New Vikings Uniforms

[Pizzaman7294]

I agree with a dark grey

[shaydre1019]

I agree with a dark grey

I think darker than standard grey, but lighter than the shade the redskins used would work.

[andrewharrington]

I wouldn't mind if a baseball wanted to make the bat in their logo a team color as opposed to reality haven't seen to many teal hornets in real life. if a football team colors were say red white and blue would you be okay if the team's facemask was the color green even though nothing else about the team logo or uniform is green? why do we excuse gray as being okay? but not accept a random different color than the teams stated color for the facemask.?

Because 1. grey is a neutral color that stands out as little as a color possibly can, which is one of the reasons every baseball team has a grey uniform, and 2. facemasks were grey for three decades before someone got cute with them. This precedent makes grey a more appropriate choice than green simply because we're used to seeing it.

I have yet to hear a legitimate justification for including Gray facemasks (outside of it matching another uniform element).

They're just pointless and unnecessary.

How about this?

The facemask should be treated as a piece of equipment, not a piece of the uniform. Much like a chinstrap on a football helmet or a cage or visor on a hockey helmet. These things aren't colour coordinated, they're just stock. There's an argument to be made that the same principal should apply to facemasks on football helmets.

You don't have to agree with it, but I think it passes muster as a "legitimate" defence of grey facemasks.

I don't agree with it. Weak argument.

Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it a weak argument. If it was considered a piece of equipment, and everyone's facemasks were grey, things would be fine, just like they were when everyone's goalie pads and baseball gloves were brown, everyone's shoes were black, and everyone's underbill was green or grey. You like colored facemasks, but a lot of people don't see it the same way, and that's the way it is. To me, football is an old, tough game, and I like it to have an old, tough look. Personally, I don't get that from a yellow mask and a pearlescent or chrome shell.

[Cellar Dweller]

Getting back to the jersey numbers, someone did a great job on a jersey mock-up, based on the clues we have. Well, I thought I would throw in a mock-up with a font that I thought looked pretty good. Two versions: rounded & squared. One with outlines, one with plain white. Who'll be first to correctly guess the font I used?

[ESTONES6]

I have yet to hear a legitimate justification for including Gray facemasks (outside of it matching another uniform element).

They're just pointless and unnecessary.

How about this?

The facemask should be treated as a piece of equipment, not a piece of the uniform. Much like a chinstrap on a football helmet or a cage or visor on a hockey helmet. These things aren't colour coordinated, they're just stock. There's an argument to be made that the same principal should apply to facemasks on football helmets.

You don't have to agree with it, but I think it passes muster as a "legitimate" defence of grey facemasks.

I don't agree with it. Weak argument.

Gray face masks tend to be a characteristic of older uniforms, uniforms with basic stripes, not patterns or pointed/modern stripes. So teams with classic, older style uniforms, i.e. Browns, Colts, Giants, the gray face mask compliments the style of uniform and keeps the look consistent.

When it comes to the Cardinals, they have a very modern uniform style. When they put the gray face mask, it looks awkward. It sticks out. It just doesn't fit with the style of the uniform.

[oldschoolvikings]

I worked up a flat model of what we may or may not have seen so far. The helmet is a complete guess at this point.

If that's what it's going to look like, it's honestly kind of bland. A gray facemask would push it into disappointment territory.

You know, if I were putting together a list of things I wanted in the new Viking uniform "Lights Out's disappointment" would honestly make the list.

[Gothamite]

I have yet to hear a legitimate justification for including Gray facemasks (outside of it matching another uniform element).

For my own part, gray would be the least worst option.

I hate white facemasks. Always. They draw way too much focus., look clunky and are generally ugly to my eye. I also don't like facemasks to match the shell, as the Bears' do, so purple is out. Gold world be goofy for much the same reason as white, which means we're left with gray. The fact that gray is aesthetically pleasing with purple is icing on the cake, if you will.

I don't think it's a good solution for every team, but teams that have a tradition of gray facemasks have in my opinion the option of refunding to it, especially if they're trying to recapture a little old-school charm, and especially in the absence of another contrasting color.

[Bathysphere]

I agree with Gothamite in a sense that I'd rather have a grey mask than an nonpleasing color combo (or chrome or something). Gold wouldn't fit at all and I just don't really like the monopurples they've been running with. If anything, grey facemasks are just neutral as far as fitting with a look goes, IMO.

[debo0775]

I have yet to hear a legitimate justification for including Gray facemasks (outside of it matching another uniform element).

For my own part, gray would be the least worst option.

I hate white facemasks. Always. They draw way too much focus., look clunky and are generally ugly to my eye. I also don't like facemasks to match the shell, as the Bears' do, so purple is out. Gold world be goofy for much the same reason as white, which means we're left with gray. The fact that gray is aesthetically pleasing with purple is icing on the cake, if you will.

I don't think it's a good solution for every team, but teams that have a tradition of gray facemasks have in my opinion the option of refunding to it, especially if they're trying to recapture a little old-school charm, and especially in the absence of another contrasting color.

Back when bar thickness was larger, I was right with you on the same color shell/facemask. With bars being so thin now, a same color treatment doesn't annoy me as much (but I still would prefer to see the Bears back in grey).

[powersurge]

I have yet to hear a legitimate justification for including Gray facemasks (outside of it matching another uniform element).

They're just pointless and unnecessary.

How about this?

The facemask should be treated as a piece of equipment, not a piece of the uniform. Much like a chinstrap on a football helmet or a cage or visor on a hockey helmet. These things aren't colour coordinated, they're just stock. There's an argument to be made that the same principal should apply to facemasks on football helmets.

You don't have to agree with it, but I think it passes muster as a "legitimate" defence of grey facemasks.

I don't agree with it. Weak argument.

I have to agree...it is a weak argument; sorry Ice Cap but it is. I totally understand why you would try to defend such a stance but in the end the simple fact is that this is football NOT hockey, and in football the face mask is of utmost importance in the design. The face mask can totally make or break the design.

[debo0775]

I have yet to hear a legitimate justification for including Gray facemasks (outside of it matching another uniform element).

They're just pointless and unnecessary.

How about this?

The facemask should be treated as a piece of equipment, not a piece of the uniform. Much like a chinstrap on a football helmet or a cage or visor on a hockey helmet. These things aren't colour coordinated, they're just stock. There's an argument to be made that the same principal should apply to facemasks on football helmets.

You don't have to agree with it, but I think it passes muster as a "legitimate" defence of grey facemasks.

I don't agree with it. Weak argument.

I have to agree...it is a weak argument; sorry Ice Cap but it is. I totally understand why you would try to defend such a stance but in the end the simple fact is that this is football NOT hockey, and in football the face mask is of utmost importance in the design. The face mask can totally make or break the design.

As could a chinstrap, but it's treated as equipment. Just differing opinions there. I don't think it's a weak argument - it's just not one you agree with.

[powersurge]

I have yet to hear a legitimate justification for including Gray facemasks (outside of it matching another uniform element).

For my own part, gray would be the least worst option.

I hate white facemasks. Always. They draw way too much focus., look clunky and are generally ugly to my eye. I also don't like facemasks to match the shell, as the Bears' do, so purple is out. Gold world be goofy for much the same reason as white, which means we're left with gray. The fact that gray is aesthetically pleasing with purple is icing on the cake, if you will.

I don't think it's a good solution for every team, but teams that have a tradition of gray facemasks have in my opinion the option of refunding to it, especially if they're trying to recapture a little old-school charm, and especially in the absence of another contrasting color.

Back when bar thickness was larger, I was right with you on the same color shell/facemask. With bars being so thin now, a same color treatment doesn't annoy me as much (but I still would prefer to see the Bears back in grey).

Non sense...you could argue that with the massive modern cage style face masks that are now en vogue in the game today that it would be even worse

[nuordr]

I worked up a flat model of what we may or may not have seen so far. The helmet is a complete guess at this point.

If that's what it's going to look like, it's honestly kind of bland. A gray facemask would push it into disappointment territory.

I completely agree! That gray facemask ruins the whole set! A purple facemask would make this set a 9 out of 10....the grey facemask makes it a 2 out of 10.

Wait.. a gray facemask can bust a 9 out of 10 all the way down to a 2?

You are hilarious!

I must be hilarious as well...because I agree.

I have yet to hear a legitimate justification for including Gray facemasks (outside of it matching another uniform element).

They're just pointless and unnecessary.

Oh, I'm not really defending a gray mask from any sort of design standpoint. And if given the power in this case, I'd most likely settle on purple, too. But a 9 (nearly perfect) to a 2 (absolutely terrible) seems a little extreme.

That is how I feel about adding a color to a uniform that is not a part of the color scheme. The Cowboys, Giants, and Raiders can get by with it because gray/silver is in their color scheme. In addition that score would drop down if they didn't include a pair of colored pants.

[powersurge]

I have yet to hear a legitimate justification for including Gray facemasks (outside of it matching another uniform element).

They're just pointless and unnecessary.

How about this?

The facemask should be treated as a piece of equipment, not a piece of the uniform. Much like a chinstrap on a football helmet or a cage or visor on a hockey helmet. These things aren't colour coordinated, they're just stock. There's an argument to be made that the same principal should apply to facemasks on football helmets.

You don't have to agree with it, but I think it passes muster as a "legitimate" defence of grey facemasks.

I don't agree with it. Weak argument.

I have to agree...it is a weak argument; sorry Ice Cap but it is. I totally understand why you would try to defend such a stance but in the end the simple fact is that this is football NOT hockey, and in football the face mask is of utmost importance in the design. The face mask can totally make or break the design.

As could a chinstrap, but it's treated as equipment. Just differing opinions there. I don't think it's a weak argument - it's just not one you agree with.

Are you SERIOUSLY comparing a face mask to a chinstrap???? It is indeed a weak argument. A chinstrap is more like a pair of gloves or a mouth piece. A face mask occupies much more space and is directly featured prominently in any close up shot of a player's head. Do they feature chinstraps when they show the picture of a team's helmet? Rarely. Have you ever seen a helmet WITHOUT a face mask while still including a chin strap? It's a silly argument. What's next, comparing a face mask to ankle tape or elbow pad? C'mon now.

[smith03]

I wouldn't mind if a baseball wanted to make the bat in their logo a team color as opposed to reality haven't seen to many teal hornets in real life. if a football team colors were say red white and blue would you be okay if the team's facemask was the color green even though nothing else about the team logo or uniform is green? why do we excuse gray as being okay? but not accept a random different color than the teams stated color for the facemask.?

Because 1. grey is a neutral color that stands out as little as a color possibly can, which is one of the reasons every baseball team has a grey uniform, and 2. facemasks were grey for three decades before someone got cute with them. This precedent makes grey a more appropriate choice than green simply because we're used to seeing it.

I have yet to hear a legitimate justification for including Gray facemasks (outside of it matching another uniform element).

They're just pointless and unnecessary.

How about this?

The facemask should be treated as a piece of equipment, not a piece of the uniform. Much like a chinstrap on a football helmet or a cage or visor on a hockey helmet. These things aren't colour coordinated, they're just stock. There's an argument to be made that the same principal should apply to facemasks on football helmets.

You don't have to agree with it, but I think it passes muster as a "legitimate" defence of grey facemasks.

I don't agree with it. Weak argument.

Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it a weak argument. If it was considered a piece of equipment, and everyone's facemasks were grey, things would be fine, just like they were when everyone's goalie pads and baseball gloves were brown, everyone's shoes were black, and everyone's underbill was green or grey. You like colored facemasks, but a lot of people don't see it the same way, and that's the way it is. To me, football is an old, tough game, and I like it to have an old, tough look. Personally, I don't get that from a yellow mask and a pearlescent or chrome shell.

so lets pretend that in the beginning (1950s) facemasks were color coordinated. today you would be okay with color facemasks?

[infrared41]

I have yet to hear a legitimate justification for including Gray facemasks (outside of it matching another uniform element).

How about this? A lot of people like them and think they look good. Or is "I like how it looks" not a "legitimate" argument? No offense, but looking for a "legitimate" argument to justify an opinion that is completely subjective is kind of silly.

This place cracks me up sometimes.

[debo0775]

I have yet to hear a legitimate justification for including Gray facemasks (outside of it matching another uniform element).

For my own part, gray would be the least worst option.

I hate white facemasks. Always. They draw way too much focus., look clunky and are generally ugly to my eye. I also don't like facemasks to match the shell, as the Bears' do, so purple is out. Gold world be goofy for much the same reason as white, which means we're left with gray. The fact that gray is aesthetically pleasing with purple is icing on the cake, if you will.

I don't think it's a good solution for every team, but teams that have a tradition of gray facemasks have in my opinion the option of refunding to it, especially if they're trying to recapture a little old-school charm, and especially in the absence of another contrasting color.

Back when bar thickness was larger, I was right with you on the same color shell/facemask. With bars being so thin now, a same color treatment doesn't annoy me as much (but I still would prefer to see the Bears back in grey).

Non sense...you could argue that with the massive modern cage style face masks that are now en vogue in the game today that it would be even worse

Only a handful of players are wearing those, though. Of all parts of a uniform, facemasks might be my most followed area. The trend for all positions is away from monstrous masks. The average is really starting to trend toward what Jason Witten wears. There are far fewer full cage masks on display on OL and DL. CBs and QBs are moving away from double bar masks (more like RGIII, less like Brett Favre). The total area taken up by the facemask is trending downward (save for a few clowns using those far too thick masks on DL).

What I meant was to look at a bar from the 80s and 90s in the same style as today. The diameter of the bar in many instances is ~1/2 that of today. To me, that's why I look at the facemask as more of equipment than design. The changes made are technological (in most cases) and not design based. Granted, there's an effort to make them appealing, but (save the Tuck-style cage) it's not solely for aesthetics.

Aaaanyway, I think a white facemask sticks out. I'm not a fan of same color shell/mask. Gold would look funky on the Vikings's helmet. That's where grey comes in.

[debo0775]

[so lets pretend that in the beginning (1950s) facemasks were color coordinated. today you would be okay with color facemasks?

He's not saying he's not ok with color facemasks in general. He's just saying the hate for grey facemasks is silly (if I'm not mistaken)

Trying to get this back on track, grey facemasks have a long history with the Vikings. To me, using one in their design is plenty appropriate.

[powersurge]

I have yet to hear a legitimate justification for including Gray facemasks (outside of it matching another uniform element).

How about this? A lot of people like them and think they look good. Or is "I like how it looks" not a "legitimate" argument? No offense, but looking for a "legitimate" argument to justify an opinion that is completely subjective is kind of silly.

This place cracks me up sometimes.

What cracks me up around here is when someone takes the "everything is subjective" route as opposed to taking at least some effort in articulating why their preference should be given any credibility beyond "I just like it". What I personally appreciate here is when differing points of view are backed up by thoughtful and somewhat meaningful reasoning. Doesnt mean I have to agree with it but at least I get a better understanding as to why that person feels that way.

No one is asking for a detailed dissertation with references and footnotes...just something else other than "I just like it".

Know what I mean?

[powersurge]

so lets pretend that in the beginning (1950s) facemasks were color coordinated. today you would be okay with color facemasks?

He's not saying he's not ok with color facemasks in general. He's just saying the hate for grey facemasks is silly (if I'm not mistaken)

Trying to get this back on track, grey facemasks have a long history with the Vikings. To me, using one in their design is plenty appropriate.

Thats NOT my quote. You edited out the actual poster. Go back and look at it again. I think you should be directing this to the true originator of this quote.