NIKE NFL Uniforms

[shaydre1019]

...so if a vendor like nike or reebok can put a convincing business case together that an annual one-off uniform would provide incremental merchandise revenue with little or no risk to brand dilution...

This is pretty much a complete paradox of impossibility, which is why I don't think you'll ever see one-offs in the NFL. Some teams might end up wearing crazy Nike designs like Denver did, but don't expect one-offs.

I don't expect to see one offs but I don't think they could dilute a brand any more then the ny titans/ jets would. O guess I'm saying they could take the place of throwbacks and not have a very significant effect on a teams identity.

[Chawls]

I saw this hat and I really hope New Era will make them for NFL teams. I'd snap up a Patriots one in a heartbeat!

The Eagles, Vikings and Rams would be really cool, but how would they do the Jaguars helmet?

[LourdOfTheFly]

I saw this hat and I really hope New Era will make them for NFL teams. I'd snap up a Patriots one in a heartbeat!

The Eagles, Vikings and Rams would be really cool, but how would they do the Jaguars helmet?

Sequins.

[Chawls]

I saw this hat and I really hope New Era will make them for NFL teams. I'd snap up a Patriots one in a heartbeat!

The Eagles, Vikings and Rams would be really cool, but how would they do the Jaguars helmet?

Um, black.

You make it sound so simple. This isn't necessarily black:

[CrazyAnna]

I saw this hat and I really hope New Era will make them for NFL teams. I'd snap up a Patriots one in a heartbeat!

The Eagles, Vikings and Rams would be really cool, but how would they do the Jaguars helmet?

Um, black.

You make it sound so simple. This isn't necessarily black:

I would think it wouldn't be to difficult though. New Era could just dye the material a dark teal. What color are their other clothing options that seem to be black (i.e. hats, shirts, jackets, and etc)? I would assume this hat would be that same color.

[deliver2david]

Just make the Jags helmet gold on those winter hats.

[TSHARE18]

You only notice the teal flakes in the helmet in bright sunlight. They are pretty much black. During games the only time you can see the colorshift is in close up shots. The helmets look black during the TV view during each play.

[Lights Out]

You know, with all the handwringing about the league not wanting to allow the teams to dilute their brand... why not just let each team make their own decisions on their brand? If a team wants one-offs, multiple helmets, Oregon-esque combos, let them do it! And the teams that don't want to do it simply don't have to.

[guest23]

You know, with all the handwringing about the league not wanting to allow the teams to dilute their brand... why not just let each team make their own decisions on their brand? If a team wants one-offs, multiple helmets, Oregon-esque combos, let them do it! And the teams that don't want to do it simply don't have to.

It used to be that way until nfl properties came into existence...hell the bears used george halas' sporting goods company as one of their original uniform suppliers...could you see the league letting jerry jones go off and do his own branding and signing his own deals this day and age?..he tried it with nike and pepsi and the league was none too happy about that.

[BBTV]

You know, with all the handwringing about the league not wanting to allow the teams to dilute their brand... why not just let each team make their own decisions on their brand? If a team wants one-offs, multiple helmets, Oregon-esque combos, let them do it! And the teams that don't want to do it simply don't have to.

Shared revenue. One club's bonehead decision affects all the other clubs. Under the current revenue model it makes perfect sense to tightly regulate these things.

[guest23]

...so if a vendor like nike or reebok can put a convincing business case together that an annual one-off uniform would provide incremental merchandise revenue with little or no risk to brand dilution...

This is pretty much a complete paradox of impossibility, which is why I don't think you'll ever see one-offs in the NFL. Some teams might end up wearing crazy Nike designs like Denver did, but don't expect one-offs.

why not?..I bet you thought the nfl would never allow same color pants/socks, pants w/o stripes, alternate jerseys or monochrome combos.

you're correct in the nfl fan base being older and more conservative but guess what that demographic is aging quickly and spending less and less every year...like many billion dollar enterprises they need to bring in the younger demographic for sustained revenue growth...traditionally the 18-34 male demographic has been the prime target...today that equals gen X&Y the boomers have long fallen out and as more of them go into retirement the nfl must embrace new demographics that are outside of the traditional target...if you don't you become major league baseball.

with all of that being said the nfl is big business and the businesses that survive over the long term evolve and part of evolution is being open to new revenue opportunities.

[oldschoolvikings]

with all of that being said the nfl is big business and the businesses that survive over the long term evolve and part of evolution is being open to new revenue opportunities.

Boy, people sure do like to misuse that term when discussing uniforms. As stated on these boards many times, not all change is evolution. Sometimes its just a temporary fad. I'd be interested to know exactly how many substantial revenue opportunities Ohio State, Alabama, or Texas really got from their short term participation in the "pro-combat" program.

[Lights Out]

He doesn't mean evolution as in the specific designs... he means evolving the NFL's business model to attract younger fans.

[IceCap]

with all of that being said the nfl is big business and the businesses that survive over the long term evolve and part of evolution is being open to new revenue opportunities.

[oldschoolvikings]

He doesn't mean evolution as in the specific designs... he means evolving the NFL's business model to attract younger fans.

I knew what he meant. Thanks. That's why I asked what effect, if any, the "pro combat" program had on the business model of the big time college teams that participated.

[IceCap]

He doesn't mean evolution as in the specific designs... he means evolving the NFL's business model to attract younger fans.

It still doesn't work. Jumping on a new trend that in all likelihood will be on the way out in five years isn't an evolutionary sound business model.

Besides, I have news for you. The young crowd? They don't watch NFL football for the one-off specialty uniforms. Hell, very few people have the appreciation for sports aesthetics that we do. You're average 18-25 year old doesn't need to be coxed into watching the NFL on Sunday with one-off "sick" new uniforms. He's going to watch anyway.

Is the new school crowd really suggesting that the NFL....the NF fricken' L....is having a hard time connecting with the younger demographic and they need to let Nike go all out with uniform design to keep from becoming irrelevant? If that's what you guys are saying....then wow. That's. Just. Wrong.

[IceCap]

As for Nike in general, I'm going to use a pro wrestling allegory.

Vice Russo was touted a brilliant writer who engineered the WWF's rebirth in the mid/late 90s with the "Attitude Era." He disagreed with Vince McMahon over how much money he should have been making and left for the WWF's competition, WCW. In WCW he presented some of the dumbest, over-thought programming not only in the history of pro wrestling but television in general. Ask a wrestling fan who remembers the Monday Night Wars from the 1990s the question "who killed WCW?" and Vince Russo is a popular answer.

So what happened? Well in the WWF he was the head writer, but every idea he had needed to be approved by Vince McMahon. McMahon served as a filter. Russo was a very creative person, but he needed someone like McMahon to tell him what ideas worked and what ideas didn't work. When Russo went to WCW he didn't have that filter. WCW wasn't owned by one guy, it was owned by a mulch-facited corporate conglomerate, which was in turn run by people who had no interest in running a wrestling show at the hands-on level. So they left Russo to his own devices. He didn't have anyone to filter the good stuff from the crap. The crap was still creative, but it was still crap. As a result the shows were awful.

Nike is like Vince Russo. The NCAA and its schools are a bit like WCW. They don't have the desire or authority to reign Nike in. No one filters Nike's ideas at this level. They go to a school, let their designers go crazy with creativity, and just present the results and say "this is how it is." Again, no filter. The NFL is a bit like the WWF. They have the desire to regulate these things. Hence Nike's creativity is going to be filtered. Which is a good thing. Creative doesn't necessarily mean good, and with unfiltered creativity you often do end up with crap. Crap that's certainly creative, but crap none the less.

[Kevin W.]

And that has a lot to do with money. How much money do football teams make that goes toward funding non-revenue sports at their schools? They don't have nearly as much money to work with as NFL teams, who spend all of their money on themselves. When you have the manufacturers like Nike and Adidas writing checks to help fund coaches' salaries, they get certain pull. That won't fly in the NFL because they don't need the cash infusion.

Nike/Adidas/Under Armour can say "Use these uniforms or we'll take your money and go elsewhere" but they'll get laughed out of the building if they try that with an NFL team.

[Audiodrama]

News for you all: I've seen changes for two NFL teams so far. I won't specify which two, but suffice it to say that one NFC club has been heavily influenced by Nike Pro Combat.

[Cujo]

News for you all: I've seen changes for two NFL teams so far. I won't specify which two, but suffice it to say that one NFC club has been heavily influenced by Nike Pro Combat.

What's your take on the Nike's "heavily influenced" makeover: Upgrade or not-so-much?