NIKE NFL Uniforms

[Claystation360]

Luckily for the Rams, once they went to blue and gold, their colors didn't look at all like anyone else's...

The Rams went blue and yellow (the second time) before the Chargers switched to blue helmets. They didn't try to look like the Chargers.

Yeah, I know. I worded that poorly. What I meant was that the Rams aren't the only team to wear blue and gold. Much like the Colts weren't the only team with blue and white in their color scheme back when the Rams were wearing blue and white. I was just trying to point out that color combinations aren't limited to one team.

There are only so many colors to choose from .. Like Indigo Starlight Blue ?

[infrared41]

Luckily for the Rams, once they went to blue and gold, their colors didn't look at all like anyone else's...

The Rams went blue and yellow (the second time) before the Chargers switched to blue helmets. They didn't try to look like the Chargers.

Yeah, I know. I worded that poorly. What I meant was that the Rams aren't the only team to wear blue and gold. Much like the Colts weren't the only team with blue and white in their color scheme back when the Rams were wearing blue and white. I was just trying to point out that color combinations aren't limited to one team.

There are only so many colors to choose from ..

My point exactly. There's simply no way for everyone to wear separate colors. So yeah, some colors are going to be used by more than one team. My point being that blue and white for the Rams shouldn't be dismissed just because the Colts also wear blue and white.

[andrewharrington]

Toss out the Super Bowl and it's 22-42. And 91-94 wasn't exactly much to write home about for those banging the drum of the "history" of these unis. It takes a decade-long effort to be the losingest team of the 1990s.

But... they did win the Super Bowl in them. You're telling people, "Well, if you take out the good times, we had a whole lot of bad times." Try telling that to fans of the 13 teams (nearly half the league) that haven't won a Super Bowl, or the fans of the teams who haven't won one in decades. They won the freaking Super Bowl. Those uniforms represent the greatest team, season and the start of the greatest era in Rams history.

Except, as mentioned earlier, they shouldn't have been wearing them in the first place.

Also, the Rams were quite good in the 1970s and 1980s in blue and yellow.

Good for them. That was in another city before I was born and before the Frontiere rot had truly begun to set in.

Also, the Rams were not the losingest team of the 1990s. The Bengals have 6 more losses from 1990-1999. Not sure if there are other teams worse than that, but, whatever. The lesson is: do your research.

No, you do YOUR research. The Rams went into the 1999 season as the worst NFL teams of the 90s to that point. It's a rather integral part of the whole mythos of the 1999 team.

But in the case of [the navy blue and gold] unis there's a 4-5 year run with an awesome offense to fall back on.

They have three winning seasons in a twelve year run with the current uniforms, along with two .500 finishes. Four playoff appearances. One Super Bowl loss as a huge favorite. Man, those are the days.

Far better than the Banks run proportionately. And I would again request that we refrain from bringing up the Super Bowl loss as a reason why one uniform should be privileged over another. I don't want to have a flame war with the Boston contingent. It's kind of a dumb argument if you think about it. Suppose the Patriots had gone beyond the impossible and beaten the 1985 Bears. Would that have suddenly made Pat Patriot sacrosanct and inviolate despite the preceding years of futility. One year does not validate or vindicate years of failure.

Point 1: Irrelevant. Whether or not they should have been wearing the blue and yellow uniform does not factor into anything we are talking about. They were wearing it and that's the end of the story. They won a Super Bowl in blue and yellow. This is a fact that can not be refuted no matter the intentions of the Rams' front office with regard to the uniforms.

Point 2: Also irrelevant. Your assertion was that the Rams were futile in blue and yellow. The truth of the matter is that the Rams do, in fact, have a history beyond the years of your own life, including a few successful eras, even in blue and yellow.

Point 3: Your quote was, "It takes a decade-long effort to be the losingest team of the 1990s." I apologize I took what you said for, well, exactly what you said, which was not accurate. I'm not a mind reader.

Point 4: I'm not using a Super Bowl loss as a basis for judging one uniform to be inferior to another. My only point is that the era of the current uniforms isn't as great as you think it is. A Super Bowl loss is part of the statistics of that era.

[Claystation360]

Toss out the Super Bowl and it's 22-42. And 91-94 wasn't exactly much to write home about for those banging the drum of the "history" of these unis. It takes a decade-long effort to be the losingest team of the 1990s.

But... they did win the Super Bowl in them. You're telling people, "Well, if you take out the good times, we had a whole lot of bad times." Try telling that to fans of the 13 teams (nearly half the league) that haven't won a Super Bowl, or the fans of the teams who haven't won one in decades. They won the freaking Super Bowl. Those uniforms represent the greatest team, season and the start of the greatest era in Rams history.

Except, as mentioned earlier, they shouldn't have been wearing them in the first place.

Also, the Rams were quite good in the 1970s and 1980s in blue and yellow.

Good for them. That was in another city before I was born and before the Frontiere rot had truly begun to set in.

Also, the Rams were not the losingest team of the 1990s. The Bengals have 6 more losses from 1990-1999. Not sure if there are other teams worse than that, but, whatever. The lesson is: do your research.

No, you do YOUR research. The Rams went into the 1999 season as the worst NFL teams of the 90s to that point. It's a rather integral part of the whole mythos of the 1999 team.

But in the case of [the navy blue and gold] unis there's a 4-5 year run with an awesome offense to fall back on.

They have three winning seasons in a twelve year run with the current uniforms, along with two .500 finishes. Four playoff appearances. One Super Bowl loss as a huge favorite. Man, those are the days.

Far better than the Banks run proportionately. And I would again request that we refrain from bringing up the Super Bowl loss as a reason why one uniform should be privileged over another. I don't want to have a flame war with the Boston contingent. It's kind of a dumb argument if you think about it. Suppose the Patriots had gone beyond the impossible and beaten the 1985 Bears. Would that have suddenly made Pat Patriot sacrosanct and inviolate despite the preceding years of futility. One year does not validate or vindicate years of failure.

Point 1: Irrelevant. Whether or not they should have been wearing the blue and yellow uniform does not factor into anything we are talking about. They were wearing it and that's the end of the story. They won a Super Bowl in blue and yellow. This is a fact that can not be refuted no matter the intentions of the Rams' front office with regard to the uniforms.

Point 2: Also irrelevant. Your assertion was that the Rams were futile in blue and yellow. The truth of the matter is that the Rams do, in fact, have a history beyond the years of your own life, including a few successful eras, even in blue and yellow.

Point 3: Your quote was, "It takes a decade-long effort to be the losingest team of the 1990s." I apologize I took what you said for, well, exactly what you said, which was not accurate. I'm not a mind reader.

Point 4: I'm not using a Super Bowl loss as a basis for judging one uniform to be inferior to another. My only point is that the era of the current uniforms isn't as great as you think it is. A Super Bowl loss is part of the statistics of that era.

For all purposes I agree that was the same arguement I was making. the Rams have been worse in the Gold and Navy then the blue and yellow. While I'm St Louis

[Norva]

The old blue and yellow just scream 80's to me. I think the new color scheme is a fantastic update that brings them into the 21st century and looks really good.

[pittfan11]

Everyone should go back to their uniforms from the 70s and 80s! Absolutely everyone!

[Claystation360]

The old blue and yellow just scream 80's to me. I think the new color scheme is a fantastic update that brings them into the 21st century and looks really good.

I'm not saying their current uniform is bad plus it makes the Rams unique to St Louis just I'm sure it's a bit more dark and drab being the fact the play indoors.

[Gothamite]

Everyone should go back to their uniforms from the 70s and 80s! Absolutely everyone!

Not my favorite period, but in many cases, that would indeed be an upgrade.

[infrared41]

The old blue and yellow just scream 80's to me. I think the new color scheme is a fantastic update that brings them into the 21st century and looks really good.

I've never understood the "screams (insert decade here)" thing. It's not like teams were wearing bell bottoms or parachute pants in the 70's and 80's and it's not like they're wearing whatever is fashionable today. They're football uniforms. They either look good or they don't. For example, the Packers current uniforms aren't significantly different from what they wore in 1984. No one says "those Packers uniforms just scream 80's." (Please note that I said significantly different. I realize there have been tweaks to stripes, etc. I'm talking about the overall look.) No one says "those Yankees uniforms just scream 70's" and so on.

The expansion teams of the 90's went with the "what's in style right now" approach and the results were mostly disastrous. My point is that going for something that "screams today's style" looks good for about a month before someone starts prattling on about "updating" it. Why not just go with a style that has proven it works and leave the fashion stuff to Vogue and Glamour?

Anyway... The Rams current look isn't better than the old blue and yellow because the old look "screams 80's." (never mind the fact that the Rams actually went to that look in the mid 70's) Their current look is better because it's just a better looking uniform. The "21st century" had nothing to do with it.

[CS85]

IMHO, the argument over going "back to ___ decade's look" isn't so much a direct desire for those exact uniforms to come back, but there's the unyielding mentality that (team) should always wear these colors on the original basic template from the days before uniforms became such a scrutinized universe, as if more teams retaining those uniforms means that there's still a scrap of tradition in a design world that is changing every day; a light of hope in an otherwise dark world of apron stripes, anti-sleeve, piping, gradients, and BFBS.

The reality is that while teams like the Rams probably should go back to their 90's color scheme, I'd be a little perturbed if they didn't at least attempt to do something progressive.

[Norva]

The old blue and yellow just scream 80's to me. I think the new color scheme is a fantastic update that brings them into the 21st century and looks really good.

I've never understood the "screams (insert decade here)" thing. It's not like teams were wearing bell bottoms or parachute pants in the 70's and 80's and it's not like they're wearing whatever is fashionable today. They're football uniforms. They either look good or they don't. For example, the Packers current uniforms aren't significantly different from what they wore in 1984. No one says "those Packers uniforms just scream 80's." (Please note that I said significantly different. I realize there have been tweaks to stripes, etc. I'm talking about the overall look.) No one says "those Yankees uniforms just scream 70's" and so on.

The expansion teams of the 90's went with the "what's in style right now" approach and the results were mostly disastrous. My point is that going for something that "screams today's style" looks good for about a month before someone starts prattling on about "updating" it. Why not just go with a style that has proven it works and leave the fashion stuff to Vogue and Glamour?

Anyway... The Rams current look isn't better than the old blue and yellow because the old look "screams 80's." (never mind the fact that the Rams actually went to that look in the mid 70's) Their current look is better because it's just a better looking uniform. The "21st century" had nothing to do with it.

Yeah, I realize they adapted the color scheme before the 80's, I just meant that the old scheme looks a bit outdated to me. I feel like their current unis are a natural and strong update of a classic look.

[BBTV]

The old blue and yellow just scream 80's to me. I think the new color scheme is a fantastic update that brings them into the 21st century and looks really good.

I've never understood the "screams (insert decade here)" thing. It's not like teams were wearing bell bottoms or parachute pants in the 70's and 80's and it's not like they're wearing whatever is fashionable today. They're football uniforms. They either look good or they don't. For example, the Packers current uniforms aren't significantly different from what they wore in 1984. No one says "those Packers uniforms just scream 80's." (Please note that I said significantly different. I realize there have been tweaks to stripes, etc. I'm talking about the overall look.) No one says "those Yankees uniforms just scream 70's" and so on.

The expansion teams of the 90's went with the "what's in style right now" approach and the results were mostly disastrous. My point is that going for something that "screams today's style" looks good for about a month before someone starts prattling on about "updating" it. Why not just go with a style that has proven it works and leave the fashion stuff to Vogue and Glamour?

Anyway... The Rams current look isn't better than the old blue and yellow because the old look "screams 80's." (never mind the fact that the Rams actually went to that look in the mid 70's) Their current look is better because it's just a better looking uniform. The "21st century" had nothing to do with it.

Well by definition, a "timeless" or "classic" uniform wouldn't "scream" any period. It'd just be good.

I do think that certain uniforms "scream" certain decades. For example, the original Vancouver Grizzlies uniforms "scream" '90s to me, as they basically hit on every '90s fad all at once - teal (it wasn't until the '90s that teams really started to embrace non-traditional colors, some notable exceptions aside), horrible font (again, it seems like it wasn't until the '90s that designers realized that they weren't bound by the stock block fonts that suppliers had laying around, so in the early stages, they went too far trying to be unique), horrible trim, etc.

I certainly wouldn't say that the Rams' uniform screamed '80s, but if the people who say that really just mean to say that they're dated, then I get that. To me it has to do with the font style, the fact that it was heat pressed up until the end, the fact that (at least IMO) the pressed numbers in that particular stock font just looked cheap and rec league, and a sleeve design that's nearly non-translatable onto a modern template. If you took the current uniform and simply recolored it to the old colors, I don't think you'd hear anyone complaining.

[Zachary15]

Josh Looney, who works for the Chiefs, more specifically KCChiefs.com, just tweeted this.

"One of the few things Nike will let me show u before they take over NFL apparel. Pretty cool."

So it looks like a pretty basic jacket. And the shirt looks like it says "Chiefs Just Do It"

[Gothamite]

Wonder if that jacket is black because that's a team color, or because they'll be selling black jackets for all clubs the way Reebok did gray in recent seasons?

[andrewharrington]

Wonder if that jacket is black because that's a team color, or because they'll be selling black jackets for all clubs the way Reebok did gray in recent seasons?

It wouldn't surpriise me if that was the case, but black is generally the Chiefs' alternate garment color anyway. I don't think anyone's going to be overly impressed by any of this early Nike stuff. I think they'll lull everyone to sleep and then blast them with something crazy in a season or two. What's with the monster keyline on the logo, though?

[Zachary15]

It wouldn't surpriise me if that was the case, but black is generally the Chiefs' alternate garment color anyway. I don't think anyone's going to be overly impressed by any of this early Nike stuff. I think they'll lull everyone to sleep and then blast them with something crazy in a season or two. What's with the monster keyline on the logo, though?

Yeah, I'm not really sure what that's all about. I'm not really into the jacket, but I think the shirt is cool. I always loved Nike's "JUST DO IT" tagline, so that shirt might be my first Nike NFL purchase.

[nicktharipper]

also noticing a complete lack of yellow on the jacket. Looks good though, hopefully other teams to follow...

[Claystation360]

The Chiefs have been trying to nuke Any yellow/gold from most apparel for years.

[Bouj]

Josh Looney, who works for the Chiefs, more specifically KCChiefs.com, just tweeted this.

"One of the few things Nike will let me show u before they take over NFL apparel. Pretty cool."

So it looks like a pretty basic jacket. And the shirt looks like it says "Chiefs Just Do It"

That's one of Nike's basic jacket templates. It's the Nike Detroyer, I think. If I had to guess, they'll probably have the N98 jacket template available for everyone too. It's the track jacket template that Nike sells for almost all of the teams they outfit (USA Soccer, Inter Milan, etc, and their NCAA Elite teams).

[Chazberg]

Josh Looney, who works for the Chiefs, more specifically KCChiefs.com, just tweeted this.

"One of the few things Nike will let me show u before they take over NFL apparel. Pretty cool."

So it looks like a pretty basic jacket. And the shirt looks like it says "Chiefs Just Do It"

That's one of Nike's basic jacket templates. It's the Nike Detroyer, I think. If I had to guess, they'll probably have the N98 jacket template available for everyone too. It's the track jacket template that Nike sells for almost all of the teams they outfit (USA Soccer, Inter Milan, etc, and their NCAA Elite teams).

It's hilarious how the Nike swoosh is above the NFL shield. Their gall really knows no bounds