Jump to content

.


gordie_delini

Recommended Posts

I agree unilaterally with oldschoolvikings and BrandMooreArt and TheOldRoman. And if that seems impossible it isn’t. You guys (we) are all right in a sense. Yes, T he changes weren’t born of malice but rather they were incremental over time and due more to ambivalence or carelessness. And YES there is a tremendous undercurrent of backward thinking going on. And yes, the teams share in that responsibility. The teams approve or reject what is put in front of them. The league has its own rules and guidelines. And the manufacturers who are supposedly subordinate to the other two, have their ideas and motivations.

My points (as clumsily as I may have made them) are twofold. 1) When discussing this let’s try and not get hung up on issues of preference or taste as far as Nike goes. Those are better left for other threads about specific teams. I may personally hate the leotard look or any individual teams look, but that is not what frustrates me about Nike. 2) No uniform manufacturer has yet (IMO)embraced the paradigm shift in what a football uniform is becoming.

I jokingly referred to NFL jerseys as tank tops and that isn’t very accurate. It’s closer to a “baby doll” cut in sleeve length (though far stretchier) and I think quickly approaching something like a tactical vest in construction and materials.

Think about it. At one time in the not too distant past, football uniforms didn’t even have helmets. And then once they did have helmets they were of course leather and not adorned with decals, facemasks, numbers or colors. Now the football helmet is drastically different and accordingly is the quintessential starting point for a team’s brand. The process changed with the equipment in a completely logical and utilitarian way. “Hey! Here’s some new prominent, top-down acreage to adorn…and it’s SHINY!!”

Football jerseys were once just heavy long-sleeved rugby style shirts whose only functions were to keep the players from being nude and to tell one team from another.

Over time they became elbow length (then short-sleeved) nylon mesh garments and of course they took on more functions as well like numerals for identifying players for penalties, position eligibility, fan recognition and record keeping purposes. The jerseys also served the useful purpose of concealing (holding in place) the sharp edges, moving parts, buckles and rivets of contemporary shoulder pads.

So football in general and equipment manufacturing specifically adjusted wonderfully to the new branding real estate of the helmet. They have not (perhaps unsurprisingly) reacted similarly to the taking AWAY of uniform real estate formerly known as the sleeve.

I would also attempt to dovetail in a point #3)…or maybe 2b) which is that uniforms should be uniform above all else. Old school or new school…I care not, so long as they match your teammates. I will make allowances for different facemasks by position, visor/no visor…undershirt/bare arms. If that makes me a hypocrite then so be it. The accessorizing that a modern athlete does to their own look is a different issue that is pervasive in all sports.

I have no problems if a team makes the decision to truncate their sleeve stripe to a glorified chevron or flag element if that is what makes sense in the sleeveless 21st century. Off the top of my head I think GB and KC look really good that way for the most part. But if it is a “flag” element like a military uniform might have or perhaps a unique striping pattern like a Scottish clan might have worn. Then I DO have a problem with it not be treated with enough respect to make sure it shows equally on all the players. The Packers were very forward thinking in reducing their five stripe sleeve pattern to a three stripe one over a decade ago. The opposite of that is perhaps the Steelers who can’t seem to come to terms with tweaking their enormous 9 striper to fit the times, or even worse the Lions who rebranded recently and still came out with a gigantic sleeve stripe element that has never looked good. And what kills me is they intentionally made their helmet striping narrower..to dimensions that would fit perfectly on a modern sleeve. Ugh, now I’m breaking my own rules and getting team specific here.

Short versions: I don’t get pissed when stripes are truncated into elongated sleeve flags. It makes “sense” to me. But then IMO uniform designers should tell teams…”This is the new default status quo. This is the most stripe area we can give you while guaranteeing that it’ll still look good. If your design requires anything above and beyond this, we need to remove something else to make accommodate you…namely remove the TV numbers.” TV numbers are an artifact with limited utility. They are born of standard definition days, without a dozen cameras on the field; without wire cameras that put us in the huddle or handhelds on the field of play and sidelines. TV numbers were necessary for spotters, Public Address folks at stadiums and telecasters when it was literally a guy with a pair of binoculars doing the work. That may still be the case somewhere (HS?) but in the NFL everyone has access to laminated roster cheat sheets and a producer in your ear on a headset to relay who just carried the ball or made the tackle. We don’t’ need TV numbers anymore. And the idea that they are even useful anymore when reduced to 3” tall and crammed into an area below the seam and above the cuff? Preposterous. On the shoulders? At 4 or even 5” I still think the look nice. But only if given the space to breathe on a fairly minimalist design. (Think Chiefs, Packers or best of all…GIANTS and RAIDERS homes)

I’m unclear what the current NFL rules are regarding TV numbers. We’ve definitely seen throwbacks without them and the world didn’t end. Moving past them, by either league relaxation of rules or push from Nike, would really free things up in a meaningful way if you ask me. If you’re a traditional team who wants them and doesn’t mind a minimal “flag” striping element or nothing? Great. If you’re the Bengals or Seahawks and you wanna go nuts with tiger stripes or feather motif? Fine. Have at it.

The counterweight to that I think is that (for functional purposes) it’s more vital then that the chest and back numerals are legible and there needs to be a designer push back to ensure that as well. I have some ideas on that but I don’t want to stray too far here.

Last add: RE the flywire. I don’t get it. I do get what it is supposed to DO. But why is that important? Was the jersey getting pulled underneath that flippy top layer of the shoulder pads THAT big of a deal? The scenario where your teammate has to put you back together again after a rough tackle? Is that what we don’t’ want? Or is it that we don’t want to give the opponent easy tackling loose fabric in and around the collar area? Because to me that has been nearly legislated out of existence by the so-called horse collar tackle and the exuberance with which the refs call the horse collar tackle that has basically made it darned near illegal to tackle by the inner rim of the shoulder pads AT ALL….whether from the rear, side or front. I just don’t think this is an issue. Not a performance one that is worth making ¾ of the teams in the league look ridiculous. Besides, there are dozens of ways we could (or maybe will in the future) address the jersey as garment/jersey as equipment discussion. We need a covering for the pads. It doesn’t HAVE to be a shirt in the traditional sense. Any of you got kids? Ever take apart a car seat? That’s a “material” covering to a piece of padding and plastic as well. And it’s skin tight when attached with various loops, hooks and clips. No, I’m not suggesting NFL jerseys use hook and loop fasteners. Don’t’ like my car seat idea? How about…ski wear? Or life jackets if you prefer? I mentioned a tactical vest earlier and I wasn’t kidding. The advances in materials technology and printing technology are just astonishing to me. Why not envision the 21st century football jersey as essentially a “skin” on the only really necessary bit…the shoulder pads. Then you aren’t worrying about the stripes/numerals/logos being cropped or tucked underneath the padding…because they will BE the padding. They’ll be part of it. Printed, glued or otherwise adhered such that they don’t move out of place because they can’t.

In the modern sports era, we’ve never seen marketing possibilities shrink quite like the modern football jersey. We’ve seen NBA shorts get longer, MLB getting longer or baggier. Athletes of all sports now wearing helmets or bigger equipment. The one time someone really tried to take away design real estate? The hemline area oforiginal RBK Edge? Players and fans revolted (err…whined) en masse. I want this to be different. Kiss the sleeves goodbye!! They probably never should have been there in the first place. Footballs roots are rugby-like in nature. The modern NFL athlete has much more in common with a basketball player in terms of the way their body moves while playing. If you were inventing football today, starting from scratch, you wouldn’t make sleeves either. So let’s get on with it shall we?

the ultimate future is ultralight one piece bodysuits,,,book it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 360
  • Created
  • Last Reply

the ultimate future is ultralight one piece bodysuits,,,book it.

I recall they talked about this idea even back in the 90s. This would look really, really bad on kickers and nose tackles.

I also wonder how much more difficult it would be to put that on with the pads, etc.

I wonder if the uniform makers are doing prototypes for this now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You made exactly the point I've been making with your reference to the Panthers - it's the team's decision to look how they look. Could Nike/Reebok/whoever present a uniform that looked different and had full UCLA/Northwestern/whatever striping? Absolutely. They can and have and do currently do that. It's on the team to have standards which present such a look. The Jets owners, for whatever reason - perhaps a revamp of jerseys in the near future...who knows - chose not to do so. The Colts chose not to do so. Most of the teams chose to just take the template and run with it. Nike isn't forcing anyone to do anything.

At this point, we're just going to disagree. I can't pin fault on Nike for delivering a product that the recipient signs off on especially when Nike/Reebok/whoever has demonstrated that they will deliver a subjectively "better" product.

First off, I would argue that Nike's templates and materials aren't subjectively better. And if the materials were better, then they could be used to make a jersey in a traditional template. That isn't done because the speedmachine template is very unique to Nike and very distinctive. As for the Panthers, I misunderstood what you were saying. There is fabric (though not that much) hanging underneath the arms on Newton and Smith's jerseys. However, as I said, I don't think teams should force players to wear jerseys of that style. The Panthers' linemen wear stripes like that of the Chargers in the pic I showed. Their stripes wrap around the shoulders and truncate natrually at the bottom of the cuff. Maybe the Panthers have inconsistency now, but they could easily do away with that by making the stripes truncate at the cuff on all jerseys. That is what I think the Jets and Colts should do.

Again, I do agree that the teams (Colts, Jets, UCLA) are largely to blame for letting the manufacturers take their look to hell. However, I do think the manufacturers took it too far, likely because they didn't want to deviate from their templates and spend a few extra cents per jersey on stitching. I'm sorry, but if you are a manufacturer and you hand a team a jersey that looks like this, the team stupidly accepting it doesn't absolve you from blame.

9334773-large.jpg2011_1009_KC141_bowen--nfl_large_580_1000.JPG?width=620&height=465

OldRomanSig2.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. i disagree for reasons stated. truncated stripes are a fine solution.

good for Reebok on those Chargers jerseys. if the same treatment were to be applied to the Colts/Jets, you're probably looking at a tapered stripe on both ends. like how Dwight Freeney tailored his Reebok jerseys (dosnt do it with the Nike ones now). is that better? i think not, but maybe some would like it. but you're proposing they wrap all the way around yet, you see the problem with the Panthers currently. its not the same with those Charger ones, they're not going all the way around the arm. when you try, like the Panthers do, you get the inconsistency from player to player. this is exactly what Sterling wrote about above and that is flawed design. solutions have to change with the problems.

also, the Colts wernt 100% fully looped even back in the Unitas days. sometimes . . .

You admitted that it could be done. Then it should be done. There was no reason to skimp, cheap out, or what have you just for the sake of it. Reebok and Nike noticably altered the look of the jerseys and it was up to the teams to stop it. Unfortunately, they didn't.

The Panthers' current stripes are just like those on the Chargers players I showed earlier. Their stripes don't stop at a chest seam, they go down to the cuff. THAT is the look I want for the Colts and Jets. That is a natural end for the stripesFor players who wear longer sleeves, their stripes can truncate at the bottom of the sleeve, as on the Colts picture you posted. Or they could stop halfway down the sleeve seam, to be at the same level the stripes stop on the cap-sleeve jerseys. Whatever. Either way, you wouldn't see the underpart of the stripe unless the player had his arms up. That isn't creating new problems with consistency.

OldRomanSig2.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the ultimate future is ultralight one piece bodysuits,,,book it.

I recall they talked about this idea even back in the 90s. This would look really, really bad on kickers and nose tackles.

I also wonder how much more difficult it would be to put that on with the pads, etc.

I wonder if the uniform makers are doing prototypes for this now.

the solution is quite simple... a back zipper...wetsuit design will be the basis for the uniform of the future...I wouldn't be surprised if oregon trots something out within the next 5 years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. i disagree for reasons stated. truncated stripes are a fine solution.

good for Reebok on those Chargers jerseys. if the same treatment were to be applied to the Colts/Jets, you're probably looking at a tapered stripe on both ends. like how Dwight Freeney tailored his Reebok jerseys (dosnt do it with the Nike ones now). is that better? i think not, but maybe some would like it. but you're proposing they wrap all the way around yet, you see the problem with the Panthers currently. its not the same with those Charger ones, they're not going all the way around the arm. when you try, like the Panthers do, you get the inconsistency from player to player. this is exactly what Sterling wrote about above and that is flawed design. solutions have to change with the problems.

also, the Colts wernt 100% fully looped even back in the Unitas days. sometimes . . .

You admitted that it could be done. Then it should be done. There was no reason to skimp, cheap out, or what have you just for the sake of it. Reebok and Nike noticably altered the look of the jerseys and it was up to the teams to stop it. Unfortunately, they didn't.

The Panthers' current stripes are just like those on the Chargers players I showed earlier. Their stripes don't stop at a chest seam, they go down to the cuff. THAT is the look I want for the Colts and Jets. That is a natural end for the stripesFor players who wear longer sleeves, their stripes can truncate at the bottom of the sleeve, as on the Colts picture you posted. Or they could stop halfway down the sleeve seam, to be at the same level the stripes stop on the cap-sleeve jerseys. Whatever. Either way, you wouldn't see the underpart of the stripe unless the player had his arms up. That isn't creating new problems with consistency.

no no, either i didnt write that as clearly as i thought it or you missed it, but im saying i know what CAN be done. . . but it SHOULDNT be done. i think if you take those UCLA stripes and give them the same treatment as the Reebok Chargers jersey, you will get a tapered stripe. i dont think thats the "natural" way of the design its supposed to be a consistant paralel stripe. so i believe that design would be even more flawed than what they have. its flawed because the solutions dosent fit/correct the problem. a solution that works today is the Oklahoma State stripe on their sleeve. that is as clever of a solution as there is. thats the thinking we need going forward until the problem changes again. if it means ditching an old, tired design thats out of date then so be it. it may be time to move on

 

GRAPHIC ARTIST

BEHANCE  /  MEDIUM  /  DRIBBBLE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the ultimate future is ultralight one piece bodysuits,,,book it.

The problem is, you'd have trouble selling a one piece bodysuit to a middle-aged chubby guy. Or for that matter, a thin young guy. (OK, sell one to his girlfriend..)

And some of you will say they can sell a "shirt" version of the upper half of a bodysuit, but I don't think that would sell nearly as well. Part of the allure of a football jersey, as silly as it is when you think about it too much, is that its a same thing the team is wearing... that you are in some way an extension of the team. I think the average fan even talks themselves into this idea while wearing a cheap replica.

My guess is the NFL makes so much scratch off of jersey sales that the idea of jersey-as-shirt instead of jersey-as-equipment will never disappear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the ultimate future is ultralight one piece bodysuits,,,book it.

I recall they talked about this idea even back in the 90s. This would look really, really bad on kickers and nose tackles.

I also wonder how much more difficult it would be to put that on with the pads, etc.

I wonder if the uniform makers are doing prototypes for this now.

the solution is quite simple... a back zipper...wetsuit design will be the basis for the uniform of the future...I wouldn't be surprised if oregon trots something out within the next 5 years

jump-ball.jpg

Mighty Ducks of Anaheim (CHL - 2018 Orr Cup Champions) Chicago Rivermen (UBA/WBL - 2014, 2015, 2017 Intercontinental Cup Champions)

King's Own Hexham FC (BIP - 2022 Saint's Cup Champions) Portland Explorers (EFL - Elite Bowl XIX Champions) Real San Diego (UPL) Red Bull Seattle (ULL - 2018, 2019, 2020 Gait Cup Champions) Vancouver Huskies (CL)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the ultimate future is ultralight one piece bodysuits,,,book it.

I recall they talked about this idea even back in the 90s. This would look really, really bad on kickers and nose tackles.

I also wonder how much more difficult it would be to put that on with the pads, etc.

I wonder if the uniform makers are doing prototypes for this now.

the solution is quite simple... a back zipper...wetsuit design will be the basis for the uniform of the future...I wouldn't be surprised if oregon trots something out within the next 5 years

jump-ball.jpg

There's no reason to have body suits. It seems like it would just be more inconvenient. The whole purpose of a jersey is to cover the pads, unless arm pads become mandated I don't think we will see full body suits and I can't imagine at least with today's technology, them being more convenient,

I think currently pants and socks are functional and comfortable enough to where players likely don't make significant adjustments or complain about them.

Jerseys are close to nothing now but idk how much more they can shrink or improve unless they actually become part of the pads, but even then I can't see them becoming a bodysuit of any sort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no no, either i didnt write that as clearly as i thought it or you missed it, but im saying i know what CAN be done. . . but it SHOULDNT be done. i think if you take those UCLA stripes and give them the same treatment as the Reebok Chargers jersey, you will get a tapered stripe. i dont think thats the "natural" way of the design its supposed to be a consistant paralel stripe. so i believe that design would be even more flawed than what they have. its flawed because the solutions dosent fit/correct the problem. a solution that works today is the Oklahoma State stripe on their sleeve. that is as clever of a solution as there is. thats the thinking we need going forward until the problem changes again. if it means ditching an old, tired design thats out of date then so be it. it may be time to move on

No, you were clear. However, I think that if it can be done, it should. First off, I disagree that the stripes would have to taper. If they needed to, they could be thinner (as on the Reebok prototypes a few Colts wore). Even if they did taper slightly, that would be far, far preferable to the truncated stripes. Look at these mock-ups I did showing how Nike could very easily make both teams look better.

Lucknew_zps38e15f49.jpg

Tebow_zpsca49b908.jpg

This is fixing the problem. It's far more "clever" than what Nike does and Reebok used to. At least from what I have read of you, you seem to love nearly every new, modern look, every trend and everything Nike does. Matte pants are cool and should always have been worn, etc. And that's fine if you have those views. However, realize that your views are a little out-there. There is nothing "tired" about UCLA stripes. Dated means it looks old and no longer looks good by today's standards. Those stripes look great by today's standards, provided they are done respectably. Sorry, the pics above on the right look like fine jerseys. The teams and Nike just need to remove their heads from their butts and make the simple fixes. Nike is not flawless.

OldRomanSig2.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why we're trying to determine whose opinion about jersey fashion is better than whose, either way, this thread is pretty much ruined because of it.

No amount of bickering here is going to change the stripes on today's uniforms. Ya'll ruined one of the best threads to pop up on CCSLC.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why we're trying to determine whose opinion about jersey fashion is better than whose, either way, this thread is pretty much ruined because of it.

No amount of bickering here is going to change the stripes on today's uniforms. Ya'll ruined one of the best threads to pop up on CCSLC.

I disagree. In the past few pages, this thread has turned to a discussion on the future of footbal jersey design, and the responsibilties of a designer to the needs vs. the desires of a client. Interesting stuff, and at least in my reading of the posts, no one is insulting anyone's opinions. A few pages back, there was a danger of the conversation veering into a boring and useless "love-nike" vs. "hate-nike" screed, but that is really not whats happening now.

IMO this is how a thread is supposed to work. Its how all good discussions work. It might start on one topic, and as it grows, it can touch on related ideas, IF that is honestly where the participants are interested in going. And if the related topics don't turn out to be all that interesting, I assume no one will continue presue them.

As far as the original purpose that Gordie started this thread for... well, that hasn't gone anywhere. If there are more questions, they can (and I believe, still are) being asked, and if Gordie is still up for answering them, he can. And I hope he does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no no, either i didnt write that as clearly as i thought it or you missed it, but im saying i know what CAN be done. . . but it SHOULDNT be done. i think if you take those UCLA stripes and give them the same treatment as the Reebok Chargers jersey, you will get a tapered stripe. i dont think thats the "natural" way of the design its supposed to be a consistant paralel stripe. so i believe that design would be even more flawed than what they have. its flawed because the solutions dosent fit/correct the problem. a solution that works today is the Oklahoma State stripe on their sleeve. that is as clever of a solution as there is. thats the thinking we need going forward until the problem changes again. if it means ditching an old, tired design thats out of date then so be it. it may be time to move on

No, you were clear. However, I think that if it can be done, it should. First off, I disagree that the stripes would have to taper. If they needed to, they could be thinner (as on the Reebok prototypes a few Colts wore). Even if they did taper slightly, that would be far, far preferable to the truncated stripes. Look at these mock-ups I did showing how Nike could very easily make both teams look better.

Lucknew_zps38e15f49.jpg

Tebow_zpsca49b908.jpg

This is fixing the problem. It's far more "clever" than what Nike does and Reebok used to. At least from what I have read of you, you seem to love nearly every new, modern look, every trend and everything Nike does. Matte pants are cool and should always have been worn, etc. And that's fine if you have those views. However, realize that your views are a little out-there. There is nothing "tired" about UCLA stripes. Dated means it looks old and no longer looks good by today's standards. Those stripes look great by today's standards, provided they are done respectably. Sorry, the pics above on the right look like fine jerseys. The teams and Nike just need to remove their heads from their butts and make the simple fixes. Nike is not flawless.

on the Colts mock up, that is a fine execution of the UCLA stripe, i like it. thats still a truncated stripe, its just longer so i think we're on the same page here. my whole point about them is that the stripe should remain truncated, i never meant to suggest a different length one way or the other for it so long as it didnt taper at the ends. would it actually taper then if it were applied as such? hard to say, that gets figured out in the process. maybe Nike DID figure it out in the process and their ultimate solution is what the teams wear now?? regardless, i think we're both saying the same thing here; the stripe dosent need to go all the way around and a truncated stripe is a fine (neither great nor poor) solution to the given problem (applying a graphic element that was made for a totally different jersey that look recognizable today). if it turned out you liked a tapered look then cool, i'd still support that if you were in charge of making the jerseys. its not a lot better or worse. if i were in charge, id make sure they were paralel all the way through, even if it meant changing nothing about the stripe as we know it currently.

the 2nd paragraph; c'mon man. heres where i'm going to tell you you are just wrong and i think you know it. have you read my blog? you might get a kick out of how much i tear down some of this new stuff and Nike, but thats not important. . . are my views and opinions "out there"? if so then, well. . . you're welcome.

your definition of "dated" i do agree with completely, and some of these things (especially large traditional stripes like the Steelers and Lions have) probably shouldnt be being made today for the very reason you gave. again, those were solutions for a different problem, ones that havent adjusted as well as the UCLA stripes. and my original point after Sterling's great post was about "backwards thinking" where people want to save the designs of old at the cost of having a better jersey and i think that where we differ the most. but form always follows function. thats what makes great products and design. instead of really focusing on how to apply old design correctly, designers need to think about how to apply appropriate solutions for what they've been given. not what their 50 year predecessors were given. when it comes down to where it dosent work anymore, it is dated and its time to move on

 

GRAPHIC ARTIST

BEHANCE  /  MEDIUM  /  DRIBBBLE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no no, either i didnt write that as clearly as i thought it or you missed it, but im saying i know what CAN be done. . . but it SHOULDNT be done. i think if you take those UCLA stripes and give them the same treatment as the Reebok Chargers jersey, you will get a tapered stripe. i dont think thats the "natural" way of the design its supposed to be a consistant paralel stripe. so i believe that design would be even more flawed than what they have. its flawed because the solutions dosent fit/correct the problem. a solution that works today is the Oklahoma State stripe on their sleeve. that is as clever of a solution as there is. thats the thinking we need going forward until the problem changes again. if it means ditching an old, tired design thats out of date then so be it. it may be time to move on

No, you were clear. However, I think that if it can be done, it should. First off, I disagree that the stripes would have to taper. If they needed to, they could be thinner (as on the Reebok prototypes a few Colts wore). Even if they did taper slightly, that would be far, far preferable to the truncated stripes. Look at these mock-ups I did showing how Nike could very easily make both teams look better.

Lucknew_zps38e15f49.jpg

Tebow_zpsca49b908.jpg

This is fixing the problem. It's far more "clever" than what Nike does and Reebok used to. At least from what I have read of you, you seem to love nearly every new, modern look, every trend and everything Nike does. Matte pants are cool and should always have been worn, etc. And that's fine if you have those views. However, realize that your views are a little out-there. There is nothing "tired" about UCLA stripes. Dated means it looks old and no longer looks good by today's standards. Those stripes look great by today's standards, provided they are done respectably. Sorry, the pics above on the right look like fine jerseys. The teams and Nike just need to remove their heads from their butts and make the simple fixes. Nike is not flawless.

on the Colts mock up, that is a fine execution of the UCLA stripe, i like it. thats still a truncated stripe, its just longer so i think we're on the same page here. my whole point about them is that the stripe should remain truncated, i never meant to suggest a different length one way or the other for it so long as it didnt taper at the ends. would it actually taper then if it were applied as such? hard to say, that gets figured out in the process. maybe Nike DID figure it out in the process and their ultimate solution is what the teams wear now?? regardless, i think we're both saying the same thing here; the stripe dosent need to go all the way around and a truncated stripe is a fine (neither great nor poor) solution to the given problem (applying a graphic element that was made for a totally different jersey that look recognizable today). if it turned out you liked a tapered look then cool, i'd still support that if you were in charge of making the jerseys. its not a lot better or worse. if i were in charge, id make sure they were paralel all the way through, even if it meant changing nothing about the stripe as we know it currently.

the 2nd paragraph; c'mon man. heres where i'm going to tell you you are just wrong and i think you know it. have you read my blog? you might get a kick out of how much i tear down some of this new stuff and Nike, but thats not important. . . are my views and opinions "out there"? if so then, well. . . you're welcome.

your definition of "dated" i do agree with completely, and some of these things (especially large traditional stripes like the Steelers and Lions have) probably shouldnt be being made today for the very reason you gave. again, those were solutions for a different problem, ones that havent adjusted as well as the UCLA stripes. and my original point after Sterling's great post was about "backwards thinking" where people want to save the designs of old at the cost of having a better jersey and i think that where we differ the most. but form always follows function. thats what makes great products and design. instead of really focusing on how to apply old design correctly, designers need to think about how to apply appropriate solutions for what they've been given. not what their 50 year predecessors were given. when it comes down to where it dosent work anymore, it is dated and its time to move on

there's a bit of a conundrum that I see here...I can see where the designer centric crowd is pushing for progressive designs that fit and accentuate the canvas of a modern jersey but there is also a business and aesthetic side that must be balanced...when you're talking about an institution that is over a century old there is always going to be a segment of fans/consumers that are attached and borderline obsessed with continuity and tradition...additionally those looks have created a ton of brand equity that's worth millions of dollars so you're never going to get everyone to embrace progressive/modern design.

bottom line is that sports uniforms will always be a mixed bag of tradition and modern design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When nike had Bauer under their control, who designed the pad graphics for goalies and equipment. Was it a designer such as yourself or someone in charge of equipment?

I've also noticed all the dumps of nikes elite jerseys, is there a new template in the works for the future, or in development your currently designs for?

Awesome thread, the nike bashing junk is getting old.

5cd0422806939bbe71c4668bc7e4fd92.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi gordie_delini- Thanks for opening up and sharing a professional football uniform design forum for how things work. This is a great thread. This is Tom O'Grady (from Gameplan Creative). We recently designed the identties for the teams in the Elite Football League of India. As the VP, Creative Director for the NBA back in the 1990's, I had the opporunity to work with some of Nike's talent designers like Todd Van Horne, Ken Black, Rodney Richardson, Eric Bodamer amongst others. The "reflect the past represnent the future" is still a term I use with my own clients. It's perfect.

At the NBA, we would do many of the same steps that you covered in your first post. And it covers a lot of same methodogy we used to create some of the NBA's most popular uniforms. We worked on the redesign of the Pistons, Raptors, Mavericks, Lakers when Nike first got the license back in 1996? I was always impressed by the passion and professionalism of the Beaverton folks.

I had a question for you? Does the NFL test the team jersey prototypes on broadcast to ensure the numberals read from a distance? We tested all the NBA uniforms prototypes before we'd sign off and pass along to Ripon Athletic to begin to create the actual on-court jerseys... does NIke work on this with the NFL or does the League handle this process themselves and then alert Nike if there are any issues.

Also, player feedback? Have you had any instances where an elite NFL player gets invovled in the design process with your design team? If so is the input considered or is it more lip service just so their voices are heard. I know we did this a few times while I was at the NBA. The team would want a star player to have their input considered but typically it was so off mark we'd just nod and then design how we saw fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.