NFL 2023 Changes

[ltjets21]

6 hours ago, Jezus_Ghoti said:

Given how bad some of these new NFL uniforms look with stripeless pants and same color socks, I'm starting to come around on the idea that college football is right and letting legs show isn't so bad. I think I might actually agree with Will Anderson here.

 

I prefer this:

 

To this:

 

Yes....but this on the other hand is atrocious.

 

 

[Kiltman]

9 minutes ago, ltjets21 said:

 

Yes....but this on the other hand is atrocious.

 

 

Bad parts of uniforms are gonna look regardless of what happens knee down. 

[j'villejags]

32 minutes ago, Ted Cunningham said:

Kenny Pickett was wearing it last year.

Might just be my love for the Speedflex but I hate the look of these helmets. Just find them to be rather dorky for some reason.

 

Zeke was looking like a long lost Power Ranger with the tinted visor.

 

[tBBP]

47 minutes ago, Ted Cunningham said:

Kenny Pickett was wearing it last year.

 

Meanwhile, on the other end of the QB-helmet-fit spectrum:

 

 

 

Dude's face always did look like Commander Krang squished up inside that helmet...

[Ted Cunningham]

I think I said this in the 2022 college thread at one point, but two major things throw me off about this helmet:

1. The non-shell vent cutouts look AWFUL on any helmet that isn't black (or maybe navy). They aren't holes in the shell; there's plastic in them! Why can't that plastic be colored the same as the shell? (Hint: It's got to be because Riddell is first a company trying to sell its product, and those vents are distinctive. Anything to make them stand out arguably helps their brand.)
2. The top bar(s) of the facemask being missing looks weird. Facemasks have had those since well before I was born, so I'm used to seeing them there. All of the sudden, there isn't one on this model. And that looks weird. Not to mention that, combined with the shape of the visor itself, makes this look like a motorcycle helmet.
   1. A subpoint to this is also that the facemask fastens on the sides behind (or inside?) the shell instead of on top. When I first saw these, I thought "Well, it will kind of be like 50s/60s helmets where the facemask only connected on the sides and didn't go around the top." But even then, the facemask fastened on the outside of the helmet. So there was simply more facemask to see. As a result, there was more contrast between shell and facemask. Now, the facemask is reduced to almost being an extension of the visor, in some ways, at least from a shape and real estate standpoint.
   2. A second subpoint about the facemask: black on black helmets, like the Steelers, look way less weird, especially from far away because it's harder to see the details, especially at any distance. However, lighter combinations (especially with dark visors like Elliot's) or higher-contrast combinations (especially if the facemask is darker than the shell) look weird, or at least very different than what I'm used to.

Summing up point no. 2 as a tl;dr: With the Axiom, the facemask is part of the helmet instead of being something that is affixed onto the helmet, and it's jarring to see a football helmet that departs from what has been a fairly linear evolution of helmet styles. (Not to mention it looks more like a motorcycle helmet now.)

[damnyoutuesday]

53 minutes ago, ltjets21 said:

 

Yes....but this on the other hand is atrocious.

 

 

Because the Ravens guy isn't wearing any socks at all. If he was at least wearing the crew socks that college teams wear, he wouldn't look nearly as bad. I don't ever notice when guys don't wear tights in college because they're at least wearing something at the bottom. This is just jarring

[dont care]

31 minutes ago, Ted Cunningham said:

I think I said this in the 2022 college thread at one point, but two major things throw me off about this helmet:

1. The non-shell vent cutouts look AWFUL on any helmet that isn't black (or maybe navy). They aren't holes in the shell; there's plastic in them! Why can't that plastic be colored the same as the shell? (Hint: It's got to be because Riddell is first a company trying to sell its product, and those vents are distinctive. Anything to make them stand out arguably helps their brand.)
2. The top bar(s) of the facemask being missing looks weird. Facemasks have had those since well before I was born, so I'm used to seeing them there. All of the sudden, there isn't one on this model. And that looks weird. Not to mention that, combined with the shape of the visor itself, makes this look like a motorcycle helmet.
   1. A subpoint to this is also that the facemask fastens on the sides behind (or inside?) the shell instead of on top. When I first saw these, I thought "Well, it will kind of be like 50s/60s helmets where the facemask only connected on the sides and didn't go around the top." But even then, the facemask fastened on the outside of the helmet. So there was simply more facemask to see. As a result, there was more contrast between shell and facemask. Now, the facemask is reduced to almost being an extension of the visor, in some ways, at least from a shape and real estate standpoint.
   2. A second subpoint about the facemask: black on black helmets, like the Steelers, look way less weird, especially from far away because it's harder to see the details, especially at any distance. However, lighter combinations (especially with dark visors like Elliot's) or higher-contrast combinations (especially if the facemask is darker than the shell) look weird, or at least very different than what I'm used to.

Summing up point no. 2 as a tl;dr: With the Axiom, the facemask is part of the helmet instead of being something that is affixed onto the helmet, and it's jarring to see a football helmet that departs from what has been a fairly linear evolution of helmet styles. (Not to mention it looks more like a motorcycle helmet now.)

I’m pretty sure those are the pads under the shell, not more plastic which is why they stay black

[Chromatic]

6 hours ago, WSU151 said:

 

I don’t need every team wearing icy whites thanks to fan votes. 

But bro, think about how many clean AF, fire drips the team could swag out in. 

[monkeypower]

36 minutes ago, Ted Cunningham said:

I think I said this in the 2022 college thread at one point, but two major things throw me off about this helmet:

1. The non-shell vent cutouts look AWFUL on any helmet that isn't black (or maybe navy). They aren't holes in the shell; there's plastic in them! Why can't that plastic be colored the same as the shell? (Hint: It's got to be because Riddell is first a company trying to sell its product, and those vents are distinctive. Anything to make them stand out arguably helps their brand.)
2. The top bar(s) of the facemask being missing looks weird. Facemasks have had those since well before I was born, so I'm used to seeing them there. All of the sudden, there isn't one on this model. And that looks weird. Not to mention that, combined with the shape of the visor itself, makes this look like a motorcycle helmet.
   1. A subpoint to this is also that the facemask fastens on the sides behind (or inside?) the shell instead of on top. When I first saw these, I thought "Well, it will kind of be like 50s/60s helmets where the facemask only connected on the sides and didn't go around the top." But even then, the facemask fastened on the outside of the helmet. So there was simply more facemask to see. As a result, there was more contrast between shell and facemask. Now, the facemask is reduced to almost being an extension of the visor, in some ways, at least from a shape and real estate standpoint.
   2. A second subpoint about the facemask: black on black helmets, like the Steelers, look way less weird, especially from far away because it's harder to see the details, especially at any distance. However, lighter combinations (especially with dark visors like Elliot's) or higher-contrast combinations (especially if the facemask is darker than the shell) look weird, or at least very different than what I'm used to.

Summing up point no. 2 as a tl;dr: With the Axiom, the facemask is part of the helmet instead of being something that is affixed onto the helmet, and it's jarring to see a football helmet that departs from what has been a fairly linear evolution of helmet styles. (Not to mention it looks more like a motorcycle helmet now.)

 

A couple of the Stampeders have been wearing them since last season and I also think it looks so weird.

 

[MCM0313]

1 hour ago, ltjets21 said:

 

Yes....but this on the other hand is atrocious.

 

 

Hey, at least Philly is wearing black socks here instead of plain white. (Yes, I know you were referring to the Baltimore guy.)

[Germanshepherd]

1 hour ago, ltjets21 said:

 

Yes....but this on the other hand is atrocious.

 

 

That looks so much better than the black on black

[HOOVER]

2 hours ago, ltjets21 said:

 

Yes....but this on the other hand is atrocious.

 

 

That’s a dog:censored: look.

[MJWalker45]

11 hours ago, monkeypower said:

 

A couple of the Stampeders have been wearing them since last season and I also think it looks so weird.

 

Reminds me of Joe Delaney.

[Carolingian Steamroller]

One thing about the Axiom style is that in addition to have no anchor bars along the sides and top of the face (thus looking more like OG double bar facemasks than modern 3, 4 point attachments) the bars themselves are flat.

 

More reminiscent of the early 90's style plastic facemask. So it's not just the arrangement but the bars themselves.

[Jezus_Ghoti]

16 hours ago, ltjets21 said:

 

Yes....but this on the other hand is atrocious.

 

 

 

Is it really worse than this?  I'm not so sure anymore. 

[LogoFan]

I'm not sure which I hate more, solid color socks that match the pants color, creating a "tights" effect, or pants so  freaking short they look like biker shorts.

I'm old-school on wanting white socks with contrast colors on the upper half.  It just looks better IMHO.  Looking at the above pic of the Ravens, they look like ballet dancers.

[MJWalker45]

26 minutes ago, Jezus_Ghoti said:

 

Is it really worse than this?  I'm not so sure anymore. 

 

2 minutes ago, LogoFan said:

I'm not sure which I hate more, solid color socks that match the pants color, creating a "tights" effect, or pants so  freaking short they look like biker shorts.

I'm old-school on wanting white socks with contrast colors on the upper half.  It just looks better IMHO.  Looking at the above pic of the Ravens, they look like ballet dancers.

Just bring back actual striped socks. 

[MCM0313]

13 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

 

Just bring back actual striped socks. 

Nike has relegated striped socks to the “uncool” bin, where they reside alongside dazzle fabric and full sleeves. 

[Jezus_Ghoti]

15 minutes ago, MCM0313 said:

Nike has relegated striped socks to the “uncool” bin, where they reside alongside dazzle fabric and full sleeves. 

The NFL also seems to have stopped enforcing any kind of rules around socks. That's why I think I'm ready to live in a post-sock world where players just show their legs like in college. 

 

Spare me from seeing all of this:

[CS85]

Leave the bare legs to the NCAA.  The NFL would look stupid as hell without socks.