Sec19Row53 Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 2 minutes ago, DCarp1231 said: Remember when the Colts trolled us with their April Fools all-white uniform nine years ago? It’s becoming more of a reality that we’ll get this eventually Please delete this post before someone who could make this happen sees it. 1 4 Quote It's where I sit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fouhy12 Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 54 minutes ago, oldschoolvikings said: OR… It’s “allowed” because the Vikings wanted to do it and that’s pretty much all there is to it. We spend a lot of time discussing these theoretical NFL uniform rules. Has anybody ever seen an actual document outlining any of these rules? I’m seriously asking. Is it possible most of these supposed rules are hearsay that gets accepted as fact? The rules will only ever be enforced as much as people care about them, and nobody really cares about this. The Vikings like it, they'll sell more jerseys, it's reasonably close to their existing uniform, and I can't imagine any other owner caring enough to raise an issue. Quote fouhy12's NFL Concepts 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDGP Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 1 hour ago, oldschoolvikings said: We spend a lot of time discussing these theoretical NFL uniform rules. Has anybody ever seen an actual document outlining any of these rules? I’m seriously asking. Is it possible most of these supposed rules are hearsay that gets accepted as fact? This exact conversation is happening over in the NBA thread as well, and when I asked people adamant about certain rules to actually provide them the response from every one of them turned into "well it's really more of a viiiiiiibe rather than a rule per se" and general speculation about how a rule COULD exist if you ignore all the evidence to the contrary. Quote I've got a dribbble, check it out if you like my stuff; alternatively, if you hate my stuff, send it to your enemies to punish their insolence! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sec19Row53 Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 11 minutes ago, MDGP said: This exact conversation is happening over in the NBA thread as well, and when I asked people adamant about certain rules to actually provide them the response from every one of them turned into "well it's really more of a viiiiiiibe rather than a rule per se" and general speculation about how a rule COULD exist if you ignore all the evidence to the contrary. 1 hour ago, Sec19Row53 said: This isn't the main color of the uniform, so there's not a rule preventing them from adding a new trim color. That's how the Colts could add a black swoosh to their uniform. However, once they added the black swoosh, that set the stage for them to be allowed to have a black uniform, because it was a color in their team "database" so to speak. You can always add a color to your uniform. You can't make a new uniform out of color that isn't currently used or in your team's history. Not a vibe, but confusing what the rule actually is. Quote It's where I sit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spartacat_12 Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 1 hour ago, ZapRowsdower8 said: Everybody accusing kids on Twitter for this need to realize that 13–17-year-olds only make up 2.4% of users. It's your run-of-the-mill 25–34-year-old moron that's truly to blame. Purple and silver is a great combo, but not like this and not for this team. The helmet is the worst part, none of that works for me. Fix the helmet, add purple socks, and throw this onto your Madden create-a-team and we may be in business. Yeah, I'm in my 30's and plenty of my friends who follow sports have terrible taste in uniforms. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SportsFan12 Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 59 minutes ago, DCarp1231 said: Remember when the Colts trolled us with their April Fools all-white uniform nine years ago? It’s becoming more of a reality that we’ll get this eventually This is pretty much what the Vikings will look like during live action on the TV, aside from the purple numbers. Unfortunately, no one involved in these processes seems to care about that anymore. It's become all about photoshoots and hype videos on social media rather than how the damn things will actually look during a game (ya know, the entire purpose uniforms exist to begin with) 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trekbkr Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 Sigh. Someday, when both the Powerball and MegaMillions jackpots are topping a billion bucks at the same time, and I win both of them, I'm gonna make an offer the Wilf boys can't refuse. My first official act as new sole Vikings owner will be to dress my team in Tommy Kramer-era classic uniforms--darker purple, no matte or satin helmet finish, white masks, full UCLA stripes on the aways, the whole bit. My second official act will be to tell NFL Licensing and Nike that I don't give a flying f about merchandising, or moving units off the racks, or Color Rushes or Theme Nights. I want my team to look the way they're supposed to look. A fella can dream. 6 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPHF Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 Who put Aaron Jones' 3s so far apart? In the unveiling videos, it's that way on his back as well. Everyone else's numbers are appropriately spaced, though. Anyway, echoing @oldschoolvikings, please don't let this be a precursor to a wordmark change. Their current one is among the best, if not the best, in the league. It has character and fits the team perfectly. They got the wordmark correct at their founding, and seemed to realize that previously when reverting back to it from their generic nineties stenciled one. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tBBP Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 Okay, I thought those 3s were spaced out a bit too much. Glad someone else caught that as well. And about that script: someone mentioned it previously, but that VIKINGS script isn't exactly new. It's just written in their NOB font...and it also adorns their training facility down in Bloomington off the 494. (The backside of that building reads "HOME OF THE MINNESOTA VIKINGS", all written in that same font, visible from the freeway loop.) 1 Quote *Disclaimer: I am not an authoritative expert on stuff...I just do a lot of reading and research and keep in close connect with a bunch of people who are authoritative experts on stuff. || dribbble || Behance || Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 I'll echo oldschoolvikings and DPHF by agreeing that the Vikings wordmark is one of the best in the league. It's one of the few that can take its location name on equal footing, which is rarer than you'd think at first: I don't think I've ever seen "Pittsburgh" with "Steelers" or "San Francisco" with "49ers," for example. 4 Quote ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschoolvikings Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 45 minutes ago, The_Admiral said: I'll echo oldschoolvikings and DPHF by agreeing that the Vikings wordmark is one of the best in the league. It's one of the few that can take its location name on equal footing, which is rarer than you'd think at first: I don't think I've ever seen "Pittsburgh" with "Steelers" or "San Francisco" with "49ers," for example. Correct. It's a beaut. 9 4 Quote http://dstewartpaint.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rfraser85 Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 49 minutes ago, oldschoolvikings said: OR… It’s “allowed” because the Vikings wanted to do it and that’s pretty much all there is to it. We spend a lot of time discussing these theoretical NFL uniform rules. Has anybody ever seen an actual document outlining any of these rules? I’m seriously asking. Is it possible most of these supposed rules are hearsay that gets accepted as fact? It looks like there is. Rule 4, Section 4, Article 2 of the NFL rulebook, which is on the NFL site: Pursuant to the official colors established for each NFL club in the League Constitution and Bylaws, playing squads are permitted to wear only those colors or a combination of those colors for helmets, jerseys, pants, and game socks and/or leg coverings; provided that white is also an available color for jerseys and mandatory color for the lower portion of game socks and/or leg coverings. But as I've said in the past, the problem remains enforcement. If the rule is not enforced, it becomes a guideline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschoolvikings Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 2 minutes ago, rfraser85 said: It looks like there is. Rule 4, Section 4, Article 2 of the NFL rulebook, which is on the NFL site: Pursuant to the official colors established for each NFL club in the League Constitution and Bylaws, playing squads are permitted to wear only those colors or a combination of those colors for helmets, jerseys, pants, and game socks and/or leg coverings; provided that white is also an available color for jerseys and mandatory color for the lower portion of game socks and/or leg coverings. But as I've said in the past, the problem remains enforcement. If the rule is not enforced, it becomes a guideline. OK. That's why I asked. I honestly don't know if some, any, or all of the rules we talk about are real or not. But, as you say, a rule that doesn't get enforced is really just a suggestion. Quote http://dstewartpaint.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rfraser85 Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 9 minutes ago, oldschoolvikings said: OK. That's why I asked. I honestly don't know if some, any, or all of the rules we talk about are real or not. But, as you say, a rule that doesn't get enforced is really just a suggestion. The other problem is there's no incentive to enforce the rule, either. Any fines go to the NFL's charities, and the players make enough money to dismiss the fines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VikWings Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 Let me preface by saying those Vikings uniforms don't need to exist at all. If they must have a white helmet (they mustn't) just wear it with the regular white uniforms. But the NFL is becoming more and more like college football with uniforms so here we are. Would have rather them gone with the white throwback from either the 70s or 90s instead of frozen Kansas State... With that being said; in a vacuum, They're ok and the white helmet looks great. The icicle numbers (which is barely even noticeable) are better than the sail numbers on the regular jerseys. I just hope Chris' speculation on the main site isn't true and they never replace their beautiful word mark on the main jerseys with the boring one on these. If they're gonna have a non-throwback alternate, these are better than that crappy color rush one that is now officially retired after not being worn last year. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 Now that it has crossed my mind, how many NFL teams besides the Vikings do have a full wordmark? I.e., it can all be written out on one line either practically or conceptually (e.g, we never see "Green Bay Packers" spelled out but the elements are there in the two end zones to where it could be, in theory). The early 2000s ones, the Texbengalseafalcardinals, all favor the little location name on the top, big notchy-serif nickname below, all center-aligned. Same with the Broncos, but upside-down, yielding the "Broncos Denver" construction I've always hated. Chiefs have never noted their location in any way, nor have the Cowboys, Steelers, or Niners. The Raiders never did until now. 1 Quote ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruttep Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 4 hours ago, rfraser85 said: provided that white is also a mandatory color for the lower portion of game socks and/or leg coverings. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sky1324 Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 2 hours ago, The_Admiral said: Now that it has crossed my mind, how many NFL teams besides the Vikings do have a full wordmark? I.e., it can all be written out on one line either practically or conceptually First one that came to mind. The old '90s wordmark fit the bill too, but the one-year '95 mark doesn't. 5 Quote the user formerly known as cdclt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruColor Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruttep Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 5 hours ago, The_Admiral said: Now that it has crossed my mind, how many NFL teams besides the Vikings do have a full wordmark? I.e., it can all be written out on one line either practically or conceptually (e.g, we never see "Green Bay Packers" spelled out but the elements are there in the two end zones to where it could be, in theory). The early 2000s ones, the Texbengalseafalcardinals, all favor the little location name on the top, big notchy-serif nickname below, all center-aligned. Same with the Broncos, but upside-down, yielding the "Broncos Denver" construction I've always hated. Chiefs have never noted their location in any way, nor have the Cowboys, Steelers, or Niners. The Raiders never did until now. The 49ers used to put "San Francisco" in one of the endzones in 80s playoff games 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.