NFL 2022 Changes

[MJWalker45]

On 3/2/2022 at 6:56 AM, BBTV said:

Once a team has multiple looks they have no look.

 

I'm OK with throwbacks because they clearly represent a different era and that era's look, but multiple looks within the same era is stupid.

Dallas, the Giants and 49ers as well, due to rotating through two sets of throwbacks and their regular uniforms, still have a look that is all theirs. I would agree that if all of a sudden Dallas started wearing blue helmets that would mess things up. But if they wore a white helmet, that look is still the same one they've had since 1960.  I'd say two helmets would help some teams improve their looks. If Seattle were rotating between silver and blue helmets, how much more often would we see less monochrome looks from them? I could see white lids helping out the Jets as well, but we all know they'd eff it up a wear WBB instead of WGW. 

On 3/2/2022 at 10:57 AM, PaleVermilion81 said:

 

Personally I hate the Giants look and the difference between home and away. That's not a good example to me, as I don't think their look works. 

The thing that bugs me more about the Giants is that neither jersey has all three colors on them. The home jersey omits red and the roads have no blue on them. Adding a pair of white pants with just red stripes this year shows how badly that look needs to be fixed. 

 

[DCarp1231]

8 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

Dallas, the Giants and 49ers as well, due to rotating through two sets of throwbacks and their regular uniforms, still have a look that is all theirs. I would agree that if all of a sudden Dallas started wearing blue helmets that would mess things up. But if they wore a white helmet, that look is still the same one they've had since 1960.  I'd say two helmets would help some teams improve their looks. If Seattle were rotating between silver and blue helmets, how much more often would we see less monochrome looks from them? I could see white lids helping out the Jets as well, but we all know they'd eff it up a wear WBB instead of WGW. 

They’d be better off with grey helmets, IMO. Even though you couldn’t do a true throwback, it still allows for the team to go for a nice Grey/Blue/Grey with the current set.

[ramsjetsthunder]

52 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

They also most likely wouldn't allow this:

 

Honestly, I don't hate this

[MJWalker45]

2 minutes ago, ramsjetsthunder said:

 

Honestly, I don't hate this

Neither do I, but a rather large amount of the logo is removed. 

[EJ_Barlik]

OK - wow - somebody took their argument vitamins this morning.....

 

But let's deal with a known case of the "2nd" helmet, or at least what all of us on here presume will be the 2nd helmet - the Buccaneers.

 

I grew up a Bucs fans and endured scores of losing seasons, pretty much since birth, with the Bucs.  Pewter wasn't even a gleam in their eye when I started watching.  And yeah, there is a ton of ridicule for those "classic" Bucs creamsicle orange and white jersey combos.  The Bucco Bruce helmet was white and it was always white.  There was no potential alternate look.  And then the Bucs go all pirate-flag on people, and the heavens opened.  Hot takes, ridicule, malignment (my word) on every side.  We hate the new look, etc.  Eventually, everything calmed down, and the new look really started to look distinguished, in the sense it was a fresh start, a new opportunity, a new path for the franchise as a whole.  Tampa wasn't just re-designing their uniforms, they were re-designing their entire path forward in the NFL.  Hey NFL, this is the new Bucs!  We're not what we used to be.....

 

So fast forward to the digital clock jerseys.  95% were hating these, mostly because (I perceive), the look and feel of the set was just, well, bad, for lack of a better word.  The numbers were somewhat hard to read (at times).  They even seemed like the neon glow of an alarm clock.  In short, ugly.  But hey, at least they were not the new Falcons level of ugliness, right?  Just no.

 

---------------

Now you have the Bucs with 2 very distinct looks - the pewter with pewter helmets, and the orange/white with Bucco Bruce helmets.  There is just no standing to think you could meld the 2 together - it doesn't work.  You can't put the pirate flag helmet with the white orange because if too much pewter.  Neither can you take Bucco Bruce and stick him on a pewter helmet.  THAT, my friends, IMO, just doesn't work.  It's Miami Heat-level mishmash.  No no no.

 

That, in my opinion, is why the 2nd helmet rule exists - to allow teams to honor their heritage, and look correct doing it.  We'll just have to see how everything works out when they ACTUALLY show up.  (In other words, there's nothing stopping Tampa from putting the alternate pirate ship logo on a white helmet.  Do I think they will?  No.  But they COULD.  But last I checked, none of us can predict the future.)

 

Why don't we just wait and see what ACTUALLY happens with the Cardinals, Jets, Eagles, before we pronounce doom and gloom?  It just might be the middle ground.

 

You entitled to an opinion on a prediction?  Sure.  But I'm entitled to wait and see too.

------------

Would you feel any better if the NFL went all A11FL on the helmets and started releasing concepts before the league even held a player selection?  I'm gonna guess no.

-----------

That all being said - would the Cardinals look BAD with a black helmet?  Let's hope not.  But I think it more depends on HOW they pair it.  Would the Falcons look better with a Red helmet and the current logo?  Possibly - it all depends on HOW they pair it.  If they wear a red helmet with the current black/red monstrosities, I think it's gonna be a new level of mis-match.  If they pair it with the classic reds with block numbers - you just MIGHT have something.

 

Hopefully, common sense will prevail, and we won't just get color-for-color's-sake helmets from the various teams.  Hopefully, we will get helmets that actually GO with the jersey / pants combo.

 

But as a famous guy used to say - you can't fix stupid.

[Carolingian Steamroller]

On 3/2/2022 at 11:16 AM, dont care said:

Well when you no longer have 1 unifying element which was the helmet that becomes a mute point.

 

I mean that term very broadly. 

 

Take the 2018-2019 Rams. Essentially they had two different aesthetics: white/navy and royal/gold. The horns and facemasks were different colors. 

 

A unifying element can be the helmet design or emblem or number font. In the case of the 2020 Rams, even though the jersey templates for home blue and road bone seem completely different, they're unified by the yellow stripe on the bone jersey matching the blue gap in the "horn" on the home jersey. They echo each other, even if they're not exactly the same.

 

It's not a stretch to do that with helmets. Especially if its done right.

 

If you compare the Bears home and away jerseys, the striping pattern is different. The home has three identical orange stripes with white trim while the road has three alternating solid blue and orange stripes. One could very easily change the color of the Bears road helmet to solid white (which they have done in the past) while maintaining the theme. 

I wouldn't do that because of my preferences for my team but I could see something like that technically working. 

[gothedistance]

7 hours ago, Old School Fool said:

The only alternate helmet the Raiders could and should wear is a 1960 throwback from their first season. Other than that they should never ever mess with the helmet.

 

 

I wish they used those for throwbacks. I want to see something different once in a while. 

[AFirestormToPurify]

47 minutes ago, Carolingian Steamroller said:

I wouldn't do that because of my preferences for my team but I could see something like that technically working. 

Why are you the only one in this thread who can admit that lol. One of the very few reasonable statements I've seen about 2nd helmets yet

It's perfectly okay to prefer things the way they are and not want to mess with a proven, time tested look but to pretend that a white Bears helmet (Raiders in black, Jaguars in teal, Packers in green/white etc you get the point) would look "stupid" or objectively/technically bad is such a close minded and boring way of thinking

[guest23]

25 minutes ago, AFirestormToPurify said:

Why are you the only one in this thread who can admit that lol. One of the very few reasonable statements I've seen about 2nd helmets yet

It's perfectly okay to prefer things the way they are and not want to mess with a proven, time tested look but to pretend that a white Bears helmet (Raiders in black, Jaguars in teal, Packers in green/white etc you get the point) would look "stupid" or objectively/technically bad is such a close minded and boring way of thinking

 

The flaw with your argument is that every example except for jags teal is a worse option  than what they wear. You are reinforcing the point that the iconic franchises have selected their best option and alternatives worsen their look.

[Indigo]

3 minutes ago, guest23 said:

 

The flaw with your argument is that every example except for jags teal is a worse option  than what they wear. You are reinforcing the point that the iconic franchises have selected their best option and alternatives worsen their look.

Exactly. If you already look the best you could possibly look (Raiders, Bears, Packers, etc.) why would you want to intentionally look worse?

[CaliforniaGlowin]

1 1/2 logo hats.  Oof. 

 

https://www.neweracap.com/Sports/NFL/NFL-Logo-Feature/c/SPONFLLOF?q=%3Aname-asc&page=0&scroll=toListing

 

Washington's hat isn't even current. 

 

 

[Brave-Bird 08]

I would like to see the Falcons use a red shell that works as an alternate first, a throwback second. I am sure there are people here that will scoff at that, but a deeper, satin red shell that can be fitted with a black facemask and the standard logo. 

 

• Would make the gradient uniform look more presentable, a true red-to-black transition from head to toe.
• Would give them the option to wear a red-black-white combo at home that is modern. 
• Then you could swap out for the old logo and helmet stripe when you wear the throwbacks. 

The throwback shell used before is too orange-tinted and glossy. I think the Falcons should have some fun shooting for the best of both worlds. 

[AFirestormToPurify]

23 minutes ago, guest23 said:

 

The flaw with your argument is that every example except for jags teal is a worse option  than what they wear. You are reinforcing the point that the iconic franchises have selected their best option and alternatives worsen their look.

Hard disagree. There are too many black helmets in the NFL already. I know, I know, this goes against my argument that the Raiders should try black helmets once or twice a year, but I'm talking about full time helmets here. Teal looks great and would make them stand out more

If you don't think this helmet is gorgeous I don't know what's wrong with you lol

 

EDIT: wait nevermind I completely misread your post. My bad. But then again:

19 minutes ago, LA Fakers+ LA Snippers said:

Exactly. If you already look the best you could possibly look (Raiders, Bears, Packers, etc.) why would you want to intentionally look worse?

I think the Packers' yellow helmets and uniforms in general are extremely overrated, but that's just me I guess. I do agree that the Bears should never mess with their helmets. The Raiders could pull off black helmets and pants imo. If they had worn black helmets from the start you'd all be saying silver helmets would look "stupid"

[EJ_Barlik]

14 minutes ago, CaliforniaGlowin said:

1 1/2 logo hats.  Oof. 

 

https://www.neweracap.com/Sports/NFL/NFL-Logo-Feature/c/SPONFLLOF?q=%3Aname-asc&page=0&scroll=toListing

 

Washington's hat isn't even current. 

 

 

Several of the logos aren't even legit (e.g., Giants, Colts [technically])

 

10 minutes ago, Foster said:

I would like to see the Falcons use a red shell that works as an alternate first, a throwback second. I am sure there are people here that will scoff at that, but a deeper, satin red shell that can be fitted with a black facemask and the standard logo. 

 

• Would make the gradient uniform look more presentable, a true red-to-black transition from head to toe.
• Would give them the option to wear a red-black-white combo at home that is modern. 
• Then you could swap out for the old logo and helmet stripe when you wear the throwbacks. 

The throwback shell used before is too orange-tinted and glossy. I think the Falcons should have some fun shooting for the best of both worlds. 

I never found the Falcons orange-tinted.  But that "dirty red" (I think) is not even in the same color ballpark as the modern red.

[Indigo]

2 minutes ago, AFirestormToPurify said:

 

I think the Packers' yellow helmets and uniforms in general are extremely overrated, but that's just me I guess. I do agree that the Bears should never mess with their helmets. The Raiders could pull off black helmets and pants imo. If they had worn black helmets from the start you'd all be saying silver helmets would look "stupid"

It’s not that it would look stupid, it would look off-putting for a Raiders team that wore silver for 60+ years. Would it look good? Probably. But it wouldn’t be as good of a look as their current helmet is, so that’s why some would call it stupid.

[AFirestormToPurify]

2 minutes ago, LA Fakers+ LA Snippers said:

Would it look good? Probably.

Thank you. That's all I wanted to hear lol

 

2 minutes ago, LA Fakers+ LA Snippers said:

so that’s why some would call it stupid.

Which is a pretty stupid thing to say, ironically

[MJD7]

2 hours ago, AFirestormToPurify said:

It's perfectly okay to prefer things the way they are and not want to mess with a proven, time tested look but to pretend that a white Bears helmet (Raiders in black, Jaguars in teal, Packers in green/white etc you get the point) would look "stupid" or objectively/technically bad is such a close minded and boring way of thinking

 

1 hour ago, AFirestormToPurify said:

If they had worn black helmets from the start you'd all be saying silver helmets would look "stupid"

Maybe I'm missing something, but when has anybody said that any of those alternate helmet options would look aesthetically "stupid" or "objectively bad?" You seem to be making a straw-man argument, accusing others of saying any second helmet would look objectively bad (which I don't think anyone has claimed), rather than acknowledging the actual opinion being presented, which is that some people here simply don't like multiple helmets for NFL teams, no matter how the second helmet "looks," since having multiple helmets tends to dilute the team's branding when they only have 17 games to play. You're allowed to disagree with that opinion, but at least acknowledge it for what it is instead of portraying it as something else.

 

Nobody has said that a teal helmet for the Jags would look "stupid," nor even that it would look any worse than black. I'd just say that they should pick one color and stick to it, hypothetically.

 

Similarly, nobody has said that a black helmet would look bad for the Raiders aesthetically. Their only claim has been that double-dipping in both silver and black helmets would seemingly dilute the traditional, consistent brand that the team has built up over decades. Teams like the Packers and Bears would fall into this category, as well.

 

For less traditional teams like the Texans and the Titans, you suggested them wearing red & light blue helmets, respectively. That's totally fine, if anything that might be what I'd prefer for both of them. I just wouldn't want either team to use that as their alternate helmet, I'd just rather them wear the new helmet full-time, and drop their current navy helmets. 

 

I think you're mistaking a desire for no alternate helmets in general, no matter how they "look" aesthetically, for a fear that every new helmet would turn out horrendous. 

 

For me, it's more along the lines of @oldschoolvikings' general sentiment that (to paraphrase): "if your alternate uniform looks better than your primary, then why not just make it your primary?" I think the same principle could be applied for helmets.

[AFirestormToPurify]

12 minutes ago, MJD7 said:

 

Maybe I'm missing something, but when has anybody said that any of those alternate helmet options would look aesthetically "stupid" or "objectively bad?" You seem to be making a straw-man argument, accusing others of thinking any second helmet would look objectively bad (which I don't think anyone has claimed),

I can definitely name names but I won't do it

 

12 minutes ago, MJD7 said:

I think you're mistaking a desire for no alternate helmets in general, no matter how they "look" aesthetically, for a fear that every new helmet would turn out horrendous. 

Nope. Again I could name some users but you're acting like this is all in my head and I'm playing the victim or whatever it is that you're trying to say and it simply isn't true

 

12 minutes ago, MJD7 said:

For me, it's more along the lines of @oldschoolvikings' general sentiment that (to paraphrase): "if your alternate uniform looks better than your primary, then why not just make it your primary?" I think the same principle could be applied for helmets.

Sure but what if both look equally good in their own right?

 

Anyway, I said yesterday that I was done derailing the thread. I said what I had to say and a few users acknowledged that even if they don't particularly agree with me, I made a few decent points, which is all I really wanted to hear lol. I'm not here to change anyone's mind cause I'm not changing mine either. Just wanted to let my (unpopular) opinion on 2nd shells be known cause that's what this board is for and if everybody shared the same opinion it would be boring

[MJD7]

4 minutes ago, AFirestormToPurify said:

I can definitely name names but I won't do it

If you don’t want to “name names” (i.e. address the person you’re arguing against directly) then I’ll say what I assume you’re referring to:

On 3/2/2022 at 7:56 AM, BBTV said:

Once a team has multiple looks they have no look.

 

I'm OK with throwbacks because they clearly represent a different era and that era's look, but multiple looks within the same era is stupid.

Even here, I didn’t read this as @BBTV calling any second helmet stupid from an aesthetic standpoint, much less “objectively bad.” He just stated his opinion that he doesn’t like when teams have multiple identities, no matter how each one looks aesthetically.

 

13 minutes ago, AFirestormToPurify said:

Sure but what if both look equally good in their own right?

Sure, a black helmet and a silver helmet could both look good for the Raiders. But some people would prefer they just pick one for consistency’s sake. If you can’t accept that, then I don’t know what to tell you.

[MCM0313]

4 hours ago, ramsjetsthunder said:

 

Honestly, I don't hate this

What a schnozz!