NIKE NFL Uniforms

[shaydre1019]

If you look at native American art you can clearly see the inspiration. And these are actually growing on me.

Is there an info graph anywhere just for kicks comparing the records of the teams that are using the old technology and the teams that are not?? I think that would be neat

[BlueSky]

Whose making the refs' shoes again?

And the Seahawks are just awful regardless of what color their pants are. IMO they've downgraded every time they changed the uni since they came into the NFL in '76.

[Sodboy13]

I don't know, I think the switch from the original sleeve striping to the sleeve-hawk was an upgrade.

[vmd9]

I hate that the swoosh looks like it's actually their logo, since it's framed perfectly in the lime box. That area would look weird without anything in there, and there's not enough room for a Seattle logo, so it was pretty clearly designed for the sole purpose of housing the swoosh. Now that I'm looking at the whole uniform for the first time, I think that it's possible that Nike had that jersey made up in several different colorways, with several different team wordmarks on the stripe, and pitched it to several different teams. Once Seattle bought it, they then worked on the pants (as would have been the case with whatever team bought it.) There just seems to be some disconnect between the two parts.

The design on the sleeves matches the contour of the pattern used on the numbers, collar, and helmet. The pattern, like the logo, is based of native american tribal art. So there is no way this is just some random template they designed. It was designed specifically for the Seahawks.

It's like saying Nike came up with a design a few years ago with frogskin pattern on it. They pitched it to all teams and TCU just happened to like it so it stuck.

I'm not seeing that connection. Maybe if there was more blue around the green thing on the sleeve, but I really doubt that the average person would look at the design on the pants stripe and the jersey sleeve and make a connection.

Either way, that same sleeve design could be used for any team. That little green box is not native-american tribal art. They could say that it is, and then make a pants design that sort of matches it, but that box by itself could represent anything that anyone wants it to. That doesn't mean that I think you're wrong - I really don't know. Just that without more evidence, I don't think it's clear that it was designed specifically for the Seahawks.

The News Tribune

"Jersey incorporates graphics inspired by Northwest coastal Indian art. Feather-pattern graphic on helmet, in numbers and on pants represents natural elements of the Pacific Northwest, again inspired by coastal Indian art."

Not sure why you are stuck on this being a "cookie-cutter" uniform design. This was designed for us and only us.

He's trying to pretend like Nike doesn't put any thought into their designs and just throws everything together randomly. Even after being proven wrong several times, for some reason he doesn't see the connection. Unlike uniforms designed by Reebok such as the Falcons, Cardinals, and Vikings, whose designs may look cool but have ZERO connection the the city/nicknames. It's the same old "Nike can't do anything right" bs that's around here every day. The green "triangle" contour is EXACTLY the same as the positive space in the patterns.

[ram29jackson]

THE neck collar thing is horrible league wide ...I dont mean the front, I understand its a less grabable material. I mean in the back where it looks like an oversized

1970s collar...and seperating the stripes on pants towards the top takes away from the flowing pattern

[TalktoChuck]

Unlike uniforms designed by Reebok such as the Falcons, Cardinals, and Vikings, whose designs may look cool but have ZERO connection the the city/nicknames.

The Vikings and Cardinals designs both connect with the nickname just as much, if not more so, as the Seahawks design connects with the city. The Vikings shoulder stripe is a horn, like the helmet logo. And the Cardinals sleeve stripes are meant to be wings. The execution of these designs is a little questionable, of course. But so is the execution of the Seahawks design.

Like I said earlier, the only thing that is glaringly wrong with this Seahawks set is the color balance. That is also most likely the reason that the jersey/helmet/pants seem a little disconnected to some people.

[vmd9]

Unlike uniforms designed by Reebok such as the Falcons, Cardinals, and Vikings, whose designs may look cool but have ZERO connection the the city/nicknames.

The Vikings and Cardinals designs both connect with the nickname just as much, if not more so, as the Seahawks design connects with the city. The Vikings shoulder stripe is a horn, like the helmet logo. And the Cardinals sleeve stripes are meant to be wings. The execution of these designs is a little questionable, of course. But so is the execution of the Seahawks design.

Like I said earlier, the only thing that is glaringly wrong with this Seahawks set is the color balance. That is also most likely the reason that the jersey/helmet/pants seem a little disconnected to some people.

I've never heard that about the Cards, but I have noticed that the sleeve stripes match the horns on the helmet. I guess they were a bad example to use since there's a connection. Maybe the Seahawks execution is better and the reasoning behind the design is more noticeable. But nevertheless there is a reason for it.

[BlueSky]

I don't know, I think the switch from the original sleeve striping to the sleeve-hawk was an upgrade.

Assuming you mean this? Then okay, sure.

But I despised the sleeve logo that looked about the size of a couple of stamps.

[Fresno St. Alum]

The little wing wedge on the top of the helmet doesn't really show up on tv, I think they should get rid of it.

[CS85]

To be frank, these new Seahawk uniforms are capable of being visually interesting, but are 100% absolutely bankrupt of tradition, team history, and style.

Everything about this uniform is Weird for the sake of being Weird, another pony show for Nike to trot out random uniform dog crap under the guise of progressive/daring/bold design.

[Lights Out]

And this garbage was just full of tradition, team history, and style?

[CrazyAnna]

To be frank, these new Seahawk uniforms are capable of being visually interesting, but are 100% absolutely bankrupt of tradition, team history, and style.

Everything about this uniform is Weird for the sake of being Weird, another pony show for Nike to trot out random uniform dog crap under the guise of progressive/daring/bold design.

Couldn't possibly disagree more.

[CS85]

To be frank, these new Seahawk uniforms are capable of being visually interesting, but are 100% absolutely bankrupt of tradition, team history, and style.

Everything about this uniform is Weird for the sake of being Weird, another pony show for Nike to trot out random uniform dog crap under the guise of progressive/daring/bold design.

Couldn't possibly disagree more.

Considering your location and the assortment of logos in your signature I wouldn't expect anything less.

[Sport]

And this garbage was just full of tradition, team history, and style?

Garbage? Hardly. My answer is yes to all three. I wasn't a big fan of the uniform as they wore it at the time (I loved the rare occasions when they used the white pants at home), but it looks so much better compared to the new uniforms and I'm finding myself missing it.

Tradition - it maintained elements of traditional football uniforms adhering to both the league and Seattle's aesthetic history. The colors were like nothing we'd ever seen before, but it had basic stripes, and a block font. It was a modern take on a traditional football uniform and was a natural progression from the royal blue and kelly uniforms.

Team History - They wore it during inarguably their best stretch of years the team has ever had including their only Super Bowl appearance. They still looked like the Seahawks despite being considerably different from the previous uniforms. They've essentially thrown the Holmgren-Hasselbeck years in the trash.

Style - You're damn right these had style. They implemented a color that was perfect for the city they played in and a color, again, that we'd never seen before. They also didn't overdo the lime green. Too much of that color looks garish (read: green alternates, current uniforms), but they used it to slightly accent the navy and slate and it added an element that made it visually interesting. The same can be said of the contrasting sleeves. That was a great choice as well. The entire look was striking and unique without looking clownish. The new set is just clownish, and lacks style.

Plus, the slate blue, gloss finish helmet with the double-blue seahawk logo looks so much more sleek and classy than the current helmet.

The only thing the current uniforms got right was they finally connected the bird-heads in the back of the helmet, but that can't save the rest of the uniform from the disaster that it is. D-

[Gothamite]

He's trying to pretend like Nike doesn't put any thought into their designs and just throws everything together randomly. Even after being proven wrong several times, for some reason he doesn't see the connection. Unlike uniforms designed by Reebok such as the Falcons, Cardinals, and Vikings, whose designs may look cool but have ZERO connection the the city/nicknames. It's the same old "Nike can't do anything right" bs that's around here every day. The green "triangle" contour is EXACTLY the same as the positive space in the patterns.

He has not been "proven wrong," unless a press release now rises to the level of objective truth.

I'm no Nike hater. I think Nike does a whole lot right. I'll mourn the day Nike no longer outfits my Arsenal, and I've been very eager for Nike to take over the NFL contract.

But with the Seahawks, I think they created a turkey. Bunch of muddy, disparate elements that just don't hold together. The lack of white on the homes means they took a somber, boring Reebok design and removed whatever last bit of energy it once had.

[nuordr]

The little wing wedge on the top of the helmet doesn't really show up on tv, I think they should get rid of it.

You can see it if you really focus your eyes. With that being said, I wish they would drop the whole helmet because it is too dull and people say it is not matte. Well it isn't glossy either, so what is it?

[BBTV]

I hate that the swoosh looks like it's actually their logo, since it's framed perfectly in the lime box. That area would look weird without anything in there, and there's not enough room for a Seattle logo, so it was pretty clearly designed for the sole purpose of housing the swoosh. Now that I'm looking at the whole uniform for the first time, I think that it's possible that Nike had that jersey made up in several different colorways, with several different team wordmarks on the stripe, and pitched it to several different teams. Once Seattle bought it, they then worked on the pants (as would have been the case with whatever team bought it.) There just seems to be some disconnect between the two parts.

The design on the sleeves matches the contour of the pattern used on the numbers, collar, and helmet. The pattern, like the logo, is based of native american tribal art. So there is no way this is just some random template they designed. It was designed specifically for the Seahawks.

It's like saying Nike came up with a design a few years ago with frogskin pattern on it. They pitched it to all teams and TCU just happened to like it so it stuck.

I'm not seeing that connection. Maybe if there was more blue around the green thing on the sleeve, but I really doubt that the average person would look at the design on the pants stripe and the jersey sleeve and make a connection.

Either way, that same sleeve design could be used for any team. That little green box is not native-american tribal art. They could say that it is, and then make a pants design that sort of matches it, but that box by itself could represent anything that anyone wants it to. That doesn't mean that I think you're wrong - I really don't know. Just that without more evidence, I don't think it's clear that it was designed specifically for the Seahawks.

The News Tribune

"Jersey incorporates graphics inspired by Northwest coastal Indian art. Feather-pattern graphic on helmet, in numbers and on pants represents natural elements of the Pacific Northwest, again inspired by coastal Indian art."

Not sure why you are stuck on this being a "cookie-cutter" uniform design. This was designed for us and only us.

He's trying to pretend like Nike doesn't put any thought into their designs and just throws everything together randomly. Even after being proven wrong several times, for some reason he doesn't see the connection. Unlike uniforms designed by Reebok such as the Falcons, Cardinals, and Vikings, whose designs may look cool but have ZERO connection the the city/nicknames. It's the same old "Nike can't do anything right" bs that's around here every day. The green "triangle" contour is EXACTLY the same as the positive space in the patterns.

You clearly have missed the entire point. I simply believe that it's possible that the jersey was designed first (with a lot of thought) and then everything else later once they knew who it was going to be for. I am just trying to understand why it looks to me like the jersey and pants don't really go together. I do believe now after reading the press release that Nike did explicitly partner with the Seahawks for a redesign, but that doesn't mean anything as far as what the elements are supposed to represent. There is absolutely 0% "tribal" elements on that jersey (and I'm not counting the screening on the numbers since that could just be tacked on.) Teams do this all the time - explain how each element has some kind of special meaning that makes it special to them. The reality is that 90% of the time, it's all BS, and the element exists just because someone thought it "looked cool". Note that "it looked cool" is a perfectly valid reason to do something - I'm not sure why designers can't just admit it though (or maybe they do, and it's the teams that try to explain everything.)

For the record, I like their new look more than I dislike it, even though I have a few complaints. I liked their 2011 look more though.

Also for the record, don't lump me in with the "Nike can't do anything right" crowd. I have never, even one time, made blanket statements toward RBK, UA, Nike, or anyone. There's plenty of Nike designs that I like. If anything, I probably like more of them than most of the folks around here.

Adding even more for the record, while the green triangle contour may be the same as the positive space in the patterns, that means nothing. That doesn't mean that they didn't just rig that design into the pants after the fact, and honestly, the blue around the triangle on the pants is what stands out, so the lack of that element around the triangle on the sleeves makes it very hard for anyone who isn't specifically looking for it to make a connection there.

I don't understand why you're taking an opinion regarding a uniform so personally.

[jc...]

Not sure if this is the correct thread to address this, but pertaining to the Carolina Panthers new word mark painted in the end zones, it looks like the generic crap they make you use when you are doing the create-a-team in Madden.

[nuordr]

Not sure if this is the correct thread to address this, but pertaining to the Carolina Panthers new word mark painted in the end zones, it looks like the generic crap they make you use when you are doing the create-a-team in Madden.

I thought the exact same thing when I first seen it.

[BlackBolt3]

Not sure if this is the correct thread to address this, but pertaining to the Carolina Panthers new word mark painted in the end zones, it looks like the generic crap they make you use when you are doing the create-a-team in Madden.

I thought the exact same thing when I first seen it.

I was hoping that they put the panther head at mid field. No such luck.