OKC NBA TEAM

[McCall]

Two completely different sets of EACH number from 0 to 9 is ridiculously inefficient and unnecessarily expensive during the manufacturing process. Not to mention they look horrifying... to say the least.

I dont think that argument holds much water at all. Otherwise teams would use the same font for every single thing on their uniforms.

You really have no understanding of logo and uniform production do you?

Dbackdiehardm, you really just need to wipe all this out and start over from scratch. I get that you're trying for western style colors, lettering and stuff and that's fine. But the choices you've made are nowhere near what you're wanting to convey. It seems like you're kind of rushing this together because you're really anxious for everyone to see what you're thinking. Again, it's fine to be excited about it, but you also wanna put your best work out there. Take your time. Use the critiques that many here (most of whom have done some outstanding work in the past) and put something solid together. No one's gonna respect you any less if you don't have a concept out there.

Also, I wouldn't go with "OK City". Just put Oklahoma above the numbers and City below. Or come up with a creative logo that fits them together without overly crowding up the chest area.

[MVP]

Two completely different sets of EACH number from 0 to 9 is ridiculously inefficient and unnecessarily expensive during the manufacturing process. Not to mention they look horrifying... to say the least.

I dont think that argument holds much water at all. Otherwise teams would use the same font for every single thing on their uniforms.

Same font for everything would still cost the same. The numbers on the back are different in size from the numbers on the front (if they have it), no? The numbers on the back are different in size from the name font, no? The numbers on the back are different in size from the wordmark on the front, no? If you have wordmarks, nameplates, numbers completely the same size and font, YOU have a point. But that's pretty much nonexistent in any sport. Since wordmarks, nameplates, and numbers are ALL different, then it is plausible to use a different font, because the cost will differ anyways. However, in THIS situation, there are two different styles for the SAME NUMBER. When the fact that you can pay the same price for ONE set of 0 to 9 numbers, now you have to pay double the price for the TWO sets of 0 to 9 numbers.

Get it?

[Arts11]

The color combo simply doesn't work. Plus w/o a team name, I think it's pretty hard to focus on a concept and build an identity.

[Coast2CoastAM2006]

Epic fail.

lets start by creating an identity. Begin with a team name. Are they the Sonics? Outlaws? Wranglers?

Since you are aiming for a western theme, maybe go with Outlaws? For lack of a better name.

have a color scheme that matches that theme. Brown, Black, Gold, maybe silver might work. Your color scheme is on the right track.

next kill the OK City with blue triangle. Nobody will ever get that its supposed to represent a dash or anythign like that. its something that would have to be constantly explained. Most designs should be self explainatory Simply use Oklahoma across the jersey or team name.

use a simpler font. A western type of block font might work. It would be unique with out being over the top and would fit in to the identity.

KIll the jagged side panels and go with something more sleek. Right now it looks like an amateur ms paint job.

the ball/lightning seems forced and doesn't mesh with the identity. First of all you had to explain that it was supposed to represent a tornado. Just looking at it, i would have never guessed tornado. I seems more fit for a team named the lightning/bolts/thunder. Since this is a western theme, there is no reason to have a forced tornado logo on the back. i know tornados are indigenous to OK, however they are for North Texas too and you don't see any reference to tornado in any of 4 major teams. so unless your team has storm theme, i wouldn't use it as an alternate logo. It just looks forced.

[sobe]

sorry to hijack the thread but what about something along these lines?

[eRay]

Right now it has less flow than Mark Madsen at the White House.

hahaha, What a great way to put it.

To sobe: That is very very busy. The side panels should not impede on the wordmark, names, or back number. You should have "Oklahoma City" on the away jerseys, and "Stampede" on the homes. The colors need to be narrowed down, there seems to be too many right now(Black, Yellow, Red, Green/Graphite, White, and Silver). The logo on the shorts looks weird because the Buffalo doesn't seem to be running, or moving it's legs...yet there are motion lines. I think you have a better start than dbackdiehard, but you still have a lot of work to do if you want to flush out a great concept. I also wish all the fonts worked together, instead of "Oklahoma City" competing with "Stampede", the name on the back being about the same as "Stampede" style-wise, and then the number font going in a completely different direction. I would say keep all fonts closer to the number font you have started with, that works for me better than the slick beveled "Stampede" font.

I write too much

[frozenguy]

Two completely different sets of EACH number from 0 to 9 is ridiculously inefficient and unnecessarily expensive during the manufacturing process. Not to mention they look horrifying... to say the least.

I dont think that argument holds much water at all. Otherwise teams would use the same font for every single thing on their uniforms.

Same font for everything would still cost the same. The numbers on the back are different in size from the numbers on the front (if they have it), no? The numbers on the back are different in size from the name font, no? The numbers on the back are different in size from the wordmark on the front, no? If you have wordmarks, nameplates, numbers completely the same size and font, YOU have a point. But that's pretty much nonexistent in any sport. Since wordmarks, nameplates, and numbers are ALL different, then it is plausible to use a different font, because the cost will differ anyways. However, in THIS situation, there are two different styles for the SAME NUMBER. When the fact that you can pay the same price for ONE set of 0 to 9 numbers, now you have to pay double the price for the TWO sets of 0 to 9 numbers.

Get it?

Your argument makes no sense. The only thing going on here is that they would have one more "font" to deal with (the second set of numbers).

Heres an example for you to think about. There are teams in MLB that dont have nameplates on the back. Whether its for tradition, or whatever the reason happens to be, they dont have nameplated on the back. An example is the Yankees, one of the most popular teams in sports. They havent had nameplates on the back for god knows how long. Now if other teams started to follow suit, BY YOUR ARGUMENT, they would save money.... a lot of money..... since there are 26 letters in the alphabet and only 10 digits for the "second" font in the uniform we are talking about..... but they dont, because the COST IS NEGLIGIBLE FOR A :censored:ING SINGLE ADDITIONAL FONT ON A UNIFORM.

Get it? (Probably not, just thought I would ask to make you feel better).

[eRay]

Two completely different sets of EACH number from 0 to 9 is ridiculously inefficient and unnecessarily expensive during the manufacturing process. Not to mention they look horrifying... to say the least.

I dont think that argument holds much water at all. Otherwise teams would use the same font for every single thing on their uniforms.

Same font for everything would still cost the same. The numbers on the back are different in size from the numbers on the front (if they have it), no? The numbers on the back are different in size from the name font, no? The numbers on the back are different in size from the wordmark on the front, no? If you have wordmarks, nameplates, numbers completely the same size and font, YOU have a point. But that's pretty much nonexistent in any sport. Since wordmarks, nameplates, and numbers are ALL different, then it is plausible to use a different font, because the cost will differ anyways. However, in THIS situation, there are two different styles for the SAME NUMBER. When the fact that you can pay the same price for ONE set of 0 to 9 numbers, now you have to pay double the price for the TWO sets of 0 to 9 numbers.

Get it?

Your argument makes no sense. The only thing going on here is that they would have one more "font" to deal with (the second set of numbers).

Heres an example for you to think about. There are teams in MLB that dont have nameplates on the back. Whether its for tradition, or whatever the reason happens to be, they dont have nameplated on the back. An example is the Yankees, one of the most popular teams in sports. They havent had nameplates on the back for god knows how long. Now if other teams started to follow suit, BY YOUR ARGUMENT, they would save money.... a lot of money..... since there are 26 letters in the alphabet and only 10 digits for the "second" font in the uniform we are talking about..... but they dont, because the COST IS NEGLIGIBLE FOR A :censored:ING SINGLE ADDITIONAL FONT ON A UNIFORM.

Get it? (Probably not, just thought I would ask to make you feel better).

I don't think you understand. everyone is saying (I think) that the numbers are not a font. Not every number "2" would be the same, for example...Jersey number 22 would feature a 2 shaped like this "<" and a 2 shaped like this ">", additionally, jersey number 2 would have a 2 in the shape of a diamond "<>" meaning there would need to be three different versions of each individual number. If you don't follow me, let me know and I will draw it all up for you in illustrator. I cut out numbers for jerseys(among other things) for a living, and I know I would hate a team that did this. Every time a jersey requires the number 2, it should be the same number, not one of three versions. I know some of you get it, help me explain.

[Jimmy!]

I don't think you understand. everyone is saying (I think) that the numbers are not a font. Not every number "2" would be the same, for example...Jersey number 22 would feature a 2 shaped like this "<" and a 2 shaped like this ">", additionally, jersey number 2 would have a 2 in the shape of a diamond "<>" meaning there would need to be three different versions of each individual number. If you don't follow me, let me know and I will draw it all up for you in illustrator. I cut out numbers for jerseys(among other things) for a living, and I know I would hate a team that did this. Every time a jersey requires the number 2, it should be the same number, not one of three versions. I know some of you get it, help me explain.

Makes sense to me. But since when did the NBA care about the cost of uniforms?

[frozenguy]

I don't think you understand. everyone is saying (I think) that the numbers are not a font. Not every number "2" would be the same, for example...Jersey number 22 would feature a 2 shaped like this "<" and a 2 shaped like this ">", additionally, jersey number 2 would have a 2 in the shape of a diamond "<>" meaning there would need to be three different versions of each individual number. If you don't follow me, let me know and I will draw it all up for you in illustrator. I cut out numbers for jerseys(among other things) for a living, and I know I would hate a team that did this. Every time a jersey requires the number 2, it should be the same number, not one of three versions. I know some of you get it, help me explain.

Makes sense to me. But since when did the NBA care about the cost of uniforms?

Thats sort of my point. By ERay's logic, every team would have completely spartan uniforms... I mean there was a time when teams didnt have stripes down the side of the unis, there was a time when teams didnt wear alterates. You are bitching about having three number fonts.... well, whats the big deal? I understand that it would cost a little more to cut out the numbers, but you could make the same argument for any other feature of a uniform that was not on it previously. I remember there was a time in the NBA not too long ago when no teams had a logo above the last name, a logo on the back of the shorts, a logo on the wasitband, etc. Now so many teams have all these additional accessories on their uniforms because things EVOLVE, things CHANGE, uniforms go through styles and modifications even if it means cutting out an extra number of whatever.... by your logic we wouldnt even be having this conversation because we could just simply make the OKC unis ultra-generic with plain number font.... Heck why even put their names on the back, its "extra work".... and why even bother using brain cells to think of a color scheme, because time is money, and its a waste of energy, just make them black and white.

[MVP]

Two completely different sets of EACH number from 0 to 9 is ridiculously inefficient and unnecessarily expensive during the manufacturing process. Not to mention they look horrifying... to say the least.

I dont think that argument holds much water at all. Otherwise teams would use the same font for every single thing on their uniforms.

Same font for everything would still cost the same. The numbers on the back are different in size from the numbers on the front (if they have it), no? The numbers on the back are different in size from the name font, no? The numbers on the back are different in size from the wordmark on the front, no? If you have wordmarks, nameplates, numbers completely the same size and font, YOU have a point. But that's pretty much nonexistent in any sport. Since wordmarks, nameplates, and numbers are ALL different, then it is plausible to use a different font, because the cost will differ anyways. However, in THIS situation, there are two different styles for the SAME NUMBER. When the fact that you can pay the same price for ONE set of 0 to 9 numbers, now you have to pay double the price for the TWO sets of 0 to 9 numbers.

Get it?

Your argument makes no sense. The only thing going on here is that they would have one more "font" to deal with (the second set of numbers).

Heres an example for you to think about. There are teams in MLB that dont have nameplates on the back. Whether its for tradition, or whatever the reason happens to be, they dont have nameplated on the back. An example is the Yankees, one of the most popular teams in sports. They havent had nameplates on the back for god knows how long. Now if other teams started to follow suit, BY YOUR ARGUMENT, they would save money.... a lot of money..... since there are 26 letters in the alphabet and only 10 digits for the "second" font in the uniform we are talking about..... but they dont, because the COST IS NEGLIGIBLE FOR A :censored:ING SINGLE ADDITIONAL FONT ON A UNIFORM.

Get it? (Probably not, just thought I would ask to make you feel better).

Seems to me the responses by others to YOUR particular posts tell me that YOUR argument makes no sense.

Having nameplates on the back of the jersey can help the fans identify with the players on the field, court, rink, wherever. A professional sports team would look eerily pathetic if they don't put anything on their jerseys, as pathetic as your argument... heh (Hmm, let's go watch a sport like hockey or football where the players wear masks, but also without any numbers or nameplates... OOOO that player made an amazing play! But wait, who is he?) Also, by creating jerseys for specific players, fans will BUY those jerseys because they are a fan of that specific player. There are people who buy buy nameless jerseys, but there are MORE people who are willing to shell out money to buy those athletes' jerseys, heck even make their own personalized ones with the names and numbers. All of this provides money for the business.

However, if you unnecessarily INCREASE the cost of manufacturing the jersey, that simply means less money, no? Logic. NECESSARY elements = nameplates, number sets, wordmarks. UNNECCESSARY elements = different font for the number sets. There are necessary elements on a jersey, and unnecessary elements. Teams are not going to want to pay for those. Not only are those suggested numbers with different fonts unnecessary in terms of cost, but they're also aesthetically horrifying. The appeal is ultimately for the fan to decide, but with the results of the responses in this thread, it ain't looking too great, perhaps except for you and the OP.

[frozenguy]

Two completely different sets of EACH number from 0 to 9 is ridiculously inefficient and unnecessarily expensive during the manufacturing process. Not to mention they look horrifying... to say the least.

I dont think that argument holds much water at all. Otherwise teams would use the same font for every single thing on their uniforms.

Same font for everything would still cost the same. The numbers on the back are different in size from the numbers on the front (if they have it), no? The numbers on the back are different in size from the name font, no? The numbers on the back are different in size from the wordmark on the front, no? If you have wordmarks, nameplates, numbers completely the same size and font, YOU have a point. But that's pretty much nonexistent in any sport. Since wordmarks, nameplates, and numbers are ALL different, then it is plausible to use a different font, because the cost will differ anyways. However, in THIS situation, there are two different styles for the SAME NUMBER. When the fact that you can pay the same price for ONE set of 0 to 9 numbers, now you have to pay double the price for the TWO sets of 0 to 9 numbers.

Get it?

Your argument makes no sense. The only thing going on here is that they would have one more "font" to deal with (the second set of numbers).

Heres an example for you to think about. There are teams in MLB that dont have nameplates on the back. Whether its for tradition, or whatever the reason happens to be, they dont have nameplated on the back. An example is the Yankees, one of the most popular teams in sports. They havent had nameplates on the back for god knows how long. Now if other teams started to follow suit, BY YOUR ARGUMENT, they would save money.... a lot of money..... since there are 26 letters in the alphabet and only 10 digits for the "second" font in the uniform we are talking about..... but they dont, because the COST IS NEGLIGIBLE FOR A :censored:ING SINGLE ADDITIONAL FONT ON A UNIFORM.

Get it? (Probably not, just thought I would ask to make you feel better).

Seems to me the responses by others to YOUR particular posts tell me that YOUR argument makes no sense.

Having nameplates on the back of the jersey can help the fans identify with the players on the field, court, rink, wherever. A professional sports team would look eerily pathetic if they don't put anything on their jerseys, as pathetic as your argument... heh (Hmm, let's go watch a sport like hockey or football where the players wear masks, but also without any numbers or nameplates... OOOO that player made an amazing play! But wait, who is he?) Also, by creating jerseys for specific players, fans will BUY those jerseys because they are a fan of that specific player. There are people who buy buy nameless jerseys, but there are MORE people who are willing to shell out money to buy those athletes' jerseys, heck even make their own personalized ones with the names and numbers. All of this provides money for the business.

However, if you unnecessarily INCREASE the cost of manufacturing the jersey, that simply means less money, no? Logic. NECESSARY elements = nameplates, number sets, wordmarks. UNNECCESSARY elements = different font for the number sets. There are necessary elements on a jersey, and unnecessary elements. Teams are not going to want to pay for those. Not only are those suggested numbers with different fonts unnecessary in terms of cost, but they're also aesthetically horrifying. The appeal is ultimately for the fan to decide, but with the results of the responses in this thread, it ain't looking too great, perhaps except for you and the OP.

To counter your "Having nameplates ... " paragraph: New York Yankees.

To counter the next paragraph: Name any uniform that exists in the NBA and I will tell you an unnecessary element on it. Yet *gasp* the team still decided to do it, even thought it costs extra money!!!!!! ZOMG!!!!!!!!!!!111 And if you believe that the few people who have responded to this thread are a true representation of america's opinion, then.... you have bigger issues.

[MVP]

Two completely different sets of EACH number from 0 to 9 is ridiculously inefficient and unnecessarily expensive during the manufacturing process. Not to mention they look horrifying... to say the least.

I dont think that argument holds much water at all. Otherwise teams would use the same font for every single thing on their uniforms.

Same font for everything would still cost the same. The numbers on the back are different in size from the numbers on the front (if they have it), no? The numbers on the back are different in size from the name font, no? The numbers on the back are different in size from the wordmark on the front, no? If you have wordmarks, nameplates, numbers completely the same size and font, YOU have a point. But that's pretty much nonexistent in any sport. Since wordmarks, nameplates, and numbers are ALL different, then it is plausible to use a different font, because the cost will differ anyways. However, in THIS situation, there are two different styles for the SAME NUMBER. When the fact that you can pay the same price for ONE set of 0 to 9 numbers, now you have to pay double the price for the TWO sets of 0 to 9 numbers.

Get it?

Your argument makes no sense. The only thing going on here is that they would have one more "font" to deal with (the second set of numbers).

Heres an example for you to think about. There are teams in MLB that dont have nameplates on the back. Whether its for tradition, or whatever the reason happens to be, they dont have nameplated on the back. An example is the Yankees, one of the most popular teams in sports. They havent had nameplates on the back for god knows how long. Now if other teams started to follow suit, BY YOUR ARGUMENT, they would save money.... a lot of money..... since there are 26 letters in the alphabet and only 10 digits for the "second" font in the uniform we are talking about..... but they dont, because the COST IS NEGLIGIBLE FOR A :censored:ING SINGLE ADDITIONAL FONT ON A UNIFORM.

Get it? (Probably not, just thought I would ask to make you feel better).

Seems to me the responses by others to YOUR particular posts tell me that YOUR argument makes no sense.

Having nameplates on the back of the jersey can help the fans identify with the players on the field, court, rink, wherever. A professional sports team would look eerily pathetic if they don't put anything on their jerseys, as pathetic as your argument... heh (Hmm, let's go watch a sport like hockey or football where the players wear masks, but also without any numbers or nameplates... OOOO that player made an amazing play! But wait, who is he?) Also, by creating jerseys for specific players, fans will BUY those jerseys because they are a fan of that specific player. There are people who buy buy nameless jerseys, but there are MORE people who are willing to shell out money to buy those athletes' jerseys, heck even make their own personalized ones with the names and numbers. All of this provides money for the business.

However, if you unnecessarily INCREASE the cost of manufacturing the jersey, that simply means less money, no? Logic. NECESSARY elements = nameplates, number sets, wordmarks. UNNECCESSARY elements = different font for the number sets. There are necessary elements on a jersey, and unnecessary elements. Teams are not going to want to pay for those. Not only are those suggested numbers with different fonts unnecessary in terms of cost, but they're also aesthetically horrifying. The appeal is ultimately for the fan to decide, but with the results of the responses in this thread, it ain't looking too great, perhaps except for you and the OP.

To counter your "Having nameplates ... " paragraph: New York Yankees.

To counter the next paragraph: Name any uniform that exists in the NBA and I will tell you an unnecessary element on it. Yet *gasp* the team still decided to do it, even thought it costs extra money!!!!!! ZOMG!!!!!!!!!!!111 And if you believe that the few people who have responded to this thread are a true representation of america's opinion, then.... you have bigger issues.

You didn't know the Yankees are worth $1.3 billion? With the way they run their business and signing whichever star player they can get by shelling out loads of money, anyone who can think logically understand they don't put selling merchandise anywhere near the top of their priority list. Merchandise sales for the Yankees is a mere fraction of their $1.3 billion value. The Yankees logos and their home jersey design has been in existence for almost 100 years. The organization and the fans alike are very fond of keeping their traditional and classic design. Another point off their long time tradition, the Yankees obviously don't need new uniform designs to attract any more fans. If the Yankees is the only example you can think of, then obviously there isn't much you can do with your argument. Comparing the almost 100 year old Yankees team with countless fans to a potentially entirely new relocated team in need of fans is honestly quite baffling.

The Atlanta Hawks? The Boston Celtics? The Charlotte Bobcats? The Chicago Bulls? The Cleveland Cavaliers? The Dallas Mavericks? The Denver Nuggets? The Detroit Pistons? The Golden State Warriors? The Houston Rockets? The Indiana Pacers? The LA Clippers? The LA Lakers? The Memphis Grizzlies? The Miami Heat? The Milwaukee Bucks? The Minnesota Timberwolves? The New Jersey Nets? The New Orleans Hornets? The New York Knicks? The Orlando Magic? The Philadelphia 76ers? The Phoenix Suns? The Portland Trailblazers? The Sacramento Kings? The San Antonio Spurs? The Seattle Supersonics? The Toronto Raptors? The Utah Jazz The Washington Wizards?

Whoops, I ended up listing every single team in the NBA! After analyzing each teams' uniforms, I couldn't find any unnecessary elements on their uniform design. If you're talking about secondary logos, its' not unnecessary by any means. The organization paid tons of money to design the logo package, they understandably would want to show the logos as much as possible. What better than putting the logos on their jerseys? If you're talking about the anniversary logos, that wouldn't be unnecessary either. Its a celebration of the team, the city, and the fans.

Perhaps using the responses in this thread is only a tiny sample of the interested population. However, I can't think of any specific place better to collect aesthetic opinions on a jersey concept than a bunch of designers and sports hunks who spend their free time on a discussion board mainly about sports logos and uniforms... huh.

[Coast2CoastAM2006]

the yankees set is actually a pet peeve of mine.

i understand they have had the same design and identity before babe ruth was on the team. but with out a name on back, it really makes it difficult to figure out which player is which. it works for jeter, a-rod, rivera because i can look at them and know who they are but for the lesser players that i've never heard of its hard to identify them if they do something good or bad. if i see player X with number 42 do something, i'm thinking home run by number 42 who ever that is.

Since baseball is stuck pre WW1, its a moot point anyway.

[frozenguy]

Two completely different sets of EACH number from 0 to 9 is ridiculously inefficient and unnecessarily expensive during the manufacturing process. Not to mention they look horrifying... to say the least.

I dont think that argument holds much water at all. Otherwise teams would use the same font for every single thing on their uniforms.

Same font for everything would still cost the same. The numbers on the back are different in size from the numbers on the front (if they have it), no? The numbers on the back are different in size from the name font, no? The numbers on the back are different in size from the wordmark on the front, no? If you have wordmarks, nameplates, numbers completely the same size and font, YOU have a point. But that's pretty much nonexistent in any sport. Since wordmarks, nameplates, and numbers are ALL different, then it is plausible to use a different font, because the cost will differ anyways. However, in THIS situation, there are two different styles for the SAME NUMBER. When the fact that you can pay the same price for ONE set of 0 to 9 numbers, now you have to pay double the price for the TWO sets of 0 to 9 numbers.

Get it?

Your argument makes no sense. The only thing going on here is that they would have one more "font" to deal with (the second set of numbers).

Heres an example for you to think about. There are teams in MLB that dont have nameplates on the back. Whether its for tradition, or whatever the reason happens to be, they dont have nameplated on the back. An example is the Yankees, one of the most popular teams in sports. They havent had nameplates on the back for god knows how long. Now if other teams started to follow suit, BY YOUR ARGUMENT, they would save money.... a lot of money..... since there are 26 letters in the alphabet and only 10 digits for the "second" font in the uniform we are talking about..... but they dont, because the COST IS NEGLIGIBLE FOR A :censored:ING SINGLE ADDITIONAL FONT ON A UNIFORM.

Get it? (Probably not, just thought I would ask to make you feel better).

Seems to me the responses by others to YOUR particular posts tell me that YOUR argument makes no sense.

Having nameplates on the back of the jersey can help the fans identify with the players on the field, court, rink, wherever. A professional sports team would look eerily pathetic if they don't put anything on their jerseys, as pathetic as your argument... heh (Hmm, let's go watch a sport like hockey or football where the players wear masks, but also without any numbers or nameplates... OOOO that player made an amazing play! But wait, who is he?) Also, by creating jerseys for specific players, fans will BUY those jerseys because they are a fan of that specific player. There are people who buy buy nameless jerseys, but there are MORE people who are willing to shell out money to buy those athletes' jerseys, heck even make their own personalized ones with the names and numbers. All of this provides money for the business.

However, if you unnecessarily INCREASE the cost of manufacturing the jersey, that simply means less money, no? Logic. NECESSARY elements = nameplates, number sets, wordmarks. UNNECCESSARY elements = different font for the number sets. There are necessary elements on a jersey, and unnecessary elements. Teams are not going to want to pay for those. Not only are those suggested numbers with different fonts unnecessary in terms of cost, but they're also aesthetically horrifying. The appeal is ultimately for the fan to decide, but with the results of the responses in this thread, it ain't looking too great, perhaps except for you and the OP.

To counter your "Having nameplates ... " paragraph: New York Yankees.

To counter the next paragraph: Name any uniform that exists in the NBA and I will tell you an unnecessary element on it. Yet *gasp* the team still decided to do it, even thought it costs extra money!!!!!! ZOMG!!!!!!!!!!!111 And if you believe that the few people who have responded to this thread are a true representation of america's opinion, then.... you have bigger issues.

You didn't know the Yankees are worth $1.3 billion? With the way they run their business and signing whichever star player they can get by shelling out loads of money, anyone who can think logically understand they don't put selling merchandise anywhere near the top of their priority list. Merchandise sales for the Yankees is a mere fraction of their $1.3 billion value. The Yankees logos and their home jersey design has been in existence for almost 100 years. The organization and the fans alike are very fond of keeping their traditional and classic design. Another point off their long time tradition, the Yankees obviously don't need new uniform designs to attract any more fans. If the Yankees is the only example you can think of, then obviously there isn't much you can do with your argument. Comparing the almost 100 year old Yankees team with countless fans to a potentially entirely new relocated team in need of fans is honestly quite baffling.

The Atlanta Hawks? The Boston Celtics? The Charlotte Bobcats? The Chicago Bulls? The Cleveland Cavaliers? The Dallas Mavericks? The Denver Nuggets? The Detroit Pistons? The Golden State Warriors? The Houston Rockets? The Indiana Pacers? The LA Clippers? The LA Lakers? The Memphis Grizzlies? The Miami Heat? The Milwaukee Bucks? The Minnesota Timberwolves? The New Jersey Nets? The New Orleans Hornets? The New York Knicks? The Orlando Magic? The Philadelphia 76ers? The Phoenix Suns? The Portland Trailblazers? The Sacramento Kings? The San Antonio Spurs? The Seattle Supersonics? The Toronto Raptors? The Utah Jazz The Washington Wizards?

Whoops, I ended up listing every single team in the NBA! After analyzing each teams' uniforms, I couldn't find any unnecessary elements on their uniform design. If you're talking about secondary logos, its' not unnecessary by any means. The organization paid tons of money to design the logo package, they understandably would want to show the logos as much as possible. What better than putting the logos on their jerseys? If you're talking about the anniversary logos, that wouldn't be unnecessary either. Its a celebration of the team, the city, and the fans.

Perhaps using the responses in this thread is only a tiny sample of the interested population. However, I can't think of any specific place better to collect aesthetic opinions on a jersey concept than a bunch of designers and sports hunks who spend their free time on a discussion board mainly about sports logos and uniforms... huh.

It almost seems like you are trying to support my point.

The Yankees simplicity of uniforms is due to the fact that it will sell well regardless of how flashy they make it. Thats why it has remained the same for so long. Now, look at the two most recent expansions - Arizona and TB. Both joined the league with very detail oriented, eyecatching. "unnecessary" (as ERay would probably put it) designs. Why? A new team typically goes with a very unique design to attract fans. Even if it (god forbid) costs money. So having a unique number font(S) is no different. Teams will shell out money to make a uniform look unique.

I'll start with the Hawks since they are first on your list. The hawks have a white collar. This costs more than not having a white collar. QED.

As for your last paragraph, I will tell you, as a DC native, that the Wiz gold alternate jerseys are VERY popular here. Yet, the media, fans, commentators, ESPN announcers, even commentors here on CC thing those things are hideous. You cant take the national viewpoint and say "Oh everyone in OKC would hate that number font". As you being to follow a team it grows on you. It happened with the gold Wiz jerseys in DC and it will happen if OKC gets "ugly" unis.

[eRay]

It almost seems like you are trying to support my point.

The Yankees simplicity of uniforms is due to the fact that it will sell well regardless of how flashy they make it. Thats why it has remained the same for so long. Now, look at the two most recent expansions - Arizona and TB. Both joined the league with very detail oriented, eyecatching. "unnecessary" (as ERay would probably put it) designs. Why? A new team typically goes with a very unique design to attract fans. Even if it (god forbid) costs money. So having a unique number font(S) is no different. Teams will shell out money to make a uniform look unique.

I'll start with the Hawks since they are first on your list. The hawks have a white collar. This costs more than not having a white collar. QED.

As for your last paragraph, I will tell you, as a DC native, that the Wiz gold alternate jerseys are VERY popular here. Yet, the media, fans, commentators, ESPN announcers, even commentors here on CC thing those things are hideous. You cant take the national viewpoint and say "Oh everyone in OKC would hate that number font". As you being to follow a team it grows on you. It happened with the gold Wiz jerseys in DC and it will happen if OKC gets "ugly" unis.

How has this become such a big deal with you? You bring up unrelated topics to "back up" your stance on this, and it confuses me. What does the Yanks' lack of nameplates, the Wizards' gold jerseys, and Arizona or TB have to do with this? None of those things feature wacky number fonts for no reason. If the font looked good, but made it so each digit had 3 different variations, you might have an argument...but you haven't reached that yet. You are being overly defensive about something that is easy to change, and would make everyone other than you feel better about your concept. I just don't see why you feel the need to argue this so much, you have no good reason to make the numbers the way you did. Style for style's sake is never a good thing...form over function, or function over form?

and your number font is "unneccesary", while having unique trim, colors, or logos is not, so don't put words in my mouth.

[elliott]

I really don't want to jump into this debate, but I just wanted to say that I think ERAY and MVP's arguments make sense but I really don't understand much of what frozenguy is saying. It almost seems like he tries to get into arguments with people.

I'll start with the Hawks since they are first on your list. The hawks have a white collar. This costs more than not having a white collar. QED.

I really don't understand this. Collars are an essential part of any uniform. If there were no collars, then they would just be pieces of fabric with arm holes that you couldn't get over your head. So, it doesn't really matter what color the collar has because every team has a collar. It's not like they pay extra to get a white collar because when adidas or whatever was designing them, they were just like "what color do you want it"? They didn't have to pay any extra.

[MVP]

It almost seems like you are trying to support my point.

The Yankees simplicity of uniforms is due to the fact that it will sell well regardless of how flashy they make it. Thats why it has remained the same for so long. Now, look at the two most recent expansions - Arizona and TB. Both joined the league with very detail oriented, eyecatching. "unnecessary" (as ERay would probably put it) designs. Why? A new team typically goes with a very unique design to attract fans. Even if it (god forbid) costs money. So having a unique number font(S) is no different. Teams will shell out money to make a uniform look unique.

I'll start with the Hawks since they are first on your list. The hawks have a white collar. This costs more than not having a white collar. QED.

As for your last paragraph, I will tell you, as a DC native, that the Wiz gold alternate jerseys are VERY popular here. Yet, the media, fans, commentators, ESPN announcers, even commentors here on CC thing those things are hideous. You cant take the national viewpoint and say "Oh everyone in OKC would hate that number font". As you being to follow a team it grows on you. It happened with the gold Wiz jerseys in DC and it will happen if OKC gets "ugly" unis.

How has this become such a big deal with you? You bring up unrelated topics to "back up" your stance on this, and it confuses me. What does the Yanks' lack of nameplates, the Wizards' gold jerseys, and Arizona or TB have to do with this? None of those things feature wacky number fonts for no reason. If the font looked good, but made it so each digit had 3 different variations, you might have an argument...but you haven't reached that yet. You are being overly defensive about something that is easy to change, and would make everyone other than you feel better about your concept. I just don't see why you feel the need to argue this so much, you have no good reason to make the numbers the way you did. Style for style's sake is never a good thing...form over function, or function over form?

and your number font is "unneccesary", while having unique trim, colors, or logos is not, so don't put words in my mouth.

Thank you, eRay.

And that last line pretty much sums up what I planned to say in response.

Neither the Devil Rays or the Diamondbacks, though both terribly designed, were as radical and unnecessary as these "OK City" jerseys with two styles for the same number.

[frozenguy]

It almost seems like you are trying to support my point.

The Yankees simplicity of uniforms is due to the fact that it will sell well regardless of how flashy they make it. Thats why it has remained the same for so long. Now, look at the two most recent expansions - Arizona and TB. Both joined the league with very detail oriented, eyecatching. "unnecessary" (as ERay would probably put it) designs. Why? A new team typically goes with a very unique design to attract fans. Even if it (god forbid) costs money. So having a unique number font(S) is no different. Teams will shell out money to make a uniform look unique.

I'll start with the Hawks since they are first on your list. The hawks have a white collar. This costs more than not having a white collar. QED.

As for your last paragraph, I will tell you, as a DC native, that the Wiz gold alternate jerseys are VERY popular here. Yet, the media, fans, commentators, ESPN announcers, even commentors here on CC thing those things are hideous. You cant take the national viewpoint and say "Oh everyone in OKC would hate that number font". As you being to follow a team it grows on you. It happened with the gold Wiz jerseys in DC and it will happen if OKC gets "ugly" unis.

How has this become such a big deal with you? You bring up unrelated topics to "back up" your stance on this, and it confuses me. What does the Yanks' lack of nameplates, the Wizards' gold jerseys, and Arizona or TB have to do with this? None of those things feature wacky number fonts for no reason. If the font looked good, but made it so each digit had 3 different variations, you might have an argument...but you haven't reached that yet. You are being overly defensive about something that is easy to change, and would make everyone other than you feel better about your concept. I just don't see why you feel the need to argue this so much, you have no good reason to make the numbers the way you did. Style for style's sake is never a good thing...form over function, or function over form?

and your number font is "unneccesary", while having unique trim, colors, or logos is not, so don't put words in my mouth.

Why are you so defensive about this issue? You need to relax a little bit.

Ok, then lets bring it back to the issue.

Having three number fonts is no more "unnneccesary" than having an alternate logo, having stripes, having piping, having ANYTHING on a jersey other than the bare minimum.

[frozenguy]

I really don't want to jump into this debate, but I just wanted to say that I think ERAY and MVP's arguments make sense but I really don't understand much of what frozenguy is saying. It almost seems like he tries to get into arguments with people.

I'll start with the Hawks since they are first on your list. The hawks have a white collar. This costs more than not having a white collar. QED.

I really don't understand this. Collars are an essential part of any uniform. If there were no collars, then they would just be pieces of fabric with arm holes that you couldn't get over your head. So, it doesn't really matter what color the collar has because every team has a collar. It's not like they pay extra to get a white collar because when adidas or whatever was designing them, they were just like "what color do you want it"? They didn't have to pay any extra.

Unless that collar magically changes color from the remainder of the uniform, then it costs time and money to make it that way.