never understood the thought process behind watermarks. it's just so... i don't know??
When they're super subtle and done for a purpose - Puma using them to denote a PI for instance - then I don't have an issue with them. However when clubs chop and change manufacturers and the watermarks come across as a design element then I agree, it isn't a good look at all.never understood the thought process behind watermarks. it's just so... i don't know??
the thin collar looks weird, but the majestic logo underneath paired with it kinda looks like its a good fit. shape is pretty unique, if the collar was the same thickness as the cuffs but maintained the same shape it could be interesting
I was actually a fan of Majestic, but yeah can't get behind the watermark at all. I'm pretty sure they introduced it in 2017 when they took the contract, along with a shocking collar which they improved the next year.
Yeah the watermark is just not needed. If it was something like the old Fitzroy monogram and the old Bears logo intermittently on the kit, sure i guess, but the Lion on the Lion? why?Yeah look there's all sorts of things wrong with that Brisbane prototype collar. Majestic collars looked all sorts of strange generally.
Still can't quite get my head around Brisbane running with the watermark.