Are the numbers on our jerseys too big?

[seabowl]

Is it only me but do the numbers on our jerseys, especially home jerseys, look bigger than other teams and are actually too big? I've wondered this for awhile and wanted to see if others are seeing it as well.

 

[Seanhawk]

I don't know about the size, but I've always thought they were maybe a little too "fat".

 

[Jerhawk]

Yeah, I've noticed the same thing.

But hey, size matters

 

[Maelstrom787]

Not at all. I love big numbers on uniforms. Ours work well, I think.

 

[PlinytheCenter]

I just wish they would bring back the sleeve hawk...

 

[sutz]

I just wish they would bring back the sleeve hawk...

They would have to bring back sleeves first.

 

[Cyrus12]

I just wish they would bring back the sleeve hawk...

agreed we are not the Seattle Nike's...replace the swoosh with the bird.

 

[pmedic920]

I just wish they would bring back the sleeve hawk...

agreed we are not the Seattle Nike's...replace the swoosh with the bird.

Nike gave us "the bird" when they added the "swoosh"

:{)

 

[Boohman14]

I like the numbers as they are. But I wish the swoosh was history. I hate contributing by proxy to the Ducks.

 

[sutz]

Ahh, the bye week. Like a little taste of the offseason in the middle of the regular season.

:rofl: :laugh:

 

[Anonymous]

No. Looks perfect.

Besides the 1976-1979 team, where the front numbers were the same size as the back, the Seahawks have always had the back numbers larger than the front. 95% of the league has numbers sized that way.

The Cards went with the same size front and back when they unveiled their last new unis, and they are smaller. They look weird small like that.

 

[djb28]

I just wish they would bring back the sleeve hawk...

agreed we are not the Seattle Nike's...replace the swoosh with the bird.

Nike gave us "the bird" when they added the "swoosh"

:{)

I acknowledge that as pretty damn funny. But back on topic. I love the big numbers on a jersey!

 

[Largent80]

Excuse me, but are all of the teams problems so diminished that fans are focusing on the size of numbers?

Evidently so.... :roll:

 

[Seanhawk]

Excuse me, but are all of the teams problems so diminished that fans are focusing on the size of numbers?

Evidently so.... :roll:

You act as if this board has any influence on anything, ever.

 

[ZorntoLargent]

10" tall on front
11.5" on the back

 

[minormillikin]

Excuse me, but are all of the teams problems so diminished that fans are focusing on the size of numbers?

Evidently so.... :roll:

ALL THREADS MUST BE SERIOUS ANALYSIS.

THE TOPIC POLICE HAVE SPOKEN.

 

[Our Man in Chicago]

I don't know about the size, but I've always thought they were maybe a little too "fat".

Agreed. The stroke width is what we're talking about here. Especially prominent in the 8s.

 

[KiwiHawk]

I like uniform threads. It means there's not enough to complain about to satisfy our need for topics. That's a hell of a lot better than things were post-Rams.

 

[Hawkspur]

I usually have to look extra hard to work out tell the difference between Clark's 55 and Avril's 56. Asides from that, it's all good. I prefer the classic straight-line number fonts like the old jersey numbers but they're better than the likes Bucs, Broncos, Eagles, Ravens and no doubt a few others.

 

[Anonymous]

I usually have to look extra hard to work out tell the difference between Clark's 55 and Avril's 56. Asides from that, it's all good. I prefer the classic straight-line number fonts like the old jersey numbers but they're better than the likes Bucs, Broncos, Eagles, Ravens and no doubt a few others.

I have to agree here.

The new font is a bit more difficult to discern at a fast glance.

I am thankful we are not the Buccaneers, as those oldschool digital numbers suck. I'm also thankful our helmets don't look like the Jags, mercy.

Very thankful.