New Vikings Uniforms

[BrandMooreArt]

First off, sorry for keeping the fasemask thing alive but here's my take.

I really like the grey facemasks and ive always seen it as an attachment to the helmet. Never invested to much thought into it

BUT

I do get how you see it as one. Kinda like having a purple car with grey hood?

More like a purple car with chrome bumpers, I think.

i had to

black, grey, whatevs. neutral color

[OnWis97]

Here's my thought on how the sleeve stripe could transition from home to road (keeping the gold surrounded by purple), and as a bonus, visually connect to the pants stripe.


(By the way, I think this counts as my first time ever for posting a concept)

You may very well be on to something here. But I hope not. That would ruin the chance of something I had thin hopes for: purple pants on the road.

[tajmccall]

They could with that striping.

[Old Biff from the Future]

That is not the belt we are using, we are going back to old school not the new belt style. I do agree with the above top picture.. Nice job

[andrewharrington]

These uniforms are awesome. I am just glad Ziggy and company decided to listen to the fans and go OLD SCHOOL! I am also happy we are not the poster children for the NEXT Seatttle uniform. Sounds like that is the Jags.... Looks great! Imagine being stuck for another six years in some wanna be future Uniform. We already went through that with the terrible 2006. Return to roots man ;-)

Once again, these uniforms are not "old school". The Vikings have never worn anything like these before.

I agree. Inspired by something old school? Sure. But hybrid numerals, asymmetrical stripes? None of that would lend itself well to a grey mask.

I'm sorry if the term rubs you wrong, but "pretending" is the exact term I intended and still intend to use. I don't think it's a poor choice of words, and I certainly don't see how it's insulting or dismissive. That seems like quite a leap. I still think it's more or less pretending.

The problem with "pretending" as a word choice in this context is that it makes presumptions about your fellow posters and their motives.

The word implies a level of dishonesty, as if the other person knows something is not true but continues to act as though it is. It's impossible not to infer some sort of dismissiveness out of it, at the very least.

It's always better to discuss the opinion and not the person. This word choice makes that very hard.

I suppose so, but the conversation was already beyond the opinion, it was about the logic or reasoning behind the opinion.

And I was merely echoing CW's view that it's a "weak argument". I guess I could avoid the word pretending, but the bottom line is I don't it's not a valid line of reasoning because it's simply not true. The facemask is not just a piece of equipment overlooked in the design process. The color of the facemaks is a conscious choice in every uniform set in the league (except arguably the Raiders and Cowboys).

The thing about that, though, is that I was discussing an alternative viewpoint. A way of looking at the subject that tends to not be considered specifically because everyone views the facemask as something that must be considered as part of the uniform. Of course that's how it is. I was simply stating that maybe, just maybe, that's not how it should be. There's a difference between saying "I know it's this way but maybe it should be that way" and pretending something is what it isn't, you know

Or to turn it around on you, I remember the last time we discussed this argument, and you claimed that the comparison to the hockey helmet cages and visors weren't valid because in your opinion you felt they should be colour coordinated. If I was in a snarky mood I could say that you, in that instance, were pretending because you were trying to claim cages were part of the uniform and more then equipment when literally every team in the game views them as nothing but equipment. I didn't though, because that would have been a poor choice of words. You weren't pretending, you were simply stating your preference for an alternate way of looking at something. Which is what I'm doing with the "grey masks as equipment" argument.

As for CWx, again I really don't care what his opinions are on the matter. He hates grey masks. Ok, cool. That's his opinion, and he's certainly entitled to it. I only posted the "maybe we should simply consider it a piece of equipment, like a chinstrap" theory because he went on about how there's no legitimate justification for grey masks. I wasn't trying to change his mind on the subject, just to point out that reasonable argument exist, whether he agrees with it or not.

As the person responsible for formulating the "facemask as equipment" viewpoint, I agree. I understand facemasks are deliberately colored and considered in the design process, even if they are grey. I understand that facemasks aren't "just equipment" in this day and age. I'm not pretending that they are. It's simply a different way of looking at the concept; an "if I were the boss for a day" type of situation. We're all bound by the laws of reality, confined by the world that is. At times, it's smart to take that into account, even when trying to be creative. Sometimes, though, it's more fun to leave that behind and design for the world that should be.

[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?

First off, how much time do you think I spend thinking about what you appreciate in a post? Second, in relation to this particular debate, everything is subjective. (When you can prove otherwise, please let me know. I already asked Lights Out but he hasn't gotten back to me on it.)

That said, if I had a better reason than I just like the way a gray facemask looks on certain uniforms, I would have stated it. The best I can give you is that I think it looks good with certain uniforms. For example, I think a gray facemask looks good with a traditional style uniform like SF's or Minnesota's throwbacks. I'm not crazy about Cleveland's gray facemasks, but it does work with their look. It works with Buffalo because a.) gray looks good as an accent to their color scheme and b.) their uniforms are a traditional style. On the other side of the coin, Arizona's gray facemasks look pretty bad with those clown suits they call uniforms. And I still can't give you a better argument than I just like how a gray facemask looks with certain uniforms.

I get that there are people here who want to apply rules and regulations to how things are supposed to work with uniform design. That's fine, and those folks are certainly entitled to that philosophy. But the very idea that there is a "legitimate" argument for why we like or don't like something is downright ridiculous. No matter how well, or how poorly, someone articulates the reasoning behind their opinion, when it's all said and done, it still comes down to "I like it" or "I don't like it." Sorry if that doesn't meet your expectations. Actually, I'm really not but I thought I'd be polite.

I do appreciate the response because despite the fact that you still are adamantly trying to stick to your "its all subjective" comment and 'I like it because I like it and that's it' argument, you actually articulated a thoughtful and relevant argument just now that totally backs up why you 'just like it'; THIS is what I was referring to. You obviously don't 'just like it'. You have a reasoning behind it and its NOT ridiculous. Whats ridiculous is that we are on a sports logo and design board where people from all walks of life and backgrounds come to discuss and debate anything and everything about things like the color of a facemask...lol. THAT'S ridiculous, but I digress. Sorry if I simply don't accept a throw away answer like "I just like it" in regards to a hotly debated and for some reason polarizing subject matter. Actually, I'M really not but I thought I'D be polite too.

[powersurge]

I do apologize for my tone getting a bit testy earlier, but I've heard that "piece of equipment" argument dozens of times before. I just don't think it holds water; to me, it seems like an excuse or a rationalization.

My view is that the facemask is part of the helmet - not a separate entity. Additionally, I feel that it should be a team color, and either the same color as the shell, or a darker color. I don't even like helmets like the Chiefs where the mask is White on a Red shell. Draws too much attention the facemask, which is front-and-center over the player's face. I think that the mask should blend more with the helmet; giving it a more overall unified look.

Chinstraps - IMO, they should also match the helmet shell color.

And yes, I think hockey and baseball equipment should follow suit. Although, I've never liked the look of team color baseball gloves...!

CWX beat me to it. I do agree with and echo his sentiments. I guess my original commentary about not accepting the "I just like it" argument was NOT specifically directed to Ice Cap and the other poster. It was to another person who never even bothered to articulate any kind of argument. I'm cool with "I just like it". I've uttered the very same line. I just get peeved when its used as a trump card to somehow get out of and dismiss a hotly debated and polarizing argument. I almost take it as being somewhat insulting to those who are engaged in the argument. I would almost rather have someone tell me my argument is a hot piece of monkey $#!t and describe the reasons why then to say "Well, I just like it...thats all. Its all just subjective anyway!". It rubs me the wrong way because as I have mentioned once before, I have sat in on so many art class critiques where thoughtful and well articulated debates are derailed by someone who doesn't have anything more to add or say and chooses to utter that phrase. My apologies to all who were offended by my comments. It was not meant to offend or disrespect anyone's views. My bad.

[Lights Out]

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.

Equipment can easily still be color-coordinated. One could argue that gloves and shoes are equipment per se, and those are color-coordinated. Hell, even your example - chin straps - can easily be color-coordinated:

Just because teams don't do it doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be done. With that in mind, there's no excuse for not color-coordinating the most prominent piece of equipment on the uniform: the facemask.

[aawagner011]

Let's be honest here- everything a player wears is equipment. Shoulder pads? Equipment. Gloves and wristbands? Equipment. Jersey and pants? Unless you're planning on playing naked...equipment. This is just silly that we are trying to draw the line between what constitutes what is and what's not equipment. Unless you can wear it off the field casually, I'd say it's equipment.

[rcb05]

I think the bumper on a car analogy is a good one. You see some bumpers that are chrome, some are just black pastic, others are color coordinated to match the car. Just depends on the look you're going for.

[vicfurth]

What if you can wear your "equipment" off the field...

Buehler?

[powersurge]

Let's be honest here- everything a player wears is equipment. Shoulder pads? Equipment. Gloves and wristbands? Equipment. Jersey and pants? Unless you're planning on playing naked...equipment. This is just silly that we are trying to draw the line between what constitutes what is and what's not equipment. Unless you can wear it off the field casually, I'd say it's equipment.

I think we are getting into semantics here. I would sincerely hope that most people on this board would comprehend and acknowledge that there is a significant difference between the relevance and impact to the branding of a team and its identity in regards to color coordinating helmets, pants, and jerseys versus shoulder pads, knee pads, and protective cups.

[PALEFACE]

Here's my thought on how the sleeve stripe could transition from home to road (keeping the gold surrounded by purple), and as a bonus, visually connect to the pants stripe.

(By the way, I think this counts as my first time ever for posting a concept)

This makes complete sense. I'm really hoping this is what the final design looks like.

I hope you don't mind oldschoolvikings, but I transferred your idea onto my earlier mock-up to see what it would look like with the number font and such.

Sorry for being late on the comment, I've was away all last week on business and just getting back to the boards today.

First, great job you two! These look really solid, I'd be super happy if this is what the team rolled out. Yes, purple pants would be a nice addition, any thoughts on mocking those up?

Second, I am on the fence about the typface Nike came up with for the Vikes. Rounded and sharp edges, I dunno. I was a little dissapointed to see that, but I am willing to keep an open mind. I dont notice it as much with the second mock-up here.

One thing I think everyone is getting confused on is "Retro" and "Traditional". So far, the team hasnt said "Retro" or "Throwback", they have said a traditional look. Meaning, using the basic design elements of the past, but not copying the past. I think these two mockups really show how this design looks updated and new, yet harkens back to the standard design elements (mostly how stripes were used as basic horizontally and vertically without using the "swooshy" lines that we see today) of the past.

Good job!

[lmh1194]

Here's my thought on how the sleeve stripe could transition from home to road (keeping the gold surrounded by purple), and as a bonus, visually connect to the pants stripe.

(By the way, I think this counts as my first time ever for posting a concept)

This makes complete sense. I'm really hoping this is what the final design looks like.

I hope you don't mind oldschoolvikings, but I transferred your idea onto my earlier mock-up to see what it would look like with the number font and such.

Sorry for being late on the comment, I've was away all last week on business and just getting back to the boards today.

First, great job you two! These look really solid, I'd be super happy if this is what the team rolled out. Yes, purple pants would be a nice addition, any thoughts on mocking those up?

Second, I am on the fence about the typface Nike came up with for the Vikes. Rounded and sharp edges, I dunno. I was a little dissapointed to see that, but I am willing to keep an open mind. I dont notice it as much with the second mock-up here.

One thing I think everyone is getting confused on is "Retro" and "Traditional". So far, the team hasnt said "Retro" or "Throwback", they have said a traditional look. Meaning, using the basic design elements of the past, but not copying the past. I think these two mockups really show how this design looks updated and new, yet harkens back to the standard design elements (mostly how stripes were used as basic horizontally and vertically without using the "swooshy" lines that we see today) of the past.

Good job!

I agree with the "throwback" vs "traditional" point. A lot of people are confusing "throwbacks" with "traditional". Up until 2006, the Vikings have always been a "traditional" team when it comes to uniforms. They wanted a more "modern" design in 2006 and we got it with side panels and piping. After receiving a lot of negative feedback, they are now going back to a more "traditional" design.

I will reserve judgement until I see the full uniform set, but I think its a good move by the Vikings that will fit in perfectly with the traditional NFC North.

[DeFrank]

The what now?

[PALEFACE]

This makes complete sense. I'm really hoping this is what the final design looks like.

I hope you don't mind oldschoolvikings, but I transferred your idea onto my earlier mock-up to see what it would look like with the number font and such.

Hey Matt I love where this is going. I had one quick thought about the whole thing and that was socks! The stripe pattern lends it self for some sock stripes that I think make sense. I hope you don't mind, but I took your design and added them. Curious to what you think of the addition.

I also added a serif to the bottom of the 2's as well, just to complete them. Just something that I think we might see on the numbers when it's all said and done, although I could be totally wrong.

[phutmasterflex]

The serif makes a whole lot of difference. I feel it "completes" the #2 better, if that makes sense

[BrandMooreArt]

This makes complete sense. I'm really hoping this is what the final design looks like.

I hope you don't mind oldschoolvikings, but I transferred your idea onto my earlier mock-up to see what it would look like with the number font and such.

Hey Matt I love where this is going. I had one quick thought about the whole thing and that was socks! The stripe pattern lends it self for some sock stripes that I think make sense. I hope you don't mind, but I took your design and added them. Curious to what you think of the addition.

I also added a serif to the bottom of the 2's as well, just to complete them. Just something that I think we might see on the numbers when it's all said and done, although I could be totally wrong.

how much one little piece of color can make a difference. that yellow stripe on the socks is the finishing touch on this. i'd be worried someone would say "it needs a stripe on the helmet" but this is a good example of the variety principle

[oldschoolvikings]

I've been fiddling with mine, too... thinking about how some are hoping for purple pants. Here's what I came up with...

I guess I got this in just before Thurday, when we're all most likely proven wrong!

[nuordr]

I've been fiddling with mine to... thinking about how some are hoping for purple pants. Here's what I came up with...

I guess I got this in just before thurday, when we're all most likely proven wrong!

For what it is worth, I love the purple pants! Great job!