|
Post by Hotman on Feb 19, 2015 3:48:57 GMT -5
So the Oilers are making a comeback? Also - never noticed there were so many teams whose names started on the letters B and C. (Weird way to organize them =alphabetically - except for the 49'ers that got stuck in the middle somehow). You're the only other person besides me who noticed the Oilers... And that aint supposed to be the Texans or Titans. Good eye!
|
|
|
Post by rangerous on Feb 19, 2015 6:59:47 GMT -5
100% spot on. The Jets uniforms since Parcells just reek of the half measures and weak compromises that have plagued the team in the last decade and a half. It's an historical throwback - but with a green way darker than history had it. How does that work? It's supposed to be minimalist - but Woody has let Nike has create strange angles, different textures and colors that don't exist on other teams' minimalist jerseys. It's supposed to represent the Jets, but there's no trace of aviation, sleekness or speed anywhere. In fact, even given a choice of fonts, we choose perhaps the blockiest, bulkiest font available. We have an iconic plane fin swoosh from our 90s logo that would look great on its own as a shoulder pad emblem, yet it's been scrubbed from history for some reason. I'm all for historical jerseys but ours are certainly not historical given the dark green and absurd Nike changes, and if we're not sticking to history what's the point of keeping such a tepid look? I posted it because I thought it was interesting. there is absolutely no need to change our uniforms IMO. We have a classic uniform and it should be left alone. Period. BTW Woody let Nike do nothing to the uniform. They were awarded the uniform contract by the league due in part to selling people on the space age materials that help keep players dry, cool, warm whatever. The different materials reflect light differently and look different. Same with every team, much more noticeable in dark colors. Nike didn't redesign a thing, change colors etc. the uniform is historically correct, the uniform has a tradition and should be l ft alone, we're not some stupid college program, looking for attention or uniform sales. going back to the namath style uniforms under parcells was great. those are really great looking uniforms. i remember the ones in the 80's and then when coslet pulled some mix and match by using the green pants with the white shirts. pretty ugly stuff.
|
|
|
Post by jets.penguin on Feb 19, 2015 8:51:15 GMT -5
I'd love it if they changed the uniform and in turn our image to go along with it...sometimes a fresh start is exactly what you need...ask baltimore, seattle, broncos, new england, etc....its not all bullshyt
|
|
|
Post by Jet Nut Sauce on Feb 19, 2015 9:54:14 GMT -5
I'd love it if they changed the uniform and in turn out image to go along with it...sometimes a fresh start is exactly what you need...ask baltimore, seattle, broncos, new england, etc....its not all bullshyt Baltimore never changed their uniforms. They've always worn this uni. Wasn't like they moved, changed their uniform and won. Settle has had these uniforms for awhile, have won once, a year ago. How did the recent uniform change work for Tampa? Minny? The Jets? the Flacons? Etc, etc? It's bullshit.
|
|
|
Post by Jetworks on Feb 19, 2015 11:03:42 GMT -5
I'd love it if they changed the uniform and in turn out image to go along with it...sometimes a fresh start is exactly what you need...ask baltimore, seattle, broncos, new england, etc....its not all bullshyt Baltimore never changed their uniforms. They've always worn this uni. Wasn't like they moved, changed their uniform and won. Settle has had these uniforms for awhile, have won once, a year ago. How did the recent uniform change work for Tampa? Minny? The Jets? the Flacons? Etc, etc? It's bullshit. Baltimore was, for all intents and purposes, the Cleveland Browns undergoing a name and uniform change. Then they won, changed the uniforms and won again. So you couldn't be more wrong in using them as your lead argument. Seattle, since the change, has won the SB, been a runner up and just missed getting there a 3rd (and 4th?) time. And that's just with the tweaked uni. The one before it that's similar saw them appear in another SB and win quite a few Divisional Championships along the way. Denver and NE's history post uniform change is well-documented as well. All that said, players, GMs and coaches make a huge difference, naturally. But to say that a cultural change to an organization like a uniform redesign doesn't play a role is silly. You play how you feel, and your look affects how you feel. Can't argue that, just ask Tampa Bay.
|
|
|
Post by DDNYjets on Feb 19, 2015 11:40:56 GMT -5
Baltimore never changed their uniforms. They've always worn this uni. Wasn't like they moved, changed their uniform and won. Settle has had these uniforms for awhile, have won once, a year ago. How did the recent uniform change work for Tampa? Minny? The Jets? the Flacons? Etc, etc? It's bullshit. Baltimore was, for all intents and purposes, the Cleveland Browns undergoing a name and uniform change. Then they won, changed the uniforms and won again. So you couldn't be more wrong in using them as your lead argument. Seattle, since the change, has won the SB, been a runner up and just missed getting there a 3rd (and 4th?) time. And that's just with the tweaked uni. The one before it that's similar saw them appear in another SB and win quite a few Divisional Championships along the way. Denver and NE's history post uniform change is well-documented as well. All that said, players, GMs and coaches make a huge difference, naturally. But to say that a cultural change to an organization like a uniform redesign doesn't play a role is silly. You play how you feel, and your look affects how you feel. Can't argue that, just ask Tampa Bay. You can also ask Deion.
|
|
|
Post by jets.penguin on Feb 19, 2015 16:56:57 GMT -5
Baltimore never changed their uniforms. They've always worn this uni. Wasn't like they moved, changed their uniform and won. Settle has had these uniforms for awhile, have won once, a year ago. How did the recent uniform change work for Tampa? Minny? The Jets? the Flacons? Etc, etc? It's bullshit. Baltimore was, for all intents and purposes, the Cleveland Browns undergoing a name and uniform change. Then they won, changed the uniforms and won again. So you couldn't be more wrong in using them as your lead argument. Seattle, since the change, has won the SB, been a runner up and just missed getting there a 3rd (and 4th?) time. And that's just with the tweaked uni. The one before it that's similar saw them appear in another SB and win quite a few Divisional Championships along the way. Denver and NE's history post uniform change is well-documented as well. All that said, players, GMs and coaches make a huge difference, naturally. But to say that a cultural change to an organization like a uniform redesign doesn't play a role is silly. You play how you feel, and your look affects how you feel. Can't argue that, just ask Tampa Bay. what he said mofo!!
|
|
|
Post by Jet Nut Sauce on Feb 19, 2015 20:54:11 GMT -5
Baltimore never changed their uniforms. They've always worn this uni. Wasn't like they moved, changed their uniform and won. Settle has had these uniforms for awhile, have won once, a year ago. How did the recent uniform change work for Tampa? Minny? The Jets? the Flacons? Etc, etc? It's bullshit. Baltimore was, for all intents and purposes, the Cleveland Browns undergoing a name and uniform change. Then they won, changed the uniforms and won again. So you couldn't be more wrong in using them as your lead argument. Seattle, since the change, has won the SB, been a runner up and just missed getting there a 3rd (and 4th?) time. And that's just with the tweaked uni. The one before it that's similar saw them appear in another SB and win quite a few Divisional Championships along the way. Denver and NE's history post uniform change is well-documented as well. All that said, players, GMs and coaches make a huge difference, naturally. But to say that a cultural change to an organization like a uniform redesign doesn't play a role is silly. You play how you feel, and your look affects how you feel. Can't argue that, just ask Tampa Bay. Intents and purposes is meaningless, there is a Cleveland Browns team. The Ravens are the Ravens, won as the Ravens. They also won like 5 seasons after they moved and changed, hardly a change your uni you win piece of nonsense. seattle won years after changing their uniforms. Convenient to ignore all the uniform changes that lead to absolutely nothing. point is, it's to easy to think that changing of the uniform had anything to do with winning. I wish it did, I'd be all for pink uniforms it would bring us a SB, lol
|
|
|
Post by Jet Nut Sauce on Feb 19, 2015 21:04:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by designerjet on Feb 19, 2015 21:33:30 GMT -5
Our uniforms suck. Nike only made them worse. I would support the tradition argument if we had a good tradition. Time for a change. Would love to see something more modern. Exactly. Our tradition was great before most of us were born. It's not worth keeping except for throw back days. The logo has nothing to do with jets, speed, athleticism. It is a logo created before graphic design was it's own field. Font usage is blah - that logo could be for any football team because there is no concept other than it being a football team. Change the NY to NE and put Pats inside the football and it works too. That's why the logo is a fail. It's not specific to NY and the Jets. Screw tradition if it stinks. Not that it matters, but I do this for a living, so I spend hours upon hours on work like this. If I create a logo for a bakery that could be used as a pizza place because they both sell food, it's a bad job.
|
|
|
Post by The Tax Returns Are in Kenya on Feb 19, 2015 23:11:52 GMT -5
Thanks for bringing the helmet up. I'm enjoying the fresh start and clearing the air of Bradway, Idzik, Rex, ... Not just a new helmet, but a new uniform would complete the breaking of ties to the circus era. You don't even need "football people" for this task and Woody could hire a really good firm. To me this would be a VERY welcome change. 100% spot on. It's supposed to represent the Jets, but there's no trace of aviation, sleekness or speed anywhere. In fact, even given a choice of fonts, we choose perhaps the blockiest, bulkiest font available. We have an iconic plane fin swoosh from our 90s logo that would look great on its own as a shoulder pad emblem, yet it's been scrubbed from history for some reason. ON the positive side, that blocky font is easy to translate into knitting
|
|
|
Post by greengeek on Feb 20, 2015 11:26:49 GMT -5
Baltimore was, for all intents and purposes, the Cleveland Browns undergoing a name and uniform change. Then they won, changed the uniforms and won again. So you couldn't be more wrong in using them as your lead argument. Seattle, since the change, has won the SB, been a runner up and just missed getting there a 3rd (and 4th?) time. And that's just with the tweaked uni. The one before it that's similar saw them appear in another SB and win quite a few Divisional Championships along the way. Denver and NE's history post uniform change is well-documented as well. All that said, players, GMs and coaches make a huge difference, naturally. But to say that a cultural change to an organization like a uniform redesign doesn't play a role is silly. You play how you feel, and your look affects how you feel. Can't argue that, just ask Tampa Bay. Intents and purposes is meaningless, there is a Cleveland Browns team. The Ravens are the Ravens, won as the Ravens. They also won like 5 seasons after they moved and changed, hardly a change your uni you win piece of nonsense. seattle won years after changing their uniforms. Convenient to ignore all the uniform changes that lead to absolutely nothing. point is, it's to easy to think that changing of the uniform had anything to do with winning. I wish it did, I'd be all for pink uniforms it would bring us a SB, lol I'm not suggesting that changing the uniforms leads to winning. I'm suggesting that that many fans (myself in particular) would like to see an appearance change. We've already had a minor appearance change thanks to the Nike version being a bit different (and to my opinion moving only in the direction of uglier) than the prior version. A change toward nicer uniforms is simply eye-candy for the fans, not a formula for winning. I for one want the eye candy since I am thoroughly enjoying the "new car smell" surrounding the football aspects of the team.
|
|
|
Post by Jetworks on Feb 20, 2015 11:40:10 GMT -5
Baltimore was, for all intents and purposes, the Cleveland Browns undergoing a name and uniform change. Then they won, changed the uniforms and won again. So you couldn't be more wrong in using them as your lead argument. Seattle, since the change, has won the SB, been a runner up and just missed getting there a 3rd (and 4th?) time. And that's just with the tweaked uni. The one before it that's similar saw them appear in another SB and win quite a few Divisional Championships along the way. Denver and NE's history post uniform change is well-documented as well. All that said, players, GMs and coaches make a huge difference, naturally. But to say that a cultural change to an organization like a uniform redesign doesn't play a role is silly. You play how you feel, and your look affects how you feel. Can't argue that, just ask Tampa Bay. Intents and purposes is meaningless, there is a Cleveland Browns team. The Ravens are the Ravens, won as the Ravens. They also won like 5 seasons after they moved and changed, hardly a change your uni you win piece of nonsense. seattle won years after changing their uniforms. Convenient to ignore all the uniform changes that lead to absolutely nothing. point is, it's to easy to think that changing of the uniform had anything to do with winning. I wish it did, I'd be all for pink uniforms it would bring us a SB, lol There is a Browns franchise now, there wasn't when they became the Ravens. Really, the Browns had a name, city and uniform change. That's what happened. It wasn't a newly created squad/organization, it just got a fancy paint job, so it isn't meaningless. And as I lastly stated in my previous comment, there is more to it than a uniform change. Convenient to ignore that so as to further argue a point no one else is arguing. Again, changing a uniform can have a positive effect on how a team performs. It can also have a negative effect. More so, the coaching, GM and players matter. Do I have to say that a third time, or can we agree on this now?
|
|
|
Post by Jetworks on Feb 20, 2015 11:42:03 GMT -5
That's awful. So's the Giants. Why is it so hard for teams in the largest market to effectively design an aesthetically pleasing logo?
|
|
|
Post by rexneffect on Feb 20, 2015 12:07:27 GMT -5
The problem with the Jets logo is that it's hard to design something with a jet that doesn't look comical on one hand (like the '63 logo) or militant on the other. (The NFL will not permit a logo that uses modern warfare or military symbols.) Something with a commercial airliner would be boring and might be an uncomfortable connection to 9/11 given the location of the team. When a font is used it has to be something that is easy to read (and easy to reproduce on products) which is why any team that uses a font in its logo uses an easily read font (e.g. 49ers, giants, jets, pacers).
You would think somebody could come up with something better than what we have that would fit those requirements but maybe Woody is just really committed to the present design.
|
|