NFL uniforms

[IamBatman]

I just wanted to add an opinion when I read that the Browns were going with the throwbacks for next year. I think that too many teams in the past few years have gone with the throwback look, which I'm not really a fan of. You've got the Jets, Giants, Colts, and now the Browns.

I'm thinking of all the teams that have changed over the past few years and there are more teams that have gone to a newer, more modern design as compared to the older, more traditional look, but in this day and age why take a step back instead of forward? This is all just opinion, but I do have to agree with most people on here who disapprove of the more common use of the gray facemasks on the helmets. I've never liked those at all. It does work for the Giants and teams with silver helmets but not for teams like Arizona, especially with their new look and also with Indy and the ugly old 49ers helmet, which thankfully was improved upon a few years ago. All the Cardinals have to do is add a red facemask and the problem is solved. No more old looks if there is no need to. The Browns uniform was fine as it was, plus it already had throwback qualities anyway as did the Colts.

So that's how I feel about the topic, I'd appreciate feedback.

[hawk36]

I feel the reason for the many throwbacks, is that they come from a time when designers, rather than computers designed. The looks were well thought out and crafted. They had character, soul. People are starting to realize that the "flavor of the month" modern unis are ok but don't stand up to the quality seen in the unis of the 50s and 60s.

[Slammersman]

I have to agree with you the Colts look bad with gray facemask, I think the Browns will as well as the Cardinals look bad. Cowboys are fine and the Giants. In college Alabama it is tradition they never change to anything else that is cool, but the Orangemen or should I say the Orange looks bad with Gray face masks. I have the same feeling on white faces I hate them unless wth a dark helmet and then sometimes no.

I have no problem if they want to go back to a throwback look but try to modern it up a little bit.

[Avenger]

I feel the reason for the many throwbacks, is that they come from a time when designers, rather than computers designed. The looks were well thought out and crafted.

You clearly don't understand the process of design, then.

Anyway, I need to get back to work. "Computer, make my clients some logos!"

[WideRight]

I totally disagree with the "back in my day people knew how to design" argument. I think the opposite is true. Today teams take marketing much more seriously then they did when most of the "classic" designs came into being. If you look back at the more classic teams (Bears, Packers, Browns, etc.) you see this:

1. Team owner let daughter pick team colors, or...

2. Team owner drew logo on napkin, or...

3. Team owner picked colors of his alma mater, or...

4. Team owner copied stripe patterns of other teams (college teams)

The Browns had the same stripes as the Packers, just in different colors. The Colts and Eagles had the same stripes for a while. The Giants and Bills had almost identical jerseys for quite a while (not exact, but awfully close.)

I think if you look at the newer designs, some of which I love (49ers, Seahawks, Cardinals) and some I hate (Bills, Bengals) the design is clearly more intentional. They are taking into account materials, how it looks on TV, the cut of new jerseys (no sleeves anymore) and in many cases the team traditions (49ers and Dolphin updates are great examples.)

They may be classic, but you cannot tell me that uniforms like the "old school" Packers, Browns, Jets, etc.) are masterpieces of design. They are classic, but they are also extremely hum-drum. If it weren't for Penn State, Alabama and Oklahoma, these would be the least inventive uniforms in all of sports.

Am I saying we should completely redo the Bears or the Colts? No. Absolutely not. But it drives me nuts that teams that have tweaked their uniforms over the years are now obsessed with "old school" and do stupid things like add grey facemasks to a uniform with no other grey. Is white that horribly "kewl" that it has to go?

I agree with the poster on another topic who wanted to know when canvas pants, big wool sweaters and leather helmets would return to the NFL. I personally can't wait to see other sports catch on with this and have the NBA switch to super-short shiny nylon shorts, or MLB to go back to 1-size-fits-all pants. WOW!! CLASSIC!!!

[cableguy]

I think the big difference between yesterdays uniforms and todays uniforms are not a computer issue but rather a marketing issue.

In the 1960's the NFL didnt seem as concerned with marketing and selling jerseys and what designs and colors would be the most profitible. Rather they were concerned more with tradition and appearence.

So lets go back to when a uniform was designed to fit the tradition of the team and not what would sell more jerseys.

[DGivens87]

Well I'll say this: I like the trend back to more traditional unis (Giants, Colts, and Jets), but I also like the newer unis, like the Patriots, Texans, and Panthers. With that being said, you can blame the recent "retro for the sake of retro" craze on pop culture.

Throwbacks are in...what better way to jump on that cash cow than to cater to it? Plus it's an easy change - you don't have to re-invent the wheel - just go back 20-30 years and poof, there's your "new" design for another jersey, line of apparell, etc.

[The Thrill]

If you look back at the more classic teams (Bears, Packers, Browns, etc.) you see this:

1. Team owner let daughter pick team colors, or...

2. Team owner drew logo on napkin, or...

3. Team owner picked colors of his alma mater, or...

4. Team owner copied stripe patterns of other teams (college teams)

What is this "owner" of whom you speak?

Oh, right...

...and a few tens of thousands of their friends. iViva los stockholders!

[JohnnyFriedRice]

It has less to do with the Browns going to a throwback look and more to do with the Browns wanting to make more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ by getting new uniforms.

The Browns are a team of tradition and going for something modern would be met with disdain and negativitey. The only option they really have is to go classic.

Bottomline: New jerseys (throwback or newly designed) = $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

[Gothamite]

They may be classic, but you cannot tell me that uniforms like the "old school" Packers, Browns, Jets, etc.) are masterpieces of design.

Yes, I can.

"Great design" doesn't have to mean "flashy." The Packers, Colts, and Browns all have great looks - they're distinct and unique to the clubs. They reflect something of the cities themselves.

Designing for the sake of designing doesn't make anything better. I'm not going to claim that all of the new designs stink, but I'd say more of them do than not.

I'd rather have my team looking like the Sox (either color), Dodgers or Cards than the Jayzz.

[Coast2CoastAM2006]

I like the new age designs.

[VitaminD]

The Browns had the same stripes as the Packers, just in different colors.  The Colts and Eagles had the same stripes for a while.  The Giants and Bills had almost identical jerseys for quite a while (not exact, but awfully close.)

So what that the Browns and Steelers shared striping designs? There are only so many logical places to put stripes on a football uniforms. When illogical people put them in illogical places, you end up with the hyperpiping like Virginia Tech has, or you get contrived monstrosities like the Bills. So the Eagles have the same shoulder stripes as the Colts; so do the Vikings. But would you confuse a team in kelly green with one in royal blue or one in purple? It takes more than shoulder stripes to make a complete identity package; it's colors, fonts, logos and stripes all together. People didn't confuse the Bills and Giants because one team wore white or red helmets and the other wore blue helmets. Not to mention the difference in number styles, lettering styles and subtle differences in striping.

They may be classic, but you cannot tell me that uniforms like the "old school" Packers, Browns, Jets, etc.) are masterpieces of design.  They are classic, but they are also extremely hum-drum.  If it weren't for Penn State, Alabama and Oklahoma, these would be the least inventive uniforms in all of sports.

If they're not masterpieces of design, why have they withstood the test of time while other teams are constantly reinventing themselves to be "kewl"? Ditto PSU, 'Bama and Oklahoma. Their designs are iconic partly because they're simple, understated and associated with success and class. Success is always cooler than this year's hot color or superfluous piping.

[ColeJ]

I feel the reason for the many throwbacks, is that they come from a time when designers, rather than computers designed. The looks were well thought out and crafted.

You clearly don't understand the process of design, then.

Anyway, I need to get back to work. "Computer, make my clients some logos!"

lol...

i think your computer is better than mine any chance i could get your computer to teach my computer a few tricks?

[ShaftDu]

owners ripping off other teams

sheesh, now you are going to tell me that the first Bengals unis looked like the Brown. SHEESH

[Puddy]

Anyway, I need to get back to work. "Computer, make my clients some logos!"

"Make it so!"

[Puddy]

I like the new age designs.

We can tell from your avatar

[BlueSky]

Most of the newer designs are crap. The Falcons are a great example. What they did to the logo is awful. Freshen your look, don't turn it over to a bunch of third-party agency marketing airheads who have no feel for the team or the city.

[Blue Falcon]

It has less to do with the Browns going to a throwback look and more to do with the Browns wanting to make more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ by getting new uniforms.

The Browns are a team of tradition and going for something modern would be met with disdain and negativitey. The only option they really have is to go classic.

Bottomline: New jerseys (throwback or newly designed) = $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

The thing is the Browns unis changed so little over the years that most fans probably didn't go out and buy the new ones, so I don't think they will be getting much $$$$ since most Browns fans still have the old jerseys.

I'm a little tired of this retro-is-cool trend. It was fine with the Jets and Giants, who look great. But I still don't understand the Colts and Browns.

[hawk36]

I feel the reason for the many throwbacks, is that they come from a time when designers, rather than computers designed. The looks were well thought out and crafted.

You clearly don't understand the process of design, then.

Anyway, I need to get back to work. "Computer, make my clients some logos!"

I think you understand my point. If not, let me explain.

I have been in the business since 1984 so I have experienced both the pre and post computer phases of graphic design. Up until the early 90s, I would say that most in the industry actually hand crafted their designs and then used the computer as a final, finishing tool for the renderings.

In the 90s, I started to see more and more students coming out of design schools with less and less knowledge of type and color, and an increased reliance on the computer.

Now, it is hard to find any new designer who has even sketched anything, who can tell the differences between Garamond and Sabon. The ideas are there, but the actual finished pieces lack a sophistication needed to make a good design great.

[Coast2CoastAM2006]

I like the new age designs.

We can tell from your avatar