2013 Pro Bowl Uniforms: Nike Unveils NFL All-Star Game System
When Nike took over for Reebok as the sponsoring manufacturer of NFL gear in 2012, many expected sweeping changes throughout the league's uniform structure. Well, it looks as if the company is finally making good on those expectations, as it unveiled the new uniform, called the "2013 Pro Bowl System," to be worn in Sunday's contest in Hawaii.
Nike's official website says the uniforms were designed with the simplicity of the '70s in mind, with modern flair thrown in. The jersey, pants and padding are supposed to work in concert, with the purpose of giving the players optimum protection and function.
Of course, the uniforms are also designed to look really cool, which they certainly do. The AFC look starts with an all-white base on the uniforms, exemplifying simplicity over gaudiness oftentimes associated with sweeping changes.
As to be expected, the NFC's colorway works in stark contrast to its opponent on Sunday. Also simplistic in nature, the NFC's uniform does have red accentuation on the lettering.
While your personal opinion may vary on the uniform's aesthetics, it's hard to deny the 2013 uniforms are better than the digs from last season.
Coming from a company like Nike, top-shelf looks are nothing short of expected. Nike has long been considered the forerunner of uniform innovation. The company's relationship with the University of Oregon is well-documented, and many were expecting that level of innovation to take hold.
But, alas, Nike chose a mostly conservative route for its first year in the NFL. When new uniforms were unveiled last April, there were very few noticeable changes (with some exceptions, like the Seattle Seahawks), and many wondered what had truly changed other than the company logo on the sleeve.
If the 2013 Pro Bowl uniforms are any indication, Friday's unveiling could lead to the type of widespread changes and innovation that many have clamored for.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?