2024 NFL Changes

[MCM0313]

3 hours ago, rfraser85 said:

 

But how thick would the outline have to be? It might turn out like the Atlanta Braves' with their navy jerseys. Up close you can read the numbers, but at any distance you can't. I think that's what would happen with the green wings.

Ditto. 

[raz]

9 hours ago, rfraser85 said:

Up close you can read the numbers, but at any distance you can't. 

 

This is my problem with most cutsie alternate helmets and jerseys. They look great (I guess) in the studio photo shoot or video, but they don't really translate to real-world conditions. 

[tBBP]

On 7/20/2024 at 1:25 PM, HOOVER said:

Answer:  if you can look at a font and say, "Oh, I remember that from the late 90's," then it's dated.  This is exactly the case for all 4 teams you referenced. 

 

The current number font could have been utilized in 1899 just as much as it can be utilized effectively in 2024.  It's called "timelessness". 

 

It appears you skipped straight past my original qualifier, so let me highlight it again:

 

On 7/19/2024 at 12:56 PM, tBBP said:

I'll ask this question once again, since I keep seeing this said (not just about the Jaguars but also the Ravens, Eagles, and up til this offseason the Broncos) but yet to see an actual empirical explanation—and this is for anyone who wants to chime in:

 

Other than the year they came out, what exactly about these numbers makes them "dated"?

 

Because if we're gonna do that, then these numbers are every bit as dated--and actually even more so:

 

 

See how easy that was?

 

For what it's worth, these have been around in this guise since 1957. I doubt the Bears will ever touch these...but that in and of itself does not make these "timeless" in my opinion. I've actually long felt the Bears could benefit from a slight refresh of these, something closer to the original version of these numbers which debuted in 1950. Better that than the short-lived anomalies of 1972.

 

When I originally posed the question, I was looking for a description of actual visual characteristics that make the numbers appear dated--glyph weight, shape, curves/angles, stroke weight, other defining features such as that. None of that was addressed in that "answer". Now I understand certain number styles just ain't everyone's cup of tea; there's nothing wrong with that, especially with something as subjective as aesthetics. But if I'm gonna engage in a conversation of substance in this space, I'd much rather do so with something of actual substance rather than lowest-hanging fruit. It's the academic in me, I know...but that's how I roll.

[Old School Fool]

Very weird that the Bears use to have a block number road alternate in 1972 and 1973. I know back in the old days teams use to have Preseason exclusive jerseys sometimes but the Bears apparently had a full on alternate jersey!

 

 

[BBTV]

On 7/19/2024 at 12:56 PM, tBBP said:

Other than the year they came out, what exactly about these numbers makes them "dated"?

 

(note - I have no idea what actual teams we're talking about here, but in general...) when they followed trends that were specific to the era in which they were released.

 

For example, all the college teams that jumped on the serpentine bandwagon back when it dawned on them that they weren't limited by standard block and tried to stand out.  That particular font screams a specific era, and was in and out of style relatively quickly.  Basically every Phoenix Design Works product.

 

A team like the Bears and those classic Jags are "classic" to me, and look just as good in 2024 as if they would in 1954.  Kind of like the navy-pinstripe suit of fonts, vs the open-shirt with wide-overlapping collar of the disco era.

 

The term "dated" gets thrown around way to liberally here, but that's my two Lincolns (rusted ones, if you will.)

 

EDIT: it's possible for a font to be "instantly dated" if it's obvious that it meets the criteria, even if it's still within its window of popularity.  Some trends you just know are going to be gone in a year or so, like when bootcut jeans were all the rage, or those stupid flared-black pants that every sorority girl wore in the late '90s.  Everyone was wearing them, and deep down, knew they sucked, but that's what was in at the time.

[CS85]

"Dated" to me is a sign of boldness that locked itself in time.  Such as the Bucs alarm clock numbers and the Jags gradient helmets.  Those are embarrassing as they are, but also dated by the standards of football design.

[Sodboy13]

5 hours ago, Old School Fool said:

Very weird that the Bears use to have a block number road alternate in 1972 and 1973. I know back in the old days teams use to have Preseason exclusive jerseys sometimes but the Bears apparently had a full on alternate jersey!

 

 

I wonder if this was a matter of materials. This would be the time when a lot of team were making the transition to mesh short-sleeved jerseys with screenprinting, away from the traditional heavy long-sleeved durene with everything sewn on. Maybe the Bears couldn't get their numeral font screened at the time, so they just settled for block. That doesn't explain why they also had the two sets of navy jerseys at the time, though, with both sporting the custom numerals. I guess until proven otherwise, I'll go with the most common Bears answer: "Ownership was late to making a leaguewide change and was too cheap to do it properly."

[SFGiants58]

59 minutes ago, CS85 said:

"Dated" to me is a sign of boldness that locked itself in time.  Such as the Bucs alarm clock numbers and the Jags gradient helmets.  Those are embarrassing as they are, but also dated by the standards of football design.

That’s the best definition I’ve heard of the term “dated” in this context. Boldness locked to a specific time would apply in other contexts.

[Carolingian Steamroller]

17 hours ago, tBBP said:

 

It appears you skipped straight past my original qualifier, so let me highlight it again:

 

 

Because if we're gonna do that, then these numbers are every bit as dated--and actually even more so:

 

 

See how easy that was?

 

For what it's worth, these have been around in this guise since 1957. I doubt the Bears will ever touch these...but that in and of itself does not make these "timeless" in my opinion. I've actually long felt the Bears could benefit from a slight refresh of these, something closer to the original version of these numbers which debuted in 1950. Better that than the short-lived anomalies of 1972.

 

When I originally posed the question, I was looking for a description of actual visual characteristics that make the numbers appear dated--glyph weight, shape, curves/angles, stroke weight, other defining features such as that. None of that was addressed in that "answer". Now I understand certain number styles just ain't everyone's cup of tea; there's nothing wrong with that, especially with something as subjective as aesthetics. But if I'm gonna engage in a conversation of substance in this space, I'd much rather do so with something of actual substance rather than lowest-hanging fruit. It's the academic in me, I know...but that's how I roll.

Always excited to talk Bears numbers since its a favorite topic.

The Bears numbers are likely even older since they share too many similarities with the rounded numerals debuted by the Cubs (with whom they shared Wrigley Field and for whom George Halas was actually making uniforms in the 1940's) in the 1930's to be coincidental. Either they were more or less direct copies or very strongly inspired.

To add to the discussion of a particular element being "dated" I think it has less to with the structure of the element itself so much as the time and place in which it is viewed.

For example. I think we can agree that powdered wigs and culottes are dated in terms of mens fashion. Perhaps to use a more recent example, three button suits. It's not that there's anything specific about a three button suit that fixes it to the 90's, the fashion trends moved past it to other forms and popular culture dubbed it "old fashioned" in a negative way.

Were the Jags numbers, a stylized custom font with three layer patterns, passe in 2009?

I argue no.

The Chargers had just gone to a similar style in 2007. The Lions switched to their rounded, three layer custom font the same year the Jags moved away from it: 2009. So why the switch?

As indicated above, Jags ownership really wanted to streamline the uniform and the pointy multicolor font was marked for termination.

Is it dated now? Maybe. There's a far greater emphasis on lighter weight numbers with less outlining. Aside from the Bucs going back to the original pewter, no team has debuted a three color number pattern since the Dolphins and Jags in 2013. Is that a bad things? I don't think so.

[Carolingian Steamroller]

1 hour ago, Sodboy13 said:

I wonder if this was a matter of materials. This would be the time when a lot of team were making the transition to mesh short-sleeved jerseys with screenprinting, away from the traditional heavy long-sleeved durene with everything sewn on. Maybe the Bears couldn't get their numeral font screened at the time, so they just settled for block. That doesn't explain why they also had the two sets of navy jerseys at the time, though, with both sporting the custom numerals. I guess until proven otherwise, I'll go with the most common Bears answer: "Ownership was late to making a leaguewide change and was too cheap to do it properly."

That's exactly it. The stripeless navy jerseys and the white block number jerseys were both mesh rather than durene. The mesh navy jersey still used the rounded numbers but sewn on fabric not screen printed.

I think whomever was making the Bears jerseys at the time was struggling to do two colors that touched each other. That's why the elements that had two colors touching like the orange/white stripes on the navy jersey and the numbers on the road jersey were left off or altered to monochrome.

[Kiltman]

On 7/20/2024 at 6:09 PM, oldschoolvikings said:

Numbers need to be read, and identifed by the player. A wing is just wing.  What, someone would look at the Eagles running out of the tunnel and wonder what that winglike shape on their helmet was? 
 

I agree with BBTV.  The fact that the Eagles put literally the same wing decal on both their green helmet and their black helmet is beyond stupid. And lazy.  The standard decal has two outlines… a black one and then a white one.  On the black helmet they should use a green wing with a white outline and a gray outline.  It would make the helmet better.  
 

Although what they really need to do is dump the black helmets into the nearest deep body of water. 

I wonder if they’ll revisit it some point soon, originally it was just a one year thing.

 

Black uni should get changed to match the Kelly Green design, I’m not sure what would look better though with it, KG Helmet / Black Wings or Black Helmet / KG Wings.

[BBTV]

3 hours ago, CS85 said:

"Dated" to me is a sign of boldness that locked itself in time.  Such as the Bucs alarm clock numbers and the Jags gradient helmets.  Those are embarrassing as they are, but also dated by the standards of football design.

 

by my definition, I wouldn't call those "dated" - just absurdly-bad designs.  Even if the alarm-clock numbers lasted 20 years, I'd just call them "awful", not "dated".  

 

But a team like the Falcons - if they still have their current jerseys in 10 years, they'll certainly qualify as 'dated' by my standards.  The day they were released, they were "marked" to be dated soon.  Not dated immediately, but there's definitely an "expires by" date on them.

 

I guess it's hard to define and it'll be different for everyone, 

[RyanMcD29]

The Jets finally get back to having the 80s/90s look full time after all this time just to.... introduce throwbacks to the style jersey they wore 20 years in until 5 or 6 years ago

But at least Nike got the greens to finally match for a change, so there's that

[Sport]

Jets speedrunning their uniform cycle. Just going to flip flop between the Namath throwbacks and the 80's throwbacks for the rest of time. 

[SportsFan12]

8 minutes ago, RyanMcD29 said:

The Jets finally get back to having the 80s/90s look full time after all this time just to.... introduce throwbacks to the style jersey they wore 20 years in until 5 or 6 years ago

 

Couldn't have said it better. Maybe this wouldn't have seemed as random if they just included this with their new uniform reveal in April, but I am still scratching my head. Thought they had a perfect uniform lineup as it was, and now fans are asking for these to be the new uniforms, because of course they are. 

 

This will be the third straight season the Jets wear a white uniform at home against Buffalo.

 

 

[DCarp1231]

Oh look! The better shade of green this time!

 

(I still hate this uniform)

[HOOVER]

18 minutes ago, RyanMcD29 said:

The Jets finally get back to having the 80s/90s look full time after all this time just to.... introduce throwbacks to the style jersey they wore 20 years in until 5 or 6 years ago

But at least Nike got the greens to finally match for a change, so there's that

So, this certainly is not bad, and it shows what an upgrade the current uniforms are, but it's probably a little too soon. 

 

Either way, it'll make some fans happy for that night...and they'll sell some jerseys, of course.

[DrunkKidCatholic]

Drop the black. Make these the alternate.

[Delicate Genius]

Yes please. The all-navy look is so bad.

[DrunkKidCatholic]

At some point we'll need a green version of that uniform.