NHL - No Third Jerseys, And The Switch To Reebok..

[ElwoodCuse]

but to get this fired up without seeing anything is absurd. Anxious? Skeptical? Nervous? Fine. Perfectly understandable. But calling for boycots and some of the other things that have been mentioned in this thread? Insanity.

If the Yankees announced that they were doing basically what the NHL is doing, their fan base would have every right to freak out, sight unseen. Some things just AREN'T to be messed with.

[BBTV]

Um... this exact same thing already happened - and involved the Yankees.

Howabout when MLB went from flannel to double-knit? Many teams changed up their looks (including classics like the Pirates and Red Sox) while some teams (Yankees) kept essentially the same design and moved it onto a cooler, higher-performing canvas. Chill out.

[ElwoodCuse]

Um... this exact same thing already happened - and involved the Yankees.

No, it didn't. It would be like if the Yankees replaced the pinstripes with a plain vest and the NY with a YANKEES mark.

You don't make a wholesale change like this. You do it gradually, if at all.

[Roger Clemente]

thank god the oilers are going to classic ones

even if their spandex

Actually the Oilers are only wearing the vintage jerseys as third jerseys ONLY for the 2006-2007 season and they won't be spandex or form-fitting. It's next season they're introducing the form-fitting (not actually spandex) uniforms.

--Roger "Time?" Clemente.

[letterform]

As for Reebok, I hope anyone with an ounce of sense will boycott this company now. It's just not right to force these tucked-in ballet tights on every team club. They've no right to screw with history of teams like the Canadiens and Blackhawks.

Overreaction, maybe? Especially for something you haven't even seen?

"force these tucked-in ballet tights on every team club."

-Reebok cannot force anything on anyone. If anything goes wrong, blame the NHL or the individual club.

"no right to screw with history of teams like the Canadiens and Blackhawks."

-Why not wait to see if that actually happens? The Canadiens jerseys weren't "air-knit" 60 years ago. Did people "boycott" a company when the material changed from sweater-like to poly and then eventually to the current version? Wait and see. If you don't like it, boycott the NHL, not Reebok. Someone signs off on this stuff.

Do I really need to see Reebok officially unveil a tucked in jersey before I can form an opinion on it? Can I not decide that a tucked in hockey jersey looks really bad or is plain wrong independent of seeing one in the flesh? It?s not a situation of individual taste or growing to like something. That?s not the issue. We?re talking about Reebok forcing a template on all clubs that will drastically change their identity and that is wrong period.

You may think I?m overreacting, but I believe you lack the capacity to understand the significance of this issue. This is more than just uniform design. We?re talking about political identity in some cases. The Montreal Canadiens for example are an icon for French speaking Quebecers and even Catholicism to a certain degree. In this country they have enormous cultural and historical implications. The Canadiens sweater isn?t just a symbol of sporting heritage; it?s a part of a people?s identity.

As far as the Reebok template goes there was info about it here:

http://www.tsn.ca/columnists/bob_mckenzie.asp?id=153365

According to an anonymous GM in this article:

"Terrible. Just terrible. If we're forced to use them, well, we've got no choice, but if there's a choice, no way."

The fact that this particular GM doesn?t like these uniforms isn?t what bothers me. What bothers me is his uncertainty of choice. He doesn?t even know if he will get one! Clearly the GM?s don?t have a veto power at this junction or this GM wouldn?t be wondering aloud if these uniforms will be forced on his club.

It?s funny how you mention that teams have to sign off on these things. I believe they already have and the cards are all in Reebok?s hands. How else can one explain what is happening in Buffalo with the Buffaloslug for instance? By all accounts ownership was set to return to a modern version of their classic uniform in a bid to please their long term fans. My how those plans changed after Reebok stepped in to the design process. Instead of giving the fans a reworked classic, they let a focus group 3000 miles away decide on a slug and we all know the rest?

How do the Sabres even go forward after this absolute disaster? And how does a team go from wanting to please their fans with a familiar identity to doing nothing to stop a logo that is universally hated and completely alienating to their fan base? It makes absolutely no sense for the Sabres to respond this way unless they don?t have a choice in the matter. From the sound of things around the league, and the nature of the coming uniform templates themselves, this seems to be the case for most NHL clubs: no choice.

[VC//]

This is BS. No more Canucks gradient! That is my favorite alternate in all of sports.

Canucks gradient was scrapped before the announcement was ever made, about a month and half i think.

[jkrdevil]

Do I really need to see Reebok officially unveil a tucked in jersey before I can form an opinion on it? Can I not decide that a tucked in hockey jersey looks really bad or is plain wrong independent of seeing one in the flesh? It?s not a situation of individual taste or growing to like something. That?s not the issue. We?re talking about Reebok forcing a template on all clubs that will drastically change their identity and that is wrong period.

You may think I?m overreacting, but I believe you lack the capacity to understand the significance of this issue. This is more than just uniform design. We?re talking about political identity in some cases. The Montreal Canadiens for example are an icon for French speaking Quebecers and even Catholicism to a certain degree. In this country they have enormous cultural and historical implications. The Canadiens sweater isn?t just a symbol of sporting heritage; it?s a part of a people?s identity.

As far as the Reebok template goes there was info about it here:

http://www.tsn.ca/columnists/bob_mckenzie.asp?id=153365

According to an anonymous GM in this article:

"Terrible. Just terrible. If we're forced to use them, well, we've got no choice, but if there's a choice, no way."

The fact that this particular GM doesn?t like these uniforms isn?t what bothers me. What bothers me is his uncertainty of choice. He doesn?t even know if he will get one! Clearly the GM?s don?t have a veto power at this junction or this GM wouldn?t be wondering aloud if these uniforms will be forced on his club.

It?s funny how you mention that teams have to sign off on these things. I believe they already have and the cards are all in Reebok?s hands. How else can one explain what is happening in Buffalo with the Buffaloslug for instance? By all accounts ownership was set to return to a modern version of their classic uniform in a bid to please their long term fans. My how those plans changed after Reebok stepped in to the design process. Instead of giving the fans a reworked classic, they let a focus group 3000 miles away decide on a slug and we all know the rest?

How do the Sabres even go forward after this absolute disaster? And how does a team go from wanting to please their fans with a familiar identity to doing nothing to stop a logo that is universally hated and completely alienating to their fan base? It makes absolutely no sense for the Sabres to respond this way unless they don?t have a choice in the matter. From the sound of things around the league, and the nature of the coming uniform templates themselves, this seems to be the case for most NHL clubs: no choice.

You need to keep up with the news and read other post in this thread. The tucked in jerseys were rejected last year by the general managers and the league told RBL to redesign them. Thats why the switch was pushed back to next year instead of this year. Considering they already rejected them once I would say the league and teams do have a choice in the matter.

As the GM's have must approve these I don't think you will see the radical changes that Reebok originally planned. Some teams will change and other will pretty much stay the same with small tweaks because of a new jersey cut.

No one has seen these yet so we don't know for sure but what we do know for sure is that they will not be tucked in.

[BBTV]

As for Reebok, I hope anyone with an ounce of sense will boycott this company now. It's just not right to force these tucked-in ballet tights on every team club. They've no right to screw with history of teams like the Canadiens and Blackhawks.

Overreaction, maybe? Especially for something you haven't even seen?

"force these tucked-in ballet tights on every team club."

-Reebok cannot force anything on anyone. If anything goes wrong, blame the NHL or the individual club.

"no right to screw with history of teams like the Canadiens and Blackhawks."

-Why not wait to see if that actually happens? The Canadiens jerseys weren't "air-knit" 60 years ago. Did people "boycott" a company when the material changed from sweater-like to poly and then eventually to the current version? Wait and see. If you don't like it, boycott the NHL, not Reebok. Someone signs off on this stuff.

Do I really need to see Reebok officially unveil a tucked in jersey before I can form an opinion on it? Can I not decide that a tucked in hockey jersey looks really bad or is plain wrong independent of seeing one in the flesh? It?s not a situation of individual taste or growing to like something. That?s not the issue. We?re talking about Reebok forcing a template on all clubs that will drastically change their identity and that is wrong period.

You may think I?m overreacting, but I believe you lack the capacity to understand the significance of this issue. This is more than just uniform design. We?re talking about political identity in some cases. The Montreal Canadiens for example are an icon for French speaking Quebecers and even Catholicism to a certain degree. In this country they have enormous cultural and historical implications. The Canadiens sweater isn?t just a symbol of sporting heritage; it?s a part of a people?s identity.

As far as the Reebok template goes there was info about it here:

http://www.tsn.ca/columnists/bob_mckenzie.asp?id=153365

According to an anonymous GM in this article:

"Terrible. Just terrible. If we're forced to use them, well, we've got no choice, but if there's a choice, no way."

The fact that this particular GM doesn?t like these uniforms isn?t what bothers me. What bothers me is his uncertainty of choice. He doesn?t even know if he will get one! Clearly the GM?s don?t have a veto power at this junction or this GM wouldn?t be wondering aloud if these uniforms will be forced on his club.

It?s funny how you mention that teams have to sign off on these things. I believe they already have and the cards are all in Reebok?s hands. How else can one explain what is happening in Buffalo with the Buffaloslug for instance? By all accounts ownership was set to return to a modern version of their classic uniform in a bid to please their long term fans. My how those plans changed after Reebok stepped in to the design process. Instead of giving the fans a reworked classic, they let a focus group 3000 miles away decide on a slug and we all know the rest?

How do the Sabres even go forward after this absolute disaster? And how does a team go from wanting to please their fans with a familiar identity to doing nothing to stop a logo that is universally hated and completely alienating to their fan base? It makes absolutely no sense for the Sabres to respond this way unless they don?t have a choice in the matter. From the sound of things around the league, and the nature of the coming uniform templates themselves, this seems to be the case for most NHL clubs: no choice.

If the teams have already signed-off on this, then blame them, not Reebok. What would happen if the Canadiens just flat out refused to go with it - would the NHL kick them out of the league? Besides - they were rejected for next season, presumably so they could get it right. Reebok would be killing any future working relationships by not pushing something on the league that it didn't want. Even if they had that power (which I do not under any circumstances believe that they do) it would make no sense. People are way too quick to blame Nike, Reebok, etc. for these types of things. I'm as frustrated as anyone when teams lose their tradition, or when crap like Buffaslug comes out (especially when it is my team in question) but that just hasn't happened - yet.

I believe you lack the capacity to understand the significance of this issue.

Wow. I'm not sure I've ever been insulted like that on these boards. Congratulations.

[Kit]

As per the tucking, I think the league should mandate that all players tuck one side in, Gretzky style .

I'm not really fussed what happens with the Jerseys so long as the designs don't all start to follow the same freaking template (like the Olympics). What a bore.

[BBTV]

Um... this exact same thing already happened - and involved the Yankees.

No, it didn't. It would be like if the Yankees replaced the pinstripes with a plain vest and the NY with a YANKEES mark.

You don't make a wholesale change like this. You do it gradually, if at all.

Show me where it is documented that the Canadiens or another team with a long history of tradition is making wholesale changes. Maybe a different material, maybe a different fit, maybe slight changes in the shoulders to account for the new template, but nowhere has it been said that the "CH" is going anywhere, or that their striping is leaving. So until we see any new jerseys, as of right now, this is nothing more than like the MLB switch in the early 70s.

[eSabre]

As for Reebok, I hope anyone with an ounce of sense will boycott this company now. It's just not right to force these tucked-in ballet tights on every team club. They've no right to screw with history of teams like the Canadiens and Blackhawks.

Overreaction, maybe? Especially for something you haven't even seen?

"force these tucked-in ballet tights on every team club."

-Reebok cannot force anything on anyone. If anything goes wrong, blame the NHL or the individual club.

"no right to screw with history of teams like the Canadiens and Blackhawks."

-Why not wait to see if that actually happens? The Canadiens jerseys weren't "air-knit" 60 years ago. Did people "boycott" a company when the material changed from sweater-like to poly and then eventually to the current version? Wait and see. If you don't like it, boycott the NHL, not Reebok. Someone signs off on this stuff.

Do I really need to see Reebok officially unveil a tucked in jersey before I can form an opinion on it? Can I not decide that a tucked in hockey jersey looks really bad or is plain wrong independent of seeing one in the flesh? It?s not a situation of individual taste or growing to like something. That?s not the issue. We?re talking about Reebok forcing a template on all clubs that will drastically change their identity and that is wrong period.

You may think I?m overreacting, but I believe you lack the capacity to understand the significance of this issue. This is more than just uniform design. We?re talking about political identity in some cases. The Montreal Canadiens for example are an icon for French speaking Quebecers and even Catholicism to a certain degree. In this country they have enormous cultural and historical implications. The Canadiens sweater isn?t just a symbol of sporting heritage; it?s a part of a people?s identity.

As far as the Reebok template goes there was info about it here:

http://www.tsn.ca/columnists/bob_mckenzie.asp?id=153365

According to an anonymous GM in this article:

"Terrible. Just terrible. If we're forced to use them, well, we've got no choice, but if there's a choice, no way."

The fact that this particular GM doesn?t like these uniforms isn?t what bothers me. What bothers me is his uncertainty of choice. He doesn?t even know if he will get one! Clearly the GM?s don?t have a veto power at this junction or this GM wouldn?t be wondering aloud if these uniforms will be forced on his club.

It?s funny how you mention that teams have to sign off on these things. I believe they already have and the cards are all in Reebok?s hands. How else can one explain what is happening in Buffalo with the Buffaloslug for instance? By all accounts ownership was set to return to a modern version of their classic uniform in a bid to please their long term fans. My how those plans changed after Reebok stepped in to the design process. Instead of giving the fans a reworked classic, they let a focus group 3000 miles away decide on a slug and we all know the rest?

How do the Sabres even go forward after this absolute disaster? And how does a team go from wanting to please their fans with a familiar identity to doing nothing to stop a logo that is universally hated and completely alienating to their fan base? It makes absolutely no sense for the Sabres to respond this way unless they don?t have a choice in the matter. From the sound of things around the league, and the nature of the coming uniform templates themselves, this seems to be the case for most NHL clubs: no choice.

The Sabres were never going to go back to a reworked version of the original uniforms. The plan all along was to revert to shades of the old colors and create a new identity. They got Reebok involved on their own. They wanted to come up with something that would work well with the new style of jerseys.

The team put a lot of time and effort into their change. To bail on it now is impossible. They like what they came up with, and fans will accept it eventually.

[steiny_ramone]

As per the tucking, I think the league should mandate that all players tuck one side in, Gretzky style .

That's one way to increase scoring.

[letterform]

Do I really need to see Reebok officially unveil a tucked in jersey before I can form an opinion on it? Can I not decide that a tucked in hockey jersey looks really bad or is plain wrong independent of seeing one in the flesh? It?s not a situation of individual taste or growing to like something. That?s not the issue. We?re talking about Reebok forcing a template on all clubs that will drastically change their identity and that is wrong period.

You may think I?m overreacting, but I believe you lack the capacity to understand the significance of this issue. This is more than just uniform design. We?re talking about political identity in some cases. The Montreal Canadiens for example are an icon for French speaking Quebecers and even Catholicism to a certain degree. In this country they have enormous cultural and historical implications. The Canadiens sweater isn?t just a symbol of sporting heritage; it?s a part of a people?s identity.

As far as the Reebok template goes there was info about it here:

http://www.tsn.ca/columnists/bob_mckenzie.asp?id=153365

According to an anonymous GM in this article:

"Terrible. Just terrible. If we're forced to use them, well, we've got no choice, but if there's a choice, no way."

The fact that this particular GM doesn?t like these uniforms isn?t what bothers me. What bothers me is his uncertainty of choice. He doesn?t even know if he will get one! Clearly the GM?s don?t have a veto power at this junction or this GM wouldn?t be wondering aloud if these uniforms will be forced on his club.

It?s funny how you mention that teams have to sign off on these things. I believe they already have and the cards are all in Reebok?s hands. How else can one explain what is happening in Buffalo with the Buffaloslug for instance? By all accounts ownership was set to return to a modern version of their classic uniform in a bid to please their long term fans. My how those plans changed after Reebok stepped in to the design process. Instead of giving the fans a reworked classic, they let a focus group 3000 miles away decide on a slug and we all know the rest?

How do the Sabres even go forward after this absolute disaster? And how does a team go from wanting to please their fans with a familiar identity to doing nothing to stop a logo that is universally hated and completely alienating to their fan base? It makes absolutely no sense for the Sabres to respond this way unless they don?t have a choice in the matter. From the sound of things around the league, and the nature of the coming uniform templates themselves, this seems to be the case for most NHL clubs: no choice.

You need to keep up with the news and read other post in this thread. The tucked in jerseys were rejected last year by the general managers and the league told RBL to redesign them. Thats why the switch was pushed back to next year instead of this year. Considering they already rejected them once I would say the league and teams do have a choice in the matter.

As the GM's have must approve these I don't think you will see the radical changes that Reebok originally planned. Some teams will change and other will pretty much stay the same with small tweaks because of a new jersey cut.

No one has seen these yet so we don't know for sure but what we do know for sure is that they will not be tucked in.

I'm not trying to sound snotty, but do you have a link for this info? I've never heard anything from a legitimate media source that the GM's voted down the tucked in jerseys. What I heard was that the league was holding off on the new jerseys because of the lockout. The new jerseys are supposed to be quite radical and the league does not want to offend traditionalists so soon after reopening their doors.

[-Helix-]

Do I really need to see Reebok officially unveil a tucked in jersey before I can form an opinion on it? Can I not decide that a tucked in hockey jersey looks really bad or is plain wrong independent of seeing one in the flesh? It?s not a situation of individual taste or growing to like something. That?s not the issue. We?re talking about Reebok forcing a template on all clubs that will drastically change their identity and that is wrong period.

You may think I?m overreacting, but I believe you lack the capacity to understand the significance of this issue. This is more than just uniform design. We?re talking about political identity in some cases. The Montreal Canadiens for example are an icon for French speaking Quebecers and even Catholicism to a certain degree. In this country they have enormous cultural and historical implications. The Canadiens sweater isn?t just a symbol of sporting heritage; it?s a part of a people?s identity.

As far as the Reebok template goes there was info about it here:

http://www.tsn.ca/columnists/bob_mckenzie.asp?id=153365

According to an anonymous GM in this article:

"Terrible. Just terrible. If we're forced to use them, well, we've got no choice, but if there's a choice, no way."

The fact that this particular GM doesn?t like these uniforms isn?t what bothers me. What bothers me is his uncertainty of choice. He doesn?t even know if he will get one! Clearly the GM?s don?t have a veto power at this junction or this GM wouldn?t be wondering aloud if these uniforms will be forced on his club.

It?s funny how you mention that teams have to sign off on these things. I believe they already have and the cards are all in Reebok?s hands. How else can one explain what is happening in Buffalo with the Buffaloslug for instance? By all accounts ownership was set to return to a modern version of their classic uniform in a bid to please their long term fans. My how those plans changed after Reebok stepped in to the design process. Instead of giving the fans a reworked classic, they let a focus group 3000 miles away decide on a slug and we all know the rest?

How do the Sabres even go forward after this absolute disaster? And how does a team go from wanting to please their fans with a familiar identity to doing nothing to stop a logo that is universally hated and completely alienating to their fan base? It makes absolutely no sense for the Sabres to respond this way unless they don?t have a choice in the matter. From the sound of things around the league, and the nature of the coming uniform templates themselves, this seems to be the case for most NHL clubs: no choice.

You need to keep up with the news and read other post in this thread. The tucked in jerseys were rejected last year by the general managers and the league told RBL to redesign them. Thats why the switch was pushed back to next year instead of this year. Considering they already rejected them once I would say the league and teams do have a choice in the matter.

As the GM's have must approve these I don't think you will see the radical changes that Reebok originally planned. Some teams will change and other will pretty much stay the same with small tweaks because of a new jersey cut.

No one has seen these yet so we don't know for sure but what we do know for sure is that they will not be tucked in.

I'm not trying to sound snotty, but do you have a link for this info? I've never heard anything from a legitimate media source that the GM's voted down the tucked in jerseys. What I heard was that the league was holding off on the new jerseys because of the lockout. The new jerseys are supposed to be quite radical and the league does not want to offend traditionalists so soon after reopening their doors.

I don't remember where I read it, but I heard that the GMs voted it down too. Which is the reason RBK went back to the drawing board last year.

And again, just like the past 43592347523947543095743 threads we've had on this, people are crying about a total re-vamp of their favorite uniforms when they DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE NEW ONES LOOK LIKE.

I have yet to see ANYTHING that says the new Reebok uniforms will force new designs on all the clubs or that they will be spandexy "spiderman costumes" tucked into the pants.

And don't show me articles from two years ago either because those RUMORS have since been thrown out.

[jkrdevil]

There is a link somewhere on the boards from back when the GM's voted it down. It was a radio interview with the Columbus GM who stated that the GM's voted the new uniforms down and told RBK to redesign them. The fact that they were pushed back a year should tell you that they were voted down. I'll try to find the link though.

[CC97]

Goalies were supposed to wear the new form-fitted jerseys for last season, but they weren't ready in time.

[IceCap]

If the new form fitting sweaters are just the same patterns (with minor diffrences to account for a new jersey cut) on newer meterials, I'm ok with that. I'm fine with a form fitting Montreal Canadiens or Toronto Maple Leafs sweater, as long as their the same traditional patterns on newer materials.

If Reebok uses this as an excuse to to turn the NHL into CFLv2 with half the teams looking the same, then I'll have a problem with this. It's not the form fitting jersey cuts I'm worried about, it's the intregrty of the NHL's unique, and in many ways traditional, jerseys designs.

Now we all know that Reebok tried to pull a CFL on the NHL when the form fitting jerseys were shown to the leauge GMs, and the GMs voted them down and told Reebok to try again and get it right, so I'm not that worried. Either Reebok will get the form fitting sweaters right, or they'll screw up again, and the NHL GMs will vote them down again.

The NHL won't let Rebook make a joke out of the leauge's most defyning piece of merchindise/team identity.

[letterform]

There's no way I'm ok with form fitting jerseys. Form fitting jerseys will dictate that all teams will have to redesign their uniforms. You can't change the template that much and expect the original design elements to work. We saw this in the Olympics and there are already rumblings of Boston and Dallas getting new logos because they don't work with the new Reebok templates.

One of the most unique things about the hockey uniform currently is that it's pretty much the only major sport that can handle a big crest on the front. You can probably kiss that goodbye next season though because a big crest will no longer work. Instead the players will be wearing glorified versions of Ladies fan jerseys with ultra small crests.

Regardless of how the new templates actually look, I'm against anything Reebok wants to do with the NHL and I'll never buy any merchadise associated with them. The fact that they would actually think to introduce a tuck in jersey shows that they have zero respect for the game and the tradition of individual franchises. Noone should trust them after what they did to Sabres fans. (another uniform one doesn't need to see to judge) Reebok cares nothing about the game or it's real fans.

Death to the slug AND Reebok.