2023-24 NHL Jersey Changes

[ujju2]

55 minutes ago, CreamSoda said:

Red Wings away whites vs Maple Leafs home blues may just be the best matchup in sports. 
 

Two classic logos.  Two classic uniforms with unique striping patterns. Perfect color balance and contrast. 

 

Disagree. Both classic looks that shouldn't change, but not enough colour combined imo. I'd rather see Oilers vs Flames (I'm biased as an Oilers fan but still...) or something like that. 4  different bright colours involved.

[The_Admiral]

Oilers blue/Flames white is another perfect matchup, yeah. Blackhawks red/Wings white, Hawks red/Leafs white were two I always loved.

[BuckDancer]

1 hour ago, the admiral said:

The Blues' current uniforms and pre-Edge uniforms are still fairly different designs, and the current ones are worse, with yellow stripes on white and white numbers instead of yellow. It's not quite the system-restore that we saw from the Senators, Coyotes, Flames, and the Buccaneers over in the NFL.

 

'ate Pronger, 'ate the Blues, simple as, but those little details but this ahead of what they wear now.

I agree, they shouldn't have dropped the yellow numbers, but I still think their current set, especially the 2014-17 version is better. The equal size waist and arm stripes and matching sock stripes, straightened arm stripes, all navy collars, ect. just looks more coherent and cleaned up.

[pepis21]

First thing what Fanatics should do for Blues is re-introduce yellow numbers on home.

[throwuascenario]

On 4/1/2023 at 2:45 PM, BuckDancer said:

I'm not questioning whether some of them were popular choices, I'm saying a lot of these were generally lazy decisions, especially arizona and ottawa.

 

I like when teams keep refining their look, a team like St. Louis for example, has throughout the decades introduced numerous looks from their original 60's light blue/gold look, to their 80's darks blue and red, the angled jerseys in the 90's, and then they kept refining their '98 look until they got what they have today. Which I would say is probably their best look and a modern classic. Now they could have easily just jumped on the old school trend after messing up their look in 2007 like many teams did and just went back to an old 70's or 80's look like their current third retro jersey. But thankfully they did it right and just fixed their mistake, which I wish many teams had done instead of the retro jersey return, and ended up with someone even better than what they had pre edge.

 

I don't understand this take at all. Every team should look as good as they can. It doesn't matter if the uniform they're switching to has been used before or not.

 

I think you're arguing that teams shouldn't use old designs because of nostalgia. I totally agree with that. I think the Coyotes and Senators made that mistake. They picked uniforms that are not their best look because they used them before. That's bad.

 

But it's also bad to say that teams can't use old looks because they've used them before. Buffalo and Edmonton switched back to uniforms that happen to be their best look. There's no reason they should be precluded from having done so just because they used them in the past. We've seen both teams try and try again to improve on their original looks and they never have. To think they will given more time when they've had 20+ years is foolish. They never will. They never should've switched them in the first place and never should again now that they're back. It's not lazy for them to wear their best look.

 

In the same vain, I would cry with joy if my Hurricanes switched back to their original look full-time. They, like Buffalo and Edmonton, have never improved upon it and should give up trying. To think that their beautiful original uniforms should be banished just because they once wore them and switched away is absurd. That is their best look and what they should always look like. It would absolutely not be lazy for them to announce this offseason they were going back to them.

[BuckDancer]

5 hours ago, throwuascenario said:

 

I don't understand this take at all. Every team should look as good as they can. It doesn't matter if the uniform they're switching to has been used before or not.

 

I think you're arguing that teams shouldn't use old designs because of nostalgia. I totally agree with that. I think the Coyotes and Senators made that mistake. They picked uniforms that are not their best look because they used them before. That's bad.

 

But it's also bad to say that teams can't use old looks because they've used them before. Buffalo and Edmonton switched back to uniforms that happen to be their best look. There's no reason they should be precluded from having done so just because they used them in the past. We've seen both teams try and try again to improve on their original looks and they never have. To think they will given more time when they've had 20+ years is foolish. They never will. They never should've switched them in the first place and never should again now that they're back. It's not lazy for them to wear their best look.

 

In the same vain, I would cry with joy if my Hurricanes switched back to their original look full-time. They, like Buffalo and Edmonton, have never improved upon it and should give up trying. To think that their beautiful original uniforms should be banished just because they once wore them and switched away is absurd. That is their best look and what they should always look like. It would absolutely not be lazy for them to announce this offseason they were going back to them.

It's not against nostalgia as much as it is against not really trying to work with something more modern and/or create something new or a new take on an old classic that holds up better.

 

The blues, avalanche, sharks, jets among others all could have went in a more safer direction and just pulled out something old out of the closet (60's blues/original sharks/wha jets, rockies inspired jerseys) much like the sens, yotes, flames, ect. but thankfully they didn't. As much as I like the blue/gold blues look and the '91 sharks look, I think most would agree their current unis are superior and were a wise choice, while still having those retro jerseys as optional thirds.

 

The hurricanes may have looked their best in their original set, but is that the best they could look? I don't think so, I think they could easily come up with something more modern and even better than what they wore back then. Which is what I thought they were going to do in 2017 when they introduced that modernized red jersey with the sublimated flag pattern. But now that they gone ahead and messed that whole thing up and have an incoherent uniform set that will likely just give way to another old favourite instead of a more modern classic. 

 

That's my issue, too many teams not really trying to work on their present look, refine it and keep making it better, carolina is great example, and just throwing in the towel and wearing a retro set instead. 

[DTConcepts]

On 4/4/2023 at 11:30 AM, throwuascenario said:

We've seen both teams try and try again to improve on their original looks and they never have.

 

Never say never.

[throwuascenario]

3 hours ago, BuckDancer said:

The blues, avalanche, sharks, jets among others all could have went in a more safer direction and just pulled out something old out of the closet (60's blues/original sharks/wha jets, rockies inspired jerseys) much like the sens, yotes, flames, ect. but thankfully they didn't. As much as I like the blue/gold blues look and the '91 sharks look, I think most would agree their current unis are superior and were a wise choice, while still having those retro jerseys as optional thirds.

 

 

I think that both the Blues and the Sharks are wearing worse uniforms now than they were at one point before. If they switched tomorrow to their respective old uniforms, they would be switching to a superior uniform (in my opinion). There's nothing lazy about upgrading your uniform. It simply doesn't matter whether or not you've worn them in the past. They're just better uniforms. There shouldn't be some uniform police saying they can never go back to a better uniform (in my opinion).

 

3 hours ago, BuckDancer said:

The hurricanes may have looked their best in their original set, but is that the best they could look? I don't think so, I think they could easily come up with something more modern and even better than what they wore back then. Which is what I thought they were going to do in 2017 when they introduced that modernized red jersey with the sublimated flag pattern. But now that they gone ahead and messed that whole thing up and have an incoherent uniform set that will likely just give way to another old favourite instead of a more modern classic. 

 

That's my issue, too many teams not really trying to work on their present look, refine it and keep making it better, carolina is great example, and just throwing in the towel and wearing a retro set instead. 

 

Yes, that is the best they could look. They were the perfect uniforms for them. The 2017 set was miles better than they're current garbage, but was worse in pretty much every way than the set it was based on. It was basically the original set stripped of all character. There's nothing you can do to "evolve" that set but strip it of character and bastardize it. So just wear them as is.

 

To further understand your position - do you think all teams should be changing uniforms every few years? The Canadiens? Rangers? You seem to be implying that uniforms need to evolve or else they become outdated. Or it specifically teams that mistakenly switch away from uniforms that for some reason means they should never be able to bring them back?

[BuckDancer]

On 4/4/2023 at 11:22 PM, throwuascenario said:

 

I think that both the Blues and the Sharks are wearing worse uniforms now than they were at one point before. If they switched tomorrow to their respective old uniforms, they would be switching to a superior uniform (in my opinion). There's nothing lazy about upgrading your uniform. It simply doesn't matter whether or not you've worn them in the past. They're just better uniforms. There shouldn't be some uniform police saying they can never go back to a better uniform (in my opinion).

 

 

Yes, that is the best they could look. They were the perfect uniforms for them. The 2017 set was miles better than they're current garbage, but was worse in pretty much every way than the set it was based on. It was basically the original set stripped of all character. There's nothng you can do to "evolve" that set but strip it of character and bastardize it. So just wear them as is.

 

To further understand your position - do you think all teams should be changing uniforms every few years? The Canadiens? Rangers? You seem to be implying that uniforms need to evolve or else they become outdated. Or it specifically teams that mistakenly switch away from uniforms that for some reason means they should never be able to bring them back?

Just to make things clear, I'm not trying to police anything, just my opinions. If the blues want  to pull out the old '67 retro thirds they wear now as their new jerseys they can. I just think it's a bad call with what they have now. Their current look is something that feels much less dated, more modern, yet still feels "classic" and not like a trendy experimental fish stick type jersey. The sharks old jerseys suffer from the same problem, especially the logo, looks too dated. Compared to a team like chicago or montreal whose jerseys are timeless.

 

No, I don't think teams should have to constantly change their unis. Many teams have gotten it right and have no need to change. The hawks, blues, original vegas, rangers, canadiens, red wings, pre adidas devils, and others look great. I think that's the main point of the argument, a lot of teams should keep exploring options with their look until they finally get to that definitive identity that stands the test of time.

 

The hurricanes for me are one of those teams, I see them much like colorado, they just need to keep exploring and updating their original look to bring it into the modern era. Would I be upset if colorado just straight up brought back their original look? No, but again, I think what they did over the past 6 years in toning down some of the more 90's/dated aspects of the jerseys (new shoulder logo, simplified numbers, loss of black) and fixing some of the inconsistencies (home jersey striping) has worked out well for them overall, and there is still work to be done. Now you may argue that the avs lost or were stripped of character when they got rid of the yeti foot or the old font with two outlines, but I think it was a good call. I think carolina and other teams should look to do the same instead of just outright bringing back the exact same thing they wore 25 years ago. 

[VikWings]

17 hours ago, throwuascenario said:

 

I think that both the Blues and the Sharks are wearing worse uniforms now than they were at one point before. If they switched tomorrow to their respective old uniforms, they would be switching to a superior uniform (in my opinion). There's nothing lazy about upgrading your uniform. It simply doesn't matter whether or not you've worn them in the past. They're just better uniforms. There shouldn't be some uniform police saying they can never go back to a better uniform (in my opinion).

 

 

That uniform police exists in the NBA where they don't allow teams to go back to exact old uniform or logo designs for some reason.

[Dynasty]

5 hours ago, VikWings said:

 

That uniform police exists in the NBA where they don't allow teams to go back to exact old uniform or logo designs for some reason.

 

That's because of the Hardwood Classics. It has to do with the NBA selling throwback merch or something in that regard... I don't know all the details.

[Andy]

Homer bias obviously, but I have always thought that Flyers orange vs Penguins in white is an underrated aesthetic matchup. Good example of how two colors on the same side of the wheel can work together.

 

[Mingjai]

On 4/3/2023 at 4:37 AM, pepis21 said:

First thing what Fanatics should do for Blues is re-introduce yellow numbers on home.

And the second thing should be to put the Bruins back in gold socks at home.

[SHaMROCK]

21 minutes ago, Mingjai said:

And the second thing should be to put the Bruins back in gold socks at home.

100% yes!!!  Why the Bruins ditched the gold sox I will never understand!!!

[throwuascenario]

On 4/5/2023 at 12:43 AM, BuckDancer said:

Just to make things clear, I'm not trying to police anything, just my opinions. If the blues want  to pull out the old '67 retro thirds they wear now as their new jerseys they can. I just think it's a bad call with what they have now. Their current look is something that feels much less dated, more modern, yet still feels "classic" and not like a trendy experimental fish stick type jersey. The sharks old jerseys suffer from the same problem, especially the logo, looks too dated. Compared to a team like chicago or montreal whose jerseys are timeless.

 

 

I don't think that the Blues' current uniforms look dated, nor do their originals. I just think that their current uniforms have a much worse color balance and that navy is honestly not needed anywhere in their scheme at all. It's way overused in their current uniforms. Get rid of the navy, up the yellow, and their currents would be better than their originals. If that was the case, they should continue to use them because they're better. Not because they once wore the originals so they should be out of the running.

 

I actually feel the exact opposite about the Sharks. To me, the overly-cartooned 3D shark is way more dated than their original logo. The logo is actually the thing that puts their originals above the currents for me. The old logo or a new 2D logo on the current jersey would be their best look IMO.

 

On 4/5/2023 at 12:43 AM, BuckDancer said:

No, I don't think teams should have to constantly change their unis. Many teams have gotten it right and have no need to change. The hawks, blues, original vegas, rangers, canadiens, red wings, pre adidas devils, and others look great. I think that's the main point of the argument, a lot of teams should keep exploring options with their look until they finally get to that definitive identity that stands the test of time.

 

 

So let's just say that Detroit, or Chicago, or Rangers, or Canadiens, changed their uniforms next season to something totally new. There was outrage but they changed nonetheless. In a few years they realized they made a mistake and wanted to go back to what they wore before.  Would it then be lazy to change back?

 

On 4/5/2023 at 12:43 AM, BuckDancer said:

The hurricanes for me are one of those teams, I see them much like colorado, they just need to keep exploring and updating their original look to bring it into the modern era. Would I be upset if colorado just straight up brought back their original look? No, but again, I think what they did over the past 6 years in toning down some of the more 90's/dated aspects of the jerseys (new shoulder logo, simplified numbers, loss of black) and fixing some of the inconsistencies (home jersey striping) has worked out well for them overall, and there is still work to be done. Now you may argue that the avs lost or were stripped of character when they got rid of the yeti foot or the old font with two outlines, but I think it was a good call. I think carolina and other teams should look to do the same instead of just outright bringing back the exact same thing they wore 25 years ago. 

 

To me, the Avalanche made tweaks to their jerseys which is much different than a new uniform. The Hurricanes did not make tweaks between their original and 2017 uniforms. They're completely different uniforms. That's the difference. I just think the Hurricanes are one of the teams that totally got it right the first time. Every time they've altered their brand since has made it worse, with the exception of the 2017 Adidas reds, which were an improvement over both what came before it and after it. But far worse than the originals.

 

I do think small tweaks can improve them. For instance, on their current throwbacks of the 2006 uniform, the bottom stripes curve on the back. I actually love that look and it's something that wasn't original to them.

 

I'm also saying all this as someone who hates throwback uniforms (with rare exceptions). If you don't think it's good enough to be your full-time look, it's not good enough to wear ever.

  

22 hours ago, VikWings said:

 

That uniform police exists in the NBA where they don't allow teams to go back to exact old uniform or logo designs for some reason.

 

Lol, the NBA will approve a uniform that doesn't inclue any of your team name, city name, team logo, team colors, or team typefaces (so literally anything that distinguishes it as your uniform) but will restrict you from using your own old uniforms. What a joke of a league.

[maz]

The truth is in the middle.

 

There's nothing wrong with trying to make something from the past better. I can understand why digging up an old look feels uninspired  to some people. Personal example: Are the Pens' unis great? Absolutely, some of the best there are. But... it felt like "91/92 dress-up" for a few years. As someone who grew up in a fanbase that idolized those first two cup teams, it wasn't until they won two more cups in these unis (kinda) that it began to shake the "throwback" feeling and  feel more "current." 

 

It looks good, and people love them. If they never changed their primary unis ever again, nobody would complain, and rightly so... but that is not to say there's no possibility of something else being just as good. They just don't want to pursue that, and that is okay too. There is inherent risk with trying something new, so I also totally understand wanting to play it safe and keep with what works for the sake of not missing the boat entirely, as well. 

 

There are merits to both of these methods. I've always leaned more towards the side that likes to see (thoughtful) change, but if it ain't broke, you don't have to fix it. In the end, as long as the team looks good, whether it's a new or old look, what does it matter?

 

 

[Ridleylash]

I get the idea, but that is just so unnecessarily limiting as a creator to only look forwards and never look back.

 

You really want to look back at the brand's history if you're redesigning it or even tweaking it at all; looking back at what's been done lets you see what fits or doesn't fit the brand, what fits the market and what doesn't, and gauge on the kind of direction that is most likely to be received favorably by the people you are trying to appeal to in your local fans; there's a reason a lot of the really crazy and out-there jerseys didn't catch on as anything but memes.

 

And some fanbases, like Arizona or Edmonton, just want the classic without a whole lot of altered design elements. But at the same time, sometimes you can improve a look by fiddling with the design a bit; take a look at the Flyers, who managed to improve already-excellent jerseys in the 80's just by fiddling with it a little. Ottawa's another great example where they fiddled with their dark jerseys in the 90's and improved them dramatically by adding some white into the color mix.

[BuckDancer]

4 hours ago, throwuascenario said:

 

I don't think that the Blues' current uniforms look dated, nor do their originals. I just think that their current uniforms have a much worse color balance and that navy is honestly not needed anywhere in their scheme at all. It's way overused in their current uniforms. Get rid of the navy, up the yellow, and their currents would be better than their originals. If that was the case, they should continue to use them because they're better. Not because they once wore the originals so they should be out of the running.

 

I actually feel the exact opposite about the Sharks. To me, the overly-cartooned 3D shark is way more dated than their original logo. The logo is actually the thing that puts their originals above the currents for me. The old logo or a new 2D logo on the current jersey would be their best look IMO.

 

 

So let's just say that Detroit, or Chicago, or Rangers, or Canadiens, changed their uniforms next season to something totally new. There was outrage but they changed nonetheless. In a few years they realized they made a mistake and wanted to go back to what they wore before.  Would it then be lazy to change back?

 

 

To me, the Avalanche made tweaks to their jerseys which is much different than a new uniform. The Hurricanes did not make tweaks between their original and 2017 uniforms. They're completely different uniforms. That's the difference. I just think the Hurricanes are one of the teams that totally got it right the first time. Every time they've altered their brand since has made it worse, with the exception of the 2017 Adidas reds, which were an improvement over both what came before it and after it. But far worse than the originals.

 

I do think small tweaks can improve them. For instance, on their current throwbacks of the 2006 uniform, the bottom stripes curve on the back. I actually love that look and it's something that wasn't original to them.

 

I'm also saying all this as someone who hates throwback uniforms (with rare exceptions). If you don't think it's good enough to be your full-time look, it's not good enough to wear ever.

  

 

Lol, the NBA will approve a uniform that doesn't inclue any of your team name, city name, team logo, team colors, or team typefaces (so literally anything that distinguishes it as your uniform) but will restrict you from using your own old uniforms. What a joke of a league.

Well I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on the blues and sharks.

 

I feel the way about the blues use of the darker blue similar to how I feel about the flames using black, I thought it was a nice addition that helped modernize the look compared to their previous gold, white, and red/blue palette. The blues and flames retro jerseys seemed more dated than other retro/classic looks from that time, specifically the 80's flyers, which was one of the few looks from that time that really was a true modern classic design. I think that's why that look lasted well into the 2000's unlike many of these other 70's/80's looks I've been critical of (flames, blues, oilers, kings,  current flyers) which didn't last past the first half of the 90's and showed their age a lot more compared to the lindros flyers uni. I try to picture the flames wearing their '89 cup unis or the blues in their original unis in the year 2003 and it just looks terribly out of place and very dated, when I think about the flyers wearing their 80's uni in that era or even today it works, probably why they didn't drop that look unlike the blues and flames.

 

For me the sharks original logo has just way too many outlines, the tape on the stick doesn't even go all the way around, the lack of detail, no shading on the shark compared to the new one which has that subtle S design I really like. Even the new fin logo is a big upgrade from the original. And I love the new wave pattern too. Those original sharks jerseys remind me of tampa's first unis, very big stripes, feels kind of "heavy" or blocky", logo feels too early 90's, not really sure how to explain it, but it just feels old to me. 

 

If those classic teams changed their look, I would probably be against it, to me they already have that timeless look I talk about so there is no NEED to modernize/make any drastic changes, what they have now is timeless. We're talking about mostly 06 teams who have been wearing these unis for 40-50 years now, the rangers changed their look at one point if I recall to a Winnipeg jets looking jersey back in the 70's, they went back to their classic look and that was a good call. They had also spent decades prior going back to the 1920's refining their jerseys like other 06 teams and some newer teams like the blues, and now have that iconic look that never really needs to be changed much. When I talk about teams who need to keep exploring their brand identity I'm talking about teams who still haven't found that iconic, timeless look. The rangers, red wings, hawks, ect. looked great in the 60's, 80's 00's, today. Never looked out of place. I can't say the same for some of these other teams who have now gone back to an old look decades later. So if they did decide to change their look, they had better come up with something just as iconic, if not then yes stick to the current timeless look.

 

As for the hurricanes, again I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think some tweaks can be made to improve on the original look. Even adding the new warning flag shoulder patch and playing down the black on the white jersey would be nice. 

 

2 hours ago, Ridleylash said:

And some fanbases, like Arizona or Edmonton, just want the classic without a whole lot of altered design elements. But at the same time, sometimes you can improve a look by fiddling with the design a bit; take a look at the Flyers, who managed to improve already-excellent jerseys in the 80's just by fiddling with it a little. Ottawa's another great example where they fiddled with their dark jerseys in the 90's and improved them dramatically by adding some white into the color mix.

 

Good examples, another thing I would add to Ottawa is that new 2d centurion logo which they never ended up using. That was a great, new, modernized, updated version of their original logo. I think most here on these board would agree that the new 2d logo is superior and should be their current main crest instead of the old '92 logo. That logo, on a jersey similar to that of their 2000-07 black alternate, but in red, and maybe a new updated S shoulder patch would blow their current look out of the water. That's the kind of tinkering and little tweaks that I'm advocating for, not just pulling out an old look that doesn't hold up that well today. 

[VikWings]

22 hours ago, Dynasty said:

 

That's because of the Hardwood Classics. It has to do with the NBA selling throwback merch or something in that regard... I don't know all the details.

 

I know and it's stupid.

[throwuascenario]

5 hours ago, BuckDancer said:

If those classic teams changed their look, I would probably be against it, to me they already have that timeless look I talk about so there is no NEED to modernize/make any drastic changes, what they have now is timeless. We're talking about mostly 06 teams who have been wearing these unis for 40-50 years now, the rangers changed their look at one point if I recall to a Winnipeg jets looking jersey back in the 70's, they went back to their classic look and that was a good call. They had also spent decades prior going back to the 1920's refining their jerseys like other 06 teams and some newer teams like the blues, and now have that iconic look that never really needs to be changed much. When I talk about teams who need to keep exploring their brand identity I'm talking about teams who still haven't found that iconic, timeless look. The rangers, red wings, hawks, ect. looked great in the 60's, 80's 00's, today. Never looked out of place. I can't say the same for some of these other teams who have now gone back to an old look decades later. So if they did decide to change their look, they had better come up with something just as iconic, if not then yes stick to the current timeless look.

 

 

No, you're misunderstanding what I'm asking. I'm not asking if they should switch. I'm saying, assume the following scenario.

 

This offseason, the Montreal Canadiens announce that they are unveiling a brand new uniform. It doesn't have the center stripe and has a different logo on it. They were this for 10 or 11 seasons before they realize  that fans like their old uniforms better. So they decide to go back to their exact classic uniforms with the CH logo and the blue center stripe.

 

The question: In this scenario, is going back to their old look lazy?