Do you think the airbrush effect that has become so prevalent once the old cotton jerseys died out has contributed to so many bad designs? A lot of designers aren't thinking 'graphically' like they once did?
I think that the technology to achieve design has outpaced the abilities of many designers. Design in general was terrible in the 1990's/early 2000's as a result of the development, increased usability and accessibility of designs suites such as Adobe and Corel. In terms of jerseys, this meant that clubs would impose more "vision" on their designs, manufacturers would respond by creating more crap and therefore perpetuating the trend of shit that comes out year after year. Thats not to say that everything is bad but for the most part, clubs aren't constructing their identities with consistency of longevity in mind.
Additionally, I think marketing has further compromised the quality of designs. Yes, the role of a marketer is to sell the club but visual identities such as uniforms and logos, which will have historical context in the future, should best be left to those who have a better knowledge of what makes an identity work and what makes it memorable. And before the usual suspects come out and tell me I'm talking out of my arse, its the exact opposite attitude that leads to designs such as the Titans/Tigers/Knights/etc... which will be remembered for being terrible in compromise for money that has been long spent. I talk primarily from an aesthete point of view and cannot see myself and these other people ever fully agreeing with one another, so whats the point of arguing I guess.
