New NFL collars are winning on the field

[oldschoolvikings]

Why would Nike want to condense the collars?

Right... those collars are doing exactly what Nike wants them to do. No, not some ridiculous "performance" nonsense, but get people talking... talking about NIKE. It's obvious for anyone who has ever tuned into an Oregon game, or seen the nightmare that's been visited on the Seahawks, that the aesthetics of football uniforms are pretty low on Nike's priority list. But every time some announcer mentions how odd the collars look, everytime a sports blog brings them up, Nike's name comes up too. Those ugly things are as good as a giant swoosh around the neck of every player. The old saying is, there's no such thing as bad pub. Again, look at Oregon... ugly gets you noticed.

[CS85]

and 2010 . . .

...and in 2013?!

[BrandMooreArt]

^LMAO

FATTER IS FASTER - nike

[-kj]

...probably not with the 10th anniversary logo on them, though.

[STL FANATIC]

I continued to be bothered by teams like the Packers refusing to use the technology tho. They could have absolutely kept their exact same uniform design and been outfitted in better technology

Objection, Your Honor. Assuming facts not in evidence.

And what reason do we have to believe that wasn't the case? Same with the Eagles.

[STL FANATIC]

I'm not a big fan of the flywire collar because they're so thick and especially the way it cuts off. But it also doesn't bother me that much. It's just whatever.

I continued to be bothered by teams like the Packers refusing to use the technology tho. They could have absolutely kept their exact same uniform design and been outfitted in better technology, and they pretended they were somehow too sacred to move from Reebok's 2nd best technology to Nike's best.

It's just silly, and a bit stuffy.

I'm gonna assume you're being sarcastic.

Only somewhat. I said Reebok's second best technology because Reebok had a new better technology that they tested but never fully implemented before losing the contract. So what most teams were wearing last year WAS Reebok's second best technology.

I understand marketing plays a role and I understand that the actual difference is minimal. But are you guys really pretending there is no benefit to the new technology? That's what these guys do. However minimal the impact, the technology IS better.

[CS85]

...probably not with the 10th anniversary logo on them, though.

Some attempts at snark are best abandoned.

[Gothamite]

I continued to be bothered by teams like the Packers refusing to use the technology tho. They could have absolutely kept their exact same uniform design and been outfitted in better technology

Objection, Your Honor. Assuming facts not in evidence.

And what reason do we have to believe that wasn't the case? Same with the Eagles.

That's not the way logic works.

It is incumbent on those making an assertion to prove its veracity.

[IceCap]

I continued to be bothered by teams like the Packers refusing to use the technology tho. They could have absolutely kept their exact same uniform design and been outfitted in better technology, and they pretended they were somehow too sacred to move from Reebok's 2nd best technology to Nike's best.

It's just silly, and a bit stuffy.

Oh come on now. Don't be such a Nike fanboy that a team choosing not to adopt Nike's bells and whistles bothers you.

Or were you just REALLY pissed when Sweden won gold in 2006?

[BBTV]

I continued to be bothered by teams like the Packers refusing to use the technology tho. They could have absolutely kept their exact same uniform design and been outfitted in better technology

Objection, Your Honor. Assuming facts not in evidence.

And what reason do we have to believe that wasn't the case? Same with the Eagles.

This doesn't make sense. So basically anyone can say anything because unless there was a camera in the boardroom it can't be disproved? I think you have to go by what was said unless you have good reason to believe otherwise.

What was said was simply that they preferred their old materials. Basically an "if it ain't broke don't fix it" kinda thing. Why go to the unknown and take a risk when you're happy with what you have, and the return on that risk is minimal?

[ARTnSocal]

Why would Nike want to condense the collars?

...

Not condense, just revert the ones back with the ridiculous toilet seat design. The fans nationwide are complaining about them big-time. Not the Flywire, the stupid toilet seat collars!! I would be shocked if elite jersey sales aren't down this season due to Nike ruining so many team collar designs. It's all about the $$ money with the NFL, we all know that..

NFL apparel has always sold a good portion of authentic elite jerseys. The elite jerseys do not have that thick colored and pointed toilet seat collar, but the fans overhwhelmingly hate those toilet seat collars and when they spend their money on an elite they want it to look identical to the ones worn by the players in real-time action.

As a 40 year fan of the Buffalo Bills I was so glad we reverted back to our traditional royal blue last season, but Nike ruined our tri-colored collar on both the royal and white jerseys that Reebok designed last season for the change. I'm so glad I bought my authentics last season, because the tri-colored collars were so much better than Nike's garbage, which I assume was only done to differenciate them from Reebok.

[TheOldRoman]

I continued to be bothered by teams like the Packers refusing to use the technology tho. They could have absolutely kept their exact same uniform design and been outfitted in better technology

Objection, Your Honor. Assuming facts not in evidence.

And what reason do we have to believe that wasn't the case? Same with the Eagles.

The biggest thing is, they absolutely could NOT have kept the same uniform design. Their "official" shade of green is the same as the Jets use. Look at the Jets' uniforms. They are attrocious. Instead of having their actual color, the body is in two different shades of olive green. The flat mesh and the chainmail parts are distinctively different colors, and that is before the chainmail changes colors with sweat. Nike clearly can't even come close to the Packers' green, so there was no reason to use the snake oil Nike templates and make themselves look worse.

[mmejia]

They simply have abominably monstrous collars.

Maybe on tight iso shots, but in general, the thick collars don't make much of an impact on the overall look. I have yet to watch a Texans game and feel that their collars are distracting or out of place. I tend to think that the Texans made a very nice transition from the Reebok uniforms to the Nike set:

[capitalcanuck]

I personally dont mind the speed machine flywire but what i dont like for the most part is what i call "cut-collars" which the majority of teams have where the contrasting color on the color goes all the way but to the front like the saints and redskins but the one team i like it in is the bills it makes the jersey just pop

[Moseph]

^{I don't mind the Texans look, I just hate the blocked collars.}

[guest23]

I'm not a big fan of the flywire collar because they're so thick and especially the way it cuts off. But it also doesn't bother me that much. It's just whatever.

I continued to be bothered by teams like the Packers refusing to use the technology tho. They could have absolutely kept their exact same uniform design and been outfitted in better technology, and they pretended they were somehow too sacred to move from Reebok's 2nd best technology to Nike's best.

It's just silly, and a bit stuffy.

I'm gonna assume you're being sarcastic.

Only somewhat. I said Reebok's second best technology because Reebok had a new better technology that they tested but never fully implemented before losing the contract. So what most teams were wearing last year WAS Reebok's second best technology.

I understand marketing plays a role and I understand that the actual difference is minimal. But are you guys really pretending there is no benefit to the new technology? That's what these guys do. However minimal the impact, the technology IS better.

some packers actually tested out the techfit several years ago but they reverted back to the traditional (ripon I believe) jerseys

[jeh-see]

Am I the only one who really likes the collar look?

Yes. You probably liked these too:

[Gothamite]

I'm not a big fan of the flywire collar because they're so thick and especially the way it cuts off. But it also doesn't bother me that much. It's just whatever.

I continued to be bothered by teams like the Packers refusing to use the technology tho. They could have absolutely kept their exact same uniform design and been outfitted in better technology, and they pretended they were somehow too sacred to move from Reebok's 2nd best technology to Nike's best.

It's just silly, and a bit stuffy.

I'm gonna assume you're being sarcastic.

Only somewhat. I said Reebok's second best technology because Reebok had a new better technology that they tested but never fully implemented before losing the contract. So what most teams were wearing last year WAS Reebok's second best technology.

I understand marketing plays a role and I understand that the actual difference is minimal. But are you guys really pretending there is no benefit to the new technology? That's what these guys do. However minimal the impact, the technology IS better.

some packers actually tested out the techfit several years ago but they reverted back to the traditional (ripon I believe) jerseys

Sounded like Reebok's "best technology" wasn't. But that is, after all, the whole point of a testing process.