Recommended Posts

^^

I like that, but since the logo is a nod to the Texas flag, I think the darker blue is needed.

Agreed, it looks great but the uniform is based on the flag, You can't just go around re-coloring flags, especially one as important as Texas. ;)

The logo isn't the Texas flag though, it's only vaguely based on the Texas flag. Recoloring the Texans logo Luv Ya Blue isn't the same as doing it to the actual Texas flag.

Also, as Admiral said, they've already taken liberties with the flag's colors as it is.

2752244354_a1c2b19c8f.jpg=Texas%20Flag-%20Conroe,%20Texas.jpg

I don't think there's anyway around this. They're called the Texans, and their logo and uniforms are based on the Texas flag. Light blue and red makes no sense.

Again, I'm not disputing that the Texans logo takes its cues from the Texas flag, but the logo is clearly not a flag and therefore open to artistic liberties and interpretation, IMHO. I don't think anything would look "off" about it if it were recolored in the Oilers colorway; especially not to people who don't get the flag connection (or even a lot of us who do).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're using real financial criteria that businesses use I guarantee that nike's performance from a merchandising standpoint has significantly outpaced the rbk era.

Why do you say that? What have they done differently at the start that would put them on a better pace? Just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly off topic, but Brady/The Patriots couldn't get his kid a Nike jersey?

a1b090665546a20ea72b243920f9a71347c776d2

I feel like there was a story about this recently. A college coach's kid ran out on the field to celebrate a title with an Under Armour hoodie on at a Nike school and the coach got "reprimanded" (scolded?) for it.

Maybe Jimbo Fisher at Florida State last year?

EDIT: Yep, Jimbo Fisher, but it was "just" the Miami game. And it was Nike who let him hear it. So Nike might go at Brady, too:

Nike to Florida State coach: Change your son's sweatshirt

http://www.wsj.com/articles/nike-to-florida-state-coach-change-your-sons-sweatshirt-1406914196

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're using real financial criteria that businesses use I guarantee that nike's performance from a merchandising standpoint has significantly outpaced the rbk era.

Why do you say that? What have they done differently at the start that would put them on a better pace? Just curious.

I too would like to know. Especially since Reebok also had an exclusive on hats and the like, where Nike does not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^

I like that, but since the logo is a nod to the Texas flag, I think the darker blue is needed.

Agreed, it looks great but the uniform is based on the flag, You can't just go around re-coloring flags, especially one as important as Texas. ;)

The logo isn't the Texas flag though, it's only vaguely based on the Texas flag. Recoloring the Texans logo Luv Ya Blue isn't the same as doing it to the actual Texas flag.

Also, as Admiral said, they've already taken liberties with the flag's colors as it is.

2752244354_a1c2b19c8f.jpg=Texas%20Flag-%20Conroe,%20Texas.jpg

I don't think there's anyway around this. They're called the Texans, and their logo and uniforms are based on the Texas flag. Light blue and red makes no sense.

Again, I'm not disputing that the Texans logo takes its cues from the Texas flag, but the logo is clearly not a flag and therefore open to artistic liberties and interpretation, IMHO. I don't think anything would look "off" about it if it were recolored in the Oilers colorway; especially not to people who don't get the flag connection (or even a lot of us who do).

Their logo and look are clearly based off the Texas flag and its colors. Oilers colors makes no sense for the Texans.

Their logo would be the first thing that would have to change before you even think about changing the colors. The few "people who don't get the flag connection" don't matter one bit, because the entire Houston Texans fan base and anyone familiar with the state of Texas most certainly do. Even then, what is the significance of light blue and red to a team called "Texans"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was a completely fabricated issue based on Lukas' own projection of his views and bias of nike.

In the grand scheme of things those on-field issues are not even noticable to the general public. Unlike when rbk took on the 10 year deal (logo swap only keep existing , nike made a very bold attempt to bring their proprietary uniforms into the league at once. While it's debatable I'd say the vast majority of teams improved their looks moving to elite 51. I know many hate the collars but overall the uniform aesthetics are much more uniform on field as compared to the mess that became of the >10 year old altered beyond recognition ripon unis and a few tech fit teams.

From the league's and nike's perspective their view is entirely different. Their #1 concern with the uniform contract is the $$$ value of the contract and the amount of apparel sales generated. If we're using real financial criteria that businesses use I guarantee that nike's performance from a merchandising standpoint has significantly outpaced the rbk era. If the league is ever going to drop nike as a partner it's because they're going to lose to a higher bidder (or they take their merch in house) because the nfl is money hungry first and foremost.

Lukas' qualitative reasoning for his thoughts on a change is beyond naive (focusing on aesthetic snafus that don't impact the bottom line) and he consistently shows his lack of business acumen when it comes to the economics of the sports apparel industry. Also he is insufferably tied to all things retro for retros sake in order hold himself above the fray of a consumer driven economy. He's like the bizarro Darren Rovell but just as annoying.

In the grand scheme of things those on-field issues are not even noticable to the general public.

Uni-watch is not meant to appeal to the general public. Neither is this forum.

Unlike when rbk took on the 10 year deal (logo swap only keep existing , nike made a very bold attempt to bring their proprietary uniforms into the league at once. While it's debatable I'd say the vast majority of teams improved their looks moving to elite 51. I know many hate the collars but overall the uniform aesthetics are much more uniform on field as compared to the mess that became of the >10 year old altered beyond recognition ripon unis and a few tech fit teams.

Rbk took on several redesigns (I'm assuming they were the designers). For example Vikings, Bills, Jaguars, etc. Nike didn't really change much right away, short of the template, which IMO didn't really make much of a noticeable difference save for the collars (which were usually a negative.)

Their #1 concern with the uniform contract is the $$$ value of the contract and the amount of apparel sales generated.

Well yeah. This isn't a sports business forum, and neither is uni-watch. It says so right in the title "athletic aesthetics".

Lukas' qualitative reasoning for his thoughts on a change is beyond naive (focusing on aesthetic snafus that don't impact the bottom line) and he consistently shows his lack of business acumen when it comes to the economics of the sports apparel industry.

I really think you have completely missed the entire point of uni-watch and this forum. Aesthetic snafus is what it's all about. Nobody is debating that money rules, or that designs are chosen based on what Nike and the team think will sell the most (not necessarily what looks best). He evaluates based on his own subjective criteria, which of course happens to be slanted a certain way - but it's his blog. You could start a sports uniform business blog and use qualitative and quantitative reasoning in your posts. There's no need for the latter in his, just like there's no need for the latter when critiquing the design of a uniform on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, they are called the Texans, and their logo and look are clearly based off the Texas flag and its colors. Oilers colors makes no sense for the Texans.

Their logo would be the first thing that would have to change before you even think about changing the colors. The few "people who don't get the flag connection" don't matter one bit, because the entire Houston Texans fan base and anyone familiar with the state of Texas most certainly do. Even then, what is the significance of light blue and red to a team called "Texans"?

What's the connection of red, white, and gold to a team called the Texans?

09000d5d8134f9db_gallery_600.jpg

What's the connection of green and gold for a team called the Texans?

WFLhoustontexans.jpg

Light blue and red might not have any particular significance to the second half of the teams' name, but they sure have relevance to the first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly off topic, but Brady/The Patriots couldn't get his kid a Nike jersey?

a1b090665546a20ea72b243920f9a71347c776d2

I feel like there was a story about this recently. A college coach's kid ran out on the field to celebrate a title with an Under Armour hoodie on at a Nike school and the coach got "reprimanded" (scolded?) for it.

Maybe Jimbo Fisher at Florida State last year?

EDIT: Yep, Jimbo Fisher, but it was "just" the Miami game. And it was Nike who let him hear it. So Nike might go at Brady, too:

Nike to Florida State coach: Change your son's sweatshirt

http://www.wsj.com/articles/nike-to-florida-state-coach-change-your-sons-sweatshirt-1406914196

Yeah it could have just been a hand me down. Or because the Reebok replicas have a better fit than the Nike ones. It's not a big deal unless Nike decides to make it a big deal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly off topic, but Brady/The Patriots couldn't get his kid a Nike jersey?

a1b090665546a20ea72b243920f9a71347c776d2

I feel like there was a story about this recently. A college coach's kid ran out on the field to celebrate a title with an Under Armour hoodie on at a Nike school and the coach got "reprimanded" (scolded?) for it.

Maybe Jimbo Fisher at Florida State last year?

EDIT: Yep, Jimbo Fisher, but it was "just" the Miami game. And it was Nike who let him hear it. So Nike might go at Brady, too:

Nike to Florida State coach: Change your son's sweatshirt

http://www.wsj.com/articles/nike-to-florida-state-coach-change-your-sons-sweatshirt-1406914196

Yeah it could have just been a hand me down. Or because the Reebok replicas have a better fit than the Nike ones. It's not a big deal unless Nike decides to make it a big deal

With all due respect your dad is Tom Brady and your still wearing an at least three year old replica jersey that is peeling? Hook your son up with something a little better than that you are Tom Brady for christ sake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the jersey has sentimental value to the kid, or he sees it as a lucky shirt. What would be the urgency to swap the kid's jersey when the only difference is the maker?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that always bugs me is when someone has criticism of Nike and the immediate response is, "so you'd rather have Adidas?" Why does it always come down to one or the other? It's like we're all 15 year old girls and we have to pick which sparkly vampire is our favorite.

I'll tell you what I'd "rather have" although I know it's an absolute impossibility in today's sports world. I'd rather each team have the responsibility to make their own aesthetic and branding choices. When they want a redesign, I'd like them to hire a local design firm, or look to their history, or, what the hell, let the owner's kid design it. And most of all, when it came time to manufacture the uniforms, I'd want each team, on their own, to hire someone whose sole concern was producing that uniform to the team's specifications. A manufacturer who would put the team's brand and identity first and last. And I wouldn't particularly care to know anything about that manufacturer, except that they do a solid job of making the Vikings look like the Vikings, and the Bears look like the Bears.

I know that this ship has long ago sailed. I know this will never happen. But don't tell me I have to choose between Nike, Adidas, and Under Armor. I'm not going to... because I can't. Honestly, if they didn't plaster their silly logos all over the uniforms, why would you even bother to try to tell them apart?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly off topic, but Brady/The Patriots couldn't get his kid a Nike jersey?

a1b090665546a20ea72b243920f9a71347c776d2

I feel like there was a story about this recently. A college coach's kid ran out on the field to celebrate a title with an Under Armour hoodie on at a Nike school and the coach got "reprimanded" (scolded?) for it.

Maybe Jimbo Fisher at Florida State last year?

EDIT: Yep, Jimbo Fisher, but it was "just" the Miami game. And it was Nike who let him hear it. So Nike might go at Brady, too:

Nike to Florida State coach: Change your son's sweatshirt

http://www.wsj.com/articles/nike-to-florida-state-coach-change-your-sons-sweatshirt-1406914196

Yeah it could have just been a hand me down. Or because the Reebok replicas have a better fit than the Nike ones. It's not a big deal unless Nike decides to make it a big deal

With all due respect your dad is Tom Brady and your still wearing an at least three year old replica jersey that is peeling? Hook your son up with something a little better than that you are Tom Brady for christ sake.

#firstworldproblems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, they are called the Texans, and their logo and look are clearly based off the Texas flag and its colors. Oilers colors makes no sense for the Texans.

Their logo would be the first thing that would have to change before you even think about changing the colors. The few "people who don't get the flag connection" don't matter one bit, because the entire Houston Texans fan base and anyone familiar with the state of Texas most certainly do. Even then, what is the significance of light blue and red to a team called "Texans"?

What's the connection of red, white, and gold team called the Texans?

09000d5d8134f9db_gallery_600.jpg

What's the connection of green and gold for a team called the Texans?

WFLhoustontexans.jpg

Light blue and red might not have any particular significance to the second half of the teams' name, but they sure have relevance to the first.

Check and mate. Well played, sir.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was a completely fabricated issue based on Lukas' own projection of his views and bias of nike.

In the grand scheme of things those on-field issues are not even noticable to the general public. Unlike when rbk took on the 10 year deal (logo swap only keep existing , nike made a very bold attempt to bring their proprietary uniforms into the league at once. While it's debatable I'd say the vast majority of teams improved their looks moving to elite 51. I know many hate the collars but overall the uniform aesthetics are much more uniform on field as compared to the mess that became of the >10 year old altered beyond recognition ripon unis and a few tech fit teams.

From the league's and nike's perspective their view is entirely different. Their #1 concern with the uniform contract is the $$$ value of the contract and the amount of apparel sales generated. If we're using real financial criteria that businesses use I guarantee that nike's performance from a merchandising standpoint has significantly outpaced the rbk era. If the league is ever going to drop nike as a partner it's because they're going to lose to a higher bidder (or they take their merch in house) because the nfl is money hungry first and foremost.

Lukas' qualitative reasoning for his thoughts on a change is beyond naive (focusing on aesthetic snafus that don't impact the bottom line) and he consistently shows his lack of business acumen when it comes to the economics of the sports apparel industry. Also he is insufferably tied to all things retro for retros sake in order hold himself above the fray of a consumer driven economy. He's like the bizarro Darren Rovell but just as annoying.

In the grand scheme of things those on-field issues are not even noticable to the general public.

Uni-watch is not meant to appeal to the general public. Neither is this forum.

Unlike when rbk took on the 10 year deal (logo swap only keep existing , nike made a very bold attempt to bring their proprietary uniforms into the league at once. While it's debatable I'd say the vast majority of teams improved their looks moving to elite 51. I know many hate the collars but overall the uniform aesthetics are much more uniform on field as compared to the mess that became of the >10 year old altered beyond recognition ripon unis and a few tech fit teams.

Rbk took on several redesigns (I'm assuming they were the designers). For example Vikings, Bills, Jaguars, etc. Nike didn't really change much right away, short of the template, which IMO didn't really make much of a noticeable difference save for the collars (which were usually a negative.)

Their #1 concern with the uniform contract is the $$$ value of the contract and the amount of apparel sales generated.

Well yeah. This isn't a sports business forum, and neither is uni-watch. It says so right in the title "athletic aesthetics".

Lukas' qualitative reasoning for his thoughts on a change is beyond naive (focusing on aesthetic snafus that don't impact the bottom line) and he consistently shows his lack of business acumen when it comes to the economics of the sports apparel industry.

I really think you have completely missed the entire point of uni-watch and this forum. Aesthetic snafus is what it's all about. Nobody is debating that money rules, or that designs are chosen based on what Nike and the team think will sell the most (not necessarily what looks best). He evaluates based on his own subjective criteria, which of course happens to be slanted a certain way - but it's his blog. You could start a sports uniform business blog and use qualitative and quantitative reasoning in your posts. There's no need for the latter in his, just like there's no need for the latter when critiquing the design of a uniform on here.

Actually I know how to separate the two distinct aspects and discuss them separately. He's the one that decided to delve into the business end of a supplier contract without regard to the financial aspects of it. For PL to create an issue solely based on his aesthetic perceptions is irresponsible and lazy. Unless he has a source that can confirm the league has expressed concerns that would influence a renewal of the contract against nike he's doing nothing but speculating and it looks like he has an axe to grind. He needs to stick to aesthetics and his love for all things retro because when it comes to other details he just doesn't quite get it.

For the sales trends you can use this as a high level barometer: http://www.statista.com/statistics/231520/people-who-bought-clothing-with-logos-of-nfl-teams-within-the-last-12-months-usa/ Looks pretty favorable for the swoosh.

This is a high level trend and of course there are variables that are external to nike vs. reebok. For the hat question in any real analysis I'd take hats out of the equation to get an apples/apples comparison for apparel only. If you want to look at the hats I'm going to take a wild guess and say that new era hats sales are killing any level that rbk had simply due to new era's leadership position in the headwear category. I'll find that data later. Thus I'm going to take a bit of a SWAG and say that the nfl has a favorable financial view of nike+new era compared to rbk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, they are called the Texans, and their logo and look are clearly based off the Texas flag and its colors. Oilers colors makes no sense for the Texans.

Their logo would be the first thing that would have to change before you even think about changing the colors. The few "people who don't get the flag connection" don't matter one bit, because the entire Houston Texans fan base and anyone familiar with the state of Texas most certainly do. Even then, what is the significance of light blue and red to a team called "Texans"?

What's the connection of red, white, and gold to a team called the Texans?

09000d5d8134f9db_gallery_600.jpg

What's the connection of green and gold for a team called the Texans?

WFLhoustontexans.jpg

Light blue and red might not have any particular significance to the second half of the teams' name, but they sure have relevance to the first.

A team called the Texans would look better in the colors of the Texas state flag than any of those other colors.

You can use light blue and red for the Texans if you're so determined to connect the team to the Oilers (it would be like putting the Ravens in Colts colors, or the Rams in Cardinals colors) but like I said, you would have to start with changing the logo. It takes its cues from the state flag, and that includes the flag's colors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly off topic, but Brady/The Patriots couldn't get his kid a Nike jersey?

a1b090665546a20ea72b243920f9a71347c776d2

I feel like there was a story about this recently. A college coach's kid ran out on the field to celebrate a title with an Under Armour hoodie on at a Nike school and the coach got "reprimanded" (scolded?) for it.

Maybe Jimbo Fisher at Florida State last year?

EDIT: Yep, Jimbo Fisher, but it was "just" the Miami game. And it was Nike who let him hear it. So Nike might go at Brady, too:

Nike to Florida State coach: Change your son's sweatshirt

http://www.wsj.com/articles/nike-to-florida-state-coach-change-your-sons-sweatshirt-1406914196

Yeah it could have just been a hand me down. Or because the Reebok replicas have a better fit than the Nike ones. It's not a big deal unless Nike decides to make it a big deal

With all due respect your dad is Tom Brady and your still wearing an at least three year old replica jersey that is peeling? Hook your son up with something a little better than that you are Tom Brady for christ sake.

Maybe it's a lucky jersey. It worked if so!

This is none of our business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shoe companies have way more power in college. A disturbing amount of power. It doesn't surprise me at all that Nike could demand Fisher's son be in a Nike shirt, but no way they'd be able to do the same with an NFL coach. And even if they could get mad at, say, Belichick's wife for wearing old stock, there wouldn't be a damn thing they could do about Brady, seeing as he's a player and he has no dealings with Nike other than wearing the Nike/team-issued gear while in official capacities. Brady might not be able to wear a Reebok jersey during a game, but he could put his son in anything he wants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.