Jets, Giants, Bills bring back uniforms

[AJpackers]

Something I've noticed about the three New York teams is that they use a modern version of uniforms that they used to use in the past. In 1998, the Jets started left the green helmets in favor of the look they had 1965-77. In 2000, the Giants did the same thing scraping the GIANTS helmets for a modern version of their 1961-74 look. And then in 2011, the Bills did it with their 1974-83 look. I was wondering what you guys thought about that, why it happens, general comments, etc.

[Buffalo]

This is a trend not only with these 3 "NY" teams (I might add, the Bills are the only team that plays games in New York State, and that Buffalo has more in common with Cleveland, Pittsburgh and Southern Ontario than the Big Apple) but with the major sports leagues in general.

Where do I begin?

Detroit Pistons

Washington Capitals

NY Mets

Buffalo Sabres

GS Warriors

NY Knicks

to name a few....

Lots of teams added black, navy, teal or other colors in the 90s only to reverse course and embrace tradition.

[Legend]

I prefer teams coming up with something new. I realize the older looks may be nice and classy etc, but it's lazy to me.

[Gothamite]

If the old looks are "nice and classy etc", then going back to them is the right thing to do. Adapting them to modern requirements, as all the teams have done, is no more "lazy" than jumping on the latest one-size-fits all design trends.

Don't forget the Blue Jays, and the Brewers' throwback alternates. Can't blame teams for wanting to go back to some of their most iconic looks.

[Artmanc3po]

If the old looks are "nice and classy etc", then going back to them is the right thing to do. Adapting them to modern requirements, as all the teams have done, is no more "lazy" than jumping on the latest one-size-fits all design trends.

Don't forget the Blue Jays, and the Brewers' throwback alternates. Can't blame teams for wanting to go back to some of their most iconic looks.

Houston Astros

Philadelphia Phillies

Atlanta Braves

Chicago White Sox (but recolored)

[tiger13x]

Washington Wizards

Cleveland Cavaliers

Toronto Blue Jays

Pittsburgh Pirates (Starting Next Year)

Charlotte Bobcats (starting next year)

Can also be added

[Gothamite]

Todd Radom had a blog article about 1987, the year that the first "updated throwbacks" appeared.

http://www.toddradom.com/1987-the-year-that-mlbs-uniforms-stepped-backwards/

[TheOldRoman]

Pittsburgh Pirates (Starting Next Year)

Whatnow?

[OnWis97]

Todd Radom had a blog article about 1987, the year that the first "updated throwbacks" appeared.

http://www.toddradom...pped-backwards/

1987 was a great year. I knew that was the Twins, Atlanta, and Oakland year, but it looks like a lot of teams were making improvements (i.e., from pullovers and elastic waist bands to buttons and belts). I did not realize that eight of 26 teams had changed though. If these boards existed then, they'd have shut down a couple of times.

[BrandMooreArt]

why it happens? everyone loves nostalgia. and a bit of irony is that so much of modern design is just recycled stuff from the past. or at least something that looks like it came from the past. right now design trends are heavy on simplicity and "vintage" and it's easy to pull something like that from a team thats 50 years old. the Jets may have been ahead of that curve in '98, but the Bills definitely jumped on the "vintage modern" thing. all 3 are really solid designs and IMO the teams have never looked better (sans some details like the Jets having 3 different greens, and the botched stripes).

the time is right to just pull things from the past. the Vikings and Dolphins did the same. the Astros and Blue Jays did it. i dont think theres ever been a time in history when designers have looked to the past so much, instead of pushing forward, and thats something thats been debated and discussed a lot in the design community, but the end product of "vintage modern" design is pretty nice. and its timeless too. those 3 teams' identites are built on traditional standards that wil never go out of style. and they're definitely better than what they had before. coming out of the wild 90s where it seemed "more is better" the old looks on modern equipment is a big breath of fresh air for a lot of sports teams and it just looks damn cool

[guest23]

Todd Radom had a blog article about 1987, the year that the first "updated throwbacks" appeared.

http://www.toddradom...pped-backwards/

1987 was a great year. I knew that was the Twins, Atlanta, and Oakland year, but it looks like a lot of teams were making improvements (i.e., from pullovers and elastic waist bands to buttons and belts). I did not realize that eight of 26 teams had changed though. If these boards existed then, they'd have shut down a couple of times.

I was a young lad when this happened but I have a good feeling that two baseball related events had a huge impact on the rest of teams making the move back to traditional retro looks.

1. The explosion of collecting baseball cards in the late 80's
   
2. When it Was a Game: aired on HBO in 1991
   

While mostly coincidental I think both were factors in the longing for the classic looks that boomers remembered their childhood heroes wearing. Also the A's could have also been considered the oregon dicks of their time so when they opted to go from the loud green and yellow back to traditional they officially declared the trend over and everyone followed.

[gothedistance]

I prefer teams coming up with something new. I realize the older looks may be nice and classy etc, but it's lazy to me.

Same here. The old look can be nice if done well. But not if its plain and outdated.

[Gothamite]

For example?

[gosioux76]

the time is right to just pull things from the past. the Vikings and Dolphins did the same. the Astros and Blue Jays did it. i dont think theres ever been a time in history when designers have looked to the past so much, instead of pushing forward, and thats something thats been debated and discussed a lot in the design community, but the end product of "vintage modern" design is pretty nice. and its timeless too. those 3 teams' identites are built on traditional standards that wil never go out of style. and they're definitely better than what they had before. coming out of the wild 90s where it seemed "more is better" the old looks on modern equipment is a big breath of fresh air for a lot of sports teams and it just looks damn cool

But is this really a function of designers making choices? Or is it about ownership believing their clubs have strayed too far from their brand roots?

I mean, the Pistons are a great example. The hop onto the teal train in the '90s in what has to be one of the most bizarre branding shifts in sports history, before reverting back to a modernized version of their classic styles. Same with the Blue Jays.

In both cases, I felt the brands, in an attempt to modernize, shifted too far from their true spirit. I viewed their current "throwbacks" as a rebalancing rather than the fruits of a designer's deliberate choice between looking back and pushing forward.

[hawk36]

For example?

Chargers did a great job of revising their 60s look. This is what they should have done with their recent uni change.

[OnWis97]

the time is right to just pull things from the past. the Vikings and Dolphins did the same. the Astros and Blue Jays did it. i dont think theres ever been a time in history when designers have looked to the past so much, instead of pushing forward, and thats something thats been debated and discussed a lot in the design community, but the end product of "vintage modern" design is pretty nice. and its timeless too. those 3 teams' identites are built on traditional standards that wil never go out of style. and they're definitely better than what they had before. coming out of the wild 90s where it seemed "more is better" the old looks on modern equipment is a big breath of fresh air for a lot of sports teams and it just looks damn cool

But is this really a function of designers making choices? Or is it about ownership believing their clubs have strayed too far from their brand roots?

I mean, the Pistons are a great example. The hop onto the teal train in the '90s in what has to be one of the most bizarre branding shifts in sports history, before reverting back to a modernized version of their classic styles. Same with the Blue Jays.

In both cases, I felt the brands, in an attempt to modernize, shifted too far from their true spirit. I viewed their current "throwbacks" as a rebalancing rather than the fruits of a designer's deliberate choice between looking back and pushing forward.

What you say is definitely a part of it. Some trend-hopping teams (the Pistons are a great example) that totally abandon their identities (Sabres switch to black/red) almost need to go back so they can be "the Pistons" (or whoever) again. If they don't go back, they become the Padres or the Canucks. The Astros were just that until they said "wait, we are orange and blue, remember?"

But I think another part of it is the evolution of marketing and apparel. The fairly recent production of "throwback" gear has led to teams feeling the demand for a "vintage" look. That may be what happened with the Blue Jays. Some teams respond very well (Blue Jays) and some try to please everyone and end up messing it up (Chargers).

Edit: that's funny. The above post popped up just as I was about to finish (i.e, about when I was dissing the Chargers)

[Gothamite]

For example?

Chargers did a great job of revising their 60s look. This is what they should have done with their recent uni change.

I'm not sure i follow you. Those two statements seem to contradict each other.

Did the Chargers do a "great job of revising their 60s look", or should they have returned to those original uniforms?

[AJpackers]

Although I'm a fan of the team, OnWis is spot on with his characterization of the Pistons. The whole flaming pipe-horse thing was a disaster, should've just stayed with the classic look.

[guest23]

Although I'm a fan of the team, OnWis is spot on with his characterization of the Pistons. The whole flaming pipe-horse thing was a disaster, should've just stayed with the classic look.

I think those drastic rebrands like the pistons and blue jays come typically during a period of prolonged mediocrity in terms of wins/losses, fan interest, attendance, and merch sales at which some exec pronounces that the franchise needs to be jumpstarted/rebranded. That plan usually ends up being terrible shortsighted as a typically older franchise attempts to hop on the trend bandwagon of what's hot now and abandoning their identity. At some point after the realization of the financial failure of the rebrand and continued mediocrity in the w/l column, the powers that be decide they need to get back to their true/original/retro/golden era identity.

The only real back to retro downgrade that I can think of is the 49ers. The last set was cluttered with a bunch of 90's elements but a minimized version of that would by far be their best look which also would be a natural and acceptable evolution of the 49er identity.

[infrared41]

I prefer teams coming up with something new. I realize the older looks may be nice and classy etc, but it's lazy to me.

I'm with Gothamite on this. Going back to an iconic look, or even a look that's nothing more than the one the fans prefer, isn't "lazy." Besides, classy never goes out of style.

Off topic, but I noticed you're sporting a Special Forces avatar. Are you Special Forces? Just wondering because I have that exact pin in my Dad's shadow box military tribute. He was 77th SFG back in the 50's.