Jump to content

Semi-Obscure Old School NFL Uniform Details


darkhaha

Recommended Posts

so the stripes aren't just printed on like on the modern jerseys?

Nope. They were knit into the fabric (much like stripes are knit into a sock), which was then cut and sewn into sleeves, which were then applied to the jersey body (or they could also have been attached to the jersey body before the side seams were sewn together).

The Steelers and Browns, for example, make their jerseys this way even today (though both teams went through a printed stripe phase as well).

Just a brief point on this - while the Browns used screened on stripes from whenever they switched to mesh jerseys (not sure - sometime in the 1970-1973 time frame) until they changed to their current version in 2005 (not counting the players who cut their jerseys down to having only two small stripes as a "cuff" in the 1990s right before the owner/players moved to Baltimore and became the Ravens). However, the Steelers never went to screened on stripes for their actual gamers; like that vintage Cowboys jersey they kept the cotton/durene sleeves. I do think they switched to a less shiny fabric though before the Starter era; of course the Nike/Reebok versions have lighter weight knitted sleeves.

One team for a while did use sewn-in sleeves - when the Jets switched uniforms in 1978 the two sleeve stripes were either sewn on or sewn-in to the sleeves. However, the Jets did eventually switch to screened-on stripes when the jerseys started having the spandex/"dazzle" fabric sleeves and shoulders in the 1980s.

I believe the Jets were wearing Champion Products jerseys in those days. Champion either printed the stripes in Lastone (their name for Plastisol ink) or sewed them in. Sewn-in is more likely because of the way the jersey was made.

Gentlemen, might I again remind you that "Durene" is merely a chemical bath that raw cotton yarn is run through prior to being knitted into finished goods. The Durene treatment of the yarn helps to make it stronger, more able to accept and hold the color dye and easier to knit. "Mercerized" is a treatment that basically pre-shrinks the cotton yarn.

Read my lips-DURENE IS NOT THEREFORE A FABRIC IN ITSELF! The majority of all football, basketball and hockey jerseys made in the 1950s until the very late 1960s were made from the following cloth- Flat-Knit Nylon/Durene-Mercerized Cotton Plaited fabric. A plaited fabric has all of one component yarn (Nylon) knitted on the face (front) side while all of the other yarn (Durene-Mercerized Cotton) was on the inside. The Nylon face side gave the jersey its durability and bright colors while the Durene-Mercerized Cotton yarn gave the jersey a comfortable feel when wearing it plus it was absorbent in regards to perspiration. It did not have any of the wicking properties of today's fabrics. The proper way to refer to this fabric is to call it "Nylon/Durene." "Durene" is merely the chemical treatment.

One more point about knitted-in stripes. If you look very closely at the knit-in pinstripes on the Yankees uniforms you will note that they look like a fine zig-zag pattern. That's why the Yankee stripes look thicker than everyone else. Almost every other team with pinstripes has them sublimated on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Ah, that's correct. I forgot that tidbit about the Steelers' sleeves, but I remember hearing about it now that you mention it. Knit in stripes rock.

I still don't have a website, but I have a dribbble now! http://dribbble.com/andyharry

[The postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the position, strategy or opinions of adidas and/or its brands.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They sure do, but I can't see how they can be used with the new template. There's just not enough sleeve to attach a knit part to.

The proper way to refer to this fabric is to call it "Nylon/Durene." "Durene" is merely the chemical treatment.

And yet "durene" is also the common shorthand for the fabric which has been subjected to the chemical treatment.

Is it the most accurate description? No. But it's not incorrect. And it's widely used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They sure do, but I can't see how they can be used with the new template. There's just not enough sleeve to attach a knit part to.

The proper way to refer to this fabric is to call it "Nylon/Durene." "Durene" is merely the chemical treatment.

And yet "durene" is also the common shorthand for the fabric which has been subjected to the chemical treatment.

Is it the most accurate description? No. But it's not incorrect. And it's widely used.

What you say is true. But I would still like to see the complete description of the cloth with identifiers, like "Nylon/Durene," "Rayon/Durene" or "Stretch Nylon/Durene." Stretch Nylon/Durene became popular in the mid-1960s and was used mostly for football jerseys. And Rawlings used a 45% Stretch Nylon/55% Durene Cotton Plaited Fabric in mid-1970 for the Pirates' knit pajamas that started the knit revolution in baseball. Stretch Nylon/Durene does not have the sheen of regular Nylon/Durene. It has a flat finish to it. I don't know, maybe because I've been in the business for so long my little bit of knowledge is dangerous.

But I learned from my original boss to study and know all I could about fabrics, colors and the intricacies of uniform design. Back when I started we didn't have the never-to-be-questioned "Styling Guides" or "Pantone Color Charts" to consult. We did it all by reading the catalogs, talking with the sales reps, visiting the factories and lettering plants and actually learning our craft. In a lot of ways it was a lot more fun doing it "the old way." When we helped a high school, college or professional team (the Rochester Americans, Rochester Red Wings and yes, the NBA Rochester Royals do a uniform you weren't bound by a set design or template that you had to follow to the nth degree. You worked with the team until you and they came up with a design that everyone liked. There wasn't any sublimation then and the players didn't dress like a bunch of clowns in the circus. It was a privilege to outfit a team and it gave you a special feeling to know that a Bob Gibson or a Don Cherry or a Jack Twyman wore a uniform that YOUR store helped the team to pick out, design, ordered and sold them. It wasn't all of this Nike-Reebok-adidas-Majestic bull:censored: that we see today. I'll take 1950s and '60s uniform sales anyday!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They sure do, but I can't see how they can be used with the new template. There's just not enough sleeve to attach a knit part to.

The proper way to refer to this fabric is to call it "Nylon/Durene." "Durene" is merely the chemical treatment.

And yet "durene" is also the common shorthand for the fabric which has been subjected to the chemical treatment.

Is it the most accurate description? No. But it's not incorrect. And it's widely used.

I think you can knit them into the 'yokesleeve' of the new cut. The better thing to do, though, would be to redesign the cut so that it accommodates such things as stripes.

I still don't have a website, but I have a dribbble now! http://dribbble.com/andyharry

[The postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the position, strategy or opinions of adidas and/or its brands.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll never understand altering a cut that players obviously feel is perfectly functional for the sole purpose of adding something like stripes. Whether the performance benefits of the modern cut are actually measureable or simply preceived, it makes little to no sense to modify it for a purely aesthetic reason. If it was something silly that the players didn't care about (for example, modifying the edge template to put a straight hem on the bottom) then who cares, but the players obviously prefer things the way they are, so putting them in discomfort so that a jersey can look like it's 40 years old just doesn't work.

"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

Did somebody mention the Vikings hand painting their logos at some point? 'Cause this looks kinda hand-painted, especially the gold arc in front of the horn.

3863278.jpg

Gene Washington's horn is right to the edge of his helmet:

3863343.jpg

Talk about helmet-head... :D

3866018.jpg

Nice shot of the aqua/white combo from earlier in '71:

4547668.jpg

Coming out of the Super Bowl tunnel wasn't such a jazzy deal back then... B)

4219958.jpg

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did somebody mention the Vikings hand painting their logos at some point? 'Cause this looks kinda hand-painted, especially the gold arc in front of the horn.

3863278.jpg

Gene Washington's horn is right to the edge of his helmet:

3863343.jpg

If I'm remembering correctly from Helmet Hut the Vikings did paint the horns on their helmet; I'm pretty sure it was a 3-step process. First the helmet was painted white (at least back in the 1960s the helmet shells weren't the standard white that they have been since the early 1970s), the horn part was masked off, then the gold part was pained on, once that was dry it was masked off, then the helmet was painted purple. it wasn't until sometime in the 1970s that the horns became a decal; that is also when the horns got smaller than in these 1969 shots (you can see the NFL 50th Season patchs in the shots).

The Eagles and Rams used to paint on their designs as well; the Eagles went to decals when they switched to the green/silver look in 1974, and the Rams went to decals by the end of the 1970s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read that the cancer that caused the death of the Rams long-time equipment manager may be attributed to the paint that he used and the hours he spent in the equipment room painting the horns on the Rams' helmets. So, that's something to think about...

PvO6ZWJ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll never understand altering a cut that players obviously feel is perfectly functional for the sole purpose of adding something like stripes. Whether the performance benefits of the modern cut are actually measureable or simply preceived, it makes little to no sense to modify it for a purely aesthetic reason. If it was something silly that the players didn't care about (for example, modifying the edge template to put a straight hem on the bottom) then who cares, but the players obviously prefer things the way they are, so putting them in discomfort so that a jersey can look like it's 40 years old just doesn't work.

Uh, damn. Don't flip out and peg me as one of them. I'm not talking about adding long sleeves to the jersey and going back to durene. I'm talking about moving the seam a few inches so that instead of meeting in the middle of the armhole, like a yoke:

St+Louis+Rams+v+Jacksonville+Jaguars+8MIvIOt9xYBl.jpg

the seam should dip down below and around the bottom of the armhole, then come back up again, like a raglan sleeve, which is basically the equivalent of straightening the hem on an Edge jersey. And we should stop calling them sleeves now and just call them armholes, because this new cut is actually completely sleeveless unless stretched over shoulder pads, in which case it's nearly sleeveless..

I still don't have a website, but I have a dribbble now! http://dribbble.com/andyharry

[The postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the position, strategy or opinions of adidas and/or its brands.]

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.