Washington Commanders to debut new NFL identity

[Moseph]

6 hours ago, DCarp1231 said:

Washington will always remain a tone deaf organization.
 

After 14+ years which includes one uniform supplier change and three different franchise names, they still continue to make money off a dead “retired” player

 

Its my understanding that the money from all of his merch goes to his daughter, but I still don't like the idea of jerseys of any players that never wore that uniform

[SoxSteeler]

8 hours ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

 

I was thinking about that too, actually.

 

I'm really upset I can't buy this on a hat:

 

 

Or at least not on a 47 brand Clean-Up style hat.

Wish I could remember where I saw it but a Guardians fan brought up the same question about the G logo on a hat, a 5150 I believe, and someone with the club, store, or in the know said hopefully by opening day they'll have G logo hats on sale. 

 

Edit: Page 76 in the Cleveland Guardians thread - after the Guardians official twitter announced the 5950 hats being available to fans someone said they would buy one if they had the fastball G on them. the Guardians official account responded with they hope to have those by opening day. 

Edited February 8, 2022 by SoxSteeler
more information

[TruColor]

8 hours ago, Survival79 said:

I guess at some point they'll get around to adding the alternate logos, helmets, and uniforms to the logo slick?

 

I've been wondering if they're updating the roundel with the correct seasons...would affect all the rest of the missing graphics.

[Crabcake]

On 2/6/2022 at 11:16 PM, DCarp1231 said:

Stumbled upon this Washington concept on Dribbble

 

Its laughable, but not surprising, how people not associated with the team can have better designs than the team’s actual final product 

 

The fact that we’re (rightfully) lauding this as so much better than the final product is laughable. If the actual team released this we would be at their throats. This is boring, college-style 4/10 at best, and most of that would depend on the pants and helmet. 
 

It is honestly staggering how bad the actual, real-life uniforms are. Anybody who pays money for those things is a grade A sucker. 

[Old School Fool]

The thing about black jerseys is that you can make it work even if it's totally unnecessary if you just stick to what the people know of the brand. Take the Detroit Lions or LA Lakers for example, they shouldn't be good but they manage to work out and it's because the black is applied in a normal manner and not some dumb in your face nightmare like the Commanders. I know it's not everyones cup of tea but to me these were "done right" and inoffensive to me.

 

 

 

Even the Arizona Cardinals usage of black is better than the Commanders.

 

[sky1324]

16 minutes ago, Old School Fool said:

The thing about black jerseys is that you can make it work even if it's totally unnecessary if you just stick to what the people know of the brand. Take the Detroit Lions or LA Lakers for example, they shouldn't be good but they manage to work out and it's because the black is applied in a normal manner and not some dumb in your face nightmare like the Commanders. I know it's not everyones cup of tea but to me these were "done right" and inoffensive to me.

 

 

No, both of those suck. Neither of those teams should have black in their color schemes.

[Ridleylash]

There's been examples of teams inserting black into their color scheme post-launch and it generally working out fine enough...buuut that's when they planned around it and used it wisely, so it's actually a cohesive look instead of it just being plopped in like they're filling in a coloring book and don't know what color to use to finish the picture. It's basically impossible to make a black jersey work if black isn't at least a part of your brand's overall look, because it'll never feel cohesive.

 

The Commanders' use of black really reminds me of this infamous piece of crap from the Jays, which just seems like they were cloying for maximum sales with a popular color for minimum design effort;

They clearly chose to have black jerseys and such because they figure it'll make merch sell better, not because it actually works with their brand in any capacity...because it just doesn't. 

 

It'll look like dog paired against the maroon, and you just know they'll be using that black helmet and black pants with their other jerseys during games this season just to add some more to the sandwich this rebrand has already become. It's only there as an excuse to have a black alternate that a bunch of people on Twitter will spam "YO THIS IS " about while pretending like they can say it's not BFBS.

 

And like, they couldn't even be assed to be consistent about using the damn color, for Christ's sake; it's on the white jersey, not on the red jersey, and then they have a mainly-black alternate. It feels like they didn't want to commit to it and also wanted it so badly that they chose this awful middle ground where their jerseys don't even match.

[ptay]

17 hours ago, Survival79 said:

I guess at some point they'll get around to adding the alternate logos, helmets, and uniforms to the logo slick?

 

 

Seeing the logo slick reminds me of how weak the primary logo really is. It also does NOT help that so far, we've mostly seen a burgundy logo shown on a burgundy background. 

 

Look at any of the other NFL primary logos.....you slap them on a t-shirt with a team color and those things will pop.

Not so with the Warshington Dubya.

[VampyrRabbit]

So, the primary W logo. Was it too much to ask to try and incorporate a representation of a D.C. landmark into it like the Caps and the Wizards?

[AnPheitseog]

9 hours ago, Old School Fool said:

The thing about black jerseys is that you can make it work even if it's totally unnecessary if you just stick to what the people know of the brand. Take the Detroit Lions or LA Lakers for example, they shouldn't be good but they manage to work out and it's because the black is applied in a normal manner and not some dumb in your face nightmare like the Commanders. I know it's not everyones cup of tea but to me these were "done right" and inoffensive to me.

 

 

 

Even the Arizona Cardinals usage of black is better than the Commanders.

 

Starting with black shouldnt be used, these are jerseys that just look GOOD. Besides Arizona, and I should clarify that the jersey is no more or less offensive than the red version.

 

In short yes, I agree. The teams shouldnt have worn them, but the jerseys on their own look good to non offensive.

[gosioux76]

11 hours ago, Crabcake said:

The fact that we’re (rightfully) lauding this as so much better than the final product is laughable. If the actual team released this we would be at their throats. This is boring, college-style 4/10 at best, and most of that would depend on the pants and helmet. 
 

 

To each their own, of course, but other than for the unnecessary BFBS, this is the type of uniform I'd have preferred from Washington.  I don't consider a simplified, clean update to be boring. The opposite of "boring, college-style" in the modern NFL usually gets us to what the Cardinals, 2000s Bengals or 2010s Jaguars were donning. 

 

This concept not only brings with it simplicity, but you can almost trace the direct lineage back to the Billy Kilmer-era teams of the '70s.  Considering the challenge of this branding exercise — creating a new identity for a team with a long and storied history — a look like this would've threaded that needle. 

 

[HopewellJones]

A big phenomenon on this board:

 

HBFHBS

 

Hating black for hating black’s sake. 
 

That Lions alt is great!

[IceCap]

Just now, HopewellJones said:

Hating black for hating black’s sake. 

Well it is terrible 99.9% of them time. 

 

1 minute ago, HopewellJones said:

That Lions alt is great!

Cool if you think that, but you may wanna own being the minority opinion on that one. 

[spartacat_12]

11 hours ago, Old School Fool said:

 

This might be the laziest BFBS uniform in the history of sports. They literally took the white jersey from that era, made the base black instead of white, and changed nothing else. The 49ers did the same thing, but they at least have a history of using black to some extent.

[4_tattoos]

8 hours ago, VampyrRabbitDesign said:

So, the primary W logo. Was it too much to ask to try and incorporate a representation of a D.C. landmark into it like the Caps and the Wizards?

Meh... It's been done

[burgundy]

On 2/7/2022 at 4:30 PM, HopewellJones said:

I'd pay to see someone punch Daniel Snyder.

 

 

I'd pay for the opportunity to be the one doing the punching.

 

[HopewellJones]

5 hours ago, IceCap said:

Well it is terrible 99.9% of them time. 

 

Cool if you think that, but you may wanna own being the minority opinion on that one. 

Get over yourself. 

[Rockstar Matt]

Gotta have thicker skin if you’re going to be on these boards, bud. 

[HopewellJones]

3 minutes ago, Rockstar Matt said:

Gotta have thicker skin if you’re going to be on these boards, bud. 

Lol what does that even mean?

 

What’s entailed in “owning that it’s a minority opinion?” Should I have included a disclaimer?
 

Sorry guys I take it back. The Lions alt is bad because.

 

Back to the serious business that is grown men discussing sports uniforms. Only thick skin here!

[tigers]

Have they come out and said Lol Jokes yet?