Flames Third Jersey Thread

[Mr.Coffee]

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.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by $ven27

People are whining way too much, it really isn't that bad. Good design, bad logo.

False Dichotomy. The logo is 75% of the overall design, it's impossible to have a good overall design that has a bad logo.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by $ven27

People are whining way too much, it really isn't that bad. Good design, bad logo.

What is so difficult to understand that people aren't whining, they're expressing an opinion?

That's what this website is for.

[$ven27]

When 100 people b*tch about it, it's whining. And the logo is more like 25% then 75%.

[you got PHANUEFED]

Wow those are ugly.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by $ven27

When 100 people b*tch about it, it's whining. And the logo is more like 25% then 75%.

phew, now I know the magic whining number........

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by you got PHANUEFED

Wow those are ugly.

HEY- stop whining.

[$ven27]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

phew, now I know the magic whining number........

Don't be a smartass, obviously it was a estimation

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by $ven27

Don't be a smartass, obviously it was a estimation

Don't whine about it.......

[GoJetsGo]

Not a fan of them and wouldn't buy one... but they're not nearly as bad as the overdramatic outrage here would suggest.

I would like to know how many of the 300+ who voted dislike shelled out 100 bucks or more for one of those Ronald McDonald Heritage jerseys. Imo those are far worse than these and I don't remember that much outrage at those golden arched abominations.

[zyzz]

The most unaesthetic jersey in the league. Embarrassing

[DenverFlame]

It's the flaming 'C' that screws it up. This looks better, I think. I would be OK with this if they made the home and away jerseys the old ones

[Ashasx]

If people don't complain, we'll keep getting ugly jerseys.

Hopefully they realize that fans hate this jersey and never use it.

[Erick Estrada]

Did the Flames hire the design team for the Pontiac Aztec to design these jerseys?

[getbak]

Honestly, my first reaction to this design is more positive than my first reaction to the 2003 jersey, and especially the current primary set.

I initially hated the black logo because it made me think of something that was burnt up and turned to ash (I've since resolved my thinking to the black fire representing burning oil, so I can live with it). I didn't really warm up to the black logo until the playoff run.

My first reaction to the current jersey set was to go online and buy one of the old jerseys on clearance. They wore the flag jersey for 3 seasons before I finally caved in and bought one, and that was only because River City had the authentics on for $100.

The only reason I own a Heritage Classic jersey is because I won it at a STH luncheon.


Compared to my initial reaction to those jerseys, I'm down right ecstatic about this one.

[Jordan!]

It's not bad

[GGG]

Originally Posted by getbak

Honestly, my first reaction to this design is more positive than my first reaction to the 2003 jersey, and especially the current primary set.

I initially hated the black logo because it made me think of something that was burnt up and turned to ash (I've since resolved my thinking to the black fire representing burning oil, so I can live with it). I didn't really warm up to the black logo until the playoff run.

My first reaction to the current jersey set was to go online and buy one of the old jerseys on clearance. They wore the flag jersey for 3 seasons before I finally caved in and bought one, and that was only because River City had the authentics on for $100.

The only reason I own a Heritage Classic jersey is because I won it at a STH luncheon.


Compared to my initial reaction to those jerseys, I'm down right ecstatic about this one.

I really like the HC jerseys. What ruined them were all the off colour knockoffs that came out.

I dont get the word mark. Was anyone clamouring for a word mark? Toss a flaming C in your choice of color and I would be happy. I was really hoping they would go off board on the third jerseys and go with something similar to the flat black BC Lion jerseys.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

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.

That's all well and good and you are, of course, entitled to hold whatever opinion you like, but you're out of touch.
Clearly the market research WAS done, as this jersey has many extremely popular elements to it as well as the ditching of some less popular elements. Gone is the lauded piping and shoulder flags, in is a clean, classic looking jersey with an original and appealing shoulder patch.
The wordmark? It's a miss, perhaps because of the colour combinations, the exact font, or (and this is most likely) the addition of the flaming C. The Minnesota and Buffalo jerseys with similar wordmarks sold QUITE well however, and were both very well received by their fans. Why isn't the wordmark quite as good? Hard to say, but it is a very popular element on other jerseys that sold very well.
To say that this jersey obviously wasn't born of market research shows complete ignorance of the market, and what is currently popular. Wordmark, clean lines, classic font, laces, bold and simple colour scheme - all elements of popular and high selling jerseys. Even the squared off shoulders are a feature Reebok has been pushing this year, so obviously it stood a high chance of appearing here.
And finally, to say that most fans would want the black ditched shows complete ignorance of the fan base. CP is not the fan base, CP is a select grouping of discerning fans who are (let's face it) prone to overreaction and do not represent the average fan. It would be silly to think this is representative of the majority fan base, that's a good thing (sometimes), but it also means you can't look at general opinion here and say "that's what everyone thinks!" because I promise you it's just not true. The original "black C" jersey is the highest selling and most popular Flames jersey of all time, and is universally considered one of the best jerseys in the NHL, so to say that "most" fans don't want black, shows you don't know what "most" fans want. Had the retro outsold the "black C" jersey at any point, then maybe you'd have something, but it's never come close. The retro made a neat third, and could very well become the home and away set at some point, but third jerseys are about SALES, that's it. The home and away? They are about identity and sales, the thirds are a cash grab and a way to test design ideas that could be incorporated into the home/away kit.
Think about it, who are you going to try and sell your jersey to? Hardcore fans who (like it or not) will buy almost any jersey, just to have it? Or casual fans, parents, kids, people who buy jerseys once in a while, and need something unique and bold to be convinced to buy a new jersey? Sorry, you go for the big sales to the casual fans, that's where thirds hit big. And the black? Sorry, but people LOVE the black and red, LOVE it. I'm not saying that makes having the black better than not having it, but it's simply the truth. It's the popular opinion.
This jersey is going to do just fine. In fact, checking out most comments from areas outside of CP, the consensus seems to be "not bad, but the flaming C looks weird". So lets all simmer.

[kipperfan]

Don't like them much, but as noted above, they would much better without the Flaming C logo on the front. If they took that out I'd probably buy one, with it in the jersey is simply too ugly to spend money on, IMO.

[MissAvery16]

80% dislike..don't see these jerseys going past one or two seasons