uah8tr

NHL 2011-2012: Possible Uniform Changes

Recommended Posts

These were debunked today at Icethetics as photoshopped 'Jackets jerseys - not even a photo of a "real" fake jersey... buyer beware!!!

I can understand China counterfitters thinking this was a leak, but everyone else? It's merely a concept that someone from HFBoards made that began to circle around. The fact that Icethetics had to take the time to state the obvious is sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, if those Ottawa sweaters made one little tweak...

sens.png?t=1312410630

That would probably be my favorite template in the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see a return of the "home whites," if for no other reason than fans in each market can get a look at each of their opponents' more colorful uniforms. A parade of visiting teams coming through a city wearing "road whites" means each game looks nearly identical to the fans in the stands.

How many times does it have to be said? It's not the 1960s any more. You can watch your team in the road wherever they're playing on High Definition television these days. You can watch any game in the league on any given night with the right cable package. The "we need to wear white at home to keep things visually interesting for the fans" argument has no merit in the year 2011.

I don't go to many hockey games, but I go to / work at every Eagles game. There's something cool about being there live and seeing the "enemy" come in showing their "battle" colors. In the NFL, you get them all in their colored gear on the sideline even if they're wearing their white uniforms (especially in the winter when they all have on their parkas) but in the NHL, going to game after game of black vs white (back when the Flyers wore black and when I went to more games) really sucked.

I get your point, but you're discounting the live experience too much.

Exactly. I think the point is not about being able to see your team in whatever colors, but rather the people in attendance at the games. It can get old only ever seeing your team's color or alternate color against white every game. That's two or three colors all year, with one being white.

Edit: just to clarify, I am speaking from the perspective of a ticketholder, someone who is in attendence for the games.

I'm exactly with BBTV and BMac on why I want white sweaters at home for the NHL. It's just much cooler when you're there. And it really has nothing to do with being able to see every jersey for every team on TV if you have Center Ice.

Moving on, the new Winnipeg jerseys look great (if that's what they'll really look like). Do we know what color their hockey pants will be? (Sorry if I missed it up-thread.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see a return of the "home whites," if for no other reason than fans in each market can get a look at each of their opponents' more colorful uniforms. A parade of visiting teams coming through a city wearing "road whites" means each game looks nearly identical to the fans in the stands.

How many times does it have to be said? It's not the 1960s any more. You can watch your team in the road wherever they're playing on High Definition television these days. You can watch any game in the league on any given night with the right cable package. The "we need to wear white at home to keep things visually interesting for the fans" argument has no merit in the year 2011.

I don't go to many hockey games, but I go to / work at every Eagles game. There's something cool about being there live and seeing the "enemy" come in showing their "battle" colors. In the NFL, you get them all in their colored gear on the sideline even if they're wearing their white uniforms (especially in the winter when they all have on their parkas) but in the NHL, going to game after game of black vs white (back when the Flyers wore black and when I went to more games) really sucked.

I get your point, but you're discounting the live experience too much.

Exactly. I think the point is not about being able to see your team in whatever colors, but rather the people in attendance at the games. It can get old only ever seeing your team's color or alternate color against white every game. That's two or three colors all year, with one being white.

Edit: just to clarify, I am speaking from the perspective of a ticketholder, someone who is in attendence for the games.

I'm exactly with BBTV and BMac on why I want white sweaters at home for the NHL. It's just much cooler when you're there. And it really has nothing to do with being able to see every jersey for every team on TV if you have Center Ice.

Even if it is "cooler" I would argue that the practicality of darks at home trumps coolness. Most alts are dark, so whites at home would force teams on road trips to pack two sets of uniforms if one of the home teams on the trip ops to wear their alternate. Alternates make the dark at home/white on the road system straightforward and easier on everyone.

Moving on, the new Winnipeg jerseys look great (if that's what they'll really look like). Do we know what color their hockey pants will be? (Sorry if I missed it up-thread.)

Those aren't the new Jets sweaters. They're concepts that someone made up, concepts that the Jets themselves have said "are not even close."

Also, if reports are to be believed the only red on the uniforms will be the maple leaves, so I would expect blue pants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. The Roman theme is a product of the 90s, and it takes to many connections to tie it into the Senators name. The vintage =O= look ties into the history of hockey in Ottawa and gives the city a look for its NHL team on par with the Montreal Canadiens and Toronto Maple Leafs' in terms of timelessness and legacy. Seeing as no other team has a claim on the history of Senators 1.0 I wouldn't have a problem with the current team running with it full time.

The Senators are a 90's expansion team. Their identity should reflect this instead of using the old team as an excuse to play original six dress up. Your stance on this is pretty ironic considering how much you ripped on their expansion cousins, The Lightning.

Another reason they should keep the former identity is because the metallic shade of gold is the only thing that distinguishes their colour scheme from the New Jersey Devils. You were up in arms about how Tampa ripped of the Leafs, lets not see it happen again.

Lastly I fail to see anything wrong with the Senators first logo (both versions). It doesn't seem cartoony or over the top at all. Looks classy, understated and balanced. The current logo is a different story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. The Roman theme is a product of the 90s, and it takes to many connections to tie it into the Senators name. The vintage =O= look ties into the history of hockey in Ottawa and gives the city a look for its NHL team on par with the Montreal Canadiens and Toronto Maple Leafs' in terms of timelessness and legacy. Seeing as no other team has a claim on the history of Senators 1.0 I wouldn't have a problem with the current team running with it full time.

The Senators are a 90's expansion team. Their identity should reflect this instead of using the old team as an excuse to play original six dress up. Your stance on this is pretty ironic considering how much you ripped on their expansion cousins, The Lightning.

The Lightning are in a non-traditional market. That, in addition to being a 90s expansion team, warrants something modern-ish. The Senators are in a market with a rich hockey tradition. Honouring that's different then a team in Tampa, Florida pretending to be the Maple Leafs and Red Wings. Ottawa has a hockey legacy on par with Toronto and Montreal, at least as far as the game's formative years go. Just like Toronto and Montreal's teams reflect their local histories in their uniforms, so to should Ottawa's.

Another reason they should keep the former identity is because the metallic shade of gold is the only thing that distinguishes their colour scheme from the New Jersey Devils. You were up in arms about how Tampa ripped of the Leafs, lets not see it happen again.

The Blackhawks had the colour scheme before the Devils. The original Senators had it before either team. Black and red's not exclusive to one team in the NHL. The Senators embracing it is not the same thing as the Lightning using a colour scheme that had been the exclusive domain of a single team for close to a century.

Plus those original Senators sweaters you love so much were very black, red, and white. Not much gold to be found.

Lastly I fail to see anything wrong with the Senators first logo (both versions). It doesn't seem cartoony or over the top at all. Looks classy, understated and balanced. The current logo is a different story.

I never said cartoony, I said 90s. The 90s were about finding marketable mascots and incorporating them into logos. Sometimes they were cartoony, like the Mighty Ducks' mark, other times they weren't, like the Sharks and Senators' logos. The Senators mark was an attempt to cash in on this trend by creating their own marketing tool, a Roman centurion, which as more appeal to the kids then the Peace Tower or an O. Or an actual Canadian Senator for that matter.

The problem with the Roman motif, even when its classy and understated as the original designs were, is that it takes to many leaps to connect the name with the logo:

The team's named the Senators after the Canadian Senate. Well Rome had a Senate too! So lets use a Roman centurion because some Senators were also Roman military leaders.

It's quite a stretch you see. Not all of Rome's Senators were military commanders, and those that were held the roles of military commander and Senator separately. Not to mention that the team is named after the Canadian Senate, not the Roman Senate.

Fact is, Senators is a near impossible name to visualize, just like Capitals, Federals, Nationals, and the like. Given that the team is located in the national capital, and the name itself is in reference to the national Parliament, an identity that represents the city is the best way to go. By representing the city they are, by proxy, representing the government-themed name. Which is why the =O= works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think kids go crazy for Roman centurions. At any rate, I never wrestled with the semantics of Roman leadership positions because I saw the logo and figured out "oh, like a Roman senator, clever." It was a good identity. Shame they've overtinkered with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, if those Ottawa sweaters made one little tweak...

sens.png?t=1312410630

That would probably be my favorite template in the league.

That's no bad, but I like the extra stripes better--we'll see if that is anything like what we eventually see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If they used it in commercials or banners outside the arena etc..., it would look fine. But having this giant blue logo at centre ice and having the team wear literally a completely different logo looks dumb. Obviously, they wanna get a head start and promote it, that's expected, but it looks very much out of place on the ice.

It may look a little dumb but the logo at center ice is way more prominent both in arena and on TV than the jersey crest. It's getting the image out there. Hell, I think the mixed logo situation may have actually helped a little by associating it with something people already know. Kind of like phasing in a new company name when a merger occurs. X takes over Y and Y is known as "Y, a division of X" for a while and then eventually is just known as X.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Lightning are in a non-traditional market. That, in addition to being a 90s expansion team, warrants something modern-ish. The Senators are in a market with a rich hockey tradition. Honouring that's different then a team in Tampa, Florida pretending to be the Maple Leafs and Red Wings. Ottawa has a hockey legacy on par with Toronto and Montreal, at least as far as the game's formative years go. Just like Toronto and Montreal's teams reflect their local histories in their uniforms, so to should Ottawa's.

The Senators were already honouring their rich hockey tradition with the inaugural jerseys. The waist striping was taken directly from the barberpole jerseys as was the colour scheme (aside from the gold).

The Blackhawks had the colour scheme before the Devils. The original Senators had it before either team. Black and red's not exclusive to one team in the NHL. The Senators embracing it is not the same thing as the Lightning using a colour scheme that had been the exclusive domain of a single team for close to a century.

Plus those original Senators sweaters you love so much were very black, red, and white. Not much gold to be found.

My point had little to do with "who used the scheme first" and more to do with brand identity. Teams should distinguish themselves from eachother and there are currently 5 teams using Red Black and White to some extent. The only thing that ever set the Senators apart is the metallic shade of gold used on their crest's. Yes the Senators original sweaters were very much black and white but they had a shimmering gold logo front and centre, a look never before seen in the NHL. It struck a pefect balance between modern and retro while giving a subtle nod to the history of the previous team.

The problem with the Roman motif, even when its classy and understated as the original designs were, is that it takes to many leaps to connect the name with the logo: The team's named the Senators after the Canadian Senate. Well Rome had a Senate too! So lets use a Roman centurion because some Senators were also Roman military leaders. It's quite a stretch you see. Not all of Rome's Senators were military commanders, and those that were held the roles of military commander and Senator separately. Not to mention that the team is named after the Canadian Senate, not the Roman Senate. Fact is, Senators is a near impossible name to visualize, just like Capitals, Federals, Nationals, and the like. Given that the team is located in the national capital, and the name itself is in reference to the national Parliament, an identity that represents the city is the best way to go. By representing the city they are, by proxy, representing the government-themed name. Which is why the =O= works.

A logo is meant to symbolize a team... or a brand if you will. It doesn't always have to spell out the team namesake in a way that makes perfect logical sense. Nobody outside of these boards would analyze it to the extent you have. The Roman Centurion can at least be interpreted as a Senator. The generic looking "O" can only be interpreted as a generic looking "O."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just like the Canadiens' CH can "only" be seen as a CH?

The =O= has history in Ottawa. Honouring that history isn't a bad thing. It's a callback to the city's hockey heritage, just like the CH is for Montreal's.

As for the Roman centurion, well that's what it is. A Roman centurion. It's NOT a Roman senator. At all. The only connection to the name is that it's Roman, and that Rome also had a Senate. It's a weak connection in an attempt to work in some sort of visual representation of a "senator," and it does so poorly, in my opinion. So don't even bother trying to represent a Senator and just use the =O= and play up the heritage of the Senators 1.0. It's not like that legacy belongs to any active team, so why not have Ottawa's current pro hockey team play it up?

The original logo, as nice as it was (as unconnected as it may have been) isn't coming back, if current uniform trends are any indication. It's been resigned to the dust bin of logo history. Your best change is to see the team go with the updated 2D centurion, but the team doesn't seem interested in promoting that mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris might have to update the 20th anniversary logo for the Senators, I think the one on the site might be bogus as I don't think I've seen it on anything official yet...

Here's the new one from the official site...

http://senators.nhl.com/

sens-20th-1.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris might have to update the 20th anniversary logo for the Senators, I think the one on the site might be bogus as I don't think I've seen it on anything official yet...

I guess there are two. The one that Chris has up on Icethetics cames directly from their teaser presentation in early March.

I might be a little dense on the matter, and someone inform me if I'm off base but shouldn't the Sens celebrate next year? They entered the league in 92-93, wouldn't it be more appropriate and accurate if we celebrated in 12-13?

edit: the fact that the anniversary logo has "vintage white" may suggest the heritage jersey includes vintage white as well. :censored:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The image on Puck Daddy:

is_this_the_new_york_islanders_new_black_rd_jersey.jpg

wyshynski Greg Wyshynski

Like we said on the post: No idea if it's a finished concept for #Isles 3rd jersey. But based on its origin, it's a legit ... something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't have the Reebok wordmark above the NOB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The image on Puck Daddy:

is_this_the_new_york_islanders_new_black_rd_jersey.jpg

wyshynski Greg Wyshynski

Like we said on the post: No idea if it's a finished concept for #Isles 3rd jersey. But based on its origin, it's a legit ... something.

Oof. I hope not. That is one seriously confused sweater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's freaking terrible whatever it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.