Quote:
Originally Posted by getbak
Just because you weren't consulted doesn't mean they didn't do all those things.
As has already been mentioned in this thread, design by committee almost never results in the best design. You get the Ed Stelmach of designs, something no one really loves, but also something no one really hates. If you ask 20 people for their opinions, you're more likely to get a bunch of conflicting choices than you are to get one solid consensus.
What are the biggest complaints about the current jerseys? The flags; the vertical stripes on the torso; and the piping. All of those are gone from the new design.
As for best selling, I believe the Wild's green jersey (with "Minnesota" written in a stylized script) and the Sabres' anniversary jersey (with "Buffalo" written in a stylized script) both were well-received by their fans and sold very well.
It's not hard to imagine how this design came together...
1. Red must be the primary colour. Since the red jerseys were re-introduced in 2003, black has been the prominent secondary colour on the Flames red jersey and white and yellow have been compliments. This design should maintain that mix because it has been the identity the Flames have built around for a decade.
2. A return to tradition horizontal stripes on the jersey. Fans like the black-white-yellow-black stripe pattern introduced with the 2003 design. This jersey should maintain those stripes.
3. A new alternate logo for a shoulder patch, but not used as the primary logo on the jersey. Using the standard flaming C as the primary logo will not differentiate this design from the primary jersey enough, so something else needs to be used on the front of the jersey. If both the primary and secondary logos are ruled out, that leaves a word mark as the only other option. The Sabres and Wild have used stylized word marks on jerseys that have been well-received.
Take those three criteria to Reebok, and it's not hard to see how they got to this design.
|
It sure doesn't look like they did the market research, because if they did, they wouldn't look like garbage. This is my point. Do you like them? 80% of this site doesn't. I guess maybe they could have done market research, yes it's plausible, but whoever collected that information or did that work looks to have failed. Again, see results of this poll.
You can take those criteria to Reebok and if they make an atrocity it doesn't mean you have to keep it. Not to mention a main criteria that fans would probably want to ditch is black, which is plastered all over it.
You know, just because the Flames do something doesn't mean you have to automatically like it, that's the fun part about freedom of thought. Is it fair to question how they got to these? I think so. Guess what, it's an opinion.
Meanwhile I'm not sure why teh other poster a couple posts back thinks that because they took away the retro, it means it's more likely to return as the full home / away set. Where's the logic in that? 3rds can be introduced as primaries too, or abandoned, or not, or whatever. So not following that logic whatsoever.