Funny because I'm an architect by trade as well. And although I wouldn't call myself a design professional, I do have to recognize that designing buildings and jerseys don't have much of a correlation.
The original designs looked good on paper. They don't translate well because the human body is not flat. Often times you don't see the entire word or the combination of colors you planned to see in the 2d drawing. Fonts also get stretched out and are not straight when worn.
I'm personally a fan of mapei team kits, and I can also see the appeal of Rapha, both very different aesthetics,, so I still feel that jersey designs are very very subjective. Having said that I own a couple of sponge bob square pants jerseys and can't say they lack broad appeal...
Originally Posted by
kbarch
Being what they call a "design professional," namely an architect, I'm vey interested in this phenomenon of drawing something and it not turning out as expected when actually produced. What was so horrible about the designs? I think the templates don't take form fitting into account very well, and lines and composition often don't work nearly as well once the design is put on a body.
Regarding the anniversary jersey, I think it would appeal to fans of your brand. But if someone doesn't know or get that it is so self-referential, one would be hard pressed to appreciate the combination of colors, fonts and composition on purely visual merits. It is obviously trying to say something specific (or pretending to), indifferent to the comprehension of an uninitiated eye. It's not bad looking, but it lacks broad appeal. That's all I meant.