Jump to content

New Kansas Football Unis


Bmac

Recommended Posts

I think most all helmet stripes should be removed. Looks more clean and modern without them. Stripes on helmets scream 1970's.

Unless it's like Penn St's helmet. They need something, so the stripe works. The rest- just kind of runs the sleek look that they could have. Therefore- my verdict = Upgrade.

No names on the back though? That's pretty lame.

No offense but that's just idiotic.

Helmet stripes and whether they fit depend on the team.

I don't have a problem with Kansas getting rid of the stripe because of the dark shell of the helmet. I like dark helmets without stripes, but prefer my white helmets with stripes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the picture. As an MU alumni, I'm not a huge fan of the Jayhawks.... but man their current (now last) jersey set was awesome. The font is what makes them unique and it looks very classy. Not too modern, not too dated. I especially like the blue helmet, red jersey, and grey pants look. Not sure how I feel about the helmet stripe but I hate the logo in place of the name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually the missing stripes from Air Force's helmets don't bother me as much as the crappy designs of the rest of the uniforms over the past however many years. Air Force use to have a nice simple clean look and now it's just a mess, year after year. They've crappified their look as do teams who just add black or black jerseys for the sake of it.

Amen... We can meet with pitchforks and torches outside of Falcon Stadium! To me, the missing stripes represent all that's wrong with Air Force's uniforms--they had such a good identity and color set (prior to the addition of black) that there was so much they could do with their uniforms. No need for piping when you have lightning bolts!

Visit my store on REDBUBBLE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with scottysprings...They should put the Jayhawk on the helmets full-time (MUCH more recognizeable symbol)

I'm glad they did not do this. Logos like that just look weird to me on a helmet...a very small step above the logo/wordmark on a helmet. I don't really know why I feel this way, but I'm not the only one. Letters or simple logos (particularly silhouettes like Iowa or Texas) are, imho, better for college helmets.

Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse."

 

BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD

POTD (Shared)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gimmick! Cliche!

One of the first thing new coaches do is take off or put back on the names on the backs of the jerseys. "It's about the name on the front, not the name on the back." Actually, it's about a new coach marking his territory. It takes time to make major uni or helmet changes. Playing with the names is a way to say, this is my program. How tired.

Everyone loves a roundel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with scottysprings...They should put the Jayhawk on the helmets full-time (MUCH more recognizeable symbol)

I'm glad they did not do this. Logos like that just look weird to me on a helmet...a very small step above the logo/wordmark on a helmet. I don't really know why I feel this way, but I'm not the only one. Letters or simple logos (particularly silhouettes like Iowa or Texas) are, imho, better for college helmets.

I agree. Except in rare cases, where the mascot is synonymous with the institution, schools should play up the school part above the nickname part. Letters > mascot.

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For example--

I still think this:

AFA_Falcon_Football_750.jpg

is better than this:

112209ap_airforce_football2_story.JPG

IMO Air Force is a poor example. Since the lightning bolts are up towards the front of the helmet, they should be the primary focus, like the Eagles' wings or the Rams' horns. Having stripes on this helmet just doesn't look right.

92512B20-6264-4E6C-AAF2-7A1D44E9958B-481-00000047E259721F.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please, fill me in as to how it's idiotic. Stripes are vintage. If not, go through your closet and see for yourself. Do you have shirts with stripes on the sleeves? I hope for your sake you don't.

Sports attire and civilian fashion trends have almost nothing to do with each other. People wear dress shirts with stripes on them all the time without a second thought. What are you talking about?

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please, fill me in as to how it's idiotic. Stripes are vintage. If not, go through your closet and see for yourself. Do you have shirts with stripes on the sleeves? I hope for your sake you don't.

Sports attire and civilian fashion trends have almost nothing to do with each other. People wear dress shirts with stripes on them all the time without a second thought. What are you talking about?

My dress shirts have Northwestern stripes on them.

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Letters > mascot.

No way. I'm sick of alphabet soup helmets. I understand that schools like Alabama and Syracuse can have a hard time translating their mascots to helmet logos/decals and might need to use letters, but too often letters are just a lazy compensation over a better possibility. The Jayhawk is so much better than "KU".

Letters over logos = Lazy & Lame.

p4Ut2be.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Letters > mascot.

No way. I'm sick of alphabet soup helmets. I understand that schools like Alabama and Syracuse can have a hard time translating their mascots to helmet logos/decals and might need to use letters, but too often letters are just a lazy compensation over a better possibility. The Jayhawk is so much better than "KU".

Letters over logos = Lazy & Lame.

Could not disagree more. In college, letters are very much a part of the identity. The block M at Michigan (OK, it's not on the helmet, but the "M" is very prevalent and they have no ferocious wolverine logo), the interlocking "IU" at Indiana. We tend to say "Michigan State", not "the Spartans", unlike in the pros, where we just as likely say "the Falcons" as "Atlanta".

I don't think it's "lazy" at all to use a "KU" logo on the helmet. It would be just as easy/lazy to slap the jayhawk on the helmet. As for "lame", I guess that's in the eye of the beholder. To me, Fresno State and Boise State are the poster children for "lame" football helmets. Too much detail on a helmet diminishes the value of the logo from any distance and on TV. But to each their own.

Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse."

 

BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD

POTD (Shared)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO Air Force is a poor example. Since the lightning bolts are up towards the front of the helmet, they should be the primary focus, like the Eagles' wings or the Rams' horns. Having stripes on this helmet just doesn't look right.

Agreed. I like stripes sometimes, but you would not want them on the eagles, rams, vikings, etc. While the bolts on the AF helmets are not quite the same, I feel the stripes look weird. I'm glad the chargers don't use them.

(but I do like the blue/gray look for Air Force).

I think the NY Jets are good example...their helmet would be too plain without the stripes. And the browns. In college, I think the "U" is a good example.

Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse."

 

BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD

POTD (Shared)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could not disagree more. In college, letters are very much a part of the identity. The block M at Michigan (OK, it's not on the helmet, but the "M" is very prevalent and they have no ferocious wolverine logo), the interlocking "IU" at Indiana. We tend to say "Michigan State", not "the Spartans", unlike in the pros, where we just as likely say "the Falcons" as "Atlanta".

I don't think it's "lazy" at all to use a "KU" logo on the helmet. It would be just as easy/lazy to slap the jayhawk on the helmet. As for "lame", I guess that's in the eye of the beholder. To me, Fresno State and Boise State are the poster children for "lame" football helmets. Too much detail on a helmet diminishes the value of the logo from any distance and on TV. But to each their own.

Why is putting a Jayhawk on the helmet "slapping" it on but the KU isn't? I agree that letters are too easy a substitute. But I would also agree that Fresno State's helmet logo is terrible (but not Boise's). The block M may be prevalent but it's not very good. I'll give Indiana a pass. What does a Hoosier look like anyway? An interesting monogram (Notre Dame/North Dakota) is good but a well done mascot is better. The Longhorn beats a T on Texas' helmets anyday. The Air Force bolt is better than an AF, the Razorback is better than an A, etc.

LehQRaC.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Letters > mascot.

No way. I'm sick of alphabet soup helmets. I understand that schools like Alabama and Syracuse can have a hard time translating their mascots to helmet logos/decals and might need to use letters, but too often letters are just a lazy compensation over a better possibility. The Jayhawk is so much better than "KU".

Letters over logos = Lazy & Lame.

I think there was a similar discussion in another thread regarding logos on football helmets versus letters. I wish I could find it because both sides made pretty good points. I prefer letters or very simplified logos because they look better when viewed from a distance. The Jayhawk logo doesn't seem to work quite as well from a distance like the letters do so I would opt for the letters...even if they could be in a better font.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could not disagree more. In college, letters are very much a part of the identity. The block M at Michigan (OK, it's not on the helmet, but the "M" is very prevalent and they have no ferocious wolverine logo), the interlocking "IU" at Indiana. We tend to say "Michigan State", not "the Spartans", unlike in the pros, where we just as likely say "the Falcons" as "Atlanta".

I don't think it's "lazy" at all to use a "KU" logo on the helmet. It would be just as easy/lazy to slap the jayhawk on the helmet. As for "lame", I guess that's in the eye of the beholder. To me, Fresno State and Boise State are the poster children for "lame" football helmets. Too much detail on a helmet diminishes the value of the logo from any distance and on TV. But to each their own.

Why is putting a Jayhawk on the helmet "slapping" it on but the KU isn't? I agree that letters are too easy a substitute. But I would also agree that Fresno State's helmet logo is terrible (but not Boise's). The block M may be prevalent but it's not very good. I'll give Indiana a pass. What does a Hoosier look like anyway? An interesting monogram (Notre Dame/North Dakota) is good but a well done mascot is better. The Longhorn beats a T on Texas' helmets anyday. The Air Force bolt is better than an AF, the Razorback is better than an A, etc.

"KU" was branded as lazy so my "slapping" meant that the logo was just as lazy. Both are slapped on...not just the KU.

As for your samples, the Arkansas, Texas and Air Force logos are all simple...I would agree on all counts. Also, Iowa's silhouette is great.

I know there are just different preferences and we're not going to change each other's mind...

There are two things that ruin helmet logos for me...detail and ferociousness. Really, there are only a few that really bug me: Louisville is boarderline, Northern IL, New Mexico, TCU, Oregon State, LSU, Boise State, Fresno State.

Though I admit I don't usually like the scripts, such as Ole' Miss or Maryland's "Terps" helmet.

Really...is anyone actually upset that the Lions did not go with some really detailed "ferocious" looking helmet logo? Probably I suppose.

Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse."

 

BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD

POTD (Shared)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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