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

For Whom The Bell Tolls

ojsimpsonbreaksfordaylight

By Phil Hecken

Ok — so it’s not the oldest rivalry in college football. It’s not the most famous, nor is it named for a battle, either real or imagined. It may not even be the biggest uni story of the day. But it is USC versus UCLA (ABC, 4:30 pm EST), and, unless you’ve been living under a rock this week, you know that the game marks the return of both teams sporting their home jerseys in the same game for the first time in decades.

So, why are both teams wearing their home jerseys, and why is this such a big deal? For a number of years, the schools shared the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum as their home stadium until UCLA moved to the Rose Bowl for the 1982 season. Each school alternated as the “home” team for the game and, until 1983, players on both teams wore their home football jerseys for the game. Since the 1984 season, however, the visiting team has been wearing their white jerseys.

Ever a student of history, USC coach Pete Carroll expressed interest in restarting the tradition of both teams wearing home jerseys. Unfortunately, ARTICLE 3. a. of the NCAA football rules states, “Players of opposing teams shall wear jerseys of contrasting colors, and the visiting team shall wear white jerseys.” However, Carroll indicated he would be willing to lose two timeouts during the game (one per half) so that the USC team could wear their dark jerseys for today’s game. But through the grace of God some common sense by the NCAA Rules Committee, and the cooperation of new UCLA coach Rick Neuheisel, the Trojans will only lose one timeout, and the color vs. color of yesteryear is renewed.

This rivalry is always big, but it used to be bigger. Oftentimes, a Rose Bowl birth was at stake for the winner. This year, unless the Bruins can somehow pull off a major upset, USC will be heading to the Rose Bowl. Back in the day when both teams wore their home jerseys, there were some terrific games (USC leads the all-time series 42-28, with 7 ties), including one game in 1967 called by some, “The Game of the Century,” featuring some guy who’s not likely to be in attendance today.

Of course, the game will feature the usual sideline attractions, and marching bands. No doubt a few famous alumni and some hollywood types will also be in attendance. But the big story for this day will be the return to the color on color uniforms so long missing from the game.

Let’s hope the NCAA (and maybe the pro game as well) will see success in this experiment and let teams wear something other than a white jersey (whether they be home or away). It’s been done before, with varying degrees of success in the college game this year. And even in the NFL, we’ve seen how good color vs. color can look.

So what about the Hemingway reference in the title? Well, that’s part of the tradition of the rivalry. The winner gets the Victory Bell, which is painted in either Bruin blue or Trojan red after the game and remains with the victor until the next year’s game.

So, Uni Watchers, color versus color: Good or bad? Can it work? College and/or pros? Let’s hear what you think.

“We didn’t tackle well today but we made up for it by not blocking.” — John McKay, former USC Head Coach

Notes & Asides: • Happy 38th Birthday to JTH! •• Army vs. Navy (CBS, noon EST) has extreme potential to be the worst uni matchup of the week, possibly the season ••• If you’re a member of the UW Hockey Wing and want to help critique the new NHL third sweaters, drop me (phecken[at]yahoo.com) a line.

Uni-news & Pics: Seattle Sounders modelled their official unis…Mr. Fake Stirrups is hanging up his spikes for good…That is a tail, right?…The Wizards broke out their “Zephyrs” (more info here) unis last night against the Lake Show.

 

154 comments to For Whom The Bell Tolls

  • nofancyname | December 6, 2008 at 7:35 am |

    Army-Navy jerseys are on armygearonline.com and navygear.com, respectively

  • scott | December 6, 2008 at 7:48 am |

    Not a fan of color vs. color. One team should always be in white, yellow or gold.

  • JTH | December 6, 2008 at 8:52 am |

    I thought this post was going to be about this guy and his fashion sense.

    Color vs. color done well is a good thing. I think today’s game is an example of that. I would not, however, like to see something like Miami or Florida in orange jerseys vs. Florida State in garnet.

    Also, with the advent of HDTV, you’d think that the networks would encourage this sort of thing. Kinda like what happened with the original Star Trek series. As I understand it, NBC wanted the shows it broadcast in color to be as colorful as possible, so that’s why they had the variety of uniforms.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Phil: thanks for the shoutout (if I may use the parlance of the whippersnappers). Looks like I’ll be using my new snowblower for the first time today. That’s not exactly the birthday blowing I was looking forward to.

  • Peterk | December 6, 2008 at 9:07 am |

    see how futbol does it. Each team has a home and an away jersey. The away jersey is not necessarily white. some teams even have a third jersey

  • Brandon | December 6, 2008 at 9:11 am |

    [quote comment=”303750″]Not a fan of color vs. color. One team should always be in white, yellow or gold.[/quote]

    I’m alright with color/color with the obvious exception being to teams having same color issues. NCSU vs Nebraska, somebody has to wear white. Orange/Red and Yellow/Orange are probably not a good idea.

  • Brandon | December 6, 2008 at 9:14 am |

    [quote comment=”303753″][quote comment=”303750″]Not a fan of color vs. color. One team should always be in white, yellow or gold.[/quote]

    I’m alright with color/color with the obvious exception being to teams having same color issues. NCSU vs Nebraska, somebody has to wear white. Orange/Red and Yellow/Orange are probably not a good idea.[/quote]

    Going to the ACC championship game here in Tampa today. I’m hoping the weather cooperates today small chance of rain. Not sure if the new digital will come out of the bag. Should have some ready for posting around 5pm if I find anything cool.

  • Shane | December 6, 2008 at 10:02 am |

    [quote comment=”303752″]see how futbol does it. Each team has a home and an away jersey. The away jersey is not necessarily white. some teams even have a third jersey[/quote]

    And then there’s the oddballs like Real Madrid who choose white as their home colors.

    (pictured: Jose Guti, who I’m pretty sure we’ve noted on here before for having rather strange NOB)

  • =bg= | December 6, 2008 at 10:11 am |

    Little karma there with #32 for USC in that painting.

  • Podunk Texas | December 6, 2008 at 10:47 am |

    [quote comment=”303751″]
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Phil: thanks for the shoutout (if I may use the parlance of the whippersnappers). Looks like I’ll be using my new snowblower for the first time today. That’s not exactly the birthday blowing I was looking forward to.[/quote]

    happy b-day, jth… mine is tomorrow:) we december birthdays often get the short end of the stick when it comes to presents—“here, this is for your birthday AND for christmas!” gee, thanks, mr. cheapskate!

  • Peter Masnik | December 6, 2008 at 10:48 am |

    If you look at football films or photos from the 20s,30s and 40s, you’ll see lots of games with both teams wearing colored jerseys. Black and white TV in the 50s was responsible for the change to white road shirts. Some teams (UCLA,Tennessee)had colors light enough to contrast with most other colors on black and white TV. Hence, the Vols wore their orange against Bama’s red, and USC/UCLA. UCLA twice wore blue against Big Ten opponents wearing colored shirts in the Rose Bowl, upsetting No. 1 Michigan State and No. 1 Ohio State exactly 10 years apart. Wayne Hardin’s early 60s Navy teams (led by Jolly Roger) wore light blue instead of white against Army black.

  • A.J. Zydzik | December 6, 2008 at 10:51 am |

    Unfortunately that picture of Hoffenheim with their mascot was taken before Bayern scored a lucky goal on them in the 4th minute of stoppage time to win 2-1…sigh…

  • The Ol Goaler | December 6, 2008 at 11:08 am |

    I don’t understand the NCAA’s insistence on one team wearing white in football, when their basketball rules only require “contrasting colors” (Mizzou vs. the Illini) in hoops.

    Other football rivalries that would look good in “color vs. color” matchups would include GeorgiaGeorgia Tech and AuburnAlabama

    Since black-and-white TVs don’t exist anymore, having one team in white isn’t as much a necessity, IMO.

  • Lee | December 6, 2008 at 11:12 am |

    I like that Navy football jersey that Nike put together, but the Army version looks like a Raiders fashion jersey no… a knock-off Da Raiduhs fashion jersey

  • Stan Bowers | December 6, 2008 at 11:15 am |

    Put me down as a FAN of the “Color vs. Color” but only if it is done correctly…by correctly, I mean that the 2 combatants must be opposite from each other on the Primary or Secondary Color Wheel…see link

    http://www.wiu.edu/a...

    That way, our eyes won’t start to bleed!!!

    Plus, as a traditionalist, it is good to see “clean, classic” designs that could be transposed to an earlier era…now, if they could hide the long-hair and tattoos…then we’d be on to something!!!

  • Peter Wunsch | December 6, 2008 at 11:39 am |

    I don’t know if it was mentioned yesterday, but when Montreal introduced the old players Thursday they all wore CCM jerseys, not Reebok.

    Also, they had a video of Roger Doucet singing both national anthems and, the video they used was the old version of the Candian anthem before they changed the words. (The English part anyway.)

    I have it all on DVR and if someone teaches me how do a screen grab I can link toi the CCM and post the anthem.

  • Lucy | December 6, 2008 at 11:41 am |

    I don’t mind color vs. color for the occasional game. I will get annoyed if it just becomes another fad that teams do because it “looks cool”/gets attention/etc.

  • LarenR | December 6, 2008 at 11:42 am |

    Color v. color in and of itself is neither a good thing nor a bad thing. It’s all about the particular unis involved. With USC/UCLA it’s awesome, because both teams have great home looks. The Buffalo/Miami Election Day Special was meh: the colors looked good together but the double-monochrome was a bit much. And it doesn’t matter who Chattanooga plays, those gold unis are just awful.

    [quote comment=”303757″][quote comment=”303751″]
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Phil: thanks for the shoutout (if I may use the parlance of the whippersnappers). Looks like I’ll be using my new snowblower for the first time today. That’s not exactly the birthday blowing I was looking forward to.[/quote]

    happy b-day, jth… mine is tomorrow:) we december birthdays often get the short end of the stick when it comes to presents—“here, this is for your birthday AND for christmas!” gee, thanks, mr. cheapskate![/quote]
    I’m feeling you pain, buddy. In my family, this isn’t the Holiday Season, it’s Birthday Season. We have nine birthdays between 12/2 and 1/28, including me, my wife, my daughter and daughter-to-be (due on or before 1/9), brother, sister-in-law, dad, mom and stepmom (both on Christmas Eve!). The one bright side is that the usually-awful combined gift can occasionally result in a greater than the sum of its parts mega-gift (as in: “Normally I’d get you a sweater for X-mas and a DVD for your birthday, but since I can combine the money for those gifts to buy one big thing, here’s your new X-Box.”).

  • Teebz | December 6, 2008 at 11:48 am |

    Happy Birfday, JTH!

    If today is the first day using the snowblower, come to Canada. We can give you many more days of snow-blowing fun. ;o)

  • Navy86 | December 6, 2008 at 11:48 am |
  • jon | December 6, 2008 at 11:48 am |

    [quote comment=”303761″]I like that Navy football jersey that Nike put together, but the Army version looks like a Raiders fashion jersey no… a knock-off Da Raiduhs fashion jersey[/quote]

    according to an email i got from navygear.com (i dont know why i get emails from them but i do) nike did not design todays jerseys, both navy and army did. so blame army if you dont like it.

  • Mike Engle | December 6, 2008 at 12:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”303769″][quote comment=”303761″]I like that Navy football jersey that Nike put together, but the Army version looks like a Raiders fashion jersey no… a knock-off Da Raiduhs fashion jersey[/quote]

    according to an email i got from navygear.com (i dont know why i get emails from them but i do) nike did not design todays jerseys, both navy and army did. so blame army if you dont like it.[/quote]
    I like the fact that now Army and Navy won’t look like each other and/or Notre Dame in Nike, but I’m not sure I like how they look.

  • Aram | December 6, 2008 at 12:10 pm |

    These Army uniforms could be the ugliest things I’ve ever seen.

  • James Craven | December 6, 2008 at 12:11 pm |

    I’m watching Army-Navy.

    GOUGE MY EYES OUT!

  • =bg= | December 6, 2008 at 12:17 pm |

    Great superhero uni here. Yup.
    http://movies.yahoo....

  • jokstrap | December 6, 2008 at 12:18 pm |

    Army has SMOB(School Motto On Back).

  • BuckeyeMark | December 6, 2008 at 12:19 pm |

    the army jerseys ROCK! if anybody gets to wear camo it’s the United States Army! they look awesome!

  • Jordan Pope | December 6, 2008 at 12:20 pm |

    you gotta give army credit..they went all out
    camo pants, jersey numbers, and helmet
    I think they look pretty good
    as for the new nike template that navy has..I really like that template

  • dpnation | December 6, 2008 at 12:20 pm |

    kinda looks like regular Army uniforms.. you know, like they’re going to battle. I’ll reserve judgment until they actually are on the field.

  • Chad | December 6, 2008 at 12:20 pm |

    not uni related, but they just mentioned that white is an english major. doesn’t that sound like an unusual skill for a military man? i guess someone’s got to fill out the papaerwork

  • RedWing in Colorado | December 6, 2008 at 12:22 pm |

    AMOB (Academy Motto On Back) for Army

    Navy looks good, Army doesn’t look as bad as they could have. At least they didn’t go with a crazy accent color to go with the cammo.

  • Stevo | December 6, 2008 at 12:24 pm |

    I noticed in the pregame that the USMA band is wearing their camo pants with their black tops. Also, all of the cadets have camo hats on.

  • Mark K | December 6, 2008 at 12:25 pm |

    Those white Navy jerseys aren’t legal per NCAA with the blue shoulders…

    —A white jersey is one with only contrasting playing numbers, player’s name, school name, NCAA Football logo, school insignia,conference insignia, mascot insignia, game insignia, memorial insignia or the American flag attached. An insignia must not exceed 16 square inches in area (i.e., rectangle, square, parallelogram), including any additional material (e.g., patch). Stripes may be placed on the sleeves. A border not more than 1 inch wide around the collar and cuffs is permissible, as is a maximum 4-inch stripe along the side seam (insert from the underarm to pants top).—-

    Oh and those Army unis are crap.

  • Stevo | December 6, 2008 at 12:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”303781″]Those white Navy jerseys aren’t legal per NCAA with the blue shoulders…

    —A white jersey is one with only contrasting playing numbers, player’s name, school name, NCAA Football logo, school insignia,conference insignia, mascot insignia, game insignia, memorial insignia or the American flag attached. An insignia must not exceed 16 square inches in area (i.e., rectangle, square, parallelogram), including any additional material (e.g., patch). Stripes may be placed on the sleeves. A border not more than 1 inch wide around the collar and cuffs is permissible, as is a maximum 4-inch stripe along the side seam (insert from the underarm to pants top).—-

    Oh and those Army unis are crap.[/quote]

    In that case the Oregon diamondplating is illegal as well when worn with the road whites, as are the Oregon State “Sports Bra” jerseys.

  • Ricko | December 6, 2008 at 12:32 pm |

    re: Army-Navy…

    Those Army “outfits” are really kind of the last straw for me. Someone needs to remind Nike (and others) that they are designing football uniforms, not football costumes.

    Were I in the military and watching—especially deployed in a combat area—I might be a little pissed.
    a) They AREN’T in combat, period. It’s a frickin’ football game.
    b) I’d wanna see something that looked like home, not like the people sitting around me.

    I swear, if it were 30 or 40 years ago, people would be wondering if the Nike design team was all girls.

    —Ricko

  • Bruce | December 6, 2008 at 12:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”303781″]Those white Navy jerseys aren’t legal per NCAA with the blue shoulders…

    —A white jersey is one with only contrasting playing numbers, player’s name, school name, NCAA Football logo, school insignia,conference insignia, mascot insignia, game insignia, memorial insignia or the American flag attached. An insignia must not exceed 16 square inches in area (i.e., rectangle, square, parallelogram), including any additional material (e.g., patch). Stripes may be placed on the sleeves. A border not more than 1 inch wide around the collar and cuffs is permissible, as is a maximum 4-inch stripe along the side seam (insert from the underarm to pants top).—-
    [/quote]

    Yeah, they had to give up a timeout to wear them, its been in the news all week.

  • Wollen1 | December 6, 2008 at 12:35 pm |

    When did the San Diego Padres get a football team?

  • zac | December 6, 2008 at 12:36 pm |

    i think navy looks great, love the blood stripe

    as for army, love the helmet and jersey. i think the pants should be black with a broad camo stripe down the side. i think the pants take it too far and are distracting.

    is it me or does the helmt camo not match the jersey and pants camo

  • BuckeyeMark | December 6, 2008 at 12:36 pm |

    to each his own but I think camo looks great and the way it’s been worked into a football uniform is just greatness. especially since we’re talking about the people who wear that camo defending our country. it just works for me. and I’m a fan of the Navy…

  • Stevo | December 6, 2008 at 12:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”303783″]re: Army-Navy…

    Those Army “outfits” are really kind of the last straw for me. Someone needs to remind Nike (and others) that they are designing football uniforms, not football costumes.

    Were I in the military and watching—especially deployed in a combat area—I might be a little pissed.
    a) They AREN’T in combat, period. It’s a frickin’ football game.
    b) I’d wanna see something that looked like home, not like the people sitting around me.

    I swear, if it were 30 or 40 years ago, people would be wondering if the Nike design team was all girls.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Ricko, it’s been stated earlier that the academies designed the unis, so you can’t blame Nike for this one.

  • Tank | December 6, 2008 at 12:39 pm |

    I hate Army’s uniforms like everyone else, but to be honest, Navy’s look worse on television. They look like some awful combination of Pitt and those “sports bra” Oregon State unis.

    Why couldn’t Nike pull this stunt on a different week? It seems like if there is ever a game for teams to wear classic uniforms, it’s Army-Navy.

  • Stevo | December 6, 2008 at 12:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”303786″]i think navy looks great, love the blood stripe

    as for army, love the helmet and jersey. i think the pants should be black with a broad camo stripe down the side. i think the pants take it too far and are distracting.

    is it me or does the helmt camo not match the jersey and pants camo[/quote]

    It could just be the difference in materials, because it’s all supposed to be the high tech “digital camo” that the Army uses on their fatigues.

  • tBone | December 6, 2008 at 12:43 pm |

    The best thing about color-vs-white is you can immediately tell who the home team is, at least in college. Enough NFL teams do the white-at-home that you have to take a second look, but it’s pretty standard in college. I don’t have a problem with it for games where both teams are more or less at home (like USC/UCLA) or if it’s a real neutral-site game, like a bowl or a conference championship. Of course, that assumes the colors actually work for this type of thing. If it’s a game like Ohio State/Michigan, then there’s no way both teams should wear their dark colors. Wolverines are not “at home” in Columbus.

  • Ricko | December 6, 2008 at 12:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”303788″][quote comment=”303783″]re: Army-Navy…

    Those Army “outfits” are really kind of the last straw for me. Someone needs to remind Nike (and others) that they are designing football uniforms, not football costumes.

    Were I in the military and watching—especially deployed in a combat area—I might be a little pissed.
    a) They AREN’T in combat, period. It’s a frickin’ football game.
    b) I’d wanna see something that looked like home, not like the people sitting around me.

    I swear, if it were 30 or 40 years ago, people would be wondering if the Nike design team was all girls.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Ricko, it’s been stated earlier that the academies designed the unis, so you can’t blame Nike for this one.[/quote]

    Yeah, but they and a couple other major suppliers started all this nonsense.

    If you think Nike had no input, you’re seriously dreaming. You know the acadamies had to have asked, at least for production purposes, “What CAN we do?” And Nike probably was giddy to supply ideas.

    And it still looks like the Home Ec class designed those costumes…maybe for the high school musical.

  • Stevo | December 6, 2008 at 12:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”303791″]The best thing about color-vs-white is you can immediately tell who the home team is, at least in college. Enough NFL teams do the white-at-home that you have to take a second look, but it’s pretty standard in college. I don’t have a problem with it for games where both teams are more or less at home (like USC/UCLA) or if it’s a real neutral-site game, like a bowl or a conference championship. Of course, that assumes the colors actually work for this type of thing. If it’s a game like Ohio State/Michigan, then there’s no way both teams should wear their dark colors. Wolverines are not “at home” in Columbus.[/quote]

    But OSU seems to feel right at home in Ann Arbor lately.

  • mdunner28 | December 6, 2008 at 12:46 pm |

    I really don’t mind the special uniforms for this game. Navy, IMO, looks very classy. Army is slowly growing on me as this game continues.

  • Ricko | December 6, 2008 at 12:51 pm |

    Interesting question for we uni-geeks to ponder.

    Is a “uniform” a) only what a team is wearing today, or b) what it wears all (or most) of the time?

    I’m not being pissy. It really is a point to ponder.

    Cuz of answer is “b,” then Oregon doesn’t have a uniform…just a set of outfits.

    Don’t know. Thoughts, anyone?

  • Stevo | December 6, 2008 at 12:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”303792″][quote comment=”303788″][quote comment=”303783″]re: Army-Navy…

    Those Army “outfits” are really kind of the last straw for me. Someone needs to remind Nike (and others) that they are designing football uniforms, not football costumes.

    Were I in the military and watching—especially deployed in a combat area—I might be a little pissed.
    a) They AREN’T in combat, period. It’s a frickin’ football game.
    b) I’d wanna see something that looked like home, not like the people sitting around me.

    I swear, if it were 30 or 40 years ago, people would be wondering if the Nike design team was all girls.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Ricko, it’s been stated earlier that the academies designed the unis, so you can’t blame Nike for this one.[/quote]

    Yeah, but they and a couple other major suppliers started all this nonsense.

    If you think Nike had no input, you’re seriously dreaming. You know the acadamies had to have asked, at least for production purposes, “What CAN we do?” And Nike probably was giddy to supply ideas.

    And it still looks like the Home Ec class designed those costumes…maybe for the high school musical.[/quote]

    Call me naive, but I seriously believe that the service academies are the one case where the tail does not wag the dog, at least uni wise. Nike’s not just dealing with a university, they’re dealing with the Department of Defense.

  • Stevo | December 6, 2008 at 12:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”303795″]Interesting question for we uni-geeks to ponder.

    Is a “uniform” a) only what a team is wearing today, or b) what it wears all (or most) of the time?

    I’m not being pissy. It really is a point to ponder.

    Cuz of answer is “b,” then Oregon doesn’t have a uniform…just a set of outfits.

    Don’t know. Thoughts, anyone?[/quote]

    The basic definition of uniform is many wearing the same thing. By that definition, Oregon has many uniforms.

  • DP30 | December 6, 2008 at 12:56 pm |

    If Navy lost the blue-and-gold shoulder boards, that uni would look perfectly acceptable to me, especially if they paired the navy pants with the navy helmet that they wore for a couple of Army-Navy games in the 1990s (I think, I can’t remember a specific year).

    As for the Army unis, umm…their pants remind me of Zubaz. I think that’s all that needs to be said. :)

  • utdivermatt | December 6, 2008 at 12:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”303781″]Those white Navy jerseys aren’t legal per NCAA with the blue shoulders…

    —A white jersey is one with only contrasting playing numbers, player’s name, school name, NCAA Football logo, school insignia,conference insignia, mascot insignia, game insignia, memorial insignia or the American flag attached. An insignia must not exceed 16 square inches in area (i.e., rectangle, square, parallelogram), including any additional material (e.g., patch). Stripes may be placed on the sleeves. A border not more than 1 inch wide around the collar and cuffs is permissible, as is a maximum 4-inch stripe along the side seam (insert from the underarm to pants top).—-

    Oh and those Army unis are crap.[/quote]

    Oh man, you got them. Those crazy military academies, breaking all the rules….

    I bet they even give full scholarships to everyone on the team.

  • flatulence | December 6, 2008 at 1:00 pm |

    How did they get the camo on Army’s headgear? Is it a sticker or painted on? It’s really hard to tell without still shots but it looks to me like the camo isn’t uniform across helmets.

  • John M | December 6, 2008 at 1:01 pm |

    I’m not much for non-traditional uniforms, and think Oregon and most Nike products are abominations, but I absolutely love the Army uniforms. A good idea well-executed. They were smart to use camo as an “accent” color rather than as a replacement for the black.

  • Ricko | December 6, 2008 at 1:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”303797″][quote comment=”303795″]Interesting question for we uni-geeks to ponder.

    Is a “uniform” a) only what a team is wearing today, or b) what it wears all (or most) of the time?

    I’m not being pissy. It really is a point to ponder.

    Cuz of answer is “b,” then Oregon doesn’t have a uniform…just a set of outfits.

    Don’t know. Thoughts, anyone?[/quote]

    The basic definition of uniform is many wearing the same thing. By that definition, Oregon has many uniforms.[/quote]

    So if someone says, “Tell me what Oregon’s football uniforms look like” we gonna need to ask them to have a seat while we look for a whiteboard and some yellow, green and black markers.

    LOL. I’m not disagreeing. Honest, I’m not. Just marveling at how the definition is changing.

  • LarenR | December 6, 2008 at 1:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”303798″]If Navy lost the blue-and-gold shoulder boards, that uni would look perfectly acceptable to me, especially if they paired the navy pants with the navy helmet that they wore for a couple of Army-Navy games in the 1990s (I think, I can’t remember a specific year).

    As for the Army unis, umm…their pants remind me of Zubaz. I think that’s all that needs to be said. :)[/quote]
    I just turned on the game (finally got the kid to stop watching Playhouse Disney) and the Navy doesn’t look too bad. The thing that bugs me is that the blue shoulder pieces extend well down onto the chest, but stop just past the top of the shoulder. From the back you can’t even see the blue and it looks weird.
    Army, on the other hand, is a total wreck. From a distance the jerseys and helmets are ok (no HD in my house…probably a good thing in this case), but the pants, ugh! Zubaz, indeed!

  • Glenn | December 6, 2008 at 1:06 pm |

    It really looks as though Army is wearing some hybrid form of aluminum foil & duct tape pants. Just watch out for chafing!

  • Mike N. | December 6, 2008 at 1:09 pm |

    Virginia Tech is sporting throwback jerseys and pants with the current helmet… and a huge-a$$ ACC Championship patch.

  • odessa steps magazin | December 6, 2008 at 1:11 pm |

    As i think I mentioned in the comments earlier in the week, ESPN radio’s Dave Dameshek has been campaigning for a couples for the red vs blue in the USC/UCLA game. I know he had both coaches on his show last year promoting the idea.

  • Johnny O | December 6, 2008 at 1:12 pm |

    I agree with the statement that if there was a team to wear camo. that it should only be Army. The Navy uni is OK. I personally don’t like all the shoulder business.

    And if the statement is said from the Army players or coaches saying, “We are wearing camo. ’cause we are in a battle,” I will throw the shenanigans flag, ’cause you are not in battle. You are playing a football game. But again, the camo. works for Army and that is all.

  • Stevo | December 6, 2008 at 1:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”303807″]I agree with the statement that if there was a team to wear camo. that it should only be Army. The Navy uni is OK. I personally don’t like all the shoulder business.

    And if the statement is said from the Army players or coaches saying, “We are wearing camo. ’cause we are in a battle,” I will throw the shenanigans flag, ’cause you are not in battle. You are playing a football game. But again, the camo. works for Army and that is all.[/quote]

    I don’t think any of the players would make that statement, because they know that the real battles begin the moment they get their assignments from the Pentagon.

  • flatulence | December 6, 2008 at 1:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”303805″]Virginia Tech is sporting throwback jerseys and pants with the current helmet… and a huge-a$$ ACC Championship patch.[/quote]
    Why aren’t there any fans in the stands in tampa?

  • Stevo | December 6, 2008 at 1:19 pm |

    [quote comment=”303809″][quote comment=”303805″]Virginia Tech is sporting throwback jerseys and pants with the current helmet… and a huge-a$$ ACC Championship patch.[/quote]
    Why aren’t there any fans in the stands in tampa?[/quote]

    Because neither FSU nor Miami are playing, so no one in Florida cares.

  • Tim F. | December 6, 2008 at 1:22 pm |

    Stuck at work, any Army-Navy screen grabs?

  • Billy | December 6, 2008 at 1:24 pm |

    Cool that Navy decided on NNOB.

  • LI Phil | December 6, 2008 at 1:25 pm |

    nice to hear boomer just give out the Long Island shout out at the A/N game…

    /if these uni’s are a “one-off” deal just for today, i think they can stand on their merits…i wouldn’t wanna see army in camo every week…and god help us all if it gives the u of zero any ideas that camo is a good look for a uni…

  • Billy | December 6, 2008 at 1:26 pm |

    Also like that Army’s helmets are matte finish, makes them look more “authentic.”

  • DenverGregg | December 6, 2008 at 1:33 pm |

    Is Navy’s blue and gold shoulder treatment meant to be an epaulet? If so, it shouldn’t be so big (the objection about it violating rules would seem to apply to the VT multicolor jersey and the one UF wore a few years ago too). I like Navy’s use of both the anchor and the USMC crest as arm insignia.

    Army’s use of camo for this game is something that I hope will not return.

    As another reader said, color v. color is great as long as the colors aren’t too close on the color wheel.

  • sebastian | December 6, 2008 at 1:33 pm |

    1) I heard Army was wearing camo and I expected the absolute worst. While I wouldn’t want Army to wear those jerseys forever, I don’t think they’re as bad as I feared.

    2) Navy’s jerseys, however, ARE worse than I feared, and I hope they never wear these WalMart knockoff jerseys ever again.

    I hope Army goes back to Black and Gold of course, but the camo isn’t as bad as I feared. Maybe do the numbers in solid white. Or use a darker camo.

  • robert | December 6, 2008 at 1:35 pm |

    the usc-ucla happening is undeniably fantastic. but what is with this army-navy nightmare? a fun game to watch every year, and i grew up rooting army because i come from a family with army, not navy traditions. but i am not a graduate of west point, nor i have i proudly served, so maybe i have no right to comment on this horror. perhaps this army look appeals to a certain segment of the population, or more importantly the cadets and serviceman, but these uniforms are disgusting on a hundred different levels. i fear an army win will make these a permanent look, so as much as this pains me to say…GO NAVY!!! HUMILIATE ARMY!!!

  • MG12 | December 6, 2008 at 1:37 pm |

    I may be the only one, but I love the Army uniforms (and no I am not in any way associated with Army or any of the armed forces). I am rarely find myself defending Nike’s uniform design, but in this case I think they hit a homerun. It would be a little much if they were used as the uniforms for every game, but I think that they are great for the Army/Navy game.

    I do find myself asking how they get the camo on the helmets. There is no way that they are painted and a decal sticker would not be able to conform to an entire helmet.

    I am guessing that thay used an Immersion foil technique. This technique is used for many products that are decorated with camo.

    http://www.discountg...

    http://www.dr-securi...

    Immersion foil is the process of laying a thin graphic foil atop a fluid bath. The product to be coated in soaked in the bath. The product is then drawn up through the foil. The foil will lay flat as the fluid is drawn from between the foil and product, reducing the chance of any air being caught under the foil.

    Learn more here:
    http://www.immersion...

    I don’t know how durable the foil is and I am going to guess we will see some interesting wear and tear on those helmets by the end of the game.

  • Billy | December 6, 2008 at 1:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”303811″]Stuck at work, any Army-Navy screen grabs?[/quote]

    No screen grabs but here is a press release with some high res images:

    http://www.businessw...

  • Ian | December 6, 2008 at 1:44 pm |

    As an enlisted member of the U.S. Navy, I like the changes both teams made. I don’t know the specifics behind the changes for the Navy uniform or what significance they hold on the jerseys, the pants are a Marine “shout out” and very classy in the fact that not a whole lot of people pay attention to the fact that it isn’t just Navy guys out there but Marines as well, but it looks good overall. I also like how they are wearing both services emblem, the Navy Anchor and the Marine Globe.

    And I agree with the fact that the Army should be the only team allowed to wear camo, and I think it looks good. It’s not totally garish and out there like Oregon’s uniforms but very classy and well done, at least in my opinion, and I also am HD deficient so I cant see what it looks like in that form.

    But overall, looks good to me.

    Hooyah Navy, Anchors Aweigh!

  • The Hemogoblin | December 6, 2008 at 1:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”303813″]nice to hear boomer just give out the Long Island shout out at the A/N game…

    /if these uni’s are a “one-off” deal just for today, i think they can stand on their merits…i wouldn’t wanna see army in camo every week…and god help us all if it gives the u of zero any ideas that camo is a good look for a uni…[/quote]

    Phil, don’t call us the University of Zero… just blame Uncle Phil like the students here do.

  • mdunner28 | December 6, 2008 at 1:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”303811″]Stuck at work, any Army-Navy screen grabs?[/quote]

    Here you go:

    http://i36.tinypic.c...

    http://i38.tinypic.c...

    http://i38.tinypic.c...

    http://i36.tinypic.c...

    http://i36.tinypic.c...

  • robert | December 6, 2008 at 1:59 pm |

    the marine shout-out IS awesome. but i have to say i agree with an earlier comment regarding the army camo…football, despite all the george carlin-esque war references, is not war, and i think insults those in combat. but that’s why i prefaced my original statement, i am not in the service, maybe it isn’t offensive, if west pointers like it, wear the god awful mess. i will say this though, the moto on the back is pretty cool.

  • The Hemogoblin | December 6, 2008 at 2:01 pm |

    Why is VT in their new helmets with their old-school uniforms?

  • S. Menecola | December 6, 2008 at 2:06 pm |

    I have to admit Nikedid the Army vs. Navy game very very well. Great execution, detail and style. I’m living in Newfoundland Canada love what I’m seeing.

  • jude | December 6, 2008 at 2:07 pm |

    Here’s some more from the Army/Navy game, including Shun White’s arm tape shout out.

    – jude

  • Cornellian | December 6, 2008 at 2:09 pm |

    Two quick screen grabs (if I did this right):
    Here of Army
    and
    Here of Navy

    I don’t mind the Army look so much. I think camo numbers are silly. The Navy look hurts my eyes. It’s trying to be too much. The pants are great. The tops are just… yeesh. They scream AFL2 to me.

  • jc | December 6, 2008 at 2:15 pm |

    “I am guessing that thay used an Immersion foil technique. This technique is used for many products that are decorated with camo.”

    mg12, nike could have also used a polymer/sticker wrap much like nascar uses on their cars to cut down on paint costs…

  • Podunk Texas | December 6, 2008 at 2:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”303766″] The one bright side is that the usually-awful combined gift can occasionally result in a greater than the sum of its parts mega-gift (as in: “Normally I’d get you a sweater for X-mas and a DVD for your birthday, but since I can combine the money for those gifts to buy one big thing, here’s your new X-Box.”).[/quote]

    excellent point that i often forget:)

  • The Hemogoblin | December 6, 2008 at 2:24 pm |

    My mother has agreed to make me one of the shirts featured yesterday… of course, what do I do? I pick the most complicated one I could find… We’re going with a Bobby Hull red jersey from his days with the Black Hawks (it was spaced then)…

  • Filthy McNasty | December 6, 2008 at 2:25 pm |

    I’m all for colour v. colour, and with the Rams wearing the blue and yellow throwbacks next year I’d love to see that pitted against the 49ers throwbacks. It was always a handsome uniform matchup when the Rams and Niners met in the 80’s and it would look even better with both teams in their ‘home’ colours.

  • Beardface | December 6, 2008 at 2:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”303824″]Why is VT in their new helmets with their old-school uniforms?[/quote]
    The throwback white helmets were auctioned off after the Furman game

    that, and it looks pretty nice to have the maroon helmet with those jerseys…

  • The Hemogoblin | December 6, 2008 at 2:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”303833″][quote comment=”303824″]Why is VT in their new helmets with their old-school uniforms?[/quote]
    The throwback white helmets were auctioned off after the Furman game

    that, and it looks pretty nice to have the maroon helmet with those jerseys…[/quote]

    Two very good reasons.

  • Phathead | December 6, 2008 at 2:34 pm |

    Hi-Res of the Army unis, mistakenly posted this in the previous thread

    http://mms.businessw...

  • Stan Bowers | December 6, 2008 at 2:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”303796″][quote comment=”303792″][quote comment=”303788″][quote comment=”303783″]re: Army-Navy…

    Those Army “outfits” are really kind of the last straw for me. Someone needs to remind Nike (and others) that they are designing football uniforms, not football costumes.

    Were I in the military and watching—especially deployed in a combat area—I might be a little pissed.
    a) They AREN’T in combat, period. It’s a frickin’ football game.
    b) I’d wanna see something that looked like home, not like the people sitting around me.

    I swear, if it were 30 or 40 years ago, people would be wondering if the Nike design team was all girls.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Ricko, it’s been stated earlier that the academies designed the unis, so you can’t blame Nike for this one.[/quote]

    Yeah, but they and a couple other major suppliers started all this nonsense.

    If you think Nike had no input, you’re seriously dreaming. You know the acadamies had to have asked, at least for production purposes, “What CAN we do?” And Nike probably was giddy to supply ideas.

    And it still looks like the Home Ec class designed those costumes…maybe for the high school musical.[/quote]

    Call me naive, but I seriously believe that the service academies are the one case where the tail does not wag the dog, at least uni wise. Nike’s not just dealing with a university, they’re dealing with the Department of Defense.[/quote]

    And, like many US Government functions, these uniforms are a waste of Taxpayer money…!!!

  • Salvamerican | December 6, 2008 at 2:49 pm |

    As far as color vs. color, I’m in favor of this happening more often. I would absolutely love to see the Barry Sanders era Lions’ Honolulu Blue vs. the Bears’ Navy Blue.

    Army doesn’t look fashionable. They look honorable. These young men have earned the right to wear camo. I always think it is tacky when non-military types wear camo (Oregon, Brett Favre). However, for one game, given the heart that goes into it for both academies, I think it is absolutely great.

  • Stan Bowers | December 6, 2008 at 2:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”303832″]I’m all for colour v. colour, and with the Rams wearing the blue and yellow throwbacks next year I’d love to see that pitted against the 49ers throwbacks. It was always a handsome uniform matchup when the Rams and Niners met in the 80’s and it would look even better with both teams in their ‘home’ colours.[/quote]

    Good call…an even better matchup would be the Niners in their throwbacks vs. the Rams in these…

    http://upload.wikime...

    But the game would have to be played in Frisco only…

    A thing of beauty…!!!

  • Buckeye Mike | December 6, 2008 at 2:55 pm |

    Hey, say what you want about the Army pics, but on the tube, they look good. They look better than the Navy ones do, which look like they work in the kitchen of a hotel. But they showed a clip of some guy in the ealry 90’s for army with the rushing record, and Boomer started in about that was old school with the huge pads and uni that wasn’t painted on. Someone else is on this now, I am sure.

  • Chris | December 6, 2008 at 3:07 pm |

    I wonder seriously how many of the people critical of the Army and Navy uniforms actually have a clue about either…especially Navy. If you knew anything about the Navy you wouldn’t be making fun of the uniforms for being ‘wal-mart’ knock offs, looking horrible, etc. If you knew anything about the Navy you would understand why everything is why it is on those football uniforms

  • robert | December 6, 2008 at 3:07 pm |

    well, i called the father in law, and asked the former marine for his take on this army-navy game. surprise, not, he loves the navy pantaloons. as for the camo, i wasn’t shocked that he hated the camo for the obvious this isn’t war reason, but i was surprised with the addition of “these kids have not yet seen combat, and don’t deserve to wear camo!” i have to say, an excellent point. so there is my unscientific survey of one.

  • David | December 6, 2008 at 3:17 pm |

    love the navy pants. navy blue! i wouldn’t mind seeing the jerseys again. as for army, it’s fun for one game, but i hope they hang them up for good afterwards.

    as for VT, i like the classic look. anything is better than what they wore this year.

  • monochrome sucks | December 6, 2008 at 3:27 pm |

    Army uniforms dont look as bad as feared. The unit patches are a nice touch (but isnt there some sort of propriety issue with wearing patches of units they aren’t part of?)

    But I have a major problem with the wearing of fatigues/camo in civilian settings (not on base). I know Bush the Lesser changed the longstanding rule against this but it’s still wrong.

  • Jeff P | December 6, 2008 at 3:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”303831″]My mother has agreed to make me one of the shirts featured yesterday… of course, what do I do? I pick the most complicated one I could find… We’re going with a Bobby Hull red jersey from his days with the Black Hawks (it was spaced then)…[/quote]

    No it wasn’t.

    There have never been spaces in the striping on the red uniform. There has always been spacing on the white ones.

  • Kevin M. | December 6, 2008 at 3:35 pm |

    Looks like Florida Tebow’s are going monochrome blue and Alabama is going all white.

  • robert | December 6, 2008 at 3:38 pm |

    that’s funny, the father in law railed that fatigue around town policy too. and i have to agree with chris, all the navy uni elements were, if not aesthetically pleasing, very meaningful, and therefore a success.

  • B. GRimm | December 6, 2008 at 3:40 pm |

    quote comment=\”303822\”][quote comment=\”303811\”]Stuck at work, any Army-Navy screen grabs?[/quote]

    Here you go:

    http://i36.tinypic.c...

    http://i38.tinypic.c...

    http://i38.tinypic.c...

    http://i36.tinypic.c...

    http://i36.tinypic.c...

    When I first turned the game on (it had just ended) I thought they had been playing in the mud with the way Army\’s helmets looked. But once I realized they were camo and saw the whole uniform I thought they looked great. I thought Navy looked like a poor AFL2 team though. Army may have lost the game big, but the won the uni battle big.

  • Mark K | December 6, 2008 at 4:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”303844″][quote comment=”303831″]My mother has agreed to make me one of the shirts featured yesterday… of course, what do I do? I pick the most complicated one I could find… We’re going with a Bobby Hull red jersey from his days with the Black Hawks (it was spaced then)…[/quote]

    No it wasn’t.

    There have never been spaces in the striping on the red uniform. There has always been spacing on the white ones.[/quote]
    I think he’s talking about the team name.

  • robert | December 6, 2008 at 4:28 pm |

    decided, in honour of the camo debate, to brave the chicago cold, and walk down to the corner store, and get a six pack of miller tall boys in the hunting camo can. football camo may be a no-no, but beer camo is a yes-yes. but a frosty beverage is necessary to celebrate tho colour bowl. is it to much to hope that ucla removes all the extra strokes around their gold numberals for the occasion? fingers crossed.

  • QuezStyle | December 6, 2008 at 4:35 pm |

    Don’t know if anyone mentioned it, but Duke and Michigan basketball are going color on color. the Wolverine’s yellow against that ugly shade of duke Blue

  • Beardface | December 6, 2008 at 4:40 pm |

    HOW BOUT THEM HOKIES!!!!!

    Orange Bowl… again! Wohoo!

    Watching the USC-UCLA game… man, color vs color looks awesome in HD… Just wish the gold pants for each team weren’t practically the same shade, makes it a lil confusing in the scrums

  • Brian | December 6, 2008 at 4:46 pm |

    Well, now I can say that I’ve seen a ref throw a flag for “failure to wear required equipment.” I probably won’t see that penalty for the rest of my life. That might be the highlight of this USC/UCLA game.

  • Stevo | December 6, 2008 at 4:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”303852″]Well, now I can say that I’ve seen a ref throw a flag for “failure to wear required equipment.” I probably won’t see that penalty for the rest of my life. That might be the highlight of this USC/UCLA game.[/quote]

    If you watch next year’s USC/UCLA game you will, because Neuheisel has promised to wear the blues in the Coliseum, and Carroll is going to even things up with the timeouts again.

  • Beardface | December 6, 2008 at 4:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”303853″][quote comment=”303852″]Well, now I can say that I’ve seen a ref throw a flag for “failure to wear required equipment.” I probably won’t see that penalty for the rest of my life. That might be the highlight of this USC/UCLA game.[/quote]

    If you watch next year’s USC/UCLA game you will, because Neuheisel has promised to wear the blues in the Coliseum, and Carroll is going to even things up with the timeouts again.[/quote]
    The NCAA will probably alter the rule next year to allow teams to do this, so this could very well be the last time we ever hear this in our lifetime

  • Sean | December 6, 2008 at 4:52 pm |

    I’m rooting against Alabama and Oklahoma, only because if they both were to win, it would be the most boring matchup in National Championship history.

    Also, as for Color v. Color, I’m all for it–the home jersey is usually one of your school’s main colors. The USC/UCLA game looks great. Florida/Alabama would look fantastic in Blue vs. Maroon (although UF should have orange pants). Granted, some won’t work (VT v. BC, for example), but the idea itself is solid.

  • jude | December 6, 2008 at 4:52 pm |

    I think I’ve figured out Shun White’s shout out, via arm tape during today’s Army/Navy game (a picture of which is here in case you missed my earlier post.)

    The Associated Press said Navy played today’s game without Rashawn King, their senior cornerback who wears #18. King went home after the death of his father, Drexel, this week.

    Dan Gelston writes: “Drexel King had a heart attack Thursday and the Mids played with a ‘DK’ sticker on the back of their helmets.”

    I missed the sticker myself. Did anyone spot it?

  • Kevin M. | December 6, 2008 at 4:57 pm |

    [quote comment=”303856″]I think I’ve figured out Shun White’s shout out, via arm tape during today’s Army/Navy game (a picture of which is here in case you missed my earlier post.)

    The Associated Press said Navy played today’s game without Rashawn King, their senior cornerback who wears #18. King went home after the death of his father, Drexel, this week.

    Dan Gelston writes: “Drexel King had a heart attack Thursday and the Mids played with a ‘DK’ sticker on the back of their helmets.”

    I missed the sticker myself. Did anyone spot it?[/quote]

    They showed it on the game it was a DK inside of a crown.

  • mdunner28 | December 6, 2008 at 5:00 pm |
  • Luke | December 6, 2008 at 5:02 pm |

    Sorry about my punished link…

  • Jack H. | December 6, 2008 at 5:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”303783″]re: Army-Navy…

    Those Army “outfits” are really kind of the last straw for me. Someone needs to remind Nike (and others) that they are designing football uniforms, not football costumes.

    Were I in the military and watching—especially deployed in a combat area—I might be a little pissed.
    a) They AREN’T in combat, period. It’s a frickin’ football game.
    b) I’d wanna see something that looked like home, not like the people sitting around me.

    I swear, if it were 30 or 40 years ago, people would be wondering if the Nike design team was all girls.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    You know that the standard Army uniform, even when they aren’t in combat, is now camo (and not the green suit-looking thing), right? I mean, this is what these guys wear on a day-to-day basis.

    I’ll admit that it’s a bit much when the San Diego Padres put on camo tops, but shit, if anyone is allowed to wear camo, it should be an Army team.

  • u2-horn | December 6, 2008 at 5:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”303858″]I’m liking the color vs. color.
    [/quote]
    I’m liking the score even better.

  • Chuck | December 6, 2008 at 5:14 pm |

    I would like to see a rule in which a team will lose a timeout if they choose to wear monochrome colors! LOL!….. Dont mind me, I am 52 and old school. :-)

  • Brandon | December 6, 2008 at 5:17 pm |

    I am ashamed to say I have no photographic offerings from the ACC Championship Game. I swear I grabbed the fully charged battery and put it in the camera before I left this morning. So no goods from me.

    My apologies.

  • robert | December 6, 2008 at 5:18 pm |

    i didn’t want to say it out loud, but sean went and talked to the giant pink elephant in the locker room when he mentioned the possibility of an aesthetically unpleasing championship game. it’s okay if alabama OR oklahoma wins, but if they BOTH win, we get this or this

  • Stuby | December 6, 2008 at 5:22 pm |

    Firstly, it looked like the Army guys had the tabs for the schools they had attended (Airborne, Ranger, etc.) On the back of their helmets.

    Secondly, the “they haven’t earned the right to wear camo because they haven’t been to combat” argument is ridiculous. You are issued camouflage in Basic Training well before any combat scenario. Being a combat vet, it doesn’t bother me in the least.

    Let’s hope that any other team from now on takes Army’s lead and uses the correct camo pattern.

  • Brandon | December 6, 2008 at 5:29 pm |

    [quote comment=\”303843\”]Army uniforms dont look as bad as feared. The unit patches are a nice touch (but isnt there some sort of propriety issue with wearing patches of units they aren\’t part of?)

    But I have a major problem with the wearing of fatigues/camo in civilian settings (not on base). I know Bush the Lesser changed the longstanding rule against this but it\’s still wrong.[/quote]

    Sir, I don\’t mind you exercising your first amendment right. However get your facts straight. I enlisted in 1999 during SlickWilly\’s Administration and as far as I could tell upon leaving Fort Carson I was not required to immediately remove my BDU\’s. I went to 2 Army v. Airforce games in my BDU\’s. Granted we were still forbidden from being in civilian night clubs and bars in uniform but as far I know there was no regulation on being at a \’civilian\’ function as you said in either the old BDU or new ACU.

    Former SGT. Brandon Creeger
    HWB 1/3 ACR
    Fort Carson, CO

    The uniforms for both teams looked ok. I would understand if Navy were to keep this full time. Army needs to keep the Black and Gold.

  • Brandon | December 6, 2008 at 5:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”303866″]Firstly, it looked like the Army guys had the tabs for the schools they had attended (Airborne, Ranger, etc.) On the back of their helmets.

    Secondly, the “they haven’t earned the right to wear camo because they haven’t been to combat” argument is ridiculous. You are issued camouflage in Basic Training well before any combat scenario. Being a combat vet, it doesn’t bother me in the least.

    Let’s hope that any other team from now on takes Army’s lead and uses the correct camo pattern.[/quote]
    Stubs I can’t agree with you more. Allowing them to wear the Tabs is a good motivational tool.

  • robert | December 6, 2008 at 5:35 pm |

    chill stuby, i made it clear that it was one man’s opinion, and not the opinion of everybody in the military. the opinion is no more or less valid then yours, i was just throwing it out there for debate. and by no means is an opinion not shared by you automatically “ridiculous”. if you think about it, while i don’t necessarily share his opinion either, i see what he is trying to say.

  • My Name is Not Earl | December 6, 2008 at 5:47 pm |

    SEC Championship game: Florida has worn the blue pants quite a bit this year. They haven’t worn the orange pants with the blue pants in a while, but they should, seeing that they have orange helmets. Also . . . Florida’s jerseys look quite dated (they haven’t changed since Spurrier took over, an era where such things as fade haircuts and zubaz pants were popular). Of course, it’s preferable that they stay the way they are, instead of having Nike redesign them.

    And what the hell is up with Archie’s suit?

  • Sean | December 6, 2008 at 5:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”303870″]SEC Championship game: Florida has worn the blue pants quite a bit this year. They haven’t worn the orange pants with the blue pants in a while, but they should, seeing that they have orange helmets. Also . . . Florida’s jerseys look quite dated (they haven’t changed since Spurrier took over, an era where such things as fade haircuts and zubaz pants were popular). Of course, it’s preferable that they stay the way they are, instead of having Nike redesign them.

    And what the hell is up with Archie’s suit?[/quote]

    Leave well enough alone, Not Earl…

    …leave…well…enough…alone…

  • LI Phil | December 6, 2008 at 5:56 pm |

    [quote]Florida has worn the blue pants quite a bit this year. They haven’t worn the orange pants with the blue pants in a while, but they should[/quote]

    that’d be a neat trick! like hockey breezers, eh?

    ;)

  • Stuby | December 6, 2008 at 5:58 pm |

    Robert, dude, I am chill. It is a ridiculous statement in that these guys are pretty much in the Army already. And you don’t ‘earn’ camouflage by going into combat.

    I guess ‘inaccurate’ would have been more accurate than ‘ridiculous’.

  • My Name is Not Earl | December 6, 2008 at 6:03 pm |

    A pretty ugly basketball game between Kentucky and Miami at Rupp. Kentucky’s home whites, with the blue panels on the shoulders and the swweping stripes down the back and the pants look terrible. Miami is wearing black jerseys with orange letters and numbers that are not trimmed in white.

  • monochrome sucks | December 6, 2008 at 6:11 pm |

    [quote]Sir, I don\’t mind you exercising your first amendment right. However get your facts straight. I enlisted in 1999 during SlickWilly\’s Administration and as far as I could tell upon leaving Fort Carson I was not required to immediately remove my BDU\’s. I went to 2 Army v. Airforce games in my BDU\’s. Granted we were still forbidden from being in civilian night clubs and bars in uniform but as far I know there was no regulation on being at a \’civilian\’ function as you said in either the old BDU or new ACU.

    Former SGT. Brandon Creeger
    HWB 1/3 ACR
    Fort Carson, CO

    The uniforms for both teams looked ok. I would understand if Navy were to keep this full time. Army needs to keep the Black and Gold. [/quote]

    what’s the 1st Amendment have to do with this?

    yeah there was and it was around for decades. im not military but ive done a lot of work over the years with DoD here in DC so i often have mtgs with military, go to the army/navy club, attend functions with military etc. maybe things were relaxed in base towns (and there were always some exceptions).

    ten years ago one would never ever be allowed to wear bdu’s to meetings or interactions with civilians in public. even during the vietnam war there was a strict rule regarding the wearing of combat dress in the US. this rule was changed during the Bush administration (the argument was that the US was a combat zone in the war on terror or something like that). now you see fatigues (isntead of dress or civilian clothes) all over the metro. the UK even recently adopted the rule change.

    the symbolic principle behind the rule was, since the US was not a combat zone, that only dress uniforms (or civilian clothes) should be worn in public so as not to project the image of an occupying military force.

    can’t find articles on it (cause i cant figure out a good search string) but ask some old heads about it and they’ll back me up.

  • robert | December 6, 2008 at 6:19 pm |

    you dropped a dude on me? ha,i guess i did use chill, but i would rather you kick me in the balls then call me dude. i ain’t no hippie.
    you’ve got to understand this 2 term nam marine is hard freakin core. he hates seeing civilians in army jackets purchased at the old army navy surplus even. his opinion was shaped by what he saw/experienced when he came back to the states after the war. in his opinion you shouldn’t wear fatigues(in public) until you have worn them into combat. it is his opinion, and it is no more inaccurate than it is ridiculous in that it is an opinion.

  • Katie | December 6, 2008 at 6:20 pm |

    In addition to having the school motto on the back of the jerseys, Army had writing down the sides of their pants. One side said West Point and the other said boots on the ground (unless I can’t read that correctly?) They can be seen here:

    http://assets.espn.g...
    http://assets.espn.g...
    http://assets.espn.g...

  • JTH | December 6, 2008 at 6:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”303757″]
    happy b-day, jth… mine is tomorrow:) we december birthdays often get the short end of the stick when it comes to presents—“here, this is for your birthday AND for christmas!” gee, thanks, mr. cheapskate![/quote]
    Thanks and happy early birthday to you.

    Yeah, my oldest son’s fifth birthday was yesterday and my youngest turns 1 on January 8th, so they’re both in for the same treatment the rest of their lives.

    Y’know, it wasn’t so much the combined gifts that bugged me as a kid. It was having to wait all year for the presents. There were no mid-year presents.

  • Brandon | December 6, 2008 at 6:27 pm |

    Monochrome, It was a lame attempted crack at your Bush the Lesser remark (just cause). That was where the 1st amendment came in. I’m not one of the old timers around here. (29) I know politicians are politicians same crap different wrapper. More to the actual uni part. I believe the switch in policy may have to do with the ever reducing role of the old doorman green suit(Class A’s). I was enlisted active duty for 6 years and I wore the Class A uniform maybe 4 or 5 times. I don’t know when it will be replaced by the dress blue(if it hasn’t already) but I believe it is due. You may see a change in D.C. but it looks much the same to me at Ft. Carson or now at home near MacDill AFB

  • JTH | December 6, 2008 at 6:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”303767″]Happy Birfday, JTH!

    If today is the first day using the snowblower, come to Canada. We can give you many more days of snow-blowing fun. ;o)[/quote]
    Thanks!

    Today’s the first day this year we’ve gotten any significant accumulation. The snowblower worked like a CHAM-PEEN. Much better than the piece of crap I’d been using for the last 8 years or so.

    BTW, I recorded some awesome hockey footage today. If and when I get around to uploading it to YouTube, I’ll post it here.

  • zac | December 6, 2008 at 6:45 pm |

    look at the army unis without the pants and it looks good the pants are just a little excessive

  • monochrome sucks | December 6, 2008 at 7:06 pm |

    [quote]Monochrome, It was a lame attempted crack at your Bush the Lesser remark (just cause). That was where the 1st amendment came in. I’m not one of the old timers around here. (29) I know politicians are politicians same crap different wrapper. More to the actual uni part. I believe the switch in policy may have to do with the ever reducing role of the old doorman green suit(Class A’s). I was enlisted active duty for 6 years and I wore the Class A uniform maybe 4 or 5 times. I don’t know when it will be replaced by the dress blue(if it hasn’t already) but I believe it is due. You may see a change in D.C. but it looks much the same to me at Ft. Carson or now at home near MacDill AFB [/quote]

    I just use the lesser part to differentiate this Bush (unmitigated disaster) from his father who i think was a very good (and underappreciated) president and the best of my lifetime (im only a couple years older then you). anyway, enough of that.

    yeah i think a lot of the change basically has to do with the general societal trend of casualization. but it’s still a bit jarring (especially at places like the army/navy club which has super strict formal dress rules or on the subway) and i agree with the old principle. there should be a difference between what is worn in a military zone versus a public zone.

    interesting enough, while looking for an article to back me up i came across some stuff saying the marines (or at least some commanders) have gone back to the old rule.

  • casey (davis, ca) | December 6, 2008 at 7:13 pm |

    The Montreal Canadiens have changed their centre ice logo. Centre Ice now adorns the All Star Game logo, rather than the 100th Anniversary Logo.

  • Patrick | December 6, 2008 at 7:26 pm |

    Not sure if this has been mentioned before…but does the piping on some of the Florida’s players blue pants just not seem right? It is almost as if they run more down the back of the pants and not down the sides.

  • Brandon | December 6, 2008 at 7:33 pm |

    MONO, This is the problem with internet forums and chats and the like. Had we been having a conversation we most likely had been on the same page. We see the thing on two different levels. I was an enlisted man on a howitzer gun line. The highest ranking man I saw in the field or in garrison was a Major General one time. I dealt mostly with LTC and below.

  • robert | December 6, 2008 at 7:38 pm |

    not the biggest gator fan, but lets celebrate the fact that we don’t have to watch a monochromatic oklahoma-alabama bcs title game.

  • LI Phil | December 6, 2008 at 8:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”303886″]not the biggest gator fan, but lets celebrate the fact that we don’t have to watch a monochromatic oklahoma-alabama bcs title game.[/quote]

    unless of course, mizzou sends the horns to the big dance, where, imho, texas rightfully belongs

  • robert | December 6, 2008 at 8:26 pm |

    i would be lying if i said i don’t want to see the horns go. but either way, it would be a good game visually. not to mention, both OU & UT are deserving teams. that being said…go tigers!

  • Tim | December 6, 2008 at 8:32 pm |

    Army’s uniforms were down right amazing. Say whatever you want but they just looked good. Everyone who watched the game with me in HD agreed, those helmets were some of the coolest things. They used GOOD camo, they didnt use too much of it, and everything just fit together.

    Maybe not a weekly thing, but every year against Navy? Sign me up.

  • Cory | December 6, 2008 at 9:08 pm |

    I know i’m a little late on this one but i absolutely love Army’s uniforms. They are awesome. I love a classic uniform just as much as the next person (watching USC-UCLA was a treat), but it’s nice to see something new. I’m interested in the age of those who dislike the uniforms. I’m 21 and I love them.

    I would be willing to bet those who dislike them will tend to be older. Every one of my friends I’ve talked to thought the Army uniforms were awesome as well. Perhaps a generation gap? The design was guided by the players, wasn’t it? or am i mistaken?

  • C.N. | December 6, 2008 at 9:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”303887″]

    unless of course, mizzou sends the horns to the big dance, where, imho, texas rightfully belongs[/quote]

    As an Oklahoma fan, I fully agree. Some ESPN columnist (Forde, maybe?) wrote something about how only college football would disregard one team beating the other head-to-head in terms of determining who was better (or higher-ranked).

    [quote comment=”303871″]

    Leave well enough alone, Not Earl…

    …leave…well…enough…alone…[/quote]

    Dear God, I’d almost forgotten about that… or blocked it out of my memory…

  • El Scotto | December 6, 2008 at 9:25 pm |

    For all you Vets, no matter where or when you wore your uniform, thanks!

  • robert | December 6, 2008 at 9:27 pm |

    ha! my first reaction to leek was “dear god!” and “i forgot about those”. i click back and you wrote it on the next line. and for your gin-use, i must concur with senator CN…leave well enough alone not earl. for the love of god, leave well enough alone.

    army age gap:from what i can tell it was a mixed bag today, but i would imagine you are right, the age to hate quotient is inversely proportional. for instance, i hate, i 38.

  • My Name is Not Earl | December 6, 2008 at 9:33 pm |

    West Virginia doing its white-out (to honor Pat White, playing his last home game)

  • C.N. | December 6, 2008 at 9:57 pm |

    [quote comment=”303891″][quote comment=”303887″]

    unless of course, mizzou sends the horns to the big dance, where, imho, texas rightfully belongs[/quote]

    As an Oklahoma fan, I fully agree. Some ESPN columnist (Forde, maybe?) wrote something about how only college football would disregard one team beating the other head-to-head in terms of determining who was better (or higher-ranked).

    [/quote]

    Also, this blowout we’ve got going on right now doesn’t make OU look that good, considering Texas already beat the mess out of Mizzou earlier this year.

  • Patrick in MI | December 6, 2008 at 9:58 pm |

    I think the Army unis would have looked better if they had the uni numbers on the helmet, preferably in black to pop out against that camo. Oh, and wear gold pants instead of the camo.

    As far as color vs. color goes, no one has black & white TV’s anymore. I say go for it!

  • Terri | December 6, 2008 at 10:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”303764″]I don’t know if it was mentioned yesterday, but when Montreal introduced the old players Thursday they all wore CCM jerseys, not Reebok.

    Also, they had a video of Roger Doucet singing both national anthems and, the video they used was the old version of the Candian anthem before they changed the words. (The English part anyway.)

    I have it all on DVR and if someone teaches me how do a screen grab I can link toi the CCM and post the anthem.[/quote]

    They changed the words to the national anthem? What did it use to be?

  • JJD | December 6, 2008 at 10:28 pm |

    I don’t have any pics and I don’t know if there will be any because Washington is HORRIBLE and ended their season 0-12, but WR Cody Bruns and would-be third string QB Taylor Bean BOTH wore #7 for Washington all season, but after second-string QB Ronnie Fouch got hurt, Bean had to go in for significant action. As a result, Bruns had to make a mid-game switch to #42.

  • Mike Engle | December 6, 2008 at 10:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”303897″][quote comment=”303764″]I don’t know if it was mentioned yesterday, but when Montreal introduced the old players Thursday they all wore CCM jerseys, not Reebok.

    Also, they had a video of Roger Doucet singing both national anthems and, the video they used was the old version of the Candian anthem before they changed the words. (The English part anyway.)

    I have it all on DVR and if someone teaches me how do a screen grab I can link toi the CCM and post the anthem.[/quote]

    They changed the words to the national anthem? What did it use to be?[/quote]
    Scoop here
    And on a totally unrelated topic, my roommate showed me this video. Enjoy.
    (Not quite uni related, but it talks about Kansas’ favorite font: Trajan.)

  • LI Phil | December 6, 2008 at 10:36 pm |

    [quote]They changed the words to the national anthem? What did it use to be?[/quote]

    it went from “we’re america’s bitch you see” to “the true north strong and free” or something like that

  • DaveAllen | December 6, 2008 at 11:14 pm |

    There is a long standing tradition with Navy-Army (I know its Army-Navy in the common vernacular, but I am a former squid) to wear one-off uniforms for this game, i.e. the Jolly Roger Helmets. I dont believe that Army should wear the camo’s when they play Toledo, Holy Cross or Vassar. However, against the supremely superior Navy teams that Army has so graciously lost to the past several years, I see no harm in it. As a matter of fact, compared to some of the Evil Empire’s other efforts, Army’s uni is downright sleek. Make no mistake, lets hope this is a one time deal – y’know, too much of a good thing

  • u2-horn | December 7, 2008 at 12:27 am |

    [quote comment=”303887″]

    unless of course, mizzou sends the horns to the big dance, where, imho, texas rightfully belongs[/quote]

    I knew I liked you, Phil.

  • Beardface | December 7, 2008 at 1:02 am |

    So far, the BCS is shaping up to have some very traditional looks in their games… At this point, I think only Cinci and Utah are going to be playing in ‘modern’ looks (assuming VT’s seniors choose once again to wear the throwbacks in Miami)

    Florida, Alabama, USC, Texas, Penn St, possibly Ohio State (if they make it), and possibly Virginia Tech (if they choose to wear the throwbacks) all have great possibility for some good looks during the BCS.

    Yep, those new ‘desiger’ uniforms are really great for recruiting the top notch players in the nation……

  • Jordan Pope | December 7, 2008 at 1:36 am |

    [quote comment=”303898″]I don’t have any pics and I don’t know if there will be any because Washington is HORRIBLE and ended their season 0-12, but WR Cody Bruns and would-be third string QB Taylor Bean BOTH wore #7 for Washington all season, but after second-string QB Ronnie Fouch got hurt, Bean had to go in for significant action. As a result, Bruns had to make a mid-game switch to #42.[/quote]

    as a proud cougar fan i could care less
    heres a little something i made my husky friend wear

    http://i193.photobuc...