Jump to content

Lions uniform changes


Proc

Recommended Posts

The zero has the same swash as the 9 on the inside. and I don't think there is silver on the stripe pattern in the white uniform. Black-white-blue-white-black, just like all the other stripes, sans the dark uniform stripe.

It also looks like the white stripe is the smallest stripe, with black being a bit bigger.

The sleeve stripes seem to be the largest bone of contention with most people.

I'd really like to see a better version of the logo sheet or better yet, see the actual uniform as I too have questions about the color pattern of the stripe.

If it's consistant, then there isn't a grey stripe on the white jerseys. But then the question becomes, how is the home jersey stripe consistant when it flips the pattern by putting in the silver? Also, if there isn't any silver in the away jersey stripe, doesn't that leave almost zero silver on that jersey?

Blue and White and Black and a little Silver Wave?

Bah. This is what we get by making judgements based on blurry pictures.

I still really like the new look, but this is why they should have dumped the black altogether instead of actually making it more pronounced on the uniform. Black Facemasks!! :cursing:

*EDIT* Looks like we're on the same wavelength, Milo. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Does anybody else think the Lions just copied Ohio State, trading scarlet for blue?

Does anyone ever complain about Ohio State having the same template as the Houston Oilers? :therock:

I love it, but i also preferred the Lions' most recent look to anything they've worn before. Honolulu blue and silver just don't work without the black for definition. Their most recent uniforms were soooooooo close to being perfect, if only the Lions would take a little more care in how they applied their striping, and I still thought they looked great in action. Now they've fixed my complaints, and given Bubbles a well-done facelift (no Mickey Rourke here), so I'm quite happy with the result. I would still have preferred standard block numbers, but overall this is a solid upgrade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Logo = pass

Wordmark = pass

Unis = FAIL

Use of black for the sake of black = UBERFAIL

Looks like the same old same old with a few tweaks. Meh.

Exactly. I'm pretty sure that if you liked what they had up until last year, then you'll like this update, and vice versa. Other than the obvious logo change and other small tweaks, it's the same thing.

Then again, I guess they figured that they couldn't mess with tradition. But dammit, they could've done a better job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The logo's okay, the wordmark so-so. The unis are ok but they're not that much different from the current look...like the block numbers better.

I was really expecting something more...different. I mean, c'mon, how many of us on this board have played with the current logo, giving it tweaks and elements of definition to make it look new? I really expected something more "outside the box" than what was the logo delivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. You guys are a tough crowd.

I think the people who say this FAILS need to count your blessings. The striping all matches perfectly, already vaulting it over Ohio State. The striping scheme on the blue jersey makes the gray pop. The logo is slightly updated but in a good way. The wordmark is modern but classy. It's not like they wanted to go with something drastic. Obviously. But all this talk of how bad this update is makes me raise my eyebrows at this forum that generally loves striping and hates piping. Do you really want the Lions looking like the Falcons? They give you a simple update that brings all the elements together into a design with much more continuity. And it is scoffed at. I think the hipocrisy is overwhelming. Take it for what it's worth, it's an update for a franchise trying to get back on it's feet. The Packers unis are generally well received. In these I see a lot of similarities. But it gets the overused "epic fail" moniker. What is wrong here? Okc Thunder is an epic fail. Not this. Sorry for the rant. I just think that people making a big deal out of a good update.

Overall I think Colorwerx was right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i love it

the logo is simple, classic, and iconic

the wordmark gives a great "mane" flow to it and coordinates with the logo

as someone else said, without the black, the blue and silver have no contrast.

i'm not sure why so many people are complaining about the black in the uniform...it's in the logo...the teams colors are blue, silver, white AND black...not just blue and silver

the number set corridinates with the curves and flow of the logo/wordmark - why would you do basic block numbers?

it just amazes me how many people on here hate everything that comes out... if it's simple, it should have been complicated, if it's complicated, it should be simple....

this Lions UPDATE, does just that, updates a classic logo to a more modern classic package.

except for the sleeve striping on the home, i dont see anything wrong with this AT ALL.

PASS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i love it

the logo is simple, classic, and iconic

the wordmark gives a great "mane" flow to it and coordinates with the logo

as someone else said, without the black, the blue and silver have no contrast.

i'm not sure why so many people are complaining about the black in the uniform...it's in the logo...the teams colors are blue, silver, whait AND black...not just blue and silver

the number set corridinates with the curves and flow of the logo/wordmark - why would you do basic block numbers?

Love the logo, Love the Wordmark, like the uniforms.

Team colors are Blue and Silver. White was always an accent color. Black was only added in back when Jackass...errrr....Millen came in.

I agree that the black around the numbers makes them "pop" more. Otherwise, it doesn't do much of anything IMO except look like it doesn't belong. At least on the old jerseys. I'm hopeful that the news ones look better...or at least that the black sleeve stripe doesn't look like a piece of electrical tape.

But seriously, I have to agree with ColorWerx. The update is very well done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with elliott. You guys are never happy. It's true that they could have used this update to get rid of Black. In my opinion that is the only place they went wrong here so far. I am only judging by what we have seen, so things could change, but this looks like a great update. The uniforms aren't stuck in the middle-ages, but they aren't longing for 2050 either. I think it looks good. It would be much better if they used this update to get rid of the Black in their scheme, as I said, but this is in no way an "epic FAIL!!!1eleven1". I've known this for a while now, but we just love to hate on stuff on here. I think we can leave this one alone, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldn't have said it better myself, Elliott. Either they hate the black, or think they should have made a more drastic change. I disagree with both. Every change they made, at least uniform wise, is an improvement. The uniforms are actually quite a bit different, and I think it will be much more noticeable when they take the field in them. The wordmark is a huge improvement, and I haven't decided on the logo. It looks better close up, but not as good far away, I think. Overall, they took a uniform that was looking outdated, and gave it a much more modern look without going overboard. I think they found a good place in between being too traditional/boring, or too out there/modern. I am surprised at the comments so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldn't have said it better myself, Elliott. Either they hate the black, or think they should have made a more drastic change. I disagree with both. Every change they made, at least uniform wise, is an improvement. The uniforms are actually quite a bit different, and I think it will be much more noticeable when they take the field in them. The wordmark is a huge improvement, and I haven't decided on the logo. It looks better close up, but not as good far away, I think. Overall, they took a uniform that was looking outdated, and gave it a much more modern look without going overboard. I think they found a good place in between being too traditional/boring, or too out there/modern. I am surprised at the comments so far.

I not only stand by my comments, but will rub it in by saying the Lions are still same ole Lions underneath. They need to fix their roster before fixing their look.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overall, I like what they have done, but if it were up to me I would have gone in a completely different direction. I would have introduced a completely new lion in a different pose as well as a new wordmark and uniforms of a different style. I think they need a bigger break from their past after last season. I know it would not have a dramatic effect on how they play, but I'm sure it would have some effect mentally and symbolically on the players, front office, and coaches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldn't have said it better myself, Elliott. Either they hate the black, or think they should have made a more drastic change. I disagree with both. Every change they made, at least uniform wise, is an improvement. The uniforms are actually quite a bit different, and I think it will be much more noticeable when they take the field in them. The wordmark is a huge improvement, and I haven't decided on the logo. It looks better close up, but not as good far away, I think. Overall, they took a uniform that was looking outdated, and gave it a much more modern look without going overboard. I think they found a good place in between being too traditional/boring, or too out there/modern. I am surprised at the comments so far.

I not only stand by my comments, but will rub it in by saying the Lions are still same ole Lions underneath. They need to fix their roster before fixing their look.

Okay?......

You realize that the designer of the uniforms and logos has nothing to do with changing the roster, right? It is not like they had to decide between changing the roster or changing the uniforms, and decided to change the uniforms. I have heard a lot of comments like this, and they make no sense at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldn't have said it better myself, Elliott. Either they hate the black, or think they should have made a more drastic change. I disagree with both. Every change they made, at least uniform wise, is an improvement. The uniforms are actually quite a bit different, and I think it will be much more noticeable when they take the field in them. The wordmark is a huge improvement, and I haven't decided on the logo. It looks better close up, but not as good far away, I think. Overall, they took a uniform that was looking outdated, and gave it a much more modern look without going overboard. I think they found a good place in between being too traditional/boring, or too out there/modern. I am surprised at the comments so far.

I don't hate the new look. When I talk about "outside the box", I'm meaning the logo, not the uniform. I hate new uniform looks such as the Falcons and Bengals have. The uniform is good and matches the traditional Lions look quite well. I also have no problem with the black, I just wish they'd gone back to a blue facemask.

Back to the logo, I guess my disappointment comes from the hype of a "new" logo. If the grapevine had it that there was going to be a "modified" logo, expectations would have been different...kind of like the Chargers logo, when we were assured the main helmet logo had been modified (vs. "new").

There was much talk about a "leaping lion" logo, and I could have seen a lion head logo, or one at a different angle. From a distance, most of the changes will be very hard to spot, esp. the logo.

But for a modest update, they did quite well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overall, I like what they have done, but if it were up to me I would have gone in a completely different direction. I would have introduced a completely new lion in a different pose as well as a new wordmark and uniforms of a different style. I think they need a bigger break from their past after last season. I know it would not have a dramatic effect on how they play, but I'm sure it would have some effect mentally and symbolically on the players, front office, and coaches.

While having a lion in a different pose is a good idea, then there's the problem of making it work from an idea to a logo that looks good on paper, on screen and on both sides of the helmet. I know some people are going to say that it can be done, but remember a logo needs to be simple and to the point. You don't need a lot of detail to clutter it up. What they did to the lion was fine. I never realized how panzy the original one was, it looks like a playful lion; whereas the new one looks more aggressive. I'm the first one to say I hate aggressive logos for the sake of an aggressive logo, but if the mock-ups here are correct, it's a good update, because you can see how wimpy the old logo actually was. And I have no problem with them touching the logo because it has bad history behind it, so change it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't post much on here, but I check it regularly... I'm a 32 yr old graphic designer in Chicago, but grew up in Detroit and have been a lions fan my entire life (unfortunately)

When I see these new changes as they are leaked, I have to ask myself... who did this. I'm really hoping these are rough drafts, but since it was leaked by NFL.com I have to believe this is a credible change.

At first glance I was happy to see a modernized version of a logo I loved, then I blew it up and saw how it was done and was not happy at all.

Here are some of my issues:

1. The new lion mouth looks more like a can opener than a mouth with teeth.

2. The mane looks like a bad hair day with cow licks sticking up in random spots rather than a flowing mane

3. I don't mind the accent marks on the lions body logo as a whole except for the two lines moving away from the mouth look like modernized drool... if they left them off I'd probably like it more.

4. I hate the new typeface, I like the notches in it, but the movement of the lines seems more female and slightly 90's to me, not modern enough, and not testosterone driven at all. If it was the Lionesses, I'd be ok with it... like if this was a WNBA typeface, it works.

5. I really, really hate the new numbers, everything I said in number 4 doubled.

I guess there's rules about not letting outside designers work on new logos, and I've seen a lot of bad ones suggested. I personally would love to work on it, but that's never going to happen... I was really hoping they wouldn't screw this up and I'm afraid they just did. There is no way I'm buying any new Detroit Lions stuff, if this is the new look.

Ok, I'm going to be depressed the rest of the day now, go ahead and bash what I've said if you want, it's just how I feel as a professional and a fan. I now have to decide if this is bad enough to finally stop being a fan of this team. It just might be.... funny how 0-16 wasn't enough, but this just might be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.