Froob Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 1 minute ago, tron1013 said: Adding a white stroke to the horns would do wonders for the mono red set And navy socks 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PurpleHayes Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 8 minutes ago, Froob said: Really is a bummer lions removed the stripes from the blue pants. If they had kept stripes on em and removed the white pants (or added stripes) they are getting A+ (even if they don’t get rid of plain white socks). Technically they could add them at any time, since the 5-year rule only applies to jerseys and helmets. No one buys NFL pants, otherwise the NFL would be just as strict about changes to them as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rfraser85 Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 I don't know if this has been asked before but is there a function to the leggings players wear now? Personally I would like them more if I knew there was a function and if players wore them in the right colors, or at least what I would consider the right colors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruColor Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 10 hours ago, MCM0313 said: 1. So, with individual colors not being trademarked, could the Texans have told the Titans to screw off and used 279? Or does Tennessee have leaguewide rights to that color? Or would there be some kind of infringement based on being in the same division? Related: 2. I remember reading long ago (like, a decade or more) that the league allowed each team to have one color that was unique to them; other colors they had to share. Is that still the case? Because, honestly, it looks like most teams don’t have a unique color of their own anymore. I mean, what - Dolphins’ aqua, Panthers’ electric blue, Eagles’ teal, the respective shades of purple worn by the Ravens and Vikings? Am I missing any? 3. What is the PMS code for the Broncos’ new royal blue that is used very sparingly? Related: 4. Why have you never included the actual color(s) of the Broncos’ pre-1997 helmets? I’m guessing it would just be an approximation? How close would it be to PMS 307 (Ole Miss’ robins’ egg blue)? (And, for that matter, how about the navy helmets worn at the same time by the Giants and Rams?) Please don’t take this onslaught of questions the wrong way - I am incredibly thankful for all that you do. Your site is wonderful. 1. I don't have any insight on the usage of 279...just speculation on my part that the NFL might want the Texans to use a different shade in order to differentiate their color from TN. 2. I think that the manufacturer(s) dictate - to a large degree - what colors are used. Don't know about any past or present league mandates. 3. Ironically, the sheets I just got for the Broncos neglected to define the Royal Blue and the Light Gray (used on the alt pants). All that is used are custom RGB values that don't match up to anything in the Pantone library, or even the Nike colors that I can tell. I have provided estimates, but I am not all that confident that they are accurate. Along those lines, I should mention that the beveling on the Texans' new numbers (Navy and Color Rush jerseys) are just tonal screens, and not additional colors. 4. I had a heated argument on this board years ago about this subject, but what I do is display the *intended* color. I understand that even though I have estimates of Orange 179 C and Blue 293 C for the Broncos of that era, that what was worn on the field wasn't always a true match to those color values. I own a 1970s-era NFL style guide, and even though Pantone values hadn't been adopted at that time, the league provided color tear-off chips for color matching. I can take those sheets and compare to my physical Pantone guides and make fairly accurate estimates of the intended color. The argument I had in the past was in regards to the Cowboys' ever-changing Metallic Blue pants of the '60s and '70s. It was said to me that I needed to estimate each variation - they seemed to change color from year-to-year. I argued that the intentional color (again, from the physical style guide I have) was close to PANTONE 8200 C, so that's the color they were *intending* to replicate. If I were to attempt to account for every manufacturer variation and dye lot discrepancy, I'd never get anything done. Oh - and I have found that occasionally, teams have provided alternate colors for helmet color mismatches - the Rams for a while designated 281 for the helmets and 287 for the uniforms, and back in the '70s, the Eagles had a darker shade of Green for their helmets as well. The Giants were probably just picking a stock helmet shell color that looked better with their uniform color. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timjameskohler Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 You know, I absolutely hated the 2015 Browns uniforms, the 2014 Buccaneers, the 2013 Jags...but I like these Houston uniforms. If you like the number font, like I do, you'll probably find the set tolerable, as with many sets everything hinges on that font, and I like this one a lot. It's fun without being (my opinion) stupid and gaudy. That home uniform is great. Will look excellent 5-6 times a year. That collar looks fantastic. I LOVE the brighter red and how it pops on the blue. I'm hoping that they pair the alternate jersey with the white pants at least once. As long as they wear the navy pants and white socks, the away set is ALSO great (navy - white - navy looks good for any navy team). I KNOW it sounds crazy, but I'm enjoying these color rushes a lot. The bright blue and red are really singing off of the dark blue -- all of the accessories look bright, fun. I'm not as crazy about the bull helmet as other people are. I wish they had just put the standard logo on all of the helmets. The new secondary logo is fine, but it looks better on hats/jackets/accessories like teams utilize their secondary logos. I also think these will look better on the field than they do now. Overall, they aren't better than the Lions redesign, but definitely better than the Broncos. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PurpleHayes Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 43 minutes ago, timjameskohler said: You know, I absolutely hated the 2015 Browns uniforms, the 2014 Buccaneers, the 2013 Jags...but I like these Houston uniforms. While the Broncos and Texans new duds are 'meh', none of the unis unveiled so far this year are anywhere near as bad as those three uniforms. Let's hope that was the low point in Nike's tenure. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlayGloria Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 1 hour ago, Froob said: Really is a bummer lions removed the stripes from the blue pants. If they had kept stripes on em and removed the white pants (or added stripes) they are getting A+ (even if they don’t get rid of plain white socks). This is going to be an unpopular opinion, but with teams doing the mono-color pants/socks look, blank pants bother me less. Say the lions wore blue pants and blue socks on gameday... I actually think it looks worse when there are pants stripes versus blank pants. The leotard look bothers me so much more when i see a pants stripe just end but the pants color continues, if that makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver_Star Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 1 hour ago, tron1013 said: Adding a white stroke to the horns would do wonders for the mono red set If the Rams would of kept their sleeve horns into their new uniforms, then we would of have a horny set of uniforms. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rfraser85 Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 10 minutes ago, PlayGloria said: This is going to be an unpopular opinion, but with teams doing the mono-color pants/socks look, blank pants bother me less. Say the lions wore blue pants and blue socks on gameday... I actually think it looks worse when there are pants stripes versus blank pants. The leotard look bothers me so much more when i see a pants stripe just end but the pants color continues, if that makes sense. I agree that it's more cohesive, but I don't like the look of pants and socks being the same color to begin with. I also think this isn't a fashion trend, so much as hiding uniform violations for sock length. Whatever you think of the NFL's dress code, it still exists. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlayGloria Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 2 minutes ago, rfraser85 said: I agree that it's more cohesive, but I don't like the look of pants and socks being the same color to begin with. I also think this isn't a fashion trend, so much as hiding uniform violations for sock length. Whatever you think of the NFL's dress code, it still exists. Yes, just for the record, my personal preference is pants stripes and contrasting socks in most scenarios. It just seems like this isn't going away anytime soon. When I look at that Texans mono-red uniform, that pants stripe bothers the hell out of me. Again, ideal scenario is navy socks and that fixes everything. But, it's hard for me to bash the lions new pants for not having a stripe, when i know deep down they are going to mono them anyway. I would almost rather have plain pants in that scenario. Again JMO. The stripe is almost jarring to me when the pants are paired with the same color sock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rfraser85 Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 20 minutes ago, PlayGloria said: Yes, just for the record, my personal preference is pants stripes and contrasting socks in most scenarios. It just seems like this isn't going away anytime soon. When I look at that Texans mono-red uniform, that pants stripe bothers the hell out of me. Again, ideal scenario is navy socks and that fixes everything. But, it's hard for me to bash the lions new pants for not having a stripe, when i know deep down they are going to mono them anyway. I would almost rather have plain pants in that scenario. Again JMO. The stripe is almost jarring to me when the pants are paired with the same color sock. That's how I feel about leggings. If the leggings do have a functional use, and as a bonus would encourage players to not go "yoga pants", I would like them a lot more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruttep Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 49 minutes ago, PlayGloria said: This is going to be an unpopular opinion, but with teams doing the mono-color pants/socks look, blank pants bother me less. Say the lions wore blue pants and blue socks on gameday... I actually think it looks worse when there are pants stripes versus blank pants. The leotard look bothers me so much more when i see a pants stripe just end but the pants color continues, if that makes sense. Disagree completely. Pant stripes at least still look like a football uniform. Stripeless pants leading into socks of the same color is what truly gives off the full legging effect, which I can't stand. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WBeltz Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 13 hours ago, MCM0313 said: 1. So, with individual colors not being trademarked, could the Texans have told the Titans to screw off and used 279? Or does Tennessee have leaguewide rights to that color? Or would there be some kind of infringement based on being in the same division? I do want to circle back on this question because doesn't T-Mobile have a very specific shade of magenta trademarked? What leads to that because then obviously that opens up a new can of worms, but if the Titans cannot prove something about the Oilers blue, why doesn't Houston just use it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnWis97 Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 Side note/unpopular opinion...but boo to the Browns for ditching the awsome brown facemask in favor of the sore-thumb white one. 4 1 1 2 Quote Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse." BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD POTD (Shared) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sec19Row53 Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 (edited) 40 minutes ago, WBeltz said: I do want to circle back on this question because doesn't T-Mobile have a very specific shade of magenta trademarked? What leads to that because then obviously that opens up a new can of worms, but if the Titans cannot prove something about the Oilers blue, why doesn't Houston just use it? No. You can't trademark a color (I'll wait now and be proven wrong). You can trademark your logo and name, and confusion of colors in conjunction with business use and logos and names could lead to problems. For example, if I started a shipping firm tomorrow and called PJ's and used brown trucks, I'd probably get a Cease and Desist. That same name with a green truck might not cause a problem. ETA - from the google machine: Can you get a trademark in a color? While you can trademark a color, you cannot own it outright. The likelihood of confusion between two different products in varying markets is low. While "Barbie" has its trademark pink in more than 100 categories, the likelihood of the brand being confused for similarly pink "Pepto-Bismol" is highly unlikely. Edited April 24 by Sec19Row53 More info 3 Quote It's where I sit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJWalker45 Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 9 minutes ago, OnWis97 said: Side note/unpopular opinion...but boo to the Browns for ditching the awsome brown facemask in favor of the sore-thumb white one. That brown facemask was horrible and I'm happy we have the white facemasks back. Especially since the team looks closer to the days we had Brian Sipe and Bernie Kosar. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruColor Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 1 minute ago, MJWalker45 said: That brown facemask was horrible and I'm happy we have the white facemasks back. Especially since the team looks closer to the days we had Brian Sipe and Bernie Kosar. Brown facemasks are apparently still going to be used on the White throwbacks. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJWalker45 Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 1 minute ago, TruColor said: Brown facemasks are apparently still going to be used on the White throwbacks. And probably on any other third helmet too 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCM0313 Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 52 minutes ago, ruttep said: Disagree completely. Pant stripes at least still look like a football uniform. Stripeless pants leading into socks of the same color is what truly gives off the full legging effect, which I can't stand. Right - it's football, not yoga. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCM0313 Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 9 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said: That brown facemask was horrible and I'm happy we have the white facemasks back. Especially since the team looks closer to the days we had Brian Sipe and Bernie Kosar. Bengals fan but wholeheartedly agree. The matchups between our teams should look really good. 1 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.