Football helmets with text - thoughts?

[TShaw528]

A short script works well in my opinion. But sometimes the word/words is/are too long and they become unreadable from a distance, just making the helmet look clutteted

[BrandMooreArt]

like anything else, i dont have a problem wit the idea of using a wordmark on the helmet as long it is done well. but, like all other areas of design i prefer to communicate with images, without text. but who can deny that UCLA helmet's greatness? or even a monogram like IU?

[Botiger]

For some reason I really like helmets that have an arching 3-letter name over a small logo. Examples are LSU and UAB's old helmet.

[YesterdayWasCool]

agree, I prefer the script/worded helmets. These were our High School Helmets: Says Rogers in gold script with white outline on matte black helmet.

*Also we were playing a team named Refugio in these pics, same helmet design, different colors.

[Fassy]

For some reason I really like helmets that have an arching 3-letter name over a small logo. Examples are LSU and UAB's old helmet.

YES! I absolutely think this was the best design on a helmet UAB wore in recent years. I also wish Maryland wouldn't have totally dumped the "Terps" helmets. I wish they would have alternated the colors of the helmet though. Maybe a black helmet with the "Terps" in red with a white outline would have looked sharp!

[tubby34]

I was randomly thinking about the fact that football helmets that have text look odd, in my opinion. I don't like the fact that text reads left-to-right, so when you look at the helmet, the "wordmark logo" faces opposite directions on the helmet. Whereas a helmet with a logo, the logo always faces forward.

What are you guys' thoughts?

I like the text (and Pitt helmets, for that matter) but don't like the way Nike's logos look on the current NFL sleeves.

I don't like the way they look either. The swoosh needs to be on the chest like in college. Due to the sleeve logo, teams like the Steelers and Lions have obstructed sleeves.

Compare this

To this.

Move manufacturer logos to the helmet bumper on the front of helmets, leave them off the in game jerseys.

High visibility for the logo lol

[wonderbread]

I doubt nike or any other apparel manufacturer wants to be confused as a helmet manufacturer with all the head injury controversies that are only going to get worse.

[CLEstones]

I am definitely not a fan of words on helmets, with 1 or 2 exceptions. A monogram logo, or even USC's interlocking SC are fine on helmets, as they look like logos. But when teams spell out whole words like "Gators" or even teams like Texas Christian or LSU putting T C U and L S U on their helmets doesn't look good to me. It's like putting a square peg in to a round hole. There is all this room to do something nice, and instead, they just write the team name on the side.

[BBTV]

I like the 80s/90s GIANTS helmets, the old Illinois helmets, and when high schools use simple letters as opposed to stealing a logo. It also works well when your nickname isn't something that lends itself to helmet-friendly imagery (giants).

It's a look that just says "football" to me.

[B-Rich]

Interesting topic.

In regards to the OP's original reference to the "flying elvis" as facing forward and appearing "correct", as opposed to a word mark such as "Pitt" appearing "wrong", because the "P" is near the front of the helmet on one side, and on the other the "t" is closest to the front.

Think about it in terms of the decal sheets for helmets. Other than the Pittsburgh Steelers, every NFL team that uses decals has a set of two, one for each side of the helmet. Teams that have directionally-oriented helmets would have two different decals-- often mirror images of each other (think Lions, Dolphins, Broncos), while other teams have two copies of the same logo (think Saints, Cowboys, Bears). In the NFL, twenty of the 31 teams that have side decals that would be considered directionally-oriented; thus they are in the majority and lend a basis to his observation that such logos look "right".

What's interesting is that the example of one helmet logo that he gives that appears "wrong"-- Pitt-- is a college team. A quick and dirty analysis of six college conference helmets reveals the complete opposite of the situation in the NFL: in college, a rather small minority of teams have helmet decals that are "directionally oriented":

ACC: 1 out of 14

AAC: 3 out of 10

Big 10: 2 out of 14 (3 out of 14 when Mich. State uses the Spartan helmet instead of the "S")

Big 12: 3 out of 10

PAC 12: 4 out of 12

SEC: 2 out of 14

A lot of this difference comes because colleges have an overwhelming tendency to use letters and wordmarks as helmet decals, as opposed to the NFL where graphic elements predominate.

Thus, whether or not something appears "wrong" or "correct" may have more to do with which type of football you are more prone to watching.

[BBTV]

Good post. I happen to like that colleges use letters / words as opposed to graphics. I think that at a scholastic level, the institution should take precedence over the mascot.

Also, did you account for the Ravens, who's decals are nither mirror images nor exact copies, but actually two different logos?

[OnWis97]

Interesting. I'll take the BIg Ten for an example. I suspect the two you are referring to are Iowa and Michigan.

Of the other 12, PSU and OSU do not really count.

That leaves 10. And while not directionally-oriented, teams like Minnesota, Indiana, Illinois, Northwestern, MSU ("S"), and Nebraska still essentially look the same on both sides.

This leaves Wisconsin (which could, if it chose, use a "W" and look the same on both sides), Purdue and Rutgers.

(I left out Maryland because I honestly don't know what their primary helmet is and if it's a flag pattern, it's kind of an outlier)

So I'd argue that only Wisconsin, Purdue and Rutgers would upset the sensibilities of those who don't like the "flipped" look. I'll admit that as a kid, that really bugged me about the Bears helmet. The "C" on the left side looked weird to me. But I've changed to not minding the "non-mirror-image" look. The main reason is because there is nothing worse on a helmet than an overly-detailed "ferocious" looking logo. The below helmet (with the exception of the unnecessary "F") is a mirror image. And it's pretty much the best example of helmets that I hate (along with "wordmark on top of logo" decals). Too much detail. Looks like a white blob on most TV shots. Probably hard to re-produce on a polo (not that college teams do that with their helmets a ton). I did not love thier "Bulldogs" script but at least I could see it. The other thing I hate on college helmets is mascots: Bucky Badger and the KU Jayhawk do not belong on helmets.

All that said, I prefer letters to words. I'd rather this helmet have "F" or "FSU" than "Bulldogs" But there is room for words (the aforementioned GIANTS and the 1980s Jets, which was kind of a logo, come to mind). But if given a choice between "Jayhaks" and the KU Jayhawk mascot, I'd take "Jayhawks" any day...though I'd ask for "KU."

For the most part the NFL does its helmet logos well. Very few are too detailed. Thank you Bears for having me look at the "C" rather than that overly detailed bear head logo. Thank you Lions for using a silhouette that is not "intimidating." I don't love 'em all, but most work; I'd suggest that Washington and Tampa have too much detail (forgetting the silly size of Tampa's).

The only one that is a disaster is Baltimore...this is because they try to shoehorn the "letter" into a specific part of the "mirror image". The "B" should not be there. It looks awful on the left side.

[Jungle Jim]

I have to admit that this one is kinda homely, but I have loved it for 40 years. I'd better love it, I have a basement full of stuff with it on it.

[JSS]

If you're referecing purely cursive, then I think for some folks it works, for others it does not. The Script Pitt definitely works and in fact is my favorite.

Few others that definitely work IMHO:

Ole Miss

Washington State

UCLA

old Fresno State

Florida

[Sport]

I have to admit that this one is kinda homely, but I have loved it for 40 years. I'd better love it, I have a basement full of stuff with it on it.

I'm holding out hope the Bengals wear a throwback uniform in 2018 for their 50th anniversary. I grew up with the tiger stripes, but I've always had a strange admiration for the planeness of the original uniforms and it would be fun to see them in action.

if you recall during the throwback year of 1994 they wore them, but at that time the Bengals wore decals that were applied and removed by the equipment manager so during their throwback games the Bengals just put a sticker on their regular helmets (which bothered me because they kept the black face masks, which technically they wore in 1980 the last year of the word mark helmets, but why not go all the way back to your inaugural season?). Nowadays the Bengals tiger stripes are all painted on which means that they'd have to buy new blank orange helmets, which means the NFL would have to relax its ridiculous one helmet per season policy if the team wanted to wear throwback uniforms. Also, Mikey Brown is probably too cheap to buy another set of helmets even if the NFL allowed him to.

So it probably won't happen.

[Hontas]

like anything else, i dont have a problem wit the idea of using a wordmark on the helmet as long it is done well. but, like all other areas of design i prefer to communicate with images, without text. but who can deny that UCLA helmet's greatness? or even a monogram like IU?

[B-Rich]

Also, did you account for the Ravens, who's decals are nither mirror images nor exact copies, but actually two different logos?

Yes, I did-- and there are actually two instances of this-- the Ravens and the Kansas City Chiefs (the arrowhead is always pointing forward, while the "KC" is always read left-right).

In thinking about this some more, I also noted something the OP (stumpygremlin) stated: "whereas a helmet with a logo, the logo always faces forward." As I noted in my earlier post, this is not "always" the case. The Cowboys' star, the Saints' fleur-de-lis, the old Oilers' derrick; heck, even the old Pat the Patriot do not "face forward", but instead face "outward". They are not directionally-oriented.

And in thinking about those last two logos, and seeing the Bengals helmet above, I started thinking about how the directional orientation has been an increasing trend in the NFL in particular.

Going back in time, there were these changes and expansions that show a shift toward directionally-oriented logos:

1963 - Dallas Texans (no) -> Kansas City Chiefs (yes)

1965 - Redskins feather helmet (no) -> spear helmet (yes)

1976 - Expansion Seattle Seahawks (yes)

1976 - Expansion Tampa Bay Buccaneers (yes, mirror imaged bucco bruce with windswept hair, followed later by flowing pirate flag)

1981 - Bengals wordmark (no)-> tiger stripes (technically, yes - mirror image)

1993 - Pat the Patriot (no) -> Patriots' flying Elvis (yes)

1995 - Expansion Carolina Panthers (yes)

1995 - Expansion Jacksonville Jaguars (yes)

1997 - Broncos "D" (no)-> Broncos horsehead (yes)

1999 - Oilers derrick (no) -> Titans flaming thumbtack (yes)

1999 - Ravens "stolen shield" (no) -> Ravens head with "B" (yes)

2002 - expansion Houston Texans (yes)

Quick question-- are the lightning bolts on the Chargers helmets the same, or mirror images? (i.e., which way do the "ridges" face top and bottom on each side?) EDIT -- a quick check revealed they are actually mirror images, so the Chargers would be considered forward-oriented.