NFL 2022 Changes

[fouhy12]

17 minutes ago, LA Fakers+ LA Snippers said:

From a practicality standpoint, you are correct, but for me personally, it just bugs me for teams like the Bears & Chiefs, who actually went into the 2000s keeping the stripes and the TV numbers on the sleeve (when most teams switched to TV numbers on the shoulders), to finally cave in and make the change. While they are obviously the same team, my mind keeps saying that the current version is innaccurate because of the shoulder TV numbers.

 

I actually prefer the modern version, but maybe that's just my youth speaking. 

[sky1324]

1 hour ago, fouhy12 said:

 

I actually prefer the modern version, but maybe that's just my youth speaking. 

Yeah, the numbers on the shoulder fill the space really nicely. The older ones feel very busy on the sleeves and empty on the shoulders.

[MJD7]

21 hours ago, MNtwins3 said:

The Raiders have their Nike logos almost on top of the shoulders

 

Ah yes, I’m pretty sure they were the team I was thinking of. I think that’d be a viable solution for teams like the Steelers & throwback Dolphins.

 

14 hours ago, BBTV said:

By "accommodating", you mean "integrating it into the uniform".  It's basically a team logo patch.  If you swapped that Nike out for an Adidas, RBK, or Puma logo, it changes the uniform.

 

Nike has so many people fooled into thinking it's "just" a manufacturer logo (which is BS to begin with - my suit doesn't have the designer's logo on it) when it's not only an advertisement, but in some cases it's so tightly-integrated with the team's brand that it's hard to tell where one stops and one starts.

 

Would the defenders of the Nike logo being anything other than a bought-and-paid-for advertisment feel differently if their logo was uglier?  What if Puma got the contract again and their logo was front-and-center on the Seahawks sleeve, the Titans sleeve (in red), or the Chargers sleeve (under the bolt)?

 

 

Or if GAP decided to make athletic uniforms like Aeropostale did a few years ago, and this was on the sleeve?

 

 

It just so happens that the swoosh is arguably the best company logo ever, and "works" in a lot of places.  But we have to look at jersey advertisers as interchangeable - there's absolutely no other way to look at it.  And is it really interchangeable?  You could say that it was back when teams flip flopped between Wilson, Russel, Reebok, Puma, etc., but those logos were slapped on wherever on the sleeve, and not integrated into the design the way Nike has done.  They all sucked, but the Nike strategy - while absolutely brilliant from their perspective (seriously - I think their people deserve raises for how they've pulled this brand-integration off) is awful from a jersey-lover's perspective.

 

Yes, I’ll admit, Nike having quite likely one of the best logos ever definitely makes it more palatable. However, if Puma, for example, had just the animal as the logo, or if Adidas had just the three stripes, etc. (i.e., if every company had the most minimalist version of their logo), then I don’t think many of them would be much more egregious than Nike. GAP isn’t the most fair “what if,” since they’re a brand not at all associated with sports uniforms, without an iconic “logo” to show for themselves that isn’t just text.

 

11 hours ago, Krona said:

As a designer it's the WORST logo ever. Do you know how many times I've had a client ask for "something like Nike"? The logo isn't great, the company is just dominant in their industry. If they fell into the depths of LA Gear or British Knights we wouldn't be asking why they failed despite such an iconic logo. I get it, It is an iconic logo, but only when attached to one one the biggest success stories in history. Put Lotto's logo in its place and we'd be talking about how it's instantly recognizable to 99% of the world.

I could not disagree with this more. I don’t think I’d consider myself a professional designer by any means, but the Nike logo is iconic because of its simplicity. Sure, the brand’s success is what gets it synonymous with sportswear in popular culture, but if a brand can get across all of the associations it wants people to think of while using such a simple, singular shape for its logo, as Nike does, then I’d say they’ve done a pretty good job.

[tBBP]

Y'all wanna know what's funny, though? Granted, it's all reteospective now since it's been well over 30 years, but there was a time when Nike wasn't king in the shoe game. As recently as the 80's, Nike was seen in much the same way Under Armour was seen about the time of the aughts: that still-challenging up-and-comer in the athletic apparel space. If you're curious as to what catapulted Nike's fortunes and ultimately shot them to the top of the game, look no further than His Airness, Michael Jordan. That marketing campaign Nike launched with him--some of y'all remember it, "It Must Be the Shoes", combined with the "Air Jordan" name and resuting shoe line--was a sheer stroke of genius on the part of the swoosh. That vaulted their profile (and of course Jordan winning all those championshops dang sure helped); after that dang near everyone wanted in on the Swoosh. All these many years later, here we are.

 

Just felt like bringing that up for those who weren't on planet Earth to w1tness all that live...

[JTernup]

6 hours ago, PERRIN said:

This might be an unpopular opinion, but that looks substantially worse on a modern template. The TV numbers are super smushed and the cuff striping isn't emphasized enough due to its small scale. You've proposed a more egregious example of the problem with the Panthers' current set, except with an obvious fix: Just do what they do now. I've never been super fond of cuff details because they get smushed by shoulder cuts and don't give the stripes any room to breathe. The Chief's switch from cuff stripes to sleeve stripes and moving the TV numbers to the shoulders instead of sleeve caps turned their look from a forgettable old-timey set to a classic uniform that fits perfectly with modern NFL aesthetics. 

 

(I meant to quote your sketch of the cuff striping on today's template, my bad)

Completely agree, the think Fakers ignored in their post is that we got to see that cuff stripe on a more modern template. Although it had only probably been 7 or 8 years from that Tony G picture things got bad by 2011. It was not uncommon to completely lose that stripe. Nike really saved the classic Chiefs jersey IMO.

 

[ManillaToad]

10 hours ago, JTernup said:

Completely agree, the think Fakers ignored in their post is that we got to see that cuff stripe on a more modern template. Although it had only probably been 7 or 8 years from that Tony G picture things got bad by 2011. It was not uncommon to completely lose that stripe. Nike really saved the classic Chiefs jersey IMO.

 

 

I think it's a lot more likely the Chiefs saved their classic jersey. nike probably suggested they add black to the uniform and C H I E F S running down the pant leg

[Krona]

15 hours ago, tBBP said:

Y'all wanna know what's funny, though? Granted, it's all reteospective now since it's been well over 30 years, but there was a time when Nike wasn't king in the shoe game. As recently as the 80's, Nike was seen in much the same way Under Armour was seen about the time of the aughts: that still-challenging up-and-comer in the athletic apparel space. If you're curious as to what catapulted Nike's fortunes and ultimately shot them to the top of the game, look no further than His Airness, Michael Jordan. That marketing campaign Nike launched with him--some of y'all remember it, "It Must Be the Shoes", combined with the "Air Jordan" name and resuting shoe line--was a sheer stroke of genius on the part of the swoosh. That vaulted their profile (and of course Jordan winning all those championshops dang sure helped); after that dang near everyone wanted in on the Swoosh. All these many years later, here we are.

 

Just felt like bringing that up for those who weren't on planet Earth to w1tness all that live...

You did a better job of getting my point across. Nike spent nearly 10 years as another name in the business, They had their fans (many who pronounced it the same as "like", to illustrate how well known they were), but McGregor SandKnit was as ubiquitous in the culture. Funny how they didn't get strapped to the rocket until they released shoes WITHOUT the swoosh and replaced it with the jumpman. I think that speaks volumes to whether it was the logo or the marketing that people fell in love with.

[MJD7]

15 minutes ago, Krona said:

You did a better job of getting my point across. Nike spent nearly 10 years as another name in the business, They had their fans (many who pronounced it the same as "like", to illustrate how well known they were), but McGregor SandKnit was as ubiquitous in the culture. Funny how they didn't get strapped to the rocket until they released shoes WITHOUT the swoosh and replaced it with the jumpman. I think that speaks volumes to whether it was the logo or the marketing that people fell in love with.

I’d argue the Jordan 1s are what really propelled Nike into the stratosphere, they’re still one of the most popular shoe designs Nike has to this day, and they prominently feature the Swoosh.

 

(This original pair worn by Jordan sold for over $600,000).

[Bruhammydude]

Vertical stripes, courtesy of @oldschoolvikings

 

[Krona]

49 minutes ago, Bruhammydude said:

Vertical stripes, courtesy of @oldschoolvikings

 

Something about vertical stripes on football jerseys just seems off to me. They feel more natural on long sleeves (think track jackets). They had a run in baseball with the Astros, Indians, and Mets and were okay, but there was a bit more real estate to play with. With pads they just seem to be more pronounced as shoulder decoration than sleeves. For 20 years they've been trying to solve this, from yokes (titans) to tiny logos (bucs) to wonky vertical ornaments (falcons) to weird truncated stripes (niners). The vikings may have the best solution so far by hinting at old hoop stripes, but adding a modern touch.

[JTernup]

1 hour ago, MJD7 said:

I’d argue the Jordan 1s are what really propelled Nike into the stratosphere, they’re still one of the most popular shoe designs Nike has to this day, and they prominently feature the Swoosh.

(This original pair worn by Jordan sold for over $600,000).

Yeah, there is no basis in reality to act like Nike didn’t get popular until they ditched the swoosh on Jordan’s. It’s an iconic logo that simplistically conveys the forward moving, quick image the brand wants to be associated with while looking great on a shoe. 
 

The swoosh has benefited from Nike’s prominence but Nike has benefited greatly from having such a good logo.

[damnyoutuesday]

3 hours ago, Bruhammydude said:

Vertical stripes, courtesy of @oldschoolvikings

 

I think some teams could pull it off. Not sure if the Eagles are that team

[ManillaToad]

5 hours ago, Bruhammydude said:

Vertical stripes, courtesy of @oldschoolvikings

 

 

Looks fine from the side, but it makes the jersey look like it has shoulder yokes

[BBTV]

39 minutes ago, ManillaToad said:

 

Looks fine from the side, but it makes the jersey look like it has shoulder yokes

 

I thought the Titans yokes looked fine.  Plus, there's at least some historical precedent for the Eagles having yokes / vertical stripes:

[ManillaToad]

29 minutes ago, BBTV said:

 

I thought the Titans yokes looked fine.  Plus, there's at least some historical precedent for the Eagles having yokes / vertical stripes:

 

Yeah but imagine every team switching to vertical stripes. Fauxyokes wouldn't be a good look for the majority

[BBTV]

4 minutes ago, ManillaToad said:

 

Yeah but imagine every team switching to vertical stripes. Fauxyokes wouldn't be a good look for the majority

 

There's no reason for every team to use vertical stripes since half or more of the teams don't even have stripes, and some teams have already implemented workarounds, to varying degrees of success (for example, Seahawks and NYJ.)  We're (or at least I'm) talking about a handful of teams here:

 

CLE

PIT

GB

CHI

Maybe any new throwback-inspired looks (like if Miami made a new uniform based off of their throwback.  Not suggesting that they alter the actual throwback.)

 

There's a couple of other teams with bad stripes (KC and Dallas for example) but I can't see it working in those other cases.  Maybe it'd work for the Colts?

[aawagner011]

Vertical stripes as a design element is perfectly fine and will probably be explored more in the future with shrinking jersey sizes and the elimination of TV numbers. I would support new uniform designs that use that style (Texas A&M for example, was great). But I don’t want to see teams with decades of history (Browns, Steelers, etc) switching to that style.

[DCarp1231]

 

I’d welcome this design back for Pittsburgh.

[habsfan1]

...

[ZapRowsdower8]

I wouldn't mind seeing the Steelers pull a Northwestern and put the stripe right across the chest with the numbers overtop.