Seattle Seahawks New Logo?

[speedy 185]

Semi-gloss is a doable compromise. That helmet is the furthest thing from matte. Look at that sheen, baby.

[hawk36 3,353]

official answer from the company who made it:

Is it just me or shouldn't the hawk head come forward (to the right in this pic) 1-2 inches? Seems like it's off center, anchored to the back of the helmet.

[WSU151 9,524]

That's far too shiny to be a matte finish.

This is the previous helmet and you can tell the difference between this shiny one and their new matte one:

Just because it's not metallic doesn't mean it's matte.

Go to the official Seahawks page located here and read that it says the helmet is matte.

I guess we're just completely ignoring the gloss part of the combo, huh?

"The new helmet features a first-of-its-kind combo of matte and gloss finishes."

[nuordr 1,039]

That's far too shiny to be a matte finish.

This is the previous helmet and you can tell the difference between this shiny one and their new matte one:

Just because it's not metallic doesn't mean it's matte.

Go to the official Seahawks page located here and read that it says the helmet is matte.

I guess we're just completely ignoring the gloss part of the combo, huh?

"The new helmet features a first-of-its-kind combo of matte and gloss finishes."

I could have pointed that out more clearly I suppose. However, I do not like anything resembling a matte finish and that is what stood out to me. But I guess we will have to see what it looks like on the field for final judgements.

[WSU151 9,524]

That's far too shiny to be a matte finish.

This is the previous helmet and you can tell the difference between this shiny one and their new matte one:

Just because it's not metallic doesn't mean it's matte.

Go to the official Seahawks page located here and read that it says the helmet is matte.

I guess we're just completely ignoring the gloss part of the combo, huh?

"The new helmet features a first-of-its-kind combo of matte and gloss finishes."

I could have pointed that out more clearly I suppose. However, I do not like anything resembling a matte finish and that is what stood out to me. But I guess we will have to see what it looks like on the field for final judgements.

It might look great outdoors. Kind of wish they went with a metallic or pearl finish.

[The Fixer 6]

so many crappy photoshops...cmon nike

[dmhtfld 192]

so many crappy photoshops...cmon nike

This ones my favorite. They completely left out the shoulder stripes.

[crashcarson15 2,466]

Oh, hell yes. I love this.

[andrewharrington 4,695]

That's far too shiny to be a matte finish.

This is the previous helmet and you can tell the difference between this shiny one and their new matte one:

Just because it's not metallic doesn't mean it's matte.

This. Matte doesn't reflect light. I'm not sure if you design guys go by the same lingo as painters but if you do I'd venture a guess at that being more eggshell than anything.

Yes. Eggshell or satin.

Pretty much exactly what I expected from Nike. Overdesigned, cluttered. Too many ideas and graphic parts combining to create a non-cohesive whole, but in a very strange way. They certainly tried to be cohesive by beating us over the head with that Haida pattern, but it's not a particularly well executed pattern to begin with (looks too much like carbon fiber or checkerboard at small scale) and the scale relationships do not work particularly well, either. The lime green 'swoosh-holder' on the sleeve is really classy, as if you didn't already know who was responsible for this atrocious collection of design elements.

[Gothamite 23,686]

official answer from the company who made it:

Is it just me or shouldn't the hawk head come forward (to the right in this pic) 1-2 inches? Seems like it's off center, anchored to the back of the helmet.

That's always a problem they've had.

From the front, you can't see the logos.

That's why they put this checkerboard pattern down the front. I would rather they just have moved the hawkhead logos forward a bit, so they start to wrap around the front.

[Mr. Aware Eagle 0]

I... don't hate them? I feel odd about this, because I tend to not like such modern designs. There are a couple of problems that have already been discussed, but overall this could have gone a lot worse. And I actually like the odd wordmark position, as well the pattern on the helmets, numbers and pant stripe.

[CS85 10,488]

The more I look at the helmet the more I can't stand the patterned stripe. It takes away from the awesomeness of the helmet logo itself. Strip that crap off of there.

[Sapphire 0]

I feel sorry for Seattle fans. The helmet looks good (minus the weird striped), but the rest is a mess.

[habsfan1 3,785]

RIP

2002-2012

[IceCap 21,978]

RIP

2002-2012

[Lights Out 4,777]

Good riddance to bad garbage

2002-2012 (already dated by 2003)

Fixed your post.

[See Red 2,002]

Not really sure how anybody can argue that this is a downgrade, honestly. I like 'em... they're old set was nice for... a year, maybe. My only issue is the logo's touching at the back of the helmet -- just doesn't look right, in my opinion.

But that design is supposed to be feathers? Doesn't look like feathers at all.

[IceCap 21,978]

The 2002-2012 Seahawks look would been awesome had they resisted the urge to go monochrom slate blue. Other then that it was a very well done contemporary look that utilized a clean, quasi-traditional yet still unique to the NFL jersey design.

Shame it had be replaced by Hasbro 90s Chic, but se la ve.

[sonny 126]

I honestly can't tell the difference between the new Seahawks and the Texans.