Uniform trends that oughta go

[Enio125]

writing on the inside of the collar is pointless too.

NO ONE CAN SEE IT!

Except the player and every person who buys one.That was a dumb comment.

No one can see it when you're wearing it.

Jerseys are meant to be worn and if something is not visible while the jersey is being worn it then serves no purpose.

That's preposterous. The shoulder pads obviously serve a purpose, and they're always covered up. 'Jerseys are meant to be worn' is only half the equation. Jerseys are also meant to be sold to fans, and fans like to see those extra little touches added to a jersey. It adds value for someone buying the product. It makes players feel proud to be part of the team. It feels custom and high-quality. A uniform is definitely more than just what we can see on the outside. It's those details that we can't see that can make a good uniform great.

Shoulder pads don't serve a cosmetic purpose like writing on the collar; they are there for safety so they don't need to be seen. (And I don't think anyone would want to wear them over their jersey.)

[habsfan1]

So nobody mentionned front numbers on helmets? It's nice too see that people have forgotten/got used to those. Remember the online backlash that happened this year after they were introduced?

[BigBubba]

What I dislike and I think needs to go...

- Bettman stripes

- Piping to nowhere

- BFBS

- Front numbers on the upper torso

- Shirt tales at the waist

- Absence of hem stripes at the waist

- Repetitive RBK striping patterns on teams who have better past looks

As you may have noticed, I left out a number of things most people hate because some things I just don't mind. Like vintage white, circle logos, wordmarks, numbers below the wordmark, thowbacks from 2000's expansion teams, and the use of double blue. All of those things I either find them cool or they just don't really bother me.

This is where I am. I don't have any issues with new teams trying to piggy back on the history of their game and league. I will take a new team having a nice look with historical character over a new team trying to change the way the uniform of the future should look any day. Sports is about the past, not the future. It's about being better than those who came before you. It's about the product on the field, not visual creativity and keeping people interested because the uniforms are sparkly and neon and progressive. Without the past, there is no present in sports, because everything that is right now is a product of what has happened in the past. The games, the players, the rivalries, everything. History and sports are so closely tied, I prefer uniforms and logos to tap into that aesthetic. It's very appropriate, whereas many of these new looks we see don't seem to be.

So you'd take new teams ripping off older teams and their historic elements than being creative and trying something new and original? They're not historic teams and thus have no right to act like one. They're new teams, and should try to create their own styles and looks as opposed to trying to fit in with a group and era to which they don't belong.

I hate all the anniversary logos teams have.

5 years

10 years

15 years

20 years

10 years since the last championship

15 years since the last championship

20 years since the last championship

10 years in this city

15 years in this city

20 years in this city

10 years in this stadium

15 years in this stadium

20 years in this stadium

It's just too much.

You forgot

35 years

40 years

50 years

85 years

I agree that ones like 5 and 85 years are stupid, but I think that 50 years is justified.

[habsfan1]

So you'd take new teams ripping off older teams and their historic elements than being creative and trying something new and original? They're not historic teams and thus have no right to act like one. They're new teams, and should try to create their own styles and looks as opposed to trying to fit in with a group and era to which they don't belong.

That did not turn out very well for the Atlanta Thrashers.

[nash61]

What I dislike and I think needs to go...

- Bettman stripes

- Piping to nowhere

- BFBS

- Front numbers on the upper torso

- Shirt tales at the waist

- Absence of hem stripes at the waist

- Repetitive RBK striping patterns on teams who have better past looks

As you may have noticed, I left out a number of things most people hate because some things I just don't mind. Like vintage white, circle logos, wordmarks, numbers below the wordmark, thowbacks from 2000's expansion teams, and the use of double blue. All of those things I either find them cool or they just don't really bother me.

This is where I am. I don't have any issues with new teams trying to piggy back on the history of their game and league. I will take a new team having a nice look with historical character over a new team trying to change the way the uniform of the future should look any day. Sports is about the past, not the future. It's about being better than those who came before you. It's about the product on the field, not visual creativity and keeping people interested because the uniforms are sparkly and neon and progressive. Without the past, there is no present in sports, because everything that is right now is a product of what has happened in the past. The games, the players, the rivalries, everything. History and sports are so closely tied, I prefer uniforms and logos to tap into that aesthetic. It's very appropriate, whereas many of these new looks we see don't seem to be.

So you'd take new teams ripping off older teams and their historic elements than being creative and trying something new and original? They're not historic teams and thus have no right to act like one. They're new teams, and should try to create their own styles and looks as opposed to trying to fit in with a group and era to which they don't belong.

I hate all the anniversary logos teams have.

5 years

10 years

15 years

20 years

10 years since the last championship

15 years since the last championship

20 years since the last championship

10 years in this city

15 years in this city

20 years in this city

10 years in this stadium

15 years in this stadium

20 years in this stadium

It's just too much.

You forgot

35 years

40 years

50 years

85 years

I agree that ones like 5 and 85 years are stupid, but I think that 50 years is justified.

Personally, I believe that 10 years should be celebrated, and every 25 years after that.

10, 25, 50, 75, 100, etc.

[Tygers09]

Gray facemasks can stay...

But what happened to striping on football helmets? I mean it depends on the design on certain helmets (not all), but some could have stripes and would be cool. The CFL for example: BC, Calgary and Toronto all went w/o stripes. All had them before, why the change?

Drop the use of black, whether being a primary color or trim/outline color!

[FrankCostanza]

What I dislike and I think needs to go...

- Bettman stripes

- Piping to nowhere

- BFBS

- Front numbers on the upper torso

- Shirt tales at the waist

- Absence of hem stripes at the waist

- Repetitive RBK striping patterns on teams who have better past looks

As you may have noticed, I left out a number of things most people hate because some things I just don't mind. Like vintage white, circle logos, wordmarks, numbers below the wordmark, thowbacks from 2000's expansion teams, and the use of double blue. All of those things I either find them cool or they just don't really bother me.

This is where I am. I don't have any issues with new teams trying to piggy back on the history of their game and league. I will take a new team having a nice look with historical character over a new team trying to change the way the uniform of the future should look any day. Sports is about the past, not the future. It's about being better than those who came before you. It's about the product on the field, not visual creativity and keeping people interested because the uniforms are sparkly and neon and progressive. Without the past, there is no present in sports, because everything that is right now is a product of what has happened in the past. The games, the players, the rivalries, everything. History and sports are so closely tied, I prefer uniforms and logos to tap into that aesthetic. It's very appropriate, whereas many of these new looks we see don't seem to be.

I agree with this. The numbers on the front upper torso on a hockey jersey look ridiculous and the "throwbacks" for expansion teams look kinda cool for the most part. Also, as you explain, history is important so it might be different to celebrate an 85th anniversary with a patch, I don't mind seeing them (or any other "odd" anniversary) because it reminds everyone of the franchise's history, which is a good thing especially to new fans.

[loogodude90]

Retro-for-the-sake-of-retro needs to stop. My two favorite teams in all sports (Washington Wizards and Baltimore O's) recently made terrible decisions to go retro. It's a trend that some teams can (and should) pull off (like the Blue Jays and Utah Jazz) but it seems like too many teams are jumping on that bandwagon.

I don't understand the calls against reviving old looks. In a lot of cases, it's not "retro for retro's sake", it's simply going back to a team's tried and true look. The Blue Jays didn't look right in black, charcoal, and blue. They simply returned to their best look they've had. The Orioles look has been pretty split between the cartoon bird and the standing bird. I think it's great for them to try to break apart from the usual looks and return to their old identity, which now looks quite unique when set against the other looks throughout the league.

This is seen in football too. The Giants and Jets both returned to old looks, and in my opinion, look the way they should. Ditto for the 49ers. The removal of black makes them great again.

To me, at least, it's not so much "retro for retro's sake" (what does that even mean? haha) as it is going to the best look.

You clearly didn't read my post carefully at all. I said that in a lot of cases, retro works, and the one of the two examples I used for this WAS the Blue Jays.

But seeing my favorite two teams go unnecessarily to a retro look (both downgrades) upsets me. The Wizards had an awesome, unique color scheme. And the O's cartoon bird just looks outdated. And unique doesn't necessarily mean good.

I'm not going to comment on football, because I don't really follow trends in football uniforms.

Oh, and "retro for retro's sake" means just going retro to follow the overall trend of other teams going retro. Anyone on this site who hasn't noticed that trend probably doesn't belong on this site.

Exactly. It's not 'retro for retro's sake' (this freaking '[blank] for [blank's] sake' term needs to die more than any of these trends). It's retro because fans love it and frankly, it more often than not looks cleaner and more timeless if it's executed right, which a big reason why fans love retro stuff (the other obviously being nostalgia).

This "freakin" [blank] for [blank's] sake term isn't a trend.

And the O's realistic bird was much more sleek and clean-looking than that chubby clunky cartoon bird.

[aawagner011]

Retro-for-the-sake-of-retro needs to stop. My two favorite teams in all sports (Washington Wizards and Baltimore O's) recently made terrible decisions to go retro. It's a trend that some teams can (and should) pull off (like the Blue Jays and Utah Jazz) but it seems like too many teams are jumping on that bandwagon.

I don't understand the calls against reviving old looks. In a lot of cases, it's not "retro for retro's sake", it's simply going back to a team's tried and true look. The Blue Jays didn't look right in black, charcoal, and blue. They simply returned to their best look they've had. The Orioles look has been pretty split between the cartoon bird and the standing bird. I think it's great for them to try to break apart from the usual looks and return to their old identity, which now looks quite unique when set against the other looks throughout the league.

This is seen in football too. The Giants and Jets both returned to old looks, and in my opinion, look the way they should. Ditto for the 49ers. The removal of black makes them great again.

To me, at least, it's not so much "retro for retro's sake" (what does that even mean? haha) as it is going to the best look.

You clearly didn't read my post carefully at all. I said that in a lot of cases, retro works, and the one of the two examples I used for this WAS the Blue Jays.

But seeing my favorite two teams go unnecessarily to a retro look (both downgrades) upsets me. The Wizards had an awesome, unique color scheme. And the O's cartoon bird just looks outdated. And unique doesn't necessarily mean good.

I'm not going to comment on football, because I don't really follow trends in football uniforms.

Oh, and "retro for retro's sake" means just going retro to follow the overall trend of other teams going retro. Anyone on this site who hasn't noticed that trend probably doesn't belong on this site.

Exactly. It's not 'retro for retro's sake' (this freaking '[blank] for [blank's] sake' term needs to die more than any of these trends). It's retro because fans love it and frankly, it more often than not looks cleaner and more timeless if it's executed right, which a big reason why fans love retro stuff (the other obviously being nostalgia).

This "freakin" [blank] for [blank's] sake term isn't a trend.

And the O's realistic bird was much more sleek and clean-looking than that chubby clunky cartoon bird.

Yes, I actually read your entire post quite thoroughly and carefully, and yes I referenced the Blue Jays. I used them as an example of a team reverting to their "traditional" look not because its "going retro because everyone else is doing it", but rather because that's what Toronto is supposed to look like. Even if you agree that it works for them, you'll notice that my point was arguing that it's not "retro for retro's sake" but simply going to their best look they've ever had. Your two examples- the Wizards and O's- are simply that of your opinion, just like everyone else's viewpoints towards sports identity on this board. That's the thing, we all have varying and differing opinions, and I happen to think that the Orioles look better with the cartoon bird. I also think that the Wizards change is great as it brings their identity full circle back to the Bullets era. I prefer the new identity much more than the previous one. That's where our opinions differ and that's ok. My opinion is no more right than yours.

And yes, I know what these "black for black's sake" and "retro for retro's sake" phrases mean. That was an entirely sarcastic remark, but I, like andrewharrington, hate all these phrases. Paul Lukas might have originated it, but just because he runs a blog doesn't mean the entire uniform culture needs to adopt it as the official lingo. I see it every day. "Retro for retro's sake", "black for black's sake", "gray facemask for gray facemask's sake". Just stop. These phrases where you can simply insert the appropriate missing blank for "whatever's sake" are just irritating. It's stupid. What happened to people who can express their own thoughts rather than follow the paths of others?

[BigBubba]

So you'd take new teams ripping off older teams and their historic elements than being creative and trying something new and original? They're not historic teams and thus have no right to act like one. They're new teams, and should try to create their own styles and looks as opposed to trying to fit in with a group and era to which they don't belong.

That did not turn out very well for the Atlanta Thrashers.

But it did with the Avalanche (pre-edge mountain stripes), Hurricanes (creative warning flag hem striping), Predators (new gold look; unique guitar string font), Sharks (teal), Wild (pre-Edge green), Colorado Rockies NL (purple), and the Tampa Bay Devil Rays after they toned things down. While some of these teams have either gone "vintage" (Wild with the unnecessary circle and heritage third jersey; granted though, they do have a long hockey history) have even fallen generic (Rays and Avalanche), those were still creative ideas that tried to be different and worked instead of falling victim to trying too hard to fit in. Your Habs, the oldest and arguably most historic hockey team in the world do not wear laces while the Blue Jackets, the youngest NHL team with literally no history outside of Rick Nash do. I'm not saying it will always work, but it can, and should be appreciated when teams actually try to do something as opposed to copying and pasting a period of history that they have no business in. That's like me filling my avatar, sig, and member title with a bunch of old CCSLC inside jokes. I was never part of those, and I have no business with them. Instead, I should try to make my own memorable CCSLC imprint instead of trying to be a part of what the vets share.

[Ark]

There are many posts which I would like to respond to, haha. I guess I'll start with this one.

It is all about the team and the execution. What works for some teams may not work for others. I hate to be that guy, but these types of threads annoy me (no offense to the OP) for the fact that people make it all or nothing. Look at the design elements on a team by team basis.

I agree with this for the most part. One of the things I've disagreed with a lot here (I'm a lurker) is the hate for "BFBS". If black makes a jersey (or epecially a color scheme) better, a team shouldn't hesitate to add it because some people on the internet might get angry. Yeah, the Islanders' new alts are awful but it's not because of the black. Another Example - even though they represent the North Stars' move to Dallas, I've alwys loved these unis:

Yeah, it's technically black for black's sake, but it's still an amazing uniform. In fact, blue for blue's sake is definitely a worse problem today.

---

One thing I definitely agree with though is the football jerseys that show the players' armpits. That is just gross.

[habsfan1]

So you'd take new teams ripping off older teams and their historic elements than being creative and trying something new and original? They're not historic teams and thus have no right to act like one. They're new teams, and should try to create their own styles and looks as opposed to trying to fit in with a group and era to which they don't belong.

That did not turn out very well for the Atlanta Thrashers.

But it did with the Avalanche (pre-edge mountain stripes), Hurricanes (creative warning flag hem striping), Predators (new gold look; unique guitar string font), Sharks (teal), Wild (pre-Edge green), Colorado Rockies NL (purple), and the Tampa Bay Devil Rays after they toned things down. While some of these teams have either gone "vintage" (Wild with the unnecessary circle and heritage third jersey; granted though, they do have a long hockey history) have even fallen generic (Rays and Avalanche), those were still creative ideas that tried to be different and worked instead of falling victim to trying too hard to fit in. Your Habs, the oldest and arguably most historic hockey team in the world do not wear laces while the Blue Jackets, the youngest NHL team with literally no history outside of Rick Nash do. I'm not saying it will always work, but it can, and should be appreciated when teams actually try to do something as opposed to copying and pasting a period of history that they have no business in. That's like me filling my avatar, sig, and member title with a bunch of old CCSLC inside jokes. I was never part of those, and I have no business with them. Instead, I should try to make my own memorable CCSLC imprint instead of trying to be a part of what the vets share.

Of course, lol. It's funny how I wasn't thinking very far when I typed my previous post. I think people (myself included) spend so much time trashing the Thrashers jerseys and the crop of unpopular jerseys that we tend to forget about the successful looks from the newer teams that you named. I hope the Predators gold look and the guitar string pattern remains a part of their history for years to come. The Hurricanes are one team that survived the extreme Edge makeover, by holding on to what they had and not going with the Penguins template recolored in red, white and black. That would of been disastrous. The Avalanche went with something lame and generic and I hope that in the future, they create a 2012 version of their original mountain pattern jerseys. That's something that everybody seems to want so I hope the team is paying attention.

[Ark]

White for white's sake. I mean, come on, 99% of of all sports teams have one and white isn't in all the color schemes...shame

Hmm, interesting idea... How many teams have not had a white jersey throughout a season? The Pens in 83-84 and the Lakers...?

Alrhough if a team had a blue home and red away jersey, that might not work all the time.

Baseball:

• Wearing Alts more than primaries.
  

I disagree with this. The only reason many teams still only have a white and grey jersey is tradition. Many times the alts are just as good as the primaries

[NJTank]

Those combat uniforms in the NCAA.

[DolphinManatee]

Retro-for-the-sake-of-retro needs to stop. My two favorite teams in all sports (Washington Wizards and Baltimore O's) recently made terrible decisions to go retro. It's a trend that some teams can (and should) pull off (like the Blue Jays and Utah Jazz) but it seems like too many teams are jumping on that bandwagon.

I don't understand the calls against reviving old looks. In a lot of cases, it's not "retro for retro's sake", it's simply going back to a team's tried and true look. The Blue Jays didn't look right in black, charcoal, and blue. They simply returned to their best look they've had. The Orioles look has been pretty split between the cartoon bird and the standing bird. I think it's great for them to try to break apart from the usual looks and return to their old identity, which now looks quite unique when set against the other looks throughout the league.

This is seen in football too. The Giants and Jets both returned to old looks, and in my opinion, look the way they should. Ditto for the 49ers. The removal of black makes them great again.

To me, at least, it's not so much "retro for retro's sake" (what does that even mean? haha) as it is going to the best look.

You clearly didn't read my post carefully at all. I said that in a lot of cases, retro works, and the one of the two examples I used for this WAS the Blue Jays.

But seeing my favorite two teams go unnecessarily to a retro look (both downgrades) upsets me. The Wizards had an awesome, unique color scheme. And the O's cartoon bird just looks outdated. And unique doesn't necessarily mean good.

I'm not going to comment on football, because I don't really follow trends in football uniforms.

Oh, and "retro for retro's sake" means just going retro to follow the overall trend of other teams going retro. Anyone on this site who hasn't noticed that trend probably doesn't belong on this site.

Exactly. It's not 'retro for retro's sake' (this freaking '[blank] for [blank's] sake' term needs to die more than any of these trends). It's retro because fans love it and frankly, it more often than not looks cleaner and more timeless if it's executed right, which a big reason why fans love retro stuff (the other obviously being nostalgia).

This "freakin" [blank] for [blank's] sake term isn't a trend.

And the O's realistic bird was much more sleek and clean-looking than that chubby clunky cartoon bird.

Yes, I actually read your entire post quite thoroughly and carefully, and yes I referenced the Blue Jays. I used them as an example of a team reverting to their "traditional" look not because its "going retro because everyone else is doing it", but rather because that's what Toronto is supposed to look like. Even if you agree that it works for them, you'll notice that my point was arguing that it's not "retro for retro's sake" but simply going to their best look they've ever had. Your two examples- the Wizards and O's- are simply that of your opinion, just like everyone else's viewpoints towards sports identity on this board. That's the thing, we all have varying and differing opinions, and I happen to think that the Orioles look better with the cartoon bird. I also think that the Wizards change is great as it brings their identity full circle back to the Bullets era. I prefer the new identity much more than the previous one. That's where our opinions differ and that's ok. My opinion is no more right than yours.

And yes, I know what these "black for black's sake" and "retro for retro's sake" phrases mean. That was an entirely sarcastic remark, but I, like andrewharrington, hate all these phrases. Paul Lukas might have originated it, but just because he runs a blog doesn't mean the entire uniform culture needs to adopt it as the official lingo. I see it every day. "Retro for retro's sake", "black for black's sake", "gray facemask for gray facemask's sake". Just stop. These phrases where you can simply insert the appropriate missing blank for "whatever's sake" are just irritating. It's stupid. What happened to people who can express their own thoughts rather than follow the paths of others?

Amen to that.

[DrAwesomeberry]

So you'd take new teams ripping off older teams and their historic elements than being creative and trying something new and original? They're not historic teams and thus have no right to act like one. They're new teams, and should try to create their own styles and looks as opposed to trying to fit in with a group and era to which they don't belong.

That did not turn out very well for the Atlanta Thrashers.

Their initial jerseys were pretty good.

[Ark]

Oh, here's one I thought of.

Teams usually using either blue, red, or black as their primary color. Only 5 teams or so use a different-colored primary home jersey (in the NHL) or road jersey (in the NBA), and obviously the NFL and MLB are no better.

Why is this? The shades of those three colors that teams use are usually similar anyway.

[Ark]

Their initial jerseys were pretty good.

I agree, but that color scheme is very boring. Actually, it's basically the same as the Floida Panthers' at that time, just with some light blue added in the logo.

[Legend]

Throwbacks becoming full time jerseys.

Word mark logos in hockey.

Vintage white.

Bland/plain/boring alternate and third uniforms.

Throwbacks as alternate uniforms.

Different language jerseys for games playing in the US.

Pink.

I know it isn't here yet for game jerseys, but ads all over jerseys. I get it's marketing and such, but it just looks horrendous. I'm not like that Lukas clown, I understand business and companies wanting to market, and in alot of situations it's no big deal. I don't think Nike is satan in company form. But just recently watching highlights from hockey game in Sweden. My oh my was it awful. You can't tell where the logo is, where the name is, it's become so cluttered.

No names on the back of jerseys. I'm a lifetime and big Yankees fan, but I wish all the teams would have names on the back. I know who the players are regardless, I like prefer the look of a name there.

[Corvus]

NHL:

• Lace up collars
  
• Piping Betman Stripe style
  
• Using colours that have nothing to do with your team history in your alt (Florida, Islanders)
  
• Plain hems: I prefer a hem stipe, but hell, do something with that space besides leaving it blank.
  
• Front numbers: Helmet front numbers make them redundant on jerseys
  
• Contrasting colour name plates: Seriously, just because your team looked amateurish and low budget in the past doesn't mean you need to emulate that now. I don't see the original six teams taking to the ice in wool alts anytime soon
  
• Vintage White