Jump to content

NFL Changes 2014+

EJ_Barlik

By EJ_Barlik
in Sports Logo News

Recommended Posts

Saint Zephyr III

Saint Zephyr III

Posted
Posted

On the plus side, I foresee a golden age for Nike-fied NFL concepts over on the concepts forum.

I think that point passed the moment Fraser Davidson's pro combat photoshop template became available for widespread use, at which point practically the entire earth went hog-wild with it. This might incite a new wave of those, though.

Since we're discussing this and since the Packers came up, if they were to ever do this, this is about the extent of which I'd hope to see... /shameless plugGBpackers_NPC_zpsld0nwsje.png
That looks too much like Notre Dame to me.

I get far more of a Baylor vibe.

GR30a5H.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
DCarp1231

DCarp1231

Posted
Posted

On the plus side, I foresee a golden age for Nike-fied NFL concepts over on the concepts forum.

I think that point passed the moment Fraser Davidson's pro combat photoshop template became available for widespread use, at which point practically the entire earth went hog-wild with it. This might incite a new wave of those, though.
Since we're discussing this and since the Packers came up, if they were to ever do this, this is about the extent of which I'd hope to see... /shameless plugGBpackers_NPC_zpsld0nwsje.png
That looks too much like Notre Dame to me.

I get far more of a Baylor vibe. Let's all agree that the helmet looks like Notre Dame and the uniforms look like Baylor

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sport

Sport

Posted
Posted

Another reason it's a completely terrible idea. I think I see some variations from player to player on the actual Jaguars. In the past I've been supportive of the Jacksonville Jaguars because I was such a fan of their uniforms, but I'm glad they have such a piss poor record while wearing that helmet.

PvO6ZWJ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shaydre1019

shaydre1019

Posted
Posted

Another reason it's a completely terrible idea. I think I see some variations from player to player on the actual Jaguars. In the past I've been supportive of the Jacksonville Jaguars because I was such a fan of their uniforms, but I'm glad they have such a piss poor record while wearing that helmet.

Yeah there's definitely inconsistency on the field. At the point even going to a navy inspired non gradient but golden bottom helmets would be a big upgrade imo

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lahaye7

lahaye7

Posted
Posted

Another reason it's a completely terrible idea. I think I see some variations from player to player on the actual Jaguars. In the past I've been supportive of the Jacksonville Jaguars because I was such a fan of their uniforms, but I'm glad they have such a piss poor record while wearing that helmet.

Yeah there's definitely inconsistency on the field. At the point even going to a navy inspired non gradient but golden bottom helmets would be a big upgrade imo

maybe the Jags are doing a setting sun thing, in 2016 their helmets will be black.

I am sore,wounded, but not slain

I will lay down and bleed a while

And then rise up to fight again

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BrianLion

BrianLion

Posted
Posted

It's hard to picture teams like Green Bay or Oakland indulging in that kind of nonsense. Like the Yankees' response to those horrific and silly TATC uniforms, I'm sure they'll just opt out.

I dont get why traditional teams can't have a little "fun" with a uniform once in a while? If it's one game in one season, who cares?

As much as I loathe Notre Dame, they at least seem to GET that now, although I'm sure the fat Adidas paycheck helps a bit too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mattp0777

mattp0777

Posted
Posted

It's hard to picture teams like Green Bay or Oakland indulging in that kind of nonsense. Like the Yankees' response to those horrific and silly TATC uniforms, I'm sure they'll just opt out.

I dont get why traditional teams can't have a little "fun" with a uniform once in a while? If it's one game in one season, who cares?

As much as I loathe Notre Dame, they at least seem to GET that now, although I'm sure the fat Adidas paycheck helps a bit too.

Notre dame is now under armour not Adidas

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldschoolvikings

oldschoolvikings

Posted
Posted

It's hard to picture teams like Green Bay or Oakland indulging in that kind of nonsense. Like the Yankees' response to those horrific and silly TATC uniforms, I'm sure they'll just opt out.

I dont get why traditional teams can't have a little "fun" with a uniform once in a while? If it's one game in one season, who cares?

As much as I loathe Notre Dame, they at least seem to GET that now, although I'm sure the fat Adidas paycheck helps a bit too.

I guess it all depend on your definition of fun.

spacer.png http://dstewartpaint.blogspot.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mad43dog

mad43dog

Posted
Posted

It's hard to picture teams like Green Bay or Oakland indulging in that kind of nonsense. Like the Yankees' response to those horrific and silly TATC uniforms, I'm sure they'll just opt out.

I dont get why traditional teams can't have a little "fun" with a uniform once in a while? If it's one game in one season, who cares?

As much as I loathe Notre Dame, they at least seem to GET that now, although I'm sure the fat Adidas paycheck helps a bit too.

I guess it all depend on your definition of fun.

spongebob-f-u-n-song-o.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cosmic

Cosmic

Posted
Posted
Strangely enough, I think both of those look much better than the real thing. Having the logo bisected by the color switch looks awful. Pushing the gradient in either direction so it's not on the decal and establishes a dominant helmet color... big improvement.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
guest23

guest23

Posted
Posted
Strangely enough, I think both of those look much better than the real thing. Having the logo bisected by the color switch looks awful. Pushing the gradient in either direction so it's not on the decal and establishes a dominant helmet color... big improvement.

I completely agree. The matte also looks cheesy and dated already. How hard would it be to do a shiny black helmet with a gold or teal (or both) finish/hue/flake? That would have looked so much better and professional compared to the current garage paint job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Old School Fool

Old School Fool

Posted
Posted

It's hard to picture teams like Green Bay or Oakland indulging in that kind of nonsense. Like the Yankees' response to those horrific and silly TATC uniforms, I'm sure they'll just opt out.

The reality of the situation is that I can see the Raiders having a chrome helmet or chrome facemask at the very least. They might be the only team in the NFL that can get away with it.

Something like this:

wgY5KMd.jpg

bSLCtu2.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Xist2inspire

Xist2inspire

Posted
Posted

It's hard to picture teams like Green Bay or Oakland indulging in that kind of nonsense. Like the Yankees' response to those horrific and silly TATC uniforms, I'm sure they'll just opt out.

I dont get why traditional teams can't have a little "fun" with a uniform once in a while? If it's one game in one season, who cares?

I agree with this, as there is something to be said for "mixing it up" a little...but, the problem is that instead of designing tasteful, reasonable, well-thought-out alternates that respectfully represent the team (think Minnesota Vikings), Nike will most likely force insane "upgrades" that wreck a team's identity and represent nothing aside from Nike's "innovation" (think Tampa Bay Bucs).

Just like real life, "fun" must be balanced with reason. It's probably "fun" to hop in a car and drive like Need For Speed, but that doesn't make it a good idea. It's "fun" to play around with traditional looks, but that doesn't make it a good idea to go hog-wild with them. I don't trust Nike to understand that when designing these hypothetical "special" alternates, therefore I'd rather not see it come to pass.

Tradition is the foundation of innovation, and not the enemy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
phutmasterflex

phutmasterflex

Posted
Posted

It's hard to picture teams like Green Bay or Oakland indulging in that kind of nonsense. Like the Yankees' response to those horrific and silly TATC uniforms, I'm sure they'll just opt out.

I dont get why traditional teams can't have a little "fun" with a uniform once in a while? If it's one game in one season, who cares?

I agree with this, as there is something to be said for "mixing it up" a little...but, the problem is that instead of designing tasteful, reasonable, well-thought-out alternates that respectfully represent the team (think Minnesota Vikings), Nike will most likely force insane "upgrades" that wreck a team's identity and represent nothing aside from Nike's "innovation" (think Tampa Bay Bucs).

Just like real life, "fun" must be balanced with reason. It's probably "fun" to hop in a car and drive like Need For Speed, but that doesn't make it a good idea. It's "fun" to play around with traditional looks, but that doesn't make it a good idea to go hog-wild with them. I don't trust Nike to understand that when designing these hypothetical "special" alternates, therefore I'd rather not see it come to pass.

Agreed. I wouldn't be so apprehensive about this if I had confidence in Nike doing something tasteful. But since they are wont to do something that may be terrible, I am against this.

Go A's!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lights Out

Lights Out

Posted
Posted

It's hard to picture teams like Green Bay or Oakland indulging in that kind of nonsense. Like the Yankees' response to those horrific and silly TATC uniforms, I'm sure they'll just opt out.

I dont get why traditional teams can't have a little "fun" with a uniform once in a while? If it's one game in one season, who cares?

I agree with this, as there is something to be said for "mixing it up" a little...but, the problem is that instead of designing tasteful, reasonable, well-thought-out alternates that respectfully represent the team (think Minnesota Vikings), Nike will most likely force insane "upgrades" that wreck a team's identity and represent nothing aside from Nike's "innovation" (think Tampa Bay Bucs).

Just like real life, "fun" must be balanced with reason. It's probably "fun" to hop in a car and drive like Need For Speed, but that doesn't make it a good idea. It's "fun" to play around with traditional looks, but that doesn't make it a good idea to go hog-wild with them. I don't trust Nike to understand that when designing these hypothetical "special" alternates, therefore I'd rather not see it come to pass.

To be fair, it most likely would depend on what the teams ask for. I'm sure some teams would ask for the full Nike treatment, whereas a team like the Packers or Giants would probably ask for a throwback or fauxback.

Hell, maybe teams could use this proposed program as a way of testing fan reactions to potential redesigns. Maybe if the current Jaguars and Bucs uniforms had been unveiled in advance as special alternates on a Thursday night game, the outcry would force Nike to come up with something more reasonable and palatable to fans.

xLmjWVv.png

POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12

Link to comment
Share on other sites
daniel75

daniel75

Posted
Posted

It's hard to picture teams like Green Bay or Oakland indulging in that kind of nonsense. Like the Yankees' response to those horrific and silly TATC uniforms, I'm sure they'll just opt out.

I dont get why traditional teams can't have a little "fun" with a uniform once in a while? If it's one game in one season, who cares?

I agree with this, as there is something to be said for "mixing it up" a little...but, the problem is that instead of designing tasteful, reasonable, well-thought-out alternates that respectfully represent the team (think Minnesota Vikings), Nike will most likely force insane "upgrades" that wreck a team's identity and represent nothing aside from Nike's "innovation" (think Tampa Bay Bucs).

Just like real life, "fun" must be balanced with reason. It's probably "fun" to hop in a car and drive like Need For Speed, but that doesn't make it a good idea. It's "fun" to play around with traditional looks, but that doesn't make it a good idea to go hog-wild with them. I don't trust Nike to understand that when designing these hypothetical "special" alternates, therefore I'd rather not see it come to pass.

To be fair, it most likely would depend on what the teams ask for. I'm sure some teams would ask for the full Nike treatment, whereas a team like the Packers or Giants would probably ask for a throwback or fauxback.

Hell, maybe teams could use this proposed program as a way of testing fan reactions to potential redesigns. Maybe if the current Jaguars and Bucs uniforms had been unveiled in advance as special alternates on a Thursday night game, the outcry would force Nike to come up with something more reasonable and palatable to fans.

If they did this the Seahawks wouldn't have their jerseys that are now so popular. Some designs take time to win people over, also just because people on here don't like a design doesn't mean thats the general public view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mmajeski06

mmajeski06

Posted
Posted

It's hard to picture teams like Green Bay or Oakland indulging in that kind of nonsense. Like the Yankees' response to those horrific and silly TATC uniforms, I'm sure they'll just opt out.

The reality of the situation is that I can see the Raiders having a chrome helmet or chrome facemask at the very least. They might be the only team in the NFL that can get away with it.

Something like this:

wgY5KMd.jpg

I wouldn't be opposed to this for one game. As long as they keep the rest of the uniform pretty much the same.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheOldRoman

TheOldRoman

Posted
Posted

They play sixteen games. No, teams shouldn't wear random crap for one of those. Teams which appear in a given look eight games per season (give or take) don't need to experiment or expand their identity in that way. If you think it's "boring" seeing a particular jersey 8 times a season, you should go to a doctor because you likely have ADD. The NFL currently allows one alternate per team, and that's fine outside of throwback seasons which necessitate white throwbacks. Teams playing sixteen games aren't afforded the luxury of being "out there" for one of them, and they certainly shouldn't be forced to be, as this proposal would do. Most teams have alternates already. This isn't about wearing alternates on Thursday nights, it's about the league getting more money from Nike to allow them to design whatever garish and outlandish crap they want because the teams would be forced to wear it. Like I said, this isn't tasteful throwbacks. This is half-assed fauxback pro combats and Pro Bowl uniforms.

OldRomanSig2.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DCarp1231

DCarp1231

Posted
Posted

It's hard to picture teams like Green Bay or Oakland indulging in that kind of nonsense. Like the Yankees' response to those horrific and silly TATC uniforms, I'm sure they'll just opt out.

The reality of the situation is that I can see the Raiders having a chrome helmet or chrome facemask at the very least. They might be the only team in the NFL that can get away with it.

Something like this:

wgY5KMd.jpg

I wouldn't be opposed to this for one game. As long as they keep the rest of the uniform pretty much the same.

Oakland could try to pull a Texas A&M and do "Silver Ice" helmets
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept