on in College Football. 

Great point!!

[FiddySicks]

14 hours ago, BBTV said:

I think the point is that the tiger is redundant considering there's tiger stripes in the same area, which I never really though about but I think I agree with now.  The solution is to simply have the shoulder stripes and that's it.  Nike's going to force their big advertisement patch in there anyway so there's no real room for a number or a redundant logo.

I absolutely love the full tiger sleeve logo and was so against them removing it. But then I saw a picture in a post just above yours with just the numbers there and... It just works. The lack of anything on the uniforms other than the stripes on the shoulders and pants that match the helmet give it a really nice balance between wild and restrained. The tiger logo is great, but you’re right. It’s redundant and ultimately unnecessary. 

[henburg]

20 hours ago, insert name said:

There was something unique about every team having their own manufacture. I just missing seeing different brands other than Nike and Adidas in US sports. If the NFL never went with 1 sole manufacture, I wonder if more teams would have different uniform templates? Kinda like what goes on in College Football. 

 

It would be interesting, but NFL teams in Techfit and tiny UnderArmour numerals is something that I wouldn't really want to see. People give Nike a lot of flack here and they deserve it at times, but they're still the best we have in regards to football right now. 

[MCM0313]

22 hours ago, guest23 said:

 

Given the nature of franchises there is likely some leeway that each club could use outside design resources unless the agreement with nike explicitly states otherwise. Using the packers as an example, as long as the on field product has a swoosh on it and it's approved by nfl properties you can do your own thing. Where I see the exclusive supplier agreements being more problematic is on the apparel/merch side of things where a single supplier ends up creating bland templated product because creating customized merch offerings for 32 clubs requires too much overhead.

 

With that being said, nike has a very outsized influence where clubs that don't have a strong brand/retail sales will be much more influenced to go with the market leader and trust their designers to be on trend and improve their brand. In some instances like the broncos and seahawks you could see that partnership as successful, looking at the bucs and jags you could easily argue that nike added no value.

The Broncos have had a pretty strong national brand for some time, haven’t they? Like, before the 1997 redesign?

[DG_ThenNowForever]

18 minutes ago, MCM0313 said:

The Broncos have had a pretty strong national brand for some time, haven’t they? Like, before the 1997 redesign?

 

John Elway was a big deal since the 80s, and so were the Broncos. They had Bills-level stink having lost so many (2?) Super Bowls, but that definitely changed in 1997.

 

It always struck me as weird that the Broncos were the team mocked in the Hank Scorpio episode of the Simpsons. I think it has more to do with how "Denver Broncos" sounds more than, say, "Philadelphia Eagles" or "Arizona Cardinals" or "Indianapolis Colts."

[guest23]

1 hour ago, MCM0313 said:

The Broncos have had a pretty strong national brand for some time, haven’t they? Like, before the 1997 redesign?

Here's hard evidence refuting your claim.

 

 

[ManillaToad]

1 hour ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

They had Bills-level stink having lost so many (2?) Super Bowls

 

1977, 1986, 1987, 1989. Each a bigger blowout than the last

[MCM0313]

4 hours ago, guest23 said:

Here's hard evidence refuting your claim.

 

 

“You Only Move Twice” - great, classic episode. 

[andrewharrington]

13 hours ago, henburg said:

 

It would be interesting, but NFL teams in Techfit and tiny UnderArmour numerals is something that I wouldn't really want to see. People give Nike a lot of flack here and they deserve it at times, but they're still the best we have in regards to football right now. 

Back then, the uniform marketing game was pretty novel and I think that’s what allowed so many brands to secure a piece of the pie, but looking back you can see the big transition taking place. Now, all major sports are on their second era of having a full-league license for on-field/on-court/on-ice uniforms.

 

Having the market established at this point, I think inviting separate outfitters to bid by team would start to create an interesting dynamic where you’d have brands lining up to overpay to outfit the Steelers and Cowboys, for example, but then there may be few suitors for a team like the Jags. The league-wide licensing and revenue-sharing deals kinda eliminate that issue, for better or worse. It also could make it next to impossible for a smaller company to stay in the game; they’d probably be left to compete for the contract business of the larger brands.

[henburg]

16 hours ago, andrewharrington said:

Back then, the uniform marketing game was pretty novel and I think that’s what allowed so many brands to secure a piece of the pie, but looking back you can see the big transition taking place. Now, all major sports are on their second era of having a full-league license for on-field/on-court/on-ice uniforms.

 

Having the market established at this point, I think inviting separate outfitters to bid by team would start to create an interesting dynamic where you’d have brands lining up to overpay to outfit the Steelers and Cowboys, for example, but then there may be few suitors for a team like the Jags. The league-wide licensing and revenue-sharing deals kinda eliminate that issue, for better or worse. It also could make it next to impossible for a smaller company to stay in the game; they’d probably be left to compete for the contract business of the larger brands.

 

Yeah, that's honestly the more important component of this discussion. As a fan of a couple small market teams, I'd fear what an open manufacturer market would mean for some of my favorite teams. Not to mention, how it would likely affect things like Free Agency and the Draft. I can just imagine extreme scenarios like a Nike player refusing to play for an Adidas-outfitted team.

[BBTV]

53 minutes ago, henburg said:

I can just imagine extreme scenarios like a Nike player refusing to play for an Adidas-outfitted team.

they could do the deals with the players rather than the league, so you’d have some guys with a swoosh on their sleeve, some with adidas, some with puma, etc, even on the same team. 
 

 

 

[DEAD!]

23 hours ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

 

It always struck me as weird that the Broncos were the team mocked in the Hank Scorpio episode of the Simpsons. I think it has more to do with how "Denver Broncos" sounds more than, say, "Philadelphia Eagles" or "Arizona Cardinals" or "Indianapolis Colts."

They could have went with "Detroit Lions" and the reference would STILL feel fresh. 

[Chromatic]

The Simpsons jokes seemed more about mocking John Elway than the Broncos themselves. At the time the team kind of seemed like that overhyped one that always underperformed in the playoffs.

[dont care]

6 hours ago, henburg said:

 

Yeah, that's honestly the more important component of this discussion. As a fan of a couple small market teams, I'd fear what an open manufacturer market would mean for some of my favorite teams. Not to mention, how it would likely affect things like Free Agency and the Draft. I can just imagine extreme scenarios like a Nike player refusing to play for an Adidas-outfitted team.

Soccer doesn’t have this problem, Ronaldo has played the majority of his career for adidas outfitted clubs, and Messi has only played for Nike outfitted Barca.