nuordr Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 In an article on uniwatchblog Phil Heckon says these views of the Pro Combat is what needs to be done in the NFL. The article is interesting and boring at the same time, which made me think that all the old-fashioned fans on here would like to read it. Personally I find his concepts to be dull and boring, but what do you think? Here is the AFC Link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo_prankster Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 It doesn't sound like they look boring, it sounds more like some of those concepts would please the traditionalist crowd. The Fictional Story of Austus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandMooreArt Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 first of all, this guy sucks at PhotoShopsecondly, the difference between simple and boring is simple is effective. some of these are simple. most are boring. GRAPHIC ARTIST BEHANCE / MEDIUM / DRIBBBLE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I don't really understand what "Pro Combat" is. Someone's going to have to explain it to me. I know it's some sort of Nike template, but what's the deal with it, and why the stupid name? Is Kellen Winslow Jr. on their board of directors? And what's the deal with the kid in this template? Look at those ankles! I could snap them with my bare hands. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davidson Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Holy Jesus, that guy has murdered my template.And yes, those just look amateur. A few nice ones in there as with most peoples attempts and a series, but plenty of chaff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeFrank Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 They could be nice if he could use photoshop! concepts: washington football (2017) ... nfl (2013) ... yikes potd 10/20/12 origin story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lightning25 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 The only good one there that I can find is the Browns. A jersey needs striping, or at least something that doesn't make it look like a practice jersey. These ones are just numbers and colors, with no design, placed on a template. This person is, as many others have said, terrible at photoshop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lights Out Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 They literally look like uniforms from the '50s. Then again, the majority of Uni Watch's readership would be just fine with regressing to the '50s as far as uniform design goes. Not a single one of these are an improvement over any team's current uniform. POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo_prankster Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 They literally look like uniforms from the '50s. Then again, the majority of Uni Watch's readership would be just fine with regressing to the '50s as far as uniform design goes. Not a single one of these are an improvement over any team's current uniform.Why are 50's uniforms such a bad thing? The Fictional Story of Austus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lights Out Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 With the exception of a select few, the football uniforms of the '50s were boring one-color affairs with either northwestern stripes or no stripes at all. It wasn't until the '60s that football uniforms started to get aesthetically pleasing, IMO. POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo_prankster Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 How about 90's uniforms? The Fictional Story of Austus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lenardo Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 He's heading in the right direction with the bills and bengals, but the execution is terrible and the rest are either just plain bad or copies of what the team already uses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njmeadowlanders Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 The big problem here is what happens when you have a lineman or something that doesn't have any sleeves? Then they would all look like Oakland road unis...no sleeves = no stripes whatsoever. At least now theres a half-assed attempt... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agentrygraphics Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Forgive me if this has been asked before...but when Nike takes over the NFL, will they be able to instantly alter team colors, etc? Take the Bills for instance...would they be able to switch the Bills to Royal & Red (Jim Kelly era) right off the bat, or will they have to wait a year (or two?) like the teams have to now? "This isn't just the Oregon Ducks, it's Football's Future Turf Soldier War Hero Steel Robot Tech Flex Machine Army." -CS85 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knnhrvy16 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Well, first off, the photoshopping really is awful. There are some that aren't executed very well, but the idea isn't too bad.Coming from a traditionalist, successful simplicity is all in the execution. For the most part, these concepts didn't achieve it. But, I don't think using Pro Combat for simplicity us a bad thing at all. Look at how well teams like LSU and Oklahoma pulled it off, it can be done. I know there's alot who'd disagree, and no one is right or wrong when it comes to uniform opinions, but my humble opinion is that a simple pro combat, like an Oklahoma or LSU, is MUCH more pleasing to look at then a sloppy eye sore like Virginia Tech's black or Boise State. In my eyes, Pro Combat is just a new template. It can be marketed and designed however a team wishes, whether they want to attach a story to it and make something new, or just translate an existing design over. It doesn't have to be modern, and it doesn't have to be simple. Its whatever the team who's wearing it wants it to be. The opinions I express are mine, and mine only. If I am to express them, it is not to say you or anyone else is wrong, and certainly not to say that I am right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TalktoChuck Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Forgive me if this has been asked before...but when Nike takes over the NFL, will they be able to instantly alter team colors, etc? Take the Bills for instance...would they be able to switch the Bills to Royal & Red (Jim Kelly era) right off the bat, or will they have to wait a year (or two?) like the teams have to now?They still have to abide by the NFL rules when it comes to changing uniforms/logos/colors, I don't exactly know how far in advance they need to notify the NFL (but someone around here will). But chances are that if a team is looking to make a change when Nike comes into town, then them and Nike are already talking about the changes to be made. That way the team can put them into affect right when Nike comes in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tBBP Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I don't really understand what "Pro Combat" is. Someone's going to have to explain it to me. I know it's some sort of Nike template, but what's the deal with it, and why the stupid name? Is Kellen Winslow Jr. on their board of directors? And what's the deal with the kid in this template? Look at those ankles! I could snap them with my bare hands.What we all see of football Pro Combat on the field is the outer skin (that is, jerseys/pants). In actuality, however, Pro Combat itself is a system of dress Nike's come up with. The actual "Pro Combat" itself consists of the strategically padded base layers with the hexagonal-ish design to it. There's also a basketball version of this, too--the current Nike SoD college b-ball uniforms (they have the same type of base layer padding underneath). Over those padded base layers go the jersey and pants/shorts. With football, however, Nike's also developed special-designed gloves and cleats (and adds team-color low socks for a finishing touch), at least for the special-designed so-called "rivalry" sets (such as the West Virginia coal miner thing, the Va Tech all-blacks, and the like). Why Nike chose the name "Pro Combat" is beyond me...but I do know it's several years older than most people realize.As for the raging popularity of it now, you can attribute that to Nike's on-screen marketing of it + Fraser's outstanding photo-realistic templates--which have now allowed anybody with half-a-skill in Photoshop to create their own Pro Combat designs.(Though, as we see from that UW link, some folks should really just leave it alone.) *Disclaimer: I am not an authoritative expert on stuff...I just do a lot of reading and research and keep in close connect with a bunch of people who are authoritative experts on stuff. || dribbble || Behance || Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgan33 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Uniwatch is honestly the worst site I have ever been to concerning sports aesthetics. All they do is suggest regressing to boring traditional jerseys while interjecting their snobby elitist commentary in a complicated visually unappealing format. This latest article does nothing to change my opinion on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chestnutz Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I may be wrong, but this altered Panthers logo sure looks like one I've seen on the boards before. BrandN's maybe? (Although he commented in this thread and didn't say anything about it) erikas | go birds | dribbble Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sodboy13 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Uniwatch is honestly the worst site I have ever been to concerning sports aesthetics. All they do is suggest regressing to boring traditional jerseys while interjecting their snobby elitist commentary in a complicated visually unappealing format. This latest article does nothing to change my opinion on this.My philosophy on UniWatch is that I enjoy the scoops and in-depth historical features - in that regard, Paul covers our peculiar fascination quite well, and obviously has more extensive access than nearly all of us. But I point and laugh at the majority of the opinion and "insight". My first encounter with Paul Lukas was a column he did for the Village Voice in 2001, examining the uniforms of the XFL. And he pretty much dismissed Birmingham and Chicago right off the bat, essentially saying, "Well, they wear purple, so of course they can't look good." He's obviously matured and grown since. Ahem. Paul makes oldschoolvikings seem like a wacky modernist by comparison. And the fact that he more or less idolizes bulldogbarks55, the biggest stereotype of a "get off my lawn" senior citizen I've ever had repeated contact with, speaks volumes to me. Yes, Paul, the sports world would be a far better place if baseball players still wore wool flannel, if basketball players still wore belts, if football players wore loose long sleeves, and if Nike had never sold its first pair of track shoes.I stay completely clear of the weekend posts, which come across as an all-concept version of The Ugliest Bathroom. On 1/25/2013 at 1:53 PM, 'Atom said: For all the bird de lis haters I think the bird de lis isnt supposed to be a pelican and a fleur de lis I think its just a fleur de lis with a pelicans head. Thats what it looks like to me. Also the flair around the tip of the beak is just flair that fleur de lis have sometimes source I am from NOLA. PotD: 10/19/07, 08/25/08, 07/22/10, 08/13/10, 04/15/11, 05/19/11, 01/02/12, and 01/05/12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.