2024 NFL Changes

[Sec19Row53]

1 hour ago, Silver_Star said:

(mod edit) comment removed

(mod edit) item removed

[MCM0313]

1 hour ago, Silver_Star said:

(mod edit) comment removed)

(mod edit) item removed

 

By “bold”, do you mean a color with a high saturation value? By that definition some navy shades would qualify. But the decision to switch to navy is almost never a bold one. It’s an overly safe, unoriginal choice. 

[The_Admiral]

The Broncos were part of the late-90s-early-2000s dark-and-fade trend with the Rams, Seahawks, Brewers, Stars, Islanders, Buccaneers, Edmonton Oilers, and almost the Packers. They weren't the platonic ideal of it like the Oilers, Brewers, and Rams, but they did darken their blue and rely on it much more than they had as an orange/royal team to that point. Hope this helps.

 

EDIT: how could I forget the Nuggets of 1993, arguably the trendsetter, shifting from blue, yellow, red (and the rest of the rainbow) to navy, beige, and burgundy.

[Lights Out]

I think the '80s NHL might have secretly been the real trendsetter. Specifically the Kings and Penguins, who jettisoned their bright color schemes for darker, primarily black uniforms that became more iconic than what they replaced. The Blues and Sabres also switched to darker shades of blue in that era. Shortly afterward, the White Sox followed the Kings' lead in switching to silver and black and became the new merchandise cash cow of the MLB. From there, the floodgates opened and every team started darkening their colors to boost sales.

 

Come to think of it, the Cowboys were arguably the earliest adopters of the trend in the NFL. They had already replaced their blue jerseys with navy in 1981.

[Carolingian Steamroller]

10 minutes ago, Lights Out said:

I think the '80s NHL might have secretly been the real trendsetter. Specifically the Kings and Penguins, who jettisoned their bright color schemes for darker, primarily black uniforms that became more iconic than what they replaced. The Blues and Sabres also switched to darker shades of blue in that era. Shortly afterward, the White Sox followed the Kings' lead in switching to silver and black and became the new merchandise cash cow of the MLB. From there, the floodgates opened and every team started darkening their colors to boost sales.

Low Key:

I think the Chargers gradually morphing from this:

 

to this

 

to this 



and finally this



is a not insignificant sign.

It was a five year process to go from azure and athletic gold to navy and white but it happened.

[The_Admiral]

19 minutes ago, Lights Out said:

I think the '80s NHL might have secretly been the real trendsetter. Specifically the Kings and Penguins, who jettisoned their bright color schemes for darker, primarily black uniforms that became more iconic than what they replaced.

 

Purple/yellow to black/silver is the ultimate dark-and-fade, I suppose, but when I think of teams sucking the life out of their color schemes, I think of the Oilers and Rams first.

[rfraser85]

1 hour ago, The_Admiral said:

The Broncos were part of the late-90s-early-2000s dark-and-fade trend with the Rams, Seahawks, Brewers, Stars, Islanders, Buccaneers, Edmonton Oilers, and almost the Packers. They weren't the platonic ideal of it like the Oilers, Brewers, and Rams, but they did darken their blue and rely on it much more than they had as an orange/royal team to that point. Hope this helps.

 

EDIT: how could I forget the Nuggets of 1993, arguably the trendsetter, shifting from blue, yellow, red (and the rest of the rainbow) to navy, beige, and burgundy.

 

The trend did start to reverse in 2008 with the Titans, even though they did start using navy again in 2015. It really got going after Nike took over, starting with the Dolphins and Vikings. I don't think every team needs to go bright, but it's been good to see some teams using brighter colors again.

[MCM0313]

1 hour ago, The_Admiral said:

 

Purple/yellow to black/silver is the ultimate dark-and-fade, I suppose, but when I think of teams sucking the life out of their color schemes, I think of the Oilers and Rams first.

I think we may overlook the LA Kings here, not only because of the sport and year, but also because their Gretzky-era logo change was a clear upgrade. If they could use that with purple instead of black, and then use black for an alt, I would even say they needn’t change again. 

[ruttep]

3 hours ago, Silver_Star said:

(mod edit) comment removed

 

I am really curious as to what was said here lol

[FriedPickles]

6 minutes ago, ruttep said:

 

I am really curious as to what was said here lol

Forgot most of what he said, but I remember he ended it by saying being cool on the Internet is the equivalent to winning the Special Olympics, and that OldSchoolVikings doesnt know color keys like primary secondary and tertiary 

[spartacat_12]

2 hours ago, Lights Out said:

I think the '80s NHL might have secretly been the real trendsetter. Specifically the Kings and Penguins, who jettisoned their bright color schemes for darker, primarily black uniforms that became more iconic than what they replaced. The Blues and Sabres also switched to darker shades of blue in that era. Shortly afterward, the White Sox followed the Kings' lead in switching to silver and black and became the new merchandise cash cow of the MLB. From there, the floodgates opened and every team started darkening their colors to boost sales.

 

Those feel like different situations though. Both teams completely changed their colour schemes, they didn't just darken the existing colours. The Penguins were also already in navy blue before the switch to black & yellow.

[oldschoolvikings]

36 minutes ago, FriedPickles said:

Forgot most of what he said, but I remember he ended it by saying that OldSchoolVikings doesnt know color keys like primary secondary and tertiary 

 

I just hope he doesn't tell my boss.

[gosioux76]

3 hours ago, Carolingian Steamroller said:

Low Key:

I think the Chargers gradually morphing from this:

 

to this

 

to this 



and finally this



is a not insignificant sign.

It was a five year process to go from azure and athletic gold to navy and white but it happened.

 

If you look at it a different way, you could say it took the Chargers all those years to create uniforms that matched the tone of their helmets. I preferred the early yellow-heavy Fouts years, but it always bothered me that the helmet was a darker shade of blue than the jerseys. 

[RyanMcD29]

Today's one of my favorite days of the summer- Pocket Helmet Delivery Day!

 

And what absolutely slipped by me when the Texans announced their new look was this. Saw it on the helmet, searched the uniform PR piece to make sure this wasn't a design error, and uhh... sure enough that's the back of the helmet and WOOF

[rfraser85]

1 hour ago, gosioux76 said:

 

If you look at it a different way, you could say it took the Chargers all those years to create uniforms that matched the tone of their helmets. I always preferred the early yellow-heavy Fouts years, but it always bothered me that the helmet was a darker shade of blue than the jerseys. 

 

It also makes for an amusing choice. I would think most of the forum likes the royal blue jerseys over the navy ones, but then there is the mismatch of colors, which is unpopular here. But a benefit to navy helmets for both sets would be that if the Chargers decided to change their CR jerseys to match the throwback look, they could use navy helmets for both jerseys.

 

I'd be curious about a modern dilemma that is somewhat similar. I had a brief discussion here about the sani-socks, or at least the look, and would pose a question: If your favorite sock look is the half-and-half, would you tolerate solid socks if it meant no more solid white socks?

[The_Admiral]

The Texans gave their helmet a tramp stamp? Man, they really are from 2002!

[ruttep]

1 hour ago, rfraser85 said:

I'd be curious about a modern dilemma that is somewhat similar. I had a brief discussion here about the sani-socks, or at least the look, and would pose a question: If your favorite sock look is the half-and-half, would you tolerate solid socks if it meant no more solid white socks?

 

Yes absolutely

[Sec19Row53]

1 hour ago, rfraser85 said:

 

It also makes for an amusing choice. I would think most of the forum likes the royal blue jerseys over the navy ones, but then there is the mismatch of colors, which is unpopular here. But a benefit to navy helmets for both sets would be that if the Chargers decided to change their CR jerseys to match the throwback look, they could use navy helmets for both jerseys.

 

I'd be curious about a modern dilemma that is somewhat similar. I had a brief discussion here about the sani-socks, or at least the look, and would pose a question: If your favorite sock look is the half-and-half, would you tolerate solid socks if it meant no more solid white socks?

Ravens and Saints? Give me solid white socks rather than solid black socks.

[Carolingian Steamroller]

2 hours ago, gosioux76 said:

 

If you look at it a different way, you could say it took the Chargers all those years to create uniforms that matched the tone of their helmets. I preferred the early yellow-heavy Fouts years, but it always bothered me that the helmet was a darker shade of blue than the jerseys. 

 

Yes but they'd basically accomplished that by 1985, yet they kept going, eliminating the gold elements and eventually adding navy pants.

And I say that as someone who really misses the 90's design.



Also someone needs to relocate them back to San Diego.

[MCM0313]

1 hour ago, rfraser85 said:

 

It also makes for an amusing choice. I would think most of the forum likes the royal blue jerseys over the navy ones, but then there is the mismatch of colors, which is unpopular here. But a benefit to navy helmets for both sets would be that if the Chargers decided to change their CR jerseys to match the throwback look, they could use navy helmets for both jerseys.

 

I'd be curious about a modern dilemma that is somewhat similar. I had a brief discussion here about the sani-socks, or at least the look, and would pose a question: If your favorite sock look is the half-and-half, would you tolerate solid socks if it meant no more solid white socks?

I would probably tolerate some things in violation of the Geneva Convention if it meant no more solid white socks.