I need your help choosing a jersey
Don’t have much to post about today. I’m going through a rest period and I’ve also been feeling a little flat. Saturday’s ride was good. Tonight should be fun out at the Tuesday Night World Championships. I really think I need to get to the coming Saturday when I’ll put my race wheels back on and get with it!
Things have slowed down a bit with the 2010 Ride For Mike as well. Much of that has to do with me feeling a bit flat. I’ve been going on such a high with the plans for the event that I knew I would have to come down at some point! However, I did get a some more jersey designs. It is neat to see them, but I would be more excited to see them delivered to Hincapie Sportswear and this long awaited process get underway!
You can help by telling me which design you like the most:
Original LowCadence Jersey Design (click to enlarge)
This is the original design – with a slight change in the location of the sponsor logos on the back. We’re going to need to find a way to enlarge those logos in order to better expose the sponsors. Do you like this one, or would you prefer one of the next two options?
Jersey Option Number Two (click to enlarge)
The Beautiful Redhead really likes this one. She thinks the addition of the white helps the design “pop” a little more and also gives a better contrast for some of the logos. I’m thinking it might also be a good way to work out the logo problem. We could have one sponsor logo on the front and remove it from the back and then spread the three remaining logos across the pockets. Hmmmmm… any other ideas?
The Third Jersey Option (click to enlarge)
The third one expands the white portions introduced in the second option. It would make the adjustment of the logos a little harder, but it does give the jersey a little more “motion.” So, what do you think? One, Two, or Three?
Tags: jersey, Kit, Ride for Mike
I agree with the beautiful redhead, we are a smart but soon to be extinct bred. White adds a nice touch of contrast/”pop” to it. I think its a solid choice over the other 2. 3rd is ok but just a little more white than I think you need. Thats my use of my Art degree for today.
2 maybe 3 but not 1
Three.
Looks less “heavy” than 1, and the swoopy bits make it more stylish than 2 without becoming garish.
I agree, the first one of them is the best.
I like the second one. Your wife has a good eye.
Although the .com on the front is making a tangent with the white area. . . . The logo may have to be a tiny bit smaller.
I want!!
3rd one is the best, in my opinion. I agree with what Robert said.
Funny, I kind of like the front of #2 and the back of #3! How’s that for being difficult? And as for those sponsors… dude, they need to be bigger and more bold – maybe even a completely different color so that they will stand out more. GWC’s ’09 jersey had logos in black and white and that was our biggest worry… Notice how this year, we were actually “true” to our sponsors’ natural colors… I’ll see you out there tonight and show ya.
2 or 3, mostly 3, not 1
I like 3 overall but agree with Kimberly on the front of 2 and the back of 3. However, I like LowCadence.com on both side panels. I like the white on the back….more visible to traffic at dusk. I also agree with Kimberly about staying “true” to the sponsors and using their actual colors for logos. I don’t think companies want you to re-brand them. IMO
Of course I have to go against most of the others and say that I like the original. My second choice would be the third one.
i would have to go with number 2. the lowcadance is missing on the side of the jersey. i do agree that the sponsors would like to have more stand out look to them.
Number 3.
I think the original is best.