This real money site caters to all players, with reviews on mobile games you can play, including slots, blackjack, and roulette.

Sunday Open Thread

Washington St Wisconsin Football

Apparently Wisconsin got the same misguided memo that Syracuse got earlier in the week. On the bright side, standing far enough away from the television it was hard to tell just who the hell was who. —Vince

 

122 comments to Sunday Open Thread

  • Robert | September 2, 2007 at 10:43 am |

    Just in case anyone didn’t see my post late in the day yesterday, Wisconsin isn’t the first team to adopt the Cleveland Indian blood clot look.

    http://i62.photobuck...

  • Stuby | September 2, 2007 at 10:44 am |

    Man, Clay Buchholz had some serious BLING going on when he pitched that no-hitter. At least 3 gold necklaces, maybe more. It was Mr. T-esque.

  • Mike F | September 2, 2007 at 10:49 am |

    Few college teams pull off the matching uniform/pants ensemble well. Wisconsin did a great job, its looks good. Syracuse on the other hand… WTF.

    Some teams that can pull it off…
    Wisconsin (Red on Red)
    Purdue (Black on Black)
    Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
    Florida (Blue on Blue)
    Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
    Boise State (Blue on Blue)
    Arizona (Blue on Blue)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)

    Some teams that can’t…
    Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow)
    Pitt (Gold on Gold)

  • Jim | September 2, 2007 at 10:55 am |

    In the St. Louis-Post Dispatch this morning, the lead sports story was Juan Encarnacion;s career is now in jeapordy after getting hit in the eye by a fould ball while on the on deck circle Friday night. For the record, we was wearing a helmet.

    You know what this (in addition to other similar news stories combined with professional sports leagues’ general over-reaction) means: Major League Ragball (coming in Spring 2009 … or starting this afternoon … as soon as enough new balls can be produced).

  • Jack | September 2, 2007 at 10:58 am |

    haha, i was at that sconnie game… i was so nervous they were gonna lose after using the red pants, and also because their motto is ‘today we go 1-0’ and announced it in the pregame pumpup film on the screen…

  • bighokie09 | September 2, 2007 at 11:03 am |

    [quote comment=”139833″]Few college teams pull off the matching uniform/pants ensemble well. Wisconsin did a great job, its looks good. Syracuse on the other hand… WTF.

    Some teams that can pull it off…
    Wisconsin (Red on Red)
    Purdue (Black on Black)
    Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
    Florida (Blue on Blue)
    Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
    Boise State (Blue on Blue)
    Arizona (Blue on Blue)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)

    Some teams that can’t…
    Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow)
    Pitt (Gold on Gold)[/quote]

    lets not forget W. Virginia (Navy), UVA (Navy), Colorado (Black), Wake Forest (Black) and Virginia Tech (Maroon), they seem to pull it off nicely. I’m sure there are othere but those are the only one i can think of at the moment.

  • bighokie09 | September 2, 2007 at 11:04 am |

    OK, maybe not Uva (Hokie Biased, can’t help it ;-)

  • Andrew | September 2, 2007 at 11:05 am |

    As a Wisconsin alum, I was a saddened when I saw the monochromatic look. Personally, I hate the red pants for the Badgers! They should be red and white at home and all white on the road. But, none of that matters considering that UW won and Michigan lost. GO BADGERS!

  • Johnny O | September 2, 2007 at 11:22 am |

    [quote comment=”139838″]As a Wisconsin alum, I was a saddened when I saw the monochromatic look. Personally, I hate the red pants for the Badgers! They should be red and white at home and all white on the road. But, none of that matters considering that UW won and Michigan lost. GO BADGERS![/quote]
    I don’t really mind the red-on-red look too much for Wisconsin, but what I do mind is being lied to. It wasn’t but a month ago someone posted on here that Wisconsin appeared to be wearing red-on-red at home in the video game NCAA ’08. I went to a friends house who had the game and sure enough, there it was. I knew Wisconsin had never worn this combo before, and I didn’t hear any announcement of a new uni here in the Badger State… so I e-mailed the football equipment manager Mark Peeler who has been with Wisconsin since 1995. I explained to him that it is very unlikely that EA Sports would have gotten this detail wrong because they go to great lengths to get things accurate. He responded back to me on Aug. 8th and stated that Wisconsin has never worn red-on-red at home, and will never wear red-on-red at home. Now, he either lied to me, didn’t know, or couldn’t divulge the info. Bonnie Bernstien said yesterday the team chose the color scheme because they wanted to be “solid” (as in their performance) at home. That is fine and all, but don’t you think the equipment manager would know this less than a month before the season starts? I e-mailed Mr. Peeler again yesterday and am waiting for a response.

    P.S. GO BUCKY!

  • Nicole | September 2, 2007 at 11:34 am |

    I was at the game as well and I couldn’t stop saying how bad the combo looked. It was the 4th quarter and I was still shaking my head.

    My mom watched the game at home and apparently Barry Alvarez said on TV how much he doesn’t like the look.

  • blt | September 2, 2007 at 11:43 am |

    As a UW alum I don’t really care for the all red. How does public opinion stand up to how “jacked” the team is over them? Should we be celebrating a team that gets excited over its uniforms?

    http://www.madison.c...

  • derek | September 2, 2007 at 11:46 am |

    I think to say an across the board that a monochrome look is bad is not true. It can be pulled of depending on the color. Wisconsin pulled it off, which is hard to say because they hammered my alma-mater. WSU while wearing them.

  • MikeyB | September 2, 2007 at 12:04 pm |

    I really liked the Wisconsin red-on-red. I didn’t have much trouble knowing who was who, since it looked like Wisconsin and Wazzu had two different shades of red.

    BTW, does anybody have pictures of Miami’s new unis?

  • Ben K | September 2, 2007 at 12:12 pm |

    here you go

  • Daron | September 2, 2007 at 12:15 pm |

    Cal Tenn observation
    .
    Given the fact that there are 100+ players suiting up on teams home games, how often is it that the same number is used on actual starting players?

    Cal has 116 players on their roster. Numbers 1 thru 9 are all duplicated and one number, #19, is even assigned to THREE players. Only two out of the first 20 numbers are NOT duplicated. The duplicates are all opposing sides of the ball. Ex. #1 = D. Jackson WR & W.Williams LB. Both are starters. Another observation is that only two out of the first 20 numbers are NOT duplicated.

    I noticed this last year when Cal had Marshawn Lynch (RB) and Desmond Bishop (LB) both wearing #10. Granted opposite sides of the ball, but it was strange always seeing #10 on the field.

    In the game last night, it seemed as if there was always a single-digit Cal player on the field.

    How often is does this happen, or is this simply relegated to Cal(in this scale)?

  • Joseph | September 2, 2007 at 12:27 pm |

    Tennessee helmet stripes last year

    Tennessee Helmet stripes this year

  • ThresherK | September 2, 2007 at 12:30 pm |

    Syracuse’s monochrome look? I think it might, just might, work if fair amounts of white were added.

    Was the kit even shown under the dim dome lighting? I think it’d look much healthier in natural light or sunlight, which improves almost every uniform. Makes me think nobody saw it in the dome before it was approved.

  • Joseph | September 2, 2007 at 12:31 pm |
  • Erik | September 2, 2007 at 12:36 pm |

    Home: Dark team color on top, light team color on pants

    Away: White on top, a team color on pants

    I’m not sure why so many teams have trouble with this.

  • Mr. Met | September 2, 2007 at 12:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”139833″]Few college teams pull off the matching uniform/pants ensemble well. Wisconsin did a great job, its looks good. Syracuse on the other hand… WTF.

    Some teams that can pull it off…
    Wisconsin (Red on Red)
    Purdue (Black on Black)
    Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
    Florida (Blue on Blue)
    Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
    Boise State (Blue on Blue)
    Arizona (Blue on Blue)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)

    Some teams that can’t…
    Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow)
    Pitt (Gold on Gold)[/quote]

    I beg to differ.
    Three teams that CAN pull it off…
    Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow, Black on Black, Green on Green)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)

    Teams that CAN’T…

    Florida (Blue on Blue)
    Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
    Boise State (Blue on Blue)
    Arizona (Blue on Blue)

    LOVE, LOVE, LOVE the Syracuse Orange and the Oregon Yellow

  • Mr. Met | September 2, 2007 at 12:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”139858″]Home: Dark team color on top, light team color on pants

    Away: White on top, a team color on pants

    I’m not sure why so many teams have trouble with this.[/quote]

    Because sometimes it can look so sweet not too. i.e. Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow, Black on Black, Green on Green)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)

  • Mr. Met | September 2, 2007 at 12:50 pm |

    I really wish Minnesota would bring back the Gold on Gold uniforms of the 70’s

  • Johnny O | September 2, 2007 at 12:55 pm |

    [quote comment=”139847″]As a UW alum I don’t really care for the all red. How does public opinion stand up to how “jacked” the team is over them? Should we be celebrating a team that gets excited over its uniforms?

    http://www.madison.c...
    Well, I guess everyone was left out in the dark, because in that article it says that Wisconsin coach Bret Bielema didn’t announce to his team about the red-on-red look until Thursday night. So I guess Mark Peeler wouldn’t have known last month when I asked him about it. BUT… how did EA Sports get the info for their video game if it was such a secret that even the football equipment manager and players didn’t even know??

  • Aaron Scholder | September 2, 2007 at 1:00 pm |

    Dallas Stars NEW JERSEYS: http://img.photobuck...
    (The reason that they have the trademark logo and no NHL sheild at the v-neck is because these are what the Stars’ junior team will wear and these are exact copies of the real thing from what I’ve read)
    http://img.photobuck....
    I like em.

  • hofflalu | September 2, 2007 at 1:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”139861″]I really wish Minnesota would bring back the Gold on Gold uniforms of the 70’s[/quote]

    I think they are. I believe an article from eariler this year in the St. Paul Pioneer-Press said the Gophers are wearing gold-on-gold for the Ohio State game this season. As a Gopher fan, this may the one game I root against my favorite team, lest they get any supersitious ideas. (Of course, after losing at home to Bowling Green last night, they may not have to worry about winning anything this season).

  • hofflalu | September 2, 2007 at 1:06 pm |

    [quote comment=”139845″]My mom watched the game at home and apparently Barry Alvarez said on TV how much he doesn’t like the look.[/quote]

    I was watching the game on TV with my dad (a big Badger fan), and I was commenting to him how the red-on-red makes the Badgers look like a mid-major conference team. I think I said something like “They look like they’re a team out of the MEAC or the SWAC.” Maybe a minute later, Alvarez comes on TV and says the quote about how they look like a SWAC team! Apparently I wasn’t the only person thinking along those lines.

  • Steve | September 2, 2007 at 1:17 pm |

    Braves in red, Mets in Black. Let the bitchfest begin…

  • JM Rempt | September 2, 2007 at 1:21 pm |

    I posted briefly on it yesterday, but it got even worse as the night wore on—It’s driving me crazy how many teams have filled up the back of their helmets with little decals and logos. It looks like something a NASCAR driver would wear in some extreme cases. USC seems to be the only one trying to keep it to a minimum.

  • C.N. | September 2, 2007 at 1:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”139840″][quote comment=”139838″]As a Wisconsin alum, I was a saddened when I saw the monochromatic look. Personally, I hate the red pants for the Badgers! They should be red and white at home and all white on the road. But, none of that matters considering that UW won and Michigan lost. GO BADGERS![/quote]
    I don’t really mind the red-on-red look too much for Wisconsin, but what I do mind is being lied to. It wasn’t but a month ago someone posted on here that Wisconsin appeared to be wearing red-on-red at home in the video game NCAA ’08. I went to a friends house who had the game and sure enough, there it was. I knew Wisconsin had never worn this combo before, and I didn’t hear any announcement of a new uni here in the Badger State… so I e-mailed the football equipment manager Mark Peeler who has been with Wisconsin since 1995. I explained to him that it is very unlikely that EA Sports would have gotten this detail wrong because they go to great lengths to get things accurate. He responded back to me on Aug. 8th and stated that Wisconsin has never worn red-on-red at home, and will never wear red-on-red at home. Now, he either lied to me, didn’t know, or couldn’t divulge the info. Bonnie Bernstien said yesterday the team chose the color scheme because they wanted to be “solid” (as in their performance) at home. That is fine and all, but don’t you think the equipment manager would know this less than a month before the season starts? I e-mailed Mr. Peeler again yesterday and am waiting for a response.

    P.S. GO BUCKY![/quote]

    Chances are good he wouldn’t tell you because he knew you would tell what you heard, which is exactly what you did.

    He was probably told not to divulge what he knew.

    I don’t think you have a legitimate beef.

  • C.N. | September 2, 2007 at 1:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”139871″][quote comment=”139840″][quote comment=”139838″]As a Wisconsin alum, I was a saddened when I saw the monochromatic look. Personally, I hate the red pants for the Badgers! They should be red and white at home and all white on the road. But, none of that matters considering that UW won and Michigan lost. GO BADGERS![/quote]
    I don’t really mind the red-on-red look too much for Wisconsin, but what I do mind is being lied to. It wasn’t but a month ago someone posted on here that Wisconsin appeared to be wearing red-on-red at home in the video game NCAA ’08. I went to a friends house who had the game and sure enough, there it was. I knew Wisconsin had never worn this combo before, and I didn’t hear any announcement of a new uni here in the Badger State… so I e-mailed the football equipment manager Mark Peeler who has been with Wisconsin since 1995. I explained to him that it is very unlikely that EA Sports would have gotten this detail wrong because they go to great lengths to get things accurate. He responded back to me on Aug. 8th and stated that Wisconsin has never worn red-on-red at home, and will never wear red-on-red at home. Now, he either lied to me, didn’t know, or couldn’t divulge the info. Bonnie Bernstien said yesterday the team chose the color scheme because they wanted to be “solid” (as in their performance) at home. That is fine and all, but don’t you think the equipment manager would know this less than a month before the season starts? I e-mailed Mr. Peeler again yesterday and am waiting for a response.

    P.S. GO BUCKY![/quote]

    Chances are good he wouldn’t tell you because he knew you would tell what you heard, which is exactly what you did.

    He was probably told not to divulge what he knew.

    I don’t think you have a legitimate beef.[/quote]

    That is, if he actually knew anything, which is debatable.

  • Erik | September 2, 2007 at 1:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”139860″][quote comment=”139858″]Home: Dark team color on top, light team color on pants

    Away: White on top, a team color on pants

    I’m not sure why so many teams have trouble with this.[/quote]

    Because sometimes it can look so sweet not too. i.e. Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow, Black on Black, Green on Green)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)[/quote]
    I’m not sure if you’re joking or insane.

    hofflalu, at least we were doing the late-game high-intensity scoring for a change.

  • C.N. | September 2, 2007 at 1:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”139852″]Cal Tenn observation
    .
    Given the fact that there are 100+ players suiting up on teams home games, how often is it that the same number is used on actual starting players?

    Cal has 116 players on their roster. Numbers 1 thru 9 are all duplicated and one number, #19, is even assigned to THREE players. Only two out of the first 20 numbers are NOT duplicated. The duplicates are all opposing sides of the ball. Ex. #1 = D. Jackson WR & W.Williams LB. Both are starters. Another observation is that only two out of the first 20 numbers are NOT duplicated.

    I noticed this last year when Cal had Marshawn Lynch (RB) and Desmond Bishop (LB) both wearing #10. Granted opposite sides of the ball, but it was strange always seeing #10 on the field.

    In the game last night, it seemed as if there was always a single-digit Cal player on the field.

    How often is does this happen, or is this simply relegated to Cal(in this scale)?[/quote]

    I don’t know if anyone else noticed, but on a second-half kickoff, the kickoff actually had to be played over (essentially, a do-over) because Cal, the return team, had two players on the field with the same number, which is illegal participation but did not result in a penalty.

    Naturally, Cal returned the second kickoff significantly farther than the first one. That’s just the way the game went.

  • Shane | September 2, 2007 at 1:44 pm |

    Add Cal to the list that can’t pull off the monochromatic look. They looked like crap last night.

    Another beef I have was the US Open. Blake and Koebel were wearing the EXACT SAME TOP and both had dark shorts on.

  • Stuby | September 2, 2007 at 1:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”139865″][quote comment=”139845″]My mom watched the game at home and apparently Barry Alvarez said on TV how much he doesn’t like the look.[/quote]

    I was watching the game on TV with my dad (a big Badger fan), and I was commenting to him how the red-on-red makes the Badgers look like a mid-major conference team. I think I said something like “They look like they’re a team out of the MEAC or the SWAC.” Maybe a minute later, Alvarez comes on TV and says the quote about how they look like a SWAC team! Apparently I wasn’t the only person thinking along those lines.[/quote]
    Speaking of which, did anyone see what Florida A&M was wearing in their game against Southern yesterday? They were like the old Oregon State unis only in green and orange. I can’t remember if they were green-over-green or what, probably because I was momentarily blinded.

  • alex | September 2, 2007 at 1:47 pm |

    Mentioned late last night.
    Montreal Canadiens Jerseys unveiled on Tuesday Sept 4th. There’s and ad on the home page.
    http://www.canadiens...

  • Jason | September 2, 2007 at 1:48 pm |

    Cal might have looked like crap (I don’t love the yellow tops myself), but I wouldn’t call them monochromatic. They were yellow tops with blue pants.

    As a die-hard Cal fan, I prefer the blue tops with the yellow pants. My wife, ever the intelligent one, prefers the classic blue and white combo.

  • Stuby | September 2, 2007 at 1:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”139875″]Add Cal to the list that can’t pull off the monochromatic look. They looked like crap last night.

    Another beef I have was the US Open. Blake and Koebel were wearing the EXACT SAME TOP and both had dark shorts on.[/quote]
    Cal wasn’t doing the monochromatic look last night. They had yellow over blue.

  • Rob | September 2, 2007 at 1:52 pm |

    Too lazy to check if this was mentioned last night, but did anyone see that James Blake was wearing the same exact Nike top as his opponent, Stefan Koubek in last nights U.S. Open match?

  • Matt Phelps | September 2, 2007 at 1:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”139836″][quote comment=”139833″]Few college teams pull off the matching uniform/pants ensemble well. Wisconsin did a great job, its looks good. Syracuse on the other hand… WTF.

    Some teams that can pull it off…
    Wisconsin (Red on Red)
    Purdue (Black on Black)
    Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
    Florida (Blue on Blue)
    Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
    Boise State (Blue on Blue)
    Arizona (Blue on Blue)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)

    Some teams that can’t…
    Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow)
    Pitt (Gold on Gold)[/quote]

    lets not forget W. Virginia (Navy), UVA (Navy), Colorado (Black), Wake Forest (Black) and Virginia Tech (Maroon), they seem to pull it off nicely. I’m sure there are othere but those are the only one i can think of at the moment.[/quote]

    Please dont forget the best white/white combo TEXAS!

  • Rob | September 2, 2007 at 1:54 pm |

    I really need to read closer, I just noticed someone said that a few posts up. Just ignore me!

  • Brandon | September 2, 2007 at 1:55 pm |

    [quote comment=”139875″]Add Cal to the list that can’t pull off the monochromatic look. They looked like crap last night.

    Another beef I have was the US Open. Blake and Koebel were wearing the EXACT SAME TOP and both had dark shorts on.[/quote]

    Mono- as in one
    Chromatic- as in color

    yup I got eyez

  • sonofsokol | September 2, 2007 at 1:56 pm |

    Watching the BYU v. Arizona game my dad and I noticed something odd… At half-time BYU retired the #14 for Cougar greats Gifford Nielson and Ty Detmer. The Vs Network guys made a big deal about how nobody would ever wear the #14 again at BYU. Then we noticed that BYU had a DB who was actually wearing the #14!!! Is that weird that they would officially retire the number and then have a guy wearing it during the game????
    Also just wanted to mention that the Vs network has the worst coverage of football I have ever seen.

  • Shane | September 2, 2007 at 1:57 pm |

    [quote comment=”139881″]Too lazy to check if this was mentioned last night, but did anyone see that James Blake was wearing the same exact Nike top as his opponent, Stefan Koubek in last nights U.S. Open match?[/quote]

    I pointed that out right before you did, man. At least you could still tell the two apart.

  • Hal | September 2, 2007 at 1:58 pm |

    Yesterday, someone commented that the problem is in letting college kids decide what they like. That’s at least part of the problem with Oregon; it’s almost like the worse thy look to normal people, the more the players like them. Remember, these are people who think Coors Light is the best beer on earth, so we already know how bad their taste is.

    When I played so many years ago, one of our opponents had all of their linemen eat ultragarlicky food before games, and then you had to smell that nauseating aroma the whole game. Maybe this is the intent that Oregon, Syracuse, Wisconsin, etc. are trying for.

  • Shane | September 2, 2007 at 1:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”139879″][quote comment=”139875″]Add Cal to the list that can’t pull off the monochromatic look. They looked like crap last night.

    Another beef I have was the US Open. Blake and Koebel were wearing the EXACT SAME TOP and both had dark shorts on.[/quote]
    Cal wasn’t doing the monochromatic look last night. They had yellow over blue.[/quote]

    Wow, I need to pay attention better. I could’ve sworn they were in all yellow. My bad.

  • Matteo | September 2, 2007 at 1:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”139833″]Few college teams pull off the matching uniform/pants ensemble well. Wisconsin did a great job, its looks good. Syracuse on the other hand… WTF.

    Some teams that can pull it off…
    Wisconsin (Red on Red)
    Purdue (Black on Black)
    Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
    Florida (Blue on Blue)
    Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
    Boise State (Blue on Blue)
    Arizona (Blue on Blue)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)

    Some teams that can’t…
    Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow)
    Pitt (Gold on Gold)[/quote]

    I’d add Cincinnati’s Black on Black to this

  • Johnny O | September 2, 2007 at 2:06 pm |

    [quote comment=”139872″][quote comment=”139871″][quote comment=”139840″][quote comment=”139838″]As a Wisconsin alum, I was a saddened when I saw the monochromatic look. Personally, I hate the red pants for the Badgers! They should be red and white at home and all white on the road. But, none of that matters considering that UW won and Michigan lost. GO BADGERS![/quote]
    I don’t really mind the red-on-red look too much for Wisconsin, but what I do mind is being lied to. It wasn’t but a month ago someone posted on here that Wisconsin appeared to be wearing red-on-red at home in the video game NCAA ’08. I went to a friends house who had the game and sure enough, there it was. I knew Wisconsin had never worn this combo before, and I didn’t hear any announcement of a new uni here in the Badger State… so I e-mailed the football equipment manager Mark Peeler who has been with Wisconsin since 1995. I explained to him that it is very unlikely that EA Sports would have gotten this detail wrong because they go to great lengths to get things accurate. He responded back to me on Aug. 8th and stated that Wisconsin has never worn red-on-red at home, and will never wear red-on-red at home. Now, he either lied to me, didn’t know, or couldn’t divulge the info. Bonnie Bernstien said yesterday the team chose the color scheme because they wanted to be “solid” (as in their performance) at home. That is fine and all, but don’t you think the equipment manager would know this less than a month before the season starts? I e-mailed Mr. Peeler again yesterday and am waiting for a response.

    P.S. GO BUCKY![/quote]

    Chances are good he wouldn’t tell you because he knew you would tell what you heard, which is exactly what you did.

    He was probably told not to divulge what he knew.

    I don’t think you have a legitimate beef.[/quote]

    That is, if he actually knew anything, which is debatable.[/quote]
    You are right. I stated in post #23 that according to the Wisconsin State Journal, everyone was left in the dark on purpose so Coach Bret could give out the info only a few days before the game. So I have no beef with the Mr. Peeler not telling me, because he probably didn’t know. My question is how did EA Sports find out the info of the red-on-red so they could include it in their video game? They would have had to know months before the release of the game in order to have it in their product. If the public didn’t know, the equipment manager didn’t know… how did they find out?

  • Dan | September 2, 2007 at 2:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”139859″][quote comment=”139833″]Few college teams pull off the matching uniform/pants ensemble well. Wisconsin did a great job, its looks good. Syracuse on the other hand… WTF.

    Some teams that can pull it off…
    Wisconsin (Red on Red)
    Purdue (Black on Black)
    Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
    Florida (Blue on Blue)
    Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
    Boise State (Blue on Blue)
    Arizona (Blue on Blue)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)

    Some teams that can’t…
    Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow)
    Pitt (Gold on Gold)[/quote]

    I beg to differ.
    Three teams that CAN pull it off…
    Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow, Black on Black, Green on Green)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)

    Teams that CAN’T…

    Florida (Blue on Blue)
    Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
    Boise State (Blue on Blue)
    Arizona (Blue on Blue)

    LOVE, LOVE, LOVE the Syracuse Orange and the Oregon Yellow[/quote]

    If Wisconsin wants to wear the all-red for every home game, I’d be in complete agreement. Out of both these lists, I think every single team listed can pull of a monochromatic uniform. White pants at home are getting dated, unless one of your two main colors is white (i.e Texas A&M, Oklahoma).

  • Jeff | September 2, 2007 at 2:18 pm |

    Not sure if this was stated yesterday in the open thread, but the coaches’ shirts being worn by the Nike schools are just absolutely hideous with the wierd striping around the armpits.

  • C.N. | September 2, 2007 at 2:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”139890″][quote comment=”139872″][quote comment=”139871″][quote comment=”139840″][quote comment=”139838″]As a Wisconsin alum, I was a saddened when I saw the monochromatic look. Personally, I hate the red pants for the Badgers! They should be red and white at home and all white on the road. But, none of that matters considering that UW won and Michigan lost. GO BADGERS![/quote]
    I don’t really mind the red-on-red look too much for Wisconsin, but what I do mind is being lied to. It wasn’t but a month ago someone posted on here that Wisconsin appeared to be wearing red-on-red at home in the video game NCAA ’08. I went to a friends house who had the game and sure enough, there it was. I knew Wisconsin had never worn this combo before, and I didn’t hear any announcement of a new uni here in the Badger State… so I e-mailed the football equipment manager Mark Peeler who has been with Wisconsin since 1995. I explained to him that it is very unlikely that EA Sports would have gotten this detail wrong because they go to great lengths to get things accurate. He responded back to me on Aug. 8th and stated that Wisconsin has never worn red-on-red at home, and will never wear red-on-red at home. Now, he either lied to me, didn’t know, or couldn’t divulge the info. Bonnie Bernstien said yesterday the team chose the color scheme because they wanted to be “solid” (as in their performance) at home. That is fine and all, but don’t you think the equipment manager would know this less than a month before the season starts? I e-mailed Mr. Peeler again yesterday and am waiting for a response.

    P.S. GO BUCKY![/quote]

    Chances are good he wouldn’t tell you because he knew you would tell what you heard, which is exactly what you did.

    He was probably told not to divulge what he knew.

    I don’t think you have a legitimate beef.[/quote]

    That is, if he actually knew anything, which is debatable.[/quote]
    You are right. I stated in post #23 that according to the Wisconsin State Journal, everyone was left in the dark on purpose so Coach Bret could give out the info only a few days before the game. So I have no beef with the Mr. Peeler not telling me, because he probably didn’t know. My question is how did EA Sports find out the info of the red-on-red so they could include it in their video game? They would have had to know months before the release of the game in order to have it in their product. If the public didn’t know, the equipment manager didn’t know… how did they find out?[/quote]

    Maybe it got leaked to them? That’s the only thing I can think of.

  • David Weber | September 2, 2007 at 2:20 pm |

    If you look at EA Sports NCAA series, there has been a red-on-red uni combo for Wisconsin for years; it’s just been an ‘alternate,’ alongside the seldom-used white jersey/red pants combo and the standard unis. This is the first time ever the Badgers have gone all-red in a game (I’m a UW student).

    Also, this isn’t the first time it was ‘erroneously’ set as the default home uni. I can’t remember the version, but it happened a few years back as well. Even weirder, the red pants didn’t have stripes!

  • Shane | September 2, 2007 at 2:21 pm |

    I haven’t seen it mentioned today, but Queens Park Rangers paid tribute to the late Ray Jones by wearing his full name on the back of their kits, though with normal numbers, instead of whatever Jones had wore (I caught it briefly on Sky Sports News last night).

  • Matches | September 2, 2007 at 2:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”139875″]

    Another beef I have was the US Open. Blake and Koebel were wearing the EXACT SAME TOP and both had dark shorts on.[/quote]

    Were they Nike tops? I’ve seen three guys wearing the exact same early-90s inspired Nike top. White/Gray/Gold with an inexplicable navy stripe. American John Isner wore it in his loss to Federer on Saturday, while fellow American Donald Young (pairing it with a distinctively CC Sabathia-like askew cap) lost to Spaniard Feliciano Lopez; both were wearing the same shirt as Isner.

    Hate you Nike.

  • Matches | September 2, 2007 at 2:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”139896″]
    Also, this isn’t the first time it was ‘erroneously’ set as the default home uni. I can’t remember the version, but it happened a few years back as well. Even weirder, the red pants didn’t have stripes![/quote]

    EA is notorious for getting uniforms incorrect. This year’s John Madden Football came out with the Browns’ default away uniform pairing their white jerseys with brown pants, which I don’t think have ever been worn.

  • Greg V. | September 2, 2007 at 2:33 pm |

    St. Xavier is pulling off the monochromatic look pretty well on ESPN right now. They are also a rare example of nice clean uniforms manufactured by Nike.

  • =bg= | September 2, 2007 at 2:36 pm |

    Ah, the St X Bombers. Those St. X-Moeller battles were legendary.

    Is Steve Rasso still coach?

    PS
    http://msn.foxsports...

    Chiefs (scroll down) have the old AFL logo on their chest..

  • JMC | September 2, 2007 at 2:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”139837″]OK, maybe not Uva (Hokie Biased, can’t help it ;-)[/quote]

    I agree. They look like crap in blue on blue. And I went to UVA. In fact, their uni’s overall have gone completely downhill since I started going there (1999).

    Old
    note the cool collar design and sweet numbers

    New
    Note the totally boring. I kinda like the “pro style” helmet stripes and the logos on the shoulders, but they are boring otherwise. Lame looking block numbers, no collar design, and bad monochrome look. Thanks Al Groh.

  • drew | September 2, 2007 at 3:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”139896″]If you look at EA Sports NCAA series, there has been a red-on-red uni combo for Wisconsin for years; it’s just been an ‘alternate,’ alongside the seldom-used white jersey/red pants combo and the standard unis. This is the first time ever the Badgers have gone all-red in a game (I’m a UW student).

    Also, this isn’t the first time it was ‘erroneously’ set as the default home uni. I can’t remember the version, but it happened a few years back as well. Even weirder, the red pants didn’t have stripes![/quote]

    I think it was NCAA Football 2005 because I would change the uniform before every game I played because I didn’t like that particular combination

  • E Ro | September 2, 2007 at 3:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”139863″]Dallas Stars NEW JERSEYS: http://img.photobuck...
    (The reason that they have the trademark logo and no NHL sheild at the v-neck is because these are what the Stars’ junior team will wear and these are exact copies of the real thing from what I’ve read)
    http://img.photobuck....
    I like em.[/quote]

    There’s too many inconsistencies: no nhl logo, no rbk tag, different material than the other rbk edges, so i’m skeptical.

  • MikeyB | September 2, 2007 at 3:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”139858″]Home: Dark team color on top, light team color on pants

    Away: White on top, a team color on pants

    I’m not sure why so many teams have trouble with this.[/quote]

    Because that gets boring after a while.

  • Taylor | September 2, 2007 at 3:18 pm |

    Only a few teams can pull off the dark pants/white top look. Mississippi St. and UVA are the only ones I can think of. Yellow, gold and gray pants don’t count.

  • Stu | September 2, 2007 at 3:25 pm |

    This may be a little late but oh well:

    Honestly I don’t see what the huge deal over Syracuse’s jerseys is. I love it when teams have unusual colors that would scare off most programs. And as far as I can tell, that orange is pretty unique and the combo is unlike most others, maybe UVA comes close. I do think it would have looked better with a navy top and orange numbers with orange pants and orange helmets. But still the old school look is awesome and people are complaining that there is no outline on the numbers. Who cares? I think it is so much better without outlining. Like how the Dallas Cowboys white jerseys have non-outlined numbers. It just looks better in my opinion

  • Chris | September 2, 2007 at 3:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”139905″][quote comment=”139863″]Dallas Stars NEW JERSEYS: http://img.photobuck...
    (The reason that they have the trademark logo and no NHL sheild at the v-neck is because these are what the Stars’ junior team will wear and these are exact copies of the real thing from what I’ve read)
    http://img.photobuck....
    I like em.[/quote]

    There’s too many inconsistencies: no nhl logo, no rbk tag, different material than the other rbk edges, so i’m skeptical.[/quote]
    Lets just hope those home ones are for real. Why couldn’t have Vancouver done that?

  • My Name is Not Earl | September 2, 2007 at 3:51 pm |

    Regarding Cal and the duplicate numbers: last night, on a kickoff, Cal actually got penalized for having two players with the same jersey number on the field at the same time. Back when Washington had all kinds of duplicate numbers (or maybe this was Cal last year), you’d have guys “borrowing” numbers just for special teams and then putting on the jerseys with their assigned numbers for offense or defense.

  • hofflalu | September 2, 2007 at 3:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”139873″][quote comment=”139860″][quote comment=”139858″]Home: Dark team color on top, light team color on pants

    Away: White on top, a team color on pants

    I’m not sure why so many teams have trouble with this.[/quote]

    Because sometimes it can look so sweet not too. i.e. Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow, Black on Black, Green on Green)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)[/quote]
    I’m not sure if you’re joking or insane.

    hofflalu, at least we were doing the late-game high-intensity scoring for a change.[/quote]

    Hehe, good point. It’s a lot easier to take as a Gopher fan to be down big early and make a comback that falls just short, than to blow a huge lead by shutting down on offense during the 4th quarter. It sure wasn’t fun rooting for a team that is the subject of multiple ESPN Classic games featuring dramatic come-from-behind wins against your squad.

  • DW in Tampa Bay | September 2, 2007 at 4:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”139847″]As a UW alum I don’t really care for the all red. How does public opinion stand up to how “jacked” the team is over them? Should we be celebrating a team that gets excited over its uniforms?

    http://www.madison.c...

    Remember, this is the same school that wants all other teams not to use their stylized “W” either.

    They have no clue.

  • SWC Susan (aka Tex) | September 2, 2007 at 4:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”139863″]Dallas Stars NEW JERSEYS: http://img.photobuck...
    (The reason that they have the trademark logo and no NHL sheild at the v-neck is because these are what the Stars’ junior team will wear and these are exact copies of the real thing from what I’ve read)
    http://img.photobuck....
    I like em.[/quote]

    …tears… I hope not!

  • pnasty | September 2, 2007 at 4:17 pm |

    i know im late on this but not only did i have to watch my vols and wolverines lose last night but i had to watch them lose to two teams with horribly unis app atae with those old nikeworld designs and the cal yellows i think my eyes got raped watching the game

  • David Weber | September 2, 2007 at 4:20 pm |

    EA is notorious for getting uniforms incorrect. This year’s John Madden Football came out with the Browns’ default away uniform pairing their white jerseys with brown pants, which I don’t think have ever been worn.

    Right, they’ve never seen the light of day, and hopefully never will. Also, the only striped socks / black shoes combo in Madden 08 is on the throwbacks; which is why I use those most of the time (even set them as defaults in franchise mode).

    Personally, I’d love to see them go back to using the all-white uniforms at home. Hearkens back to the glory days of Bernie Kosar (I grew up in Cleveland) and the championship era of Jim Brown, when the dark jerseys were almost never used.

  • Stuby | September 2, 2007 at 4:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”139901″]Ah, the St X Bombers. Those St. X-Moeller battles were legendary.

    Is Steve Rasso still coach?

    PS
    http://msn.foxsports...

    Chiefs (scroll down) have the old AFL logo on their chest..[/quote]
    That AFL logo is the Lamar Hunt memorial patch.

  • Toivo | September 2, 2007 at 4:55 pm |

    [quote comment=”139882″][quote comment=”139836″][quote comment=”139833″]Few college teams pull off the matching uniform/pants ensemble well. Wisconsin did a great job, its looks good. Syracuse on the other hand… WTF.

    Some teams that can pull it off…
    Wisconsin (Red on Red)
    Purdue (Black on Black)
    Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
    Florida (Blue on Blue)
    Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
    Boise State (Blue on Blue)
    Arizona (Blue on Blue)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)

    Some teams that can’t…
    Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow)
    Pitt (Gold on Gold)[/quote]

    lets not forget W. Virginia (Navy), UVA (Navy), Colorado (Black), Wake Forest (Black) and Virginia Tech (Maroon), they seem to pull it off nicely. I’m sure there are othere but those are the only one i can think of at the moment.[/quote]

    Please dont forget the best white/white combo TEXAS![/quote]

    That is incorrect, the best white/white combo is Penn State. They have so much white on their stuff they had to forgo the helmet logo to keep that white…as a matter of fact they should just do away with the stripe on that thing as well.

  • Douzoglou Grandes Ligas | September 2, 2007 at 5:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”139840″][quote comment=”139838″]As a Wisconsin alum, I was a saddened when I saw the monochromatic look. Personally, I hate the red pants for the Badgers! They should be red and white at home and all white on the road. But, none of that matters considering that UW won and Michigan lost. GO BADGERS![/quote]
    I don’t really mind the red-on-red look too much for Wisconsin, but what I do mind is being lied to. It wasn’t but a month ago someone posted on here that Wisconsin appeared to be wearing red-on-red at home in the video game NCAA ’08. I went to a friends house who had the game and sure enough, there it was. I knew Wisconsin had never worn this combo before, and I didn’t hear any announcement of a new uni here in the Badger State… so I e-mailed the football equipment manager Mark Peeler who has been with Wisconsin since 1995. I explained to him that it is very unlikely that EA Sports would have gotten this detail wrong because they go to great lengths to get things accurate. He responded back to me on Aug. 8th and stated that Wisconsin has never worn red-on-red at home, and will never wear red-on-red at home. Now, he either lied to me, didn’t know, or couldn’t divulge the info. Bonnie Bernstien said yesterday the team chose the color scheme because they wanted to be “solid” (as in their performance) at home. That is fine and all, but don’t you think the equipment manager would know this less than a month before the season starts? I e-mailed Mr. Peeler again yesterday and am waiting for a response.

    P.S. GO BUCKY![/quote]

    It is very possible he didn’t know… however if NCAA 08 knows, he probably knew as well. You can’t blame the guy for trying to keep a surprise. Maybe he was just so ashamed to know they were going to look that crappy and not be able to do anything about it that he was just in denial…

  • Chuck Ryals | September 2, 2007 at 5:11 pm |

    new Leafs jerseys? http://hfboards.com/...

  • charlie | September 2, 2007 at 5:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”139913″][quote comment=”139905″][quote comment=”139863″]Dallas Stars NEW JERSEYS: http://img.photobuck...
    (The reason that they have the trademark logo and no NHL sheild at the v-neck is because these are what the Stars’ junior team will wear and these are exact copies of the real thing from what I’ve read)
    http://img.photobuck....
    I like em.[/quote]

    There’s too many inconsistencies: no nhl logo, no rbk tag, different material than the other rbk edges, so i’m skeptical.[/quote]
    Lets just hope those home ones are for real. Why couldn’t have Vancouver done that?[/quote]

    Im pretty sure those pictures arent photoshopped, but im pretty sure the jerseys arent legit. somebody has wayyyy to much time on their hands and actually made those im pretty sure.

  • Douzoglou Grandes Ligas | September 2, 2007 at 5:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”139875″]Add Cal to the list that can’t pull off the monochromatic look. They looked like crap last night.

    Another beef I have was the US Open. Blake and Koebel were wearing the EXACT SAME TOP and both had dark shorts on.[/quote]

    Last night they weren’t wearing their monochromatic look… if you look up what the definition of monochrome it refferes to mono-only or alone and chroma- color… last night was blue pants (I guess those could be considered monochromatic since it was blue) however their jersey was gold with blue “saber stripes” or whatever they call those…

  • Evan | September 2, 2007 at 5:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”139932″]new Leafs jerseys?

    http://hfboards.com/...

    It looks very “classic”
    Plain, but very good

  • Zach | September 2, 2007 at 5:27 pm |

    Just wanted to say, I am glad to see so many NFL teams coming back to the white helmets. I think that it makes a classic look and it looks really classy. I’m a college student so don’t remember that long ago but I would always love watching Dallas when they wear their white helmets and now I LOVE the new chargers helmets.

  • Chuck Ryals | September 2, 2007 at 5:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”139935″][quote comment=”139932″]new Leafs jerseys?

    http://hfboards.com/...

    It looks very “classic”
    Plain, but very good[/quote]
    I’ll take plain over gaudy any day! I hope the new jerseys have a tie up collar,,,,,,,,,

  • Mike Edgerly | September 2, 2007 at 5:41 pm |

    Can’t believe nobody’s commented on this yet, but Auburn was wearing some hideous Under Armor sleeves in the game last night vs. K-State. Most of the players had some rounded pattern thingy on their sleeves as well. Awful!

  • JTM | September 2, 2007 at 5:42 pm |

    Some teams that can pull it off…
    Wisconsin (Red on Red)
    Purdue (Black on Black)
    Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
    Florida (Blue on Blue)
    Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
    Boise State (Blue on Blue)
    Arizona (Blue on Blue)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)

    As a UW alum (that’s U-Dub, rather than U-double U, given the topics today), Washington’s only worn purple on purple once that I can remember–in 1989 against Colorado. After losing 45-28, I don’t think they’ve ever used the combo again. This was pretty soon after they switched from the gold pants to purple pants on the road and, if I recall correctly, like Wisconsin, the players wanted to wear the purple on purple combo.

    I’m not a fan of the monochrome/pajama look and am glad the Dawgs have avoided it since, now if only the Seahawks would get the message . . .

  • teddymcg | September 2, 2007 at 5:42 pm |

    Please dont forget the best white/white combo TEXAS![/quote]

    If you’re into see-through pants. They look like a bunch of Iggy Pops.

  • Mr. Met | September 2, 2007 at 6:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”139873″][quote comment=”139860″][quote comment=”139858″]Home: Dark team color on top, light team color on pants

    Away: White on top, a team color on pants

    I’m not sure why so many teams have trouble with this.[/quote]

    Because sometimes it can look so sweet not too. i.e. Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow, Black on Black, Green on Green)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)[/quote]
    I’m not sure if you’re joking or insane.

    hofflalu, at least we were doing the late-game high-intensity scoring for a change.[/quote]

    Not joking at all. Why can’t someone like bright color on color. Most of the Oregon players like the uniforms from what I read. Just because I hate the Yankees uniform and hate Notre Dames uniforms and love Oregons doesn’t mean I don’t get it.

  • azs | September 2, 2007 at 6:13 pm |

    I know this has nothing to do with anything but I emailed Paul and he suggested I ask y’all:

    I’m looking for vintage/throwback/classic Phoenix Suns gear. I found a site called Retro Sports Apparel but they want $48 for a t-shirt. Eff that. I’m a damn student. Anyone know of where to look? Any thoughts are much appreciated.

    BTW wisconsin looked like a tampon yesterday…

  • JM Rempt | September 2, 2007 at 6:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”139903″][quote comment=”139837″]OK, maybe not Uva (Hokie Biased, can’t help it ;-)[/quote]

    I agree. They look like crap in blue on blue. And I went to UVA. In fact, their uni’s overall have gone completely downhill since I started going there (1999).

    Old
    note the cool collar design and sweet numbers

    New
    Note the totally boring. I kinda like the “pro style” helmet stripes and the logos on the shoulders, but they are boring otherwise. Lame looking block numbers, no collar design, and bad monochrome look. Thanks Al Groh.[/quote]

    the UVA design element that bugs me the most are those Helmet stripes that only go halfway back. HATE.

  • Evan | September 2, 2007 at 6:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”139938″][quote comment=”139935″][quote comment=”139932″]new Leafs jerseys?

    http://hfboards.com/...

    It looks very “classic”
    Plain, but very good[/quote]
    I’ll take plain over gaudy any day! I hope the new jerseys have a tie up collar,,,,,,,,,[/quote]
    yeah they didnt screw it up with stupid stripes or piping trying to make it look “futuristic”

  • JMC | September 2, 2007 at 6:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”139947″]

    the UVA design element that bugs me the most are those Helmet stripes that only go halfway back. HATE.[/quote]

    I really disliked them at first but they’ve grown on me. Compared to the other changes they’ve made I’m ok with them. They look like the Ravens I believe.

  • Go Bears | September 2, 2007 at 7:10 pm |

    Cal should go gold on gold one time just to bug everyone even more – they DO have gold pants available. With the darker helmet, shoes, and socks it wouldn’t look too bad. The blue pants they always wear with the gold jerseys make them look like a road team (light jersey, dark pants).

    The monochromatic thing tends to look better on teams with black shoes as well (unless we’re talking about white on white, which shouldn’t even count because so many teams do it). I can think of Kentucky (blue), Louisville (black), Utah (red), and Clemson (purple OR orange) that all look crappy going solid color because of the white shoes.

  • Stuby | September 2, 2007 at 7:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”139947″][quote comment=”139903″][quote comment=”139837″]OK, maybe not Uva (Hokie Biased, can’t help it ;-)[/quote]

    I agree. They look like crap in blue on blue. And I went to UVA. In fact, their uni’s overall have gone completely downhill since I started going there (1999).

    Old
    note the cool collar design and sweet numbers

    New
    Note the totally boring. I kinda like the “pro style” helmet stripes and the logos on the shoulders, but they are boring otherwise. Lame looking block numbers, no collar design, and bad monochrome look. Thanks Al Groh.[/quote]

    the UVA design element that bugs me the most are those Helmet stripes that only go halfway back. HATE.[/quote]
    My biggest pet peeve right there. Titans, Panthers, etc.

  • Tom C. | September 2, 2007 at 7:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”139867″]Braves in red, Mets in Black. Let the bitchfest begin…[/quote]

    yeah I don’t know what it is. I am not against alt jerseys… but something about alt. vs. alt. screams minor leagues. I actually just went to espn.com and saw the smoltz highlight was the top one… then came to uni-watch to see who was complaining about the uni’s

  • Aaron Scholder | September 2, 2007 at 7:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”139933″][quote comment=”139913″][quote comment=”139905″][quote comment=”139863″]Dallas Stars NEW JERSEYS: http://img.photobuck...
    (The reason that they have the trademark logo and no NHL sheild at the v-neck is because these are what the Stars’ junior team will wear and these are exact copies of the real thing from what I’ve read)
    http://img.photobuck....
    I like em.[/quote]

    There’s too many inconsistencies: no nhl logo, no rbk tag, different material than the other rbk edges, so i’m skeptical.[/quote]
    Lets just hope those home ones are for real. Why couldn’t have Vancouver done that?[/quote]

    Im pretty sure those pictures arent photoshopped, but im pretty sure the jerseys arent legit. somebody has wayyyy to much time on their hands and actually made those im pretty sure.[/quote]
    They most likely are not photoshopped. The reason they don’t have many of the Reebok hallmarks such as the NHL shield or the tag or the cut of an authentic jersey is because they are not made for the NHL team. They are made for Dallas’s youth team which bears the same name and wears the same jerseys, just without NHL insignia.

  • Aaron Scholder | September 2, 2007 at 7:53 pm |

    Here’s a quote from a Stars fan: “These are the jerseys given by the Stars to their select kids teams. Those teams have always worn the exact same jerseys as the Stars. That’s why the material is different, why the tag logo on the inside is different, and why it has a TM on the crest. This isn’t official, but some people are saying the Stars are very angry these jerseys were shown to the public ahead of the official release date.”

  • Terri | September 2, 2007 at 8:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”139954″][quote comment=”139933″][quote comment=”139913″][quote comment=”139905″][quote comment=”139863″]Dallas Stars NEW JERSEYS: http://img.photobuck...
    (The reason that they have the trademark logo and no NHL sheild at the v-neck is because these are what the Stars’ junior team will wear and these are exact copies of the real thing from what I’ve read)
    http://img.photobuck....
    I like em.[/quote]

    There’s too many inconsistencies: no nhl logo, no rbk tag, different material than the other rbk edges, so i’m skeptical.[/quote]
    Lets just hope those home ones are for real. Why couldn’t have Vancouver done that?[/quote]

    Im pretty sure those pictures arent photoshopped, but im pretty sure the jerseys arent legit. somebody has wayyyy to much time on their hands and actually made those im pretty sure.[/quote]
    They most likely are not photoshopped. The reason they don’t have many of the Reebok hallmarks such as the NHL shield or the tag or the cut of an authentic jersey is because they are not made for the NHL team. They are made for Dallas’s youth team which bears the same name and wears the same jerseys, just without NHL insignia.[/quote]

    The home jersey looks like it belongs on the mavericks, not the stars…at least I’ll only be at away games this yr, so I won’t have to see it.

    I’m gonna go cry at the loss of the star jersey now…

  • Smail | September 2, 2007 at 8:35 pm |

    [quote comment=”139940″]Can’t believe nobody’s commented on this yet, but Auburn was wearing some hideous Under Armor sleeves in the game last night vs. K-State. Most of the players had some rounded pattern thingy on their sleeves as well. Awful![/quote]

    Auburn wore those diagonal banded sleeves last year too.

  • Matt | September 2, 2007 at 8:55 pm |

    Purdue’s black on black does look good…however, once upon a time, right after the Drew Brees ended, we wore these
    awful jerseys….including this
    gold-on-gold-on-gold ensemble.

  • Pretty Boy Paulie | September 2, 2007 at 9:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”139859″][quote comment=”139833″]Few college teams pull off the matching uniform/pants ensemble well. Wisconsin did a great job, its looks good. Syracuse on the other hand… WTF.

    Some teams that can pull it off…
    Wisconsin (Red on Red)
    Purdue (Black on Black)
    Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
    Florida (Blue on Blue)
    Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
    Boise State (Blue on Blue)
    Arizona (Blue on Blue)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)

    Some teams that can’t…
    Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow)
    Pitt (Gold on Gold)[/quote]

    I beg to differ.
    Three teams that CAN pull it off…
    Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow, Black on Black, Green on Green)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)

    Teams that CAN’T…

    Florida (Blue on Blue)
    Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
    Boise State (Blue on Blue)
    Arizona (Blue on Blue)

    LOVE, LOVE, LOVE the Syracuse Orange and the Oregon Yellow[/quote]

    I LOVE THE OREGON YELLOW! Sorry boys but I honestly don’t see anything wrong with the Oregon Uniforms. I LOVE THEM!!!!

  • Mark Max | September 2, 2007 at 9:39 pm |

    The Ohio bobcats also went with the monchromatic look last night against Gardner Webb. here’s the link.

  • Mark Max | September 2, 2007 at 9:41 pm |

    let’s try this again!

  • Todd | September 2, 2007 at 9:48 pm |

    Not to be outdone, the Hoosiers went with the monocrhomatic crimson unis. Problem is when the players sweat, the jersey is a different color than the pants.

  • John L. | September 2, 2007 at 9:51 pm |

    MY EYES….MY EYES….WHAT HAVE THEY DONE…OUTLAW MONOCROME NOW.

  • Nick | September 2, 2007 at 10:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”139833″]Few college teams pull off the matching uniform/pants ensemble well. Wisconsin did a great job, its looks good. Syracuse on the other hand… WTF.

    Some teams that can pull it off…
    Wisconsin (Red on Red)
    Purdue (Black on Black)
    Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
    Florida (Blue on Blue)
    Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
    Boise State (Blue on Blue)
    Arizona (Blue on Blue)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)

    Some teams that can’t…
    Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow)
    Pitt (Gold on Gold)[/quote]

    How about none of em !!!

    I would prefer the dark jerseys and lighter pants.
    How about a little class, a little tradition, a little maturity, and looking less like an 85 pound team that wants to “look tough”.

  • pnasty | September 2, 2007 at 10:06 pm |

    [quote comment=”139958″]Purdue’s black on black does look good…however, once upon a time, right after the Drew Brees ended, we wore these
    awful jerseys….including this
    gold-on-gold-on-gold ensemble.[/quote]

    those gold purdue jerseys wouldn’t have been bad if they went dark numbers ala GT

  • Joe | September 2, 2007 at 10:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”139887″]Yesterday, someone commented that the problem is in letting college kids decide what they like. That’s at least part of the problem with Oregon; it’s almost like the worse thy look to normal people, the more the players like them. Remember, these are people who think Coors Light is the best beer on earth, so we already know how bad their taste is.

    When I played so many years ago, one of our opponents had all of their linemen eat ultragarlicky food before games, and then you had to smell that nauseating aroma the whole game. Maybe this is the intent that Oregon, Syracuse, Wisconsin, etc. are trying for.[/quote]
    As a “college kid” i take offense to that. Very few kids i know like coors light, and we do have some taste. Age and level of “Getting It” do not correlate. My favorite college uni is the Rutgers Red/White jersey, mostly because they havent been good enough to get Nikeified.

  • Robert | September 2, 2007 at 10:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”139856″]Tennessee Helmet Stripes this year

    Vs.

    Last Year[/quote]

    Interesting. Why did they change it? The narrow stripe looked better.

  • Robert | September 2, 2007 at 10:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”139942″]Please dont forget the best white/white combo TEXAS![/quote]

    If you’re into see-through pants. They look like a bunch of Iggy Pops.[/quote]

    You stole my thunder. With Texas’ budget, can’t they afford some pants that are made of material thick-enough that we can’t see through it?

  • Connor Witt | September 2, 2007 at 11:02 pm |

    I walked by qwest field in seattle yesterday and looked in the the team store. I saw jerseys that appeared to be identical to the Seahawks’ road jersey except for the sleeves were the lime green color usually seen on the trim. I am not positive but I believe the outline of the numbers were also lime green. Does anyone know if this is going to be seen on the field?

  • DCM | September 3, 2007 at 12:01 am |

    Tenn when BACK to the wide helmet stripe…they used to wear it that way. Good choice. I think UVA’s new numbers and collar are an improvement as well.

    No one has mentioned monocromatic Clemson – they’ll wear white on white, orange on orange, or purple on purple…then mix and match all three! They could go the whole year and never wear the same thing.

    Speaking of, it used to be in tennis that both players would ALWAYS wear the some outfit…white on white!

  • rpt319 | September 3, 2007 at 3:27 am |

    Is there a problem with the SPAM filter I tried posting twice and it didn’t post my post.

  • rpt319 | September 3, 2007 at 3:52 am |

    The CFL’s Saskatchewan Roughriders debuted their green retro third jersey and helmet combination during the Labour Day Classic against the Winnipeg Blue Bombers.

    This jersey/helmet combo is supposed to represent the Riders’ uniform during their heyday in the 1970s.

  • Simvastatin | September 3, 2007 at 5:36 am |

    29359 – good site. Sally

  • Stuby | September 3, 2007 at 7:00 am |

    [quote comment=”139977″][quote comment=”139942″]Please dont forget the best white/white combo TEXAS![/quote]

    If you’re into see-through pants. They look like a bunch of Iggy Pops.[/quote]

    You stole my thunder. With Texas’ budget, can’t they afford some pants that are made of material thick-enough that we can’t see through it?[/quote]
    White helmets need to have a stripe, otherwise they look like a bunch of eggs running around the field.

  • Shayne M | September 3, 2007 at 8:31 am |

    [quote comment=”139990″]The CFL’s Saskatchewan Roughriders debuted their green retro third jersey and helmet combination during the Labour Day Classic against the Winnipeg Blue Bombers.

    This jersey/helmet combo is supposed to represent the Riders’ uniform during their heyday in the 1970s.[/quote]
    Saskatchewan by far has the best green jerseys in all of football. This retro alternate is the best jersey I have ever seen. I am an argos fan and loved the houston oilers way back when but the riders jerseys and even the Jets (NY-NFL) are my two favourite sets of jerseys of all time.

  • PSUFAN | September 3, 2007 at 9:32 am |

    One team that can always pull off a sweet white on white: Penn State. Simple and Classic.

  • Rick | September 3, 2007 at 11:22 am |

    “Pants” became became my catch all sanitized alternate cuss word during every failed punt in that game. The Red Pants are bad luck. Only twice have we won a game in the past 10 years with the red pants and at least they wore them for away games and the Rose Bowl.

  • Tape | September 3, 2007 at 3:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”139859″]
    I beg to differ.
    Three teams that CAN pull it off…
    Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
    Oregon (Yellow on Yellow, Black on Black, Green on Green)
    Washington (Purple on Purple)
    [/quote]

    you are clearly reading the wrong website.

  • Wayne | September 3, 2007 at 4:25 pm |

    Watching college football is becoming quite an eyesore now. I’ll stick to watching Michigan and other schools who understand how not to overdo it.

  • David | September 3, 2007 at 6:24 pm |

    Why does everyone love white jerseys with dark pants?! It’s UGLY as sin! I say ban dark colored pants, period. White pants are fine, silver is fine, gold is fine, but orange for Syracuse and Illinois must only be worn with blue or white, not orange!

  • rpt319 | September 3, 2007 at 9:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”140022″]
    Saskatchewan by far has the best green jerseys in all of football. This retro alternate is the best jersey I have ever seen. I am an argos fan and loved the houston oilers way back when but the riders jerseys and even the Jets (NY-NFL) are my two favourite sets of jerseys of all time.[/quote]

    I don’t like these retro jerseys. Mostly because they replaced the black 3rd jerseys with them. But also because they seem to play up the 1970s and forget about the special team that won the Grey Cup in 1989. I also don’t like that they went back to the Safeway S. The Riders current logo is much nicer than that.

  • Rick | September 4, 2007 at 9:06 am |

    The all red look is here to stay:
    http://badgerherald....

  • CV | September 4, 2007 at 3:23 pm |

    As a die-hard Badger fan and Alumni, I didn’t like the all red much at all. Looks like a high school team. That said, I like it better than the all white look on the road. God Almighty those are boring. IMO, the best look for UW is the white jerseys with the red pants. FOREVER reminds me of the Jan 1, 1999 Rose Bowl win over UCLA.

    http://www2.jsonline...

  • CV | September 4, 2007 at 3:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”140225″]The all red look is here to stay:
    http://badgerherald....

    All reds at home, all white on the road. Great…..

  • CV | September 4, 2007 at 3:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”140117″]Why does everyone love white jerseys with dark pants?! It’s UGLY as sin! I say ban dark colored pants, period. White pants are fine, silver is fine, gold is fine, but orange for Syracuse and Illinois must only be worn with blue or white, not orange![/quote]

    I couldn’t disagree more. Complete 180. Nothing is more boring than an all white look in Football. That’s for baseball and Basketball unis IMO.

  • n/a | September 4, 2007 at 6:36 pm |

    As a big Wisconsin Fan I’ve always loved the simplicity of their home uniforms…Red Jersey and White pants. Also another thing about Wisconsin is that all of their stripes match…double stripes on the helmet, jersey sleeve, and pants. They’ve had the same uniforms for as long as I can remember and I started watching them in 1993 when I was 6. The only change was that the motion W was added to the front on one of the shoulders. It kills me that Bielema had to go with the solid red look, because Wisconsin has worn red jersey’s with white pants forever. The red pants are only acceptable for bowl games and road games at Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota, and Northwestern. They can’t wear them agaisnt Iowa because they got pounded once while wearing them I recall and they definately can’t wear them against Penn State on the road because it started a losing streak in 2005 when they wore Red at Happy Valley.

    Stick with the white pants, be tradional like Oklahoma, Texas, and Penn State.

    Also its better for the white pants to have some stripes incorporated, such as the double stripe that Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Florida State have on their whites.