2024 NFL Changes

[PaleVermilion81]

1 hour ago, PurpleHayes said:

The blame for the rise in monochrome is squarely on the players, who in my opinion should not be put in charge of deciding what uniform to wear, or should be trusted to understand what even looks good. Every current NFL player grew up watching Any Given Sunday (or that putrid Longest Yard remake) with its' mono-black and mono-white unis, but this doesn't mean they look good on the field to the FAN.

 

The current NFL fan that age or younger also likes mono. So yeah we can blame the players, but it's not a player thing. It's a culture thing of that younger age. They prefer mono (in general). For example, every time I play Madden with my 14 year old nephew he always mixes and matches uniforms for a mono look regardless of the team. That's just their taste. Nike knows this and is appealing to this younger fanbase. 

[Bomba Tomba]

Mono white is the only bearable mono for me

[PurpleHayes]

50 minutes ago, PaleVermilion81 said:

 

The current NFL fan that age or younger also likes mono. So yeah we can blame the players, but it's not a player thing. It's a culture thing of that younger age. They prefer mono (in general). For example, every time I play Madden with my 14 year old nephew he always mixes and matches uniforms for a mono look regardless of the team. That's just their taste. Nike knows this and is appealing to this younger fanbase. 

 

That's likely true, and the problem with that is that it's very short-sighted, since that generation will soon age out and the next generation will prefer something different...hopefully something more classic, but I doubt it. I understand why sports leagues want to appeal to younger fans, but that's only part of the fanbase...and they can appeal to them in many other ways other than by taking classic NFL team uniforms and putting them through a grinder.

 

I also object to 14-year olds determining what uniform a team wears on the field. This is apparently what has happened with the Saints, who allow fans to vote on the uniform combo each week...and it's likely the same bunch of 14-year olds who keep responding "MONO PLEASE" since fans of other ages have more important things to do.

 

Besides, how can a team claiming that they wear all black to "intimidate" an opponent actually intimidate an opponent who is also wearing black? (see Saints vs. Falcons)

[ManillaToad]

1 hour ago, The Impaler said:

I don't think monochrome is bad, in fact the only monochrome I really don't care for is white, just think it's boring.  However, I think monochrome is just poorly executed too often.  Saints and Ravens are the first to come to mind.  Put striping on the pants and opposite socks and all the sudden those two looks are much more palatable.  I'm not saying every team should have a monochrome look by any means, and I think for teams such as the Patriots silver pants should be standard home (actually white, scrap the silver, but that's another story).

 

It's not monochrome if the socks contrast the pants & jersey

[AgentColon2]

Doing my daily check in for a 

[SportsFan12]

Packers Eagles in Brazil should finally have the Eagles in midnight green vs. Green Bay. Hasn't happened since the Reebok era in the 2010 playoffs when Vick was QB.

[CaliforniaGlowin]

33 minutes ago, AgentColon2 said:

Doing my daily check in for a 

Only daily? It's hourly for me

[gothedistance]

1 hour ago, SportsFan12 said:

Packers Eagles in Brazil should finally have the Eagles in midnight green vs. Green Bay. Hasn't happened since the Reebok era in the 2010 playoffs when Vick was QB.

 

I thought Cleveland was the opponent for the Eagles game in Brazil. Glad that's not the case. The Browns uniform will look good at Lincoln Financial Field.

 

The Reebok version of the midnight green looks better. The Nike one is stale.

 

 

[aawagner011]

6 hours ago, PurpleHayes said:

 

Yes, they used to use professionals who had good taste, something which I feel is lacking now in the Nike era, where it's all about making a splashy uniform that will generate love 'em/hate 'em vibes, because to Nike there is no such thing as bad publicity.

 

It also gives them an excuse to use the "we listened to the fans" explanation when they undo the changes and go back to a more traditional uniform...which begs the question as to why they didn't "listen to the fans" in the first place before adding side panels, alarm clock numbers, piping, chrome facemasks, shoulder panels, stupid number fonts, etc.

 

No one in their right mind would say that the fans demanded these changes.

 

One reason: Nike HATES fans who like traditional uniforms, because it makes it harder to roll out an all-new design every five years...they would do it every single year if the NFL let them, and every NFL team would also become like Oregon with 1,572 uniform combinations.

 

The blame for the rise in monochrome is squarely on the players, who in my opinion should not be put in charge of deciding what uniform to wear, or should be trusted to understand what even looks good. Every current NFL player grew up watching Any Given Sunday (or that putrid Longest Yard remake) with its' mono-black and mono-white unis, but this doesn't mean they look good on the field to the FAN.

 

I recommend reading Uni Watch‘s two recent Substack articles. The first interview is with a Nike employee who created Color Rush. The second explains how designing for the NFL works. I have a much different understanding of the process after reading the interviews.

 

At the end of the day, most of these poor designs fall at the feet of the team. Nike is not allowed by the NFL to communicate with the teams. The only way they engage with the teams is through the league. So they cannot solicit any designs. The process begins only when teams submit notice to the league and even then, communication is through the league unless it’s a planned sit down meeting between Nike and the team to get input.

 

The designer specifically addressed your point about the alarm clock numbers. The Bucs’ ownership came to Nike asking for a more futuristic design. Nike even advised against the chrome outline because it would not withstand long term use in the wash, but ownership loved it. Same thing with the Vikings numbers. Nike threw out the different numbers just as an idea. Ownership fell so in love with the concept, that Nike even submitted several other options with more traditional numbers but the team wouldn’t hear it. Nike also has nothing to do with helmet design - that comes strictly from the NFL and has for about a decade.

 

At the end of the day, Nike is designing what the teams are asking for. The designer acknowledged in the interview that there are many teams who know who they are and won’t even entertain the idea of wacky redesigns or alternates. That’s how we ended up with the Packers and Giants all white Color Rush (which was a league initiative and participation required of all teams). But for those teams that want to push the envelope, Nike is designing whatever they ask for. The client dictates the design process.

[MCM0313]

2 hours ago, SportsFan12 said:

Packers Eagles in Brazil should finally have the Eagles in midnight green vs. Green Bay. Hasn't happened since the Reebok era in the 2010 playoffs when Vick was QB.

Eagles will no doubt ruin the look by wearing white socks and tweeting emojis. 
 

Packers, of course, will wear mismatched socks - some green, some white - as is their way. 

[MCM0313]

6 hours ago, PurpleHayes said:

 

Yes, they used to use professionals who had good taste, something which I feel is lacking now in the Nike era, where it's all about making a splashy uniform that will generate love 'em/hate 'em vibes, because to Nike there is no such thing as bad publicity.

 

It also gives them an excuse to use the "we listened to the fans" explanation when they undo the changes and go back to a more traditional uniform...which begs the question as to why they didn't "listen to the fans" in the first place before adding side panels, alarm clock numbers, piping, chrome facemasks, shoulder panels, stupid number fonts, etc.

 

No one in their right mind would say that the fans demanded these changes.

 

One reason: Nike HATES fans who like traditional uniforms, because it makes it harder to roll out an all-new design every five years...they would do it every single year if the NFL let them, and every NFL team would also become like Oregon with 1,572 uniform combinations.

 

The blame for the rise in monochrome is squarely on the players, who in my opinion should not be put in charge of deciding what uniform to wear, or should be trusted to understand what even looks good. Every current NFL player grew up watching Any Given Sunday (or that putrid Longest Yard remake) with its' mono-black and mono-white unis, but this doesn't mean they look good on the field to the FAN.

 

Those guys look like they’re about to start slow-dancing. 

[The Impaler]

3 hours ago, ManillaToad said:

 

It's not monochrome if the socks contrast the pants & jersey

Fair enough but I think we all know what was meant.  

[oldschoolvikings]

3 hours ago, ManillaToad said:

 

It's not monochrome if the socks contrast the pants & jersey

Well, if you want to call it something else that’s up to you, but I think for a lot of us, saying “monochrome” is short hand for anytime the pants and jerseys are the same (non white) color… regardless of the socks.  That’s how I’ve always used the term, and will continue to do so.  
 

Put it this way… when the pants and jerseys are the same color, but the socks are a different color, the uniform sucks really bad.  And when the pants and jerseys are the same color, and so are the socks, the uniform sucks really really bad.  Not too much reason to split hairs.  

[rfraser85]

13 minutes ago, The Impaler said:

Fair enough but I think we all know what was meant.  

 

I'm trying to remember if there was a term for that style (jersey and pants match, but socks contrast). The term that comes to mind is unitard (uniform +leotard) or clean if the jersey and pants are white. Most of us know the jargon, but it would help to have a distinction.

[The Impaler]

14 minutes ago, rfraser85 said:

 

I'm trying to remember if there was a term for that style (jersey and pants match, but socks contrast). The term that comes to mind is unitard (uniform +leotard) or clean if the jersey and pants are white. Most of us know the jargon, but it would help to have a distinction.

I've always thought of unitard as like what the Saints and Ravens do.  Solid pants and socks that match the jersey.  For the record, I am 49, so not a young whippersnapper and I enjoy the pants and jersey's being the same color.  But only generally when the pants are striped and there is contrast with the sock.  Which doesn't seem to happen too often.  

[rfraser85]

1 minute ago, The Impaler said:

I've always thought of unitard as like what the Saints and Ravens do.  Solid pants and socks that match the jersey.  For the record, I am 49, so not a young whippersnapper and I enjoy the pants and jersey's being the same color.  But only generally when the pants are striped and there is contrast with the sock.  Which doesn't seem to happen too often.  

 

I think that's called the "yoga pants" look. I think these are the names and combos using the Bills as reference:

 

Home: Blue, White, Blue

Road: White, Blue, White

Clean: White, White, Blue

Unitard: Blue, Blue, White

Monochrome: Blue, Blue, Blue or White, White, White

Yoga Pants: Blue, White, White or White, Blue, Blue

 

These are the basic six I think of.

[fouhy12]

1 hour ago, oldschoolvikings said:

Put it this way… when the pants and jerseys are the same color, but the socks are a different color, the uniform sucks really bad.  And when the pants and jerseys are the same color, and so are the socks, the uniform sucks really really bad.  Not too much reason to split hairs.  

 

I don't think any of these uniforms suck really bad. 

 

 

Heck, I'll even throw these in there.

 

 

[Silver_Star]

25 minutes ago, fouhy12 said:

 

I don't think any of these uniforms suck really bad. 

 

 

Heck, I'll even throw these in there.

 

 

 

Exactly. They look great with the correct socks. Otherwise, those looks are just plain awesome. Jaguars in all teal look better with black socks. That is like the Panthers in all black look better with the process cyan socks.

[dont care]

Those aren’t monochrome, and you’d be kidding yourself if you didn’t say they’d look even better with different pants

[PlayGloria]

4 minutes ago, dont care said:

Those aren’t monochrome, and you’d be kidding yourself if you didn’t say they’d look even better with different pants

 

The Colts would not look better. I know that for sure