Tampa Bay Buccaneers Getting New Logo, Helmet & Uniforms

[nuordr]

New Bucs with the jerseys.

Poor Verner just can't escape that shoulder yoke, can he?

Seeing all those numbers together must be an 11 year old's video game dream. Middle schooler's rejoice!

I don't quite get that, but I do think tha the 8s look like slashed 0s. ø

I thought the number "7" was the worst, but that number "2" is right up there in terms of being bad! I will never understand how a group of people agreed on this horrible design!

[TruColor]

I thought the number "7" was the worst, but that number "2" is right up there in terms of being bad! I will never understand how a group of people agreed on this horrible design!

That '2' is magical, isn't it?:

[ADW77]

I thought the number "7" was the worst, but that number "2" is right up there in terms of being bad! I will never understand how a group of people agreed on this horrible design!

That '2' is magical, isn't it?:

Any chance we can get a look at the lettering CWx?

[BrandMooreArt]

I think puma made their early uniforms.

I thought it was Adidas?

It was Puma, but that's beside the point. Reebok was able to take designs from the companies they inherited the contract from and transition them without sacrificing the design. Nike didn't care to find a way to retain the little details like that Titans example. Their template was more important. Some teams told them to go piss up a rope and kept their old cut, but most didn't.

For the vast majority of clubs, rbk did absolutely nothing to transition as the new supplier other than change the logo. They simply used the existing contracted jersey manufacturers (Ripon, Wilson, etc.) which in effect meant there was zero change in the transition. What nike has undertaken is completely different by attempting to switch all 32 teams to a new supplier using their fabrics and template.

If you truly want to compare rbk to nike as nfl suppliers you have to look at what rbk/adi actually brought to the table as a supplier:

• Several horribly trendy and already dated redeisgns (falcons, vikings, cards, etc.)
• rbk/adi tech-fit uniforms which looked horrible on field due to the horrible warping of stripes and numbers
• ugly on field nfl equipment merchandise

Compare that to nike:

• A mixed bag of redesigns, some good (vikings) and some horrible (jags/bucs)
• Some teams shoehorned into templates that don't look good (jets) while others have more consistent and improved looks while others actually have improved (chiefs).
• superior merchandise but noticeably higher price points.

All in all it seems like the switch over from rbk to nike really comes out as a wash. What I do like about the nike on field is that there are considerably less templates being worn which at least makes the uniforms look much more consistent within a single squad.

of your 3 points to Reebok the only one i agree with that was really bad is the TechFit jersey and im a huge fan of the Falcons uniforms. and when Reebok did those new designs thy were executed really well but thats all matter of opinion. i think whats more objective is that the lines and shapes in those uniforms all flow well and appear to have some thought put into how they would be crafted (minus the Vikings) but Nike's new designs look very pieced together and "fill-in-the-blank" like. its one thing when you are converting someone elses design to your product, but when they have the opportunity to do something new and know what they're in to from the beggining, it's not looking good

[tohasbo]

I thought the number "7" was the worst, but that number "2" is right up there in terms of being bad! I will never understand how a group of people agreed on this horrible design!

That '2' is magical, isn't it?:

Any chance we can get a look at the lettering CWx?

I don't think it was featured in the style guide but I could be wrong

[guest23]

I think puma made their early uniforms.

I thought it was Adidas?

It was Puma, but that's beside the point. Reebok was able to take designs from the companies they inherited the contract from and transition them without sacrificing the design. Nike didn't care to find a way to retain the little details like that Titans example. Their template was more important. Some teams told them to go piss up a rope and kept their old cut, but most didn't.

For the vast majority of clubs, rbk did absolutely nothing to transition as the new supplier other than change the logo. They simply used the existing contracted jersey manufacturers (Ripon, Wilson, etc.) which in effect meant there was zero change in the transition. What nike has undertaken is completely different by attempting to switch all 32 teams to a new supplier using their fabrics and template.

If you truly want to compare rbk to nike as nfl suppliers you have to look at what rbk/adi actually brought to the table as a supplier:

• Several horribly trendy and already dated redeisgns (falcons, vikings, cards, etc.)
• rbk/adi tech-fit uniforms which looked horrible on field due to the horrible warping of stripes and numbers
• ugly on field nfl equipment merchandise

Compare that to nike:

• A mixed bag of redesigns, some good (vikings) and some horrible (jags/bucs)
• Some teams shoehorned into templates that don't look good (jets) while others have more consistent and improved looks while others actually have improved (chiefs).
• superior merchandise but noticeably higher price points.

All in all it seems like the switch over from rbk to nike really comes out as a wash. What I do like about the nike on field is that there are considerably less templates being worn which at least makes the uniforms look much more consistent within a single squad.

of your 3 points to Reebok the only one i agree with that was really bad is the TechFit jersey and im a huge fan of the Falcons uniforms. and when Reebok did those new designs thy were executed really well but thats all matter of opinion. i think whats more objective is that the lines and shapes in those uniforms all flow well and appear to have some thought put into how they would be crafted (minus the Vikings) but Nike's new designs look very pieced together and "fill-in-the-blank" like. its one thing when you are converting someone elses design to your product, but when they have the opportunity to do something new and know what they're in to from the beggining, it's not looking good

Well beauty is in the eye of the beholder but I honestly thought the rbk designs looked like rather unoriginal derivatives of the broncos. The inconsistencies from player to player based on too many uniform templates applied to a particular design (bengals) also considerably downgraded the aesthetic. I agree with your nike observation. They are trying to force designs into their templates as opposed to a blank canvas design and building a template around that.

[ADW77]

I thought the number "7" was the worst, but that number "2" is right up there in terms of being bad! I will never understand how a group of people agreed on this horrible design!

That '2' is magical, isn't it?:

Any chance we can get a look at the lettering CWx?

I don't think it was featured in the style guide but I could be wrong

The lettering is in the style guides, but not in the logoslicks.

[BrandMooreArt]

I think puma made their early uniforms.

I thought it was Adidas?

It was Puma, but that's beside the point. Reebok was able to take designs from the companies they inherited the contract from and transition them without sacrificing the design. Nike didn't care to find a way to retain the little details like that Titans example. Their template was more important. Some teams told them to go piss up a rope and kept their old cut, but most didn't.

For the vast majority of clubs, rbk did absolutely nothing to transition as the new supplier other than change the logo. They simply used the existing contracted jersey manufacturers (Ripon, Wilson, etc.) which in effect meant there was zero change in the transition. What nike has undertaken is completely different by attempting to switch all 32 teams to a new supplier using their fabrics and template.

If you truly want to compare rbk to nike as nfl suppliers you have to look at what rbk/adi actually brought to the table as a supplier:

• Several horribly trendy and already dated redeisgns (falcons, vikings, cards, etc.)
• rbk/adi tech-fit uniforms which looked horrible on field due to the horrible warping of stripes and numbers
• ugly on field nfl equipment merchandise

Compare that to nike:

• A mixed bag of redesigns, some good (vikings) and some horrible (jags/bucs)
• Some teams shoehorned into templates that don't look good (jets) while others have more consistent and improved looks while others actually have improved (chiefs).
• superior merchandise but noticeably higher price points.

All in all it seems like the switch over from rbk to nike really comes out as a wash. What I do like about the nike on field is that there are considerably less templates being worn which at least makes the uniforms look much more consistent within a single squad.

of your 3 points to Reebok the only one i agree with that was really bad is the TechFit jersey and im a huge fan of the Falcons uniforms. and when Reebok did those new designs thy were executed really well but thats all matter of opinion. i think whats more objective is that the lines and shapes in those uniforms all flow well and appear to have some thought put into how they would be crafted (minus the Vikings) but Nike's new designs look very pieced together and "fill-in-the-blank" like. its one thing when you are converting someone elses design to your product, but when they have the opportunity to do something new and know what they're in to from the beggining, it's not looking good

Well beauty is in the eye of the beholder but I honestly thought the rbk designs looked like rather unoriginal derivatives of the broncos. The inconsistencies from player to player based on too many uniform templates applied to a particular design (bengals) also considerably downgraded the aesthetic. I agree with your nike observation. They are trying to force designs into their templates as opposed to a blank canvas design and building a template around that.

what is that about the Bengals? the shoulder areas? not sure if i ever noticed

[TruColor]

I don't think it was featured in the style guide but I could be wrong

In the On-Field Guide.

[EJ_Barlik]

I nominate this for post of the year, possible the entire existence of CCSLC

A very short while ago

I can still remember when the Buccaneers would make me smile

And I knew if I had my chance that I could redesign their pants

And maybe fans would be happy for awhile

But February made me shiver

With every rumor they'd deliver

Strange helmet on the door step...I couldn't shake it's bad rep

I can't remember if I cried when I saw their unis got Nike-fied

Something broke me deep inside the day...Bucs unis...died

So bye, bye Quality Design

Took the bevel to new levels and many souls cried

And the good old red and pewter look that they denied

For numbers that are chrome-ified

For numbers that are chrome-ified

Did you make a logo site and do you have faith in Philip Knight?

If Nike tells us so

Now do you believe in cut-and-paste with the XFL and toxic waste?

And can you teach me how to meet deadlines real slow?

Well I know that you're in love with matte

I saw the Vikings helmet not quite fall flat

You both made the purple look less blue

And I dug those purply hues

I was a lonely liker of the Bucs

With their colors rad and their old coach Chuck

But "God ing damn," I shouted, "these ing suck"

The day Bucs Unis Died

*chorus*

Now for 17 years this look had been real swell
Saving the franchise from creamsicle hell

But that's now how it used to be

When Dungy was praising Shaun E. King before Chucky hijacked his winning team

And they both now haunt my TV

And while our heads were looking down, the Glazers shopped their look around

Big investment with no return

All these jerseys should be burned

And while Goodell re-wrote a book of rules, Nike went to work with Satan's tools and the NFL played us all for fools

The day the Bucs Unis Died.

*chorus*

Hocus Pocus and a plague of locusts please descend upon the look that broke us

After the Jags we're falling fast

We landed hard upon the painted grass

Mike Glennon fumbled a forward pass, Darrelle Revis on the sidelines counting cash

The halftime air had scents of doom as their new jerseys entered the locker room

Random swatches on their pants, clock numbers counted their last chance

As Nike tried to rape the field

The Bucs fans refused to yield

Piss on the rotten NFL shield today Bucs Unis Died

*chorus*

And there we all were in the CCSLC

Generations of aesthetics geeks

With no patience left to start again

So Licht Be Nimble, Licht Be Quick

Fighting staph infections and Lovie Smith

Firing everyone is just a means to an end

As I watched the unveil take center stage

My hands were clenched in fists of rage

No designer ever lured to hell could design such a turd

As the uniforms freshly ate the flames

A fireball rose over Raymond James

Here we are left to take the blame the day the Bucs Unis Died

*chorus

I met a fan who had season tix and I asked what he thought of this

He simply frowned and turned away

I went down to the sacred store where once hung the jerseys I did adore

But the man there said the jerseys went away

And in the streets the children screamed

It's the XFL look of their dreams

Not a word was spoken

Adults hearts all were broken

Red and pewter I admired most

Now are ketchup mustard and burnt toast

I'm glad as hell I don't live on the coast today, the Bucs Unis Died.

So bye, bye Quality Design

Took the bevel to new levels and many souls cried

And the good old red and pewter look that they denied

For numbers that are chrome-ified

For numbers that are chrome-ified

[EJ_Barlik]

I thought the number "7" was the worst, but that number "2" is right up there in terms of being bad! I will never understand how a group of people agreed on this horrible design!

That '2' is magical, isn't it?:

Any chance we can get a look at the lettering CWx?

I don't think it was featured in the style guide but I could be wrong

The lettering is in the style guides, but not in the logoslicks.

Did anyone else notice that the angle of the dots inside the numbers doesn't even match the angle of the diagonals on the numbers themselves???

[TruColor]

This numeral pattern-thing seems to be a new Nike trend:

(I'm starting to create all of the individual NFL number sets in the same manner as the Bucs'; this is an excuse to show off the Seahawks.)

[TruColor]

...oh, and here's the Bucs' nameplate lettering:

[Sport]

Thought: I wonder how much, if any, of the motivation behind the whacky number fonts and materials used in the numbers that Nike keeps putting out is in an effort to make it more difficult for counterfeiters to reproduce.

Sidethought: The Bucs new NOB font looks like it was cut out by a counterfeiter already.

[oldschoolvikings]

This numeral pattern-thing seems to be a new Nike trend:

Yes. One that I don't care for.

[TSHARE18]

...oh, and here's the Bucs' nameplate lettering:

Are you going to put up all the teams?

[TruColor]

Are you going to put up all the teams?

I'll start a new thread...

[tBBP]

So who wants to explain that angled cut at the top left of the letter "N"...and/or why it's not there on the letter "M"? Or "Y"? Or why it had to be there at all? I cannot believe how terribly forced, mind-numbingly inconsistent, and unequivocally horribad that NOB/number set is.

(I won't even call it a "font"...that'd be an insult to fonts.)

[Chawls]

...oh, and here's the Bucs' nameplate lettering:

The letter "I" looks nice.

[Rambulance]

...oh, and here's the Bucs' nameplate lettering:

The letter "I" looks nice.

The K, L, M, T, V, W, & Y are nice as well.