NIKE NFL Uniforms

[BlueSky]

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?

Yeah, I don't know if they'd consider that with all the focus on preventing concussions.

JK in case it wasn't obvious.

There's a lot that bothers me about the new Seahawks uni (hereafter referred to as "clown suit") but nothing more than what a previous poster mentioned about the swoosh being centered in that little neon green area as if it's the team logo. Logo creep on steroids. Marketing is in this horrific spiral where there's so much for people to take in and so much collateral noise that marketers think they have to be more and more aggressive to be noticed. While that may be true, it's awful for those being bombarded with marketing BS 24/7.

[oldschoolvikings]

If the Seahawks' helmet was gray and they didn't go monochrome they would look fantastic.

Road version.

This looks okay only if they wore it once at home during the season.

That doesn't make any sense. Why wear the best version only once?

Because in my eyes it is an alternate...kinda like when your Vikings wear their alternate once or twice a year.

Apples and oranges. The Vikings throwback IS their alt. (Also better looking than their current primes, but that's another discussion.) This look wouldn't be an alt... NFL teams can wear multiple pants with their prime jersey, doesn't make it an alt. My point was that the Seahawks could decide that, on second thought, Arena League teams actually DO NOT have better style than NFL teams, and could wear gray pants with the current jersey. Still mismatched, still clunky, but marginally more professional.

[AAO]

Who's updating the NFL uniforms for the mothership? That section needs some work. I could do it, but I don't have all the necessary graphics or access to the vectors.

[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.

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.

You're right, the new designs on the uniforms don't resemble this style of art at all...

[BBTV]

The jerseys? Not at all.

The pants? Sure, they extracted one piece of that and repeated it over and over. Part of what makes that style of art great is that there are so many different designs all coming together to make one piece. Like how each part of the bottom bird you posted could almost be its own piece. There's no singular repeated pattern like on the pants stripe.

Again, it is not reasonable to think that the average person would see those pants and say "hey, tribal art - cool!"

All those pictures prove is that the original Seahawks logo was perfect for them. The current one is a nice evolution, but the original might be an all timer.

In no way does this jersey evoke images like the ones that you posted. Those images as well as the jersey are pretty well done IMO (one more so than the other, but still) but it's folly to think that there's as much meaning to the jersey as is being claimed.

[CS85]

The nike-dedicated green shoulder swatch to me says all you need to say about the look.

[seahawk9]

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.

Thank you Blue Sky, missing the classic royal blue, green, and silver. It was clean, bright, professional classic, like the uniforms of the Packers, Bears, Steelers, Cowboys, etc. Don't recall anyone ever complaining about those unis up until they decided to change for the sake of change back in 2002......Love to see the old colors with the new logo..

[CrazyAnna]

The collar, sleeves, pants, helmet center-stripe, and inside the numbers is without a doubt Pacific Northwest Indian inspired. Even our new connecting Seahawk logo on the helmet now resembles a totem pole.

But this is all I will say about this. Of course everyone has opinions and God bless us all for having them. Agree or disagree. Love or hate the uniforms. We are all unique and I love that about forums.

[Bustin8]

I like the uniforms the more I see them in-game

[nuordr]

The collar, sleeves, pants, helmet center-stripe, and inside the numbers is without a doubt Pacific Northwest Indian inspired. Even our new connecting Seahawk logo on the helmet now resembles a totem pole.

But this is all I will say about this. Of course everyone has opinions and God bless us all for having them. Agree or disagree. Love or hate the uniforms. We are all unique and I love that about forums.

You can show most people on this board the detailed specifics and they will still tell you are wrong. The bottom line is besides the helmet, these uniforms looked wonderful on the field and I cannot believe I am going to do this, but I believe this will be my newest Jersey for my collection.

[shaydre1019]

If you have even the slightest eye for art you can tell that there is clearly a correlation between the two. However it's also hard to translate tribal art like that onto a football uniform without it looking like a 90s Mls jersey. This design is slowly growing on me and I'm starting to think Nike totally knew what they were doing with these.

Still some very very wacky elements though like the number font which isnt terrible but could be a lot better. And the shoulder numbers which look really out of place

But to say that they made these uniforms with a generic design and THEN presented them to the Seahawks without doin any research is foolish. Well executed tribal art translation? Not necessarily. Tribal art inspiration? Definitely.

[dmhtfld]

I wasn't a big fan of the shiny decals on a matte helmet and I didn't like the font they chose for the numbers but other than that I thought they looked pretty good.

[dennisbergan]

Thank you Blue Sky, missing the classic royal blue, green, and silver. It was clean, bright, professional classic, like the uniforms of the Packers, Bears, Steelers, Cowboys, etc. Don't recall anyone ever complaining about those unis up until they decided to change for the sake of change back in 2002

Those original Seahawk uniforms were dull and completely out-of-style by the late 1980's.

Not EVERYBODY in the NFL has to have "classic" uniforms. Not EVERYONE in the NFL has to have "block" numbers. Not EVERYONE in the NFL had a franchise 500 years ago and still think anything that was around in the 1960's is "traditional" and worth remembering.

Seattle is a relatively new franchise in a progressive part of the country with a new-age company (Nike) in its backyard. There is NO reason why they shouldn't be different. There is NO reason why they should be lumped in with the Chiefs and Browns and Bears. Let those old franchises still trot out their 40 year old uniforms, that Grandpa and Grandma used to love and enjoy. Let the Seahawks be unique to the rest of the NFL. Its not going to kill anyone to not have everyone dress the same and look the same (except for some of the old foggies that frequent these boards).

[63Bulldogs63]

In watching the Cowboys and Raiders pre season game on ESPN I noticed something weird about Orton's jersey. He wears an ideal cut that older quarterbacks tend to use. His sleeves go down almost to his elbow but the sleeve stripes are way up almost near the shoulders. Kinda odd. Any other teams with sleeve stripes have this issue with players that use a longer sleeve cut?

Edit: also noticed Romo's jersey has the same problem with the sleeves. Bothersome.

[larrypep]

Also noticed the Raiders still have the AL shield on their helmet. I guess like the jersey with permanent patches, helmets can have these tributes as well?

[andrewharrington]

And honestly, it isn't a problem at all. Long-ass sleeves just don't look good on a football field.

They would work if they were snug and stretchy, made of a performance material. Picture taking the sleeves off the undershirt and sewing them directly to the jersey instead of the customary cap sleeves so that the 'jersey' doesn't have to be two parts but is still able to accommodate sleeve design and eliminates the armhole as a place to grab.

I mean, seriously. How hard is it to recolor the navy panel white on those pants? And same for the powder panel on the alts? Awful.

The lightning bolts ARE usually consistent, though. The bolt is in a white panel on the navy jersey and navy pants, and it's in a navy panel on the white jersey and white pants. The only inconsistency is with the other pair of white pants that go with the powder blue uniform, as the bolt never appears in a powder blue panel anywhere else in the uniform set. However, it still looks good, so it doesn't really matter to me.

First off, I consider the Chargers a bottom 10 set in the league. Anyway, having different color backgrounds is the definition of inconsistency. It's not consistent unless the bolt always appears on one color, as was the case with the much superior previous set.

But you certainly could (and should) design the uniform in such a way that the bolt doesn't need to have the same background color to appear consistent. That type of versatility is surely more desirable than being painted into a corner by a logo that can only appear on a white background.

6) Forgot to mention the 49ers. It's really a shame the franchise decided to keep the awkward sleeve pattern instead of having Nike fix it.

I don't know for sure, but it's possible this was a design solution that the team specifically requested back when they first adopted the uniform they currently wear. It might not be something that they think needs fixing.

I don't really care for the collars, but overall the Nike uniforms are a big improvement over Reebok. If having to watch a few teams with "different" collars, I really don't see it as a big deal.

I think you have some valid, if generalized, points in what you said, but I don't exactly get this part. The real changes that Nike's made have all been received pretty poorly, those being the disco collars, the darkening of the mesh sweat panels, the strange placement of the Swoosh in some cases, the overlapping of the belt tunnel over the pant stripe...

They didn't really change much else in the way of design, at least not much else that affects the look of the uniform. There was some smart moving around of stripes and TV numbers, and obviously, there's great technology in the socks, the fabrics, et al, but visually, where is the overall improvement that you're speaking of? It seems that visually, there's much more to complain about on a league-wide scale since the switch. Some of that is obviously due to the normal acclimation of the public to major change, but you get my point.

I'd say it's a flat finish

Flat would be even less shiny than matte. Zero gloss and not even totally smooth, almost like a fine sandpaper.

The collar, sleeves, pants, helmet center-stripe, and inside the numbers is without a doubt Pacific Northwest Indian inspired. Even our new connecting Seahawk logo on the helmet now resembles a totem pole.

But this is all I will say about this. Of course everyone has opinions and God bless us all for having them. Agree or disagree. Love or hate the uniforms. We are all unique and I love that about forums.

What he's saying is this: Picture the uniform with a blank helmet, no collar trim, pattern-free numerals and a single solid pant stripe. On it's own, the design on the sleeves has, at best, a far-fetched connection to the native art of the northwest, especially when viewed by someone not familiar with that style of art. When placed in the context of native art, you can see the connection, but otherwise, it's about as arbitrary as you can get while still maintaining some semblance of a connection to native northwest art. That's not necessarily bad, but it is reality, even if you have the Seahawk blinders on. I mean, that green shape looks more like a Hershey's Kiss than anything, but that's not what we associate it with because we have the benefit of context when viewing it. Take that design element off a blue and green jersey that says 'Seahawks' on it, and it's probably going to score very low if you want people to try and guess what it is or what style of art it is.

Using that as our starting point (mainly generic jersey with a very minimal connection to native northwest art), the entire uniform can be completed simply by using this northwestern wing shape in a line up the pant and along the collar, and using it as a repeating pattern in the numbers and on the crown of the helmet. This design element is common among all those items, but it's used at different scales, in different colors and in such a way that the parts still don't visually connect very well. It's not integrated in very innovative or seamless ways. It's like putting native northwest wallpaper in your suburban colonial and proclaiming you live in a rustic cabin overlooking Puget Sound.

That being said, I disagree with Gothamite on this one. I think these have much more energy and visual presence than their predecessors. Even though I like the cleaner, more minimal design of the previous uniform, I think these new ones are more fun to look at. The jolt of color is great amongst the blue and grey.

[ARTnSocal]

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

I really liked the Seahawks white away uniform. It's amazing how good that rare blue looked when they didn't overdose it like they did on their home version.

You're absolutely right about the size of the Seahawk logo tho' .. The logo should have been much bigger with the Reebok logo just below the number on the shoulders.

That was such great shade of blue that looks so good when it doesn't suffer from the overkill that the monochrome home uniform did.

The Seahawks, I see nothing wrong with them changing their uniforms for something eccentric as they've done with Nike ... but they took a perfectly beautiful shade of blue and tossed it down the Johnny-flusher for a generic navy and it's just an awful design.

[slats7]

In watching the Cowboys and Raiders pre season game on ESPN I noticed something weird about Orton's jersey. He wears an ideal cut that older quarterbacks tend to use. His sleeves go down almost to his elbow but the sleeve stripes are way up almost near the shoulders. Kinda odd. Any other teams with sleeve stripes have this issue with players that use a longer sleeve cut?

Edit: also noticed Romo's jersey has the same problem with the sleeves. Bothersome.

Not your imagination.

2011:

2012:

The Dallas QBs are the only ones who continue to wear real, honest to goodness sleeves. Nike :censored:ed it up by moving the stripes too high, like they do with every other player. Sleeve stripes should never be above the numbers on the front of the jersey, regardless of what position you play. Every Dallas player should be wearing the exact same sleeve length exhibited by Romo and Orton, albeit with the stripes at the bottom of the cuff.

[Billy B]

In watching the Cowboys and Raiders pre season game on ESPN I noticed something weird about Orton's jersey. He wears an ideal cut that older quarterbacks tend to use. His sleeves go down almost to his elbow but the sleeve stripes are way up almost near the shoulders. Kinda odd. Any other teams with sleeve stripes have this issue with players that use a longer sleeve cut?

Edit: also noticed Romo's jersey has the same problem with the sleeves. Bothersome.

Not your imagination.

The Dallas QBs are the only ones who continue to wear real, honest to goodness sleeves. Nike :censored:ed it up by moving the stripes too high, like they do with every other player. Sleeve stripes should never be above the numbers on the front of the jersey, regardless of what position you play. Every Dallas player should be wearing the exact same sleeve length exhibited by Romo and Orton, albeit with the stripes at the bottom of the cuff.

Yeah, because linemen, RBs, WRs, etc. want to wear long sleeves...

[slats7]

In watching the Cowboys and Raiders pre season game on ESPN I noticed something weird about Orton's jersey. He wears an ideal cut that older quarterbacks tend to use. His sleeves go down almost to his elbow but the sleeve stripes are way up almost near the shoulders. Kinda odd. Any other teams with sleeve stripes have this issue with players that use a longer sleeve cut?

Edit: also noticed Romo's jersey has the same problem with the sleeves. Bothersome.

Not your imagination.

The Dallas QBs are the only ones who continue to wear real, honest to goodness sleeves. Nike :censored:ed it up by moving the stripes too high, like they do with every other player. Sleeve stripes should never be above the numbers on the front of the jersey, regardless of what position you play. Every Dallas player should be wearing the exact same sleeve length exhibited by Romo and Orton, albeit with the stripes at the bottom of the cuff.

Yeah, because linemen, RBs, WRs, etc. want to wear long sleeves...

Who cares what they want? Half of them would probably wear next to nothing if they could. The fact is that hiked up sleeves/stripes look terrible. Romo (who needs full range of motion in his arm) has proven that one can excel wearing traditional sleeves, putting a lie to the notion that they put you at a competitive disadvantage. The idea that they impede performance is a farce. This is all about form, not function.

Dez, take a cue from your QB and lower those sleeves.