On Now
Coming Up
  • Wed., Oct. 01, 2014 12:45 PM - 1:00 PM CDT Live McCarthy press conf. Packers Head Coach Mike McCarthy will be available to the media in the Lambeau Field media auditorium.
  • Wed., Oct. 01, 2014 2:30 PM - 4:00 PM CDT Alumni Appearance (Murphy, Koch) Mark Murphy and Greg Koch are scheduled to appear at the Packers Pro Shop on Wednesday, October 1st, from 2:30-4 p.m.
  • Wed., Oct. 01, 2014 5:00 PM - 7:00 PM CDT Paul Coffman appearance Paul Coffman is scheduled to appear at the Bellin Health North Reach flu clinic on Wednesday, October 1, from 5-7 p.m., in Marinette, WI.
  • Thu., Oct. 02, 2014 6:00 PM - 7:00 PM CDT Alumni Appearance (Murphy, Koch)

    TTZ: Mark Murphy
    Club Level: Greg Koch


  • Thu., Oct. 02, 2014 7:25 PM - 10:30 PM CDT Packers vs. Minnesota Vikings (Gold Pkg.) Packers vs. Minnesota Vikings (Gold Pkg.)
  • Thu., Oct. 02, 2014 10:45 PM - 11:15 PM CDT Live McCarthy, Rodgers press conf. Packers Head Coach Mike McCarthy and QB Aaron Rodgers will be available to the media in the Lambeau Field media auditorium, following the Packers-Vikings matchup.

Nike unveils Packers’ 2012 uniforms

Posted by Duke Bobber on April 3, 2012 – 1:27 pm

Nike unveiled the 2012 uniforms of all 32 NFL teams on Tuesday morning in New York. The highly anticipated event didn’t carry any surprises for Packers fans. The uniforms still bear the familiar colors and marks worn by the team since the sleeve stripes were reduced from five to three in 1997. In spite of some April Fools’ Day trickery, the helmet ‘G’ emblem isn’t going anywhere.

Nike is changing the material of the uniforms for some clubs, but the Packers have elected to maintain their existing uniform fabrication for the coming season.

Be the first to get the new Nike jersey. Sign up here to receive Packers Pro Shop emails, including a reminder when the new Nike jerseys are available. Click here to see the rest of the league’s new uniforms.


Tags: , , ,
Posted in Packers.com Blog | 82 Comments »


82 Responses to “Nike unveils Packers’ 2012 uniforms”

  1. By Camron on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    These are so cool! Ah!

  2. By Cece on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    Not crazy about the shoes…

  3. By John Alves on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    Cool

  4. By Harry Houck on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    Are they made in America? Nike has abused foreign labor in the past!

  5. By Trent on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    I’m glad they didn’t change the Packers’ uniforms. In fact, I’m glad there wasn’t much change to most of the teams’ jerseys, but I think Nike missed an opportunity to change some of the jerseys that are truly ugly, like the Titans, Jags, and Panthers.

  6. By Ace on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    need to do a side by side comparison. Must be very subtle changes.

  7. By Jesse on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    The numbers appear to be printed rather than sewn on with previous jerseys… Hope this is not the case..

  8. By J Stags on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    The changes are more in the way the uniforms are built than the overall color design. The NFL was known for being very traditional with uniforms and Nike understood that any drastic changes would upset the market place. However, the uniforms look a lot slicker and more modern when viewed in person.

    In addition, Nike has launched a full line of “sideline” gear and fan gear, which I have to say I really do like.

  9. By Jason on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    “Nike is changing the material of the uniforms for some clubs, but the Packers have elected to maintain their existing uniform fabrication for the coming season.”

    So pretty much nothing has changed except from now there’s a Nike logo instead of Reebok?

  10. By Aerncartos on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    It seems the biggest changes are the shoes and addition of the nike logo on the thigh.

  11. By Rob on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    Teams had to approve what was done. Nike couldnt just change it up however they wanted.

  12. By Jerry King on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    Perhaps there should be a “G” on the back of the helmet, because that’s what the competition is going to be seeing a lot of this next year…..Packers running down field away from them

  13. By Duke Bobber on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    @Jason: That seems to be the case. You can see the most radical change was made to Seattle’s uniforms: https://apps.facebook.com/nikenfl/

  14. By hawk1982 on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    I don’t buy any products that NIKE makes. I don’t support slave labor and will not buy these!!!

  15. By Arleen on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    Jerry, the running down the field for the Packers will be for scoring touchdowns.

  16. By Dante Paradisi on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    ARE THEY MADE IN AMERICA ?

    If not, Keep them !

  17. By Mater714 on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    Idk but I would like to see the Pack have an all black uniform to be the alternate..

  18. By Vince on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    By the way, the shoes are different and synced with the uniforms….apparently the big difference for Nike.

  19. By Mike on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    they should make some black on them and pull a oregon move.

  20. By Philip on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    Why do people refer to the situation in a way that suggests Nike could’ve made any decisions whatsoever what the team’s jerseys look like? Saying “I’m glad Nike didn’t [whatever]” or “Nike should’ve changed [whatever] ugly jersey” makes no sense.

    Each team is in control of just about every aspect of its uniform aesthetics and, for now, somewhat in control of the material used to make them.

    Every time I saw someone say something like, “ZOMG if Nike turns the PACK into the Oregon Ducks I’ma go FLIPPIN’ CRAZY ON THEY BUTTS!” I just shook my head.

  21. By Sam on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    I think the uniforms could, and should be, awesomer.You know, yellow slashes through the green, I don’t know, but it’s kinda the same, I think.

  22. By Jon on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    The new uni is pretty nice, because they barely changed it. I like the new pants, it reminds me more of earlier days in football. And I’m wondering if players HAVE to wear those gloves and shoes, or if they have black or white as a choice

    @Philip, exactly. Nike cant do anything that the team or league disagrees with. As you can read in the article, the Packers even got their choice on the fabric used.

  23. By Bill on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    Harry Houck are you gay?

  24. By Kari on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    Is it me or does anyone else not see a difference.

  25. By Gina on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    I sincerely hope these are made in the good ole USA!!!!!! Clay you look READY!!! GO PACK!!!

  26. By brandy on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    Can or will someone answer the question asked several times. WERE THESE UNIFORMS MADE IN AMERICA? If not, shame on the NFL because the money saved on cheap labor will not be reflected at the pro shop or anywhere else

  27. By James on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    I like the original Packers unifom before the change was made. Some teams look great in with the new uniforms, but the packers should just use the ones they had last year.

  28. By David R on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    I am very glad the Packers didn’t bow to Nike like most college teams did! No change is needed in the look of our uniforms! The Packers are built on tradition! We keep what works! We don’t change for changes sake! Stay strong! Go Pack Go!

  29. By DonHut1Hut2Hut3son on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    THANK YOU, NFL for allowing freedom of choice by each team on this … some of the Nike uniform changes will look good, yes, but this is Green Bay, Wisconsin, not Eugene, Oregon (and the Oregon Ducks)! Ducks college football uniforms by Nike were cool the first 3-4 versions … but 85 variations (I’m exaggerating)?! PLEASE. It’s like seeing RED Yankee baseball caps … red is NOT a Yankees color, dudes (I’m not a Yankees fan, either). That’s for fashion-istas, not franchise tradition. Franchises choose their color schemes when they are born (altho, yes, they can change it later) — The reason (in my mind) the Packers uniforms are classic is that, by minimal if any change, they have REMAINED historic, and thus emblematic of Green Bay’s tradition (class organization and class athletes, good folk, representative of its community and state).

  30. By Steve Boutwell on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    As long as players have long hair, how about putting the names lower down on the back?

  31. By Kayte Thomas on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    Love it! The colors and the emblem are perfect – don’t mess with perfection. It’s nice to see tradition still means something. Go Pack!

  32. By SDK15 on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    Mike … you’re a moron for that suggestion.

  33. By Squid on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    It looks the same as last year almost. Whats all the hype about

  34. By jakyl on Apr 3, 2012 | Reply

    How about some better pics from different angles.

  35. By Jim on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    i like the reebok nfl jersey.

  36. By Packer Fan on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    nah,

    Reebok jerseys are better

  37. By Aaron on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    I think the Packers are foolish if they dont take advantage of the new nike uniform(fyi the Packers opted to retain the older uniforms with nike logos.) The new uniforms have exceptional improvements such as water resistance, better temp adjustments, lighter, and tighter fit. Several other teams will now have a slight advantage when facing the Packers. If Nike came out with a new helmet that prevents concussions, would the Packers not make everyone wear them? The old thinking of traditional uniforms are best is close minded and ignorant.

  38. By Nick on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    All of you saying you like the “old” uniforms are idiots. It says right in this article they are made using the exact same process and materials as the jerseys from last year. They don’t look any different because they aren’t any different.

  39. By Craig on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    You truly believe that a uniform will give other teams an edge over the packers? The packers will be a better team next year than they were this year and were one game from perfection… The new uniforms look over all the same which fits the team well. This is the uniform of a traditional, classy franchise and it makes sense to leave it as is.

  40. By Nick on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    Exactly what I was thinking. They didn’t have to change the look but why not change the materials to ones that will keep you lighter and drier?

  41. By josh on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    They should have just changed the ugly teams like the jags

  42. By josh on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    they look great

  43. By David on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    Aaron Rogers said he liked the throwback uniforms because the pants were so comfortable. Why don’t they make the new uniforms with those type of pants?

  44. By Anthony Sorrentino on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    So the only change is the logo of the Manufacturer and the NFL shield doesn’t have Equipment on it? Wow…a lot of hype for nothing! Don’t get me wrong I LOVE the Packers Uni and wouldn’t change a thing…but now the authentic Jersey will cost more @ the Pro Shop and it really is the same thing Reebok was providing! Love you Pack…Go Pack Go!!!!!!

  45. By John K. on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    Seems strange the Pack would not even buy into the new, apparently updated Nike uniform materials and construction. They will be wearing the same unis as last year – literally the only change is the Nike emblem. Either the Pack does not believe the new materials are an improvement (and I would like to know why they think that)or they are just not willing to evolve. There’s is nothing wrong with change as long as it makes you better and is in keeping with who you are. I think this team’s unis could be improved upon. I think sometimes change can keep you fresh.

  46. By Damama on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    To you grouches saying the Packers uni’s are made from the same material. How do you come up with that? They may look the same in appearance but that doesn’t mean they’re identical in material and everything. Also to those who say the other teams with different material “waterproof” and such actually gave the other teams an advantage you’re a d*** idiot if you really believe that’ll make a difference. The cloth used doesn’t improve performance. The Pack would be a top performing team if they were wearing haz-mat uniforms. Point is give the team some credit and quit being pathetic and negative.

  47. By Aaron on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    To the fans that dont believe a uniform could provide a slight advantage-Certain swimsuits are banned at the olympics for the same reason. Now apply it to the NFL, playing a wet game, absorbing extra ounces of water, not to mention wick-a-way materials which allow athletes to expell several ounces, even pounds of sweat. So if you dont believe several ounces or pounds of sweat dont matter, then you are a fool.

  48. By Joshua on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    For those complaining that the new authentic uniforms will cost more at the ProShop simply because they’re manufactured by Nike, there are plenty of websites where you can purchase authentic (or at least authentically made) uniforms for MAD cheap. we’re talking as low as $30-$40 (plus shipping).
    As far as the changes that weren’t made, I believe it’s a wise decision, as has been stated numerous times. The Pack is the epitome of tradition and steadfastness. I believe there is no more an instantly identifiable NFL uniform than that of the Green Bay Packers. The color combo and the ‘G’ is among the most easily recognizable of any sports franchise in the world. Changing it (i.e., adding BLACK (?! seriously) would be not only foolish but a terrible business decision. You stick with what works.

  49. By john on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    Did anyone ask A-rod waht the uniforms should be made of? HE was awful fond of the way the throwback uni’s felt.

  50. By John K. on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    Damama are you serious? How did we come up with the fact that the Pack is not changing even to the new materials? Read the article at the top and at nikeinc.com. It says, “Nike is changing the material of the uniforms for some clubs, but the Packers have elected to maintain their existing uniform fabrication for the coming season.” Also, from si.com, “The Packers allowed no changes to their classic look as well as changing the new technology Nike introduced which includes a different fabric that is lighter when wet.” I love the Pack’s classic look but am curious as to why not changing to new, supposedly better, materials. My guess is the Pack’s brain trust must have determined the new materials are not as good as advertised.

    “Pathetic and negative” – come on man. I assume we all want the same thing – more rings.

  51. By John K. on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    “Kam Chancellor, Seattle’s Pro Bowl safety, says he loves the new designs, but enjoys the cut and fit even better. “The shrink-wrap fit, we can move our body around,” he said. “We can move and be free.”

    The major performance aspects the players honed in on were the stretch fit, the breathability of the top and the strong Flywire collar.”

    Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/football/nfl/04/03/nike.nfl/index.html#ixzz1r6FeBW3O

    None of these performance aspects will be available to the Packers in 2012 because they have opted not to adopt them.

  52. By Nick on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    For those people who said they won’t buy a jersey unless they are made in the USA. Are you aware that the Reebok jerseys weren’t made in the USA?

  53. By Anthony Sorrentino on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    Damama, Obviously you didn’t read the above article or the Nike press release about the Packers and 4 other teams making absolutely no changes in uniform look or materials! Also, are all the NFL players who think the feel,lightweight and water resistance of the new fabric and the advantage it will give them all d*** idiot’s too? Read first, then comment and please no name calling, we all want more SB wins and Lombardi trophy’s!!!!! Go Pack Go!

  54. By waltrows on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    60 years….1 uniform….7 world championships….Therefore, it’s not the uniform.

  55. By Marlo on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    In response to the questions concerning where Nike products are made, a quick search of the Internet reveals “In a single line one can say wherever it is cheapest. Nike has contracted manufacturing deals in countries such as China, Indonesia, Vietnam and Mexico.” (blurtit.com)

    If the new uniforms are manufactured in the USA, Nike’s not advertising this fact in any article that I saw.

  56. By John K. on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    In 60 years the Pack has certainly embraced change. When dudes started wearing helmets the Packers did as well. When the footwear improved, the Pack climbed on board. When shoulder pads and helmets improved the Pack was right there. Equipment improves with better, lighter, stronger materials. The Packers, just like every other professional football team, should strive to stay on the cutting edge of its equipment. The moment you fall behind, you are behind and no one waits for you to catch up. My point is – why did the Pack balk at the supposedly improved equipment? There’s a ton of hyperbole out there and while it’s entertaining I am just wondering why the decision was made. I can guarantee it’s not because of “60 years. . . 1 uniform (which is incorrect anyway) . . . 7 world championships.”

  57. By Connor on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    How bout we add some purple and pink just to makes us look even girly….to the bears uniforms

  58. By jimmyjames77 on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    Glad the Pack didn’t make any design changes in regards to their overall appearance and color scheme, but have to question the decision not to “upgrade” to the newest material and uniform design construction. Seems Nike put a lot of thought into form and function and Packers are potentially putting themselves at a disadvantage. I would also think the players would want the updated uniforms. Dumb decision by a sometimes too conservative franchise.

  59. By Nike Free 5.0 v4 on Apr 4, 2012 | Reply

    Civics 101: Health Care And Legal Precedents

  60. By Rocky on Apr 5, 2012 | Reply

    If the players are ok with the quality of uniforms we have, I don’t see what all the beef is about.Personally I like the ones we have, but I don’t have to wear them, they do. Next thing ya know, we’ll have a NFL week of a pageant showcasing designs on the 50 yard line. Get real people, this is football, not a fashion show.

  61. By Derrik Jones on Apr 5, 2012 | Reply

    Why won’t you get the new jerseys?You won’t get that many players hurt and most of the time you can have your best players on the field.:)

  62. By mike on Apr 5, 2012 | Reply

    I am going to wear my classic Reebok Rodgers jersey and my old Reebok Favre jersey. Screw Nike.

  63. By USA60% on Apr 5, 2012 | Reply

    Football is an all American sport, it’s only right to wear uniforms made in the U.S.A., wait for it!!! if 60% of the items used by the NFL are American made, think of the social impact it would have on the way we purchase.

    http://www.wsisports.com/home

  64. By Greatness on Apr 5, 2012 | Reply

    All of you who think Green Bay has adopted the new FABRIC produced by Nike please read!

    The Packers changed nothing about their classic, green and gold look. They also will not use the fabric that is reportedly lighter, particularly when wet. When Nike described the Pack’s uniforms, they put it quite simply:

    “The Green Bay Packers have chosen to stay with their traditional design aesthetic as well as their former uniform fabrication for the coming season.”

    The uniform style is GREAT but why wouldn’t the Packers choose to use the new fabric designed by NIKE as the other NFL teams are doing?

    Tradition is great but you need to keep up with innovation or you fall behind. Sometimes you can keep tradition but use technology….Especially if the new fabric is as good as they are saying! It would be like not using under armor in the cold – guess we did that too when we didn’t use advanced technology to keep warm in the 2007 Championship game. I LOVE THE PACK but we need to be innovators!

  65. By Glad on Apr 5, 2012 | Reply

    Glad to see we have some true fans out there that listen to the packer news. I like the post Greatness.

  66. By james1965 on Apr 5, 2012 | Reply

    Somthing is just wrong about the sleeves, Almost unmanly, just sayin..

  67. By james1965 on Apr 5, 2012 | Reply

    also if your that strong, shouldn’t matter if your jersey is a little lighter. that again is something you may here from the red carpet not the grid iron . Man up Nike

  68. By GSpackfan on Apr 5, 2012 | Reply

    not a huge fan of the jester shoes, but the uni looks great at usual. Green and Gold Forever!

  69. By Tom on Apr 5, 2012 | Reply

    I think the packer colors should add alittle stripe of orange since the true colors are green , gold , and blaze orange!! maybe a orange stripe in the middle of the white on the helmet,sleeves, and pants. I think that would be cool and show the true colors.

  70. By ben on Apr 5, 2012 | Reply

    WHY NOT CHANGE THE FABRIC!?! the fabric is all high grade and fancy, hi-tech, and because of that the packer don’t get the cool light weight collar thing. i already have 3 authentic packer jersey and if they would have had the new fabric and light weight collar thing i probably would have got one. but probably not now.

  71. By Chase on Apr 5, 2012 | Reply

    Really people? I doubt the people in charge of this decision didn’t just ignore the possible improvements. They probably had some factor we’re unaware of and to think that a uniform is going to cause us to lose is just plain foolishness. Olympic swimmers cut through water, football players cut through other players. Pretty sure it’s going to take more than a few ounces to a difference here.

  72. By Joe on Apr 6, 2012 | Reply

    For all your “purists” out there.

    Reebok – “Similar to Nike, they also utilize a 100% outsourcing strategy and manufacture their products throughout Asia….They are facing scrutiny in regards to wage, overtime, and air quality issues, and like Nike, are working to address these issues.”

    Adidas – “They have adjusted their manufacturing strategy, from a vertical operation in Germany in the 60’s and 70’s, to an outsourcing focus today throughout Asia. Unlike the big two, they do not have a code of conduct, and their factories are considered to be the worst in the industry. It is just a matter of time before they are exposed, with an underground swelling of negativity already occurring today.”

    from http://www.unc.edu/~andrewsr/ints092/vandu.html

  73. By Dave on Apr 6, 2012 | Reply

    Figures, I recently bought an authentic Aaron Rogers Reebok jersey for megabucks and they come out with these. I guess I’m happy that there’s no major changes.

  74. By Ms. Lynn T. Johnsonm lifelong beloved PACKERS FAN recently back from lambeau from U.P. on Apr 6, 2012 | Reply

    Mr. Ted Thompson, Aaron Rodgers, Mike McCarthy and ALL green bay packers organization members IMPORTANT MESSAGE DELIVER ASAP;
    We could and should have REFUSED THE NIKE SWOOSH. We are proudly the NFL’s only publicly-owned team. While I am not yet a shareholder (this Christmas) I could afford $300 vs. $250 on my income to avoid seeing the NFL MVP No. 12 shoot back his arm sans Nike Swoosh. PLEASE “google” “where are nikes made”. click on Wickipedia. While factory/sweatshop” conditions are allegedly better than in the 1980s Nike actually POLLED the workers in either Thailand or Vietnam and they responded that they “liked” working in the Nike factories. I’m sure they like it better than utter poverty.

  75. By Animal808 on Apr 6, 2012 | Reply

    I Don’t care what Changes they make as long as we never lose to freaking Eli Manning again!!!!! But really, change the fabric if that’s what the players want…but no need to change the colors.

  76. By Dr. Tom on Apr 6, 2012 | Reply

    I still like the uniforms from the past 4 years best. The colors on them simply popped and were in my opinion the best looking uniforms in the league.

  77. By jim p on Apr 6, 2012 | Reply

    seems to me the “G” logo was moved higher to the crown of the helmet from the previous 60’s style. very subtle

  78. By Richard on Apr 6, 2012 | Reply

    To me, the issue here is that the fan base supports the NFL well. Teams, players, products, stadiums etc.
    To bad the NFL don’t support American workers because it should stand for NO FOREIGN LABOR also.

  79. By mike on Apr 6, 2012 | Reply

    Are they made in USA if not why not!!!!!!!

  80. By John on Apr 9, 2012 | Reply

    I’m still wearing an authentic Nike jersey (with my last name and #13) from the last time they provided the unis. This works out great for me. Also, I think Steve Boutwell might be on to something – put the players names UNDER the numbers so the long hair doesn’t cover it up. It’s the future (along with less padding and extremely large helmets – right Vic?)

  81. By Cali on Apr 13, 2012 | Reply

    Clothes and Dancing….. This site has turned into some sorta lonely housewife gossip site. Let me know when someone wants to talk Packers Football!! GO PACK GO!!

  1. 1 Trackback(s)

  2. Apr 4, 2012: Football, ecco le uniformi Nike per i team Nfl |

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.