Duty, Honor, Country

army versus navy

by Phil Hecken

Yesterday’s Army-Navy game was either the greatest or the worst uniform matchup of the year, depending upon your perspective. It was the 109th meeting between the teams, and it’s always the biggest game of the year for those two service academies. Even though Navy thoroughly smoked Army, 34-0, the uniforms were the story.

Nike chose Army and Navy seeing as how it’s already ruined Oregon as partners in debuting its new “Enforcer” football uniforms this weekend. According to the Swoosh, the new uniforms “were developed as the next evolution of Nike’s shrink wrap uniform with high performance materials that will help the athletes perform at their highest standard.” The uniforms “are lightweight, breathable and more form-fitting, enabling superior field performance.” (Apparently someone forgot to tell Army this). Nike continues, “The uniforms provide greater moisture management and reduction of grab points while also incorporating inspiration from two of the nation’s military units in its design.” Whatever.

Wait — what was that last part — “incorporating inspiration from two of the nation’s military units in its design”? Let’s look at that part, shall we.

Navy: Navy’s unis incorporated symbols associated with the Marine Corps for the first time ever, while also including the blue and gold always associated with the Naval Academy. Navy football players wore their traditional sun gold helmet and their jersey had the United States Marines “globe and anchor” logo, which emphasizes the connection between the Marine Corps and the Navy. Also, included in the jersey are the shoulder boards, which depict the wings of the Blue Angel plane. Each player also wore a unit patch representing different units of both the Army and the Navy from around the world. Navy also wore a replica of the Marine Corps Elegant Dress Pants (as seen on right) with the fold and red officer blood stripe running down each pant leg.

Army: Army debuted a new helmet and pants, along with jersey numerals with a digital print camouflage pattern. The pants featured the name “West Point” along the right side. “Boots on the Ground,” Army’s slogan, ran along the left side of the pant. In place of the name plate, “Duty, Honor, Country” was displayed on the back of each player’s jersey along with their uniform number. Each player also had a unit patch on the front of their jersey.

So, what’s the verdict, Uni Watchers? Just another Nike gimmick, or a fine tribute to the Armed Services? Maybe a little bit of both. Regardless, the real champion of the 109th Army-Navy game was the unis. Either way, it’s interesting to see how the Swoosh is attempting to work with some universities (and academies) to produce unique and sometimes visually jarring uniforms.  I would imagine the Battle of the Academies was probably just a “one-off” thing and these two teams will retrun to their more “traditional” unis next season (until they face each other next year?).  But how did you like it? Let us know what you think.

“Men, I want you just thinking of one word all season. One word and one word only: Super Bowl.” — former Houston Oilers Head Coach Bill Peterson

Notes & Asides: • This weeks “worst uni matchup” winners: Stade Francais / Harlequins (thanks, SQL), AC Milan / Palermo (grazie, Stuby), and Atlanta / St. Louis (thanks, John Muir) •• BCS selections announced tonight at 8:00 EST (FOX) ••• Today in the NFL: Look for the G-Men to clinch the NFC East & a first round bye with a win over the Iggles at 1:00 EST; FAIC (Football Afternoon In Canada) at 4:05 EST, with the Bills “hosting” the Fish; Tremendous game between playoff-bound Pittsburgh & playoff-wannabe Dallas at 4:15; SNF features the suddenly-hot Ravens and the barely-breathing Skins…good stuff

BCS Predictions: BCS: Florida vs. Oklahoma; Fiesta: Texas vs. TOSU; Sugar: Bama vs. Utah; Rose: USC vs. PSU; Orange: VT vs. Cincinnati

 

195 comments to Duty, Honor, Country

  • tommy forrester | December 7, 2008 at 7:32 am |

    i’ve dreamed army would go camo since, like, ’92. too bad it’s that digital style now but i’ll take it. navy looked good too. they should put an anchor on the helmet tho.

  • skott daltonic | December 7, 2008 at 8:07 am |

    i’m not at all sure what to think about those uniforms…i like that nike is trying to do something a little more unique and tailored to each school.

    i like the red stripes for navy as well as the marines logo.

    i did not see the blue angels wings on the shoulders, just some bulky yokes.

    (ps. that gold that they use, the same as the Rams, sucks. go back to GOLD, like the bruins or the packers use. and blue. like navy (NAVY) used to use…no more flashy gold. Dance Fever called, they want their disco threads back.)

    army. wow.

    i wonder if Air Force will be included in new uni’s for military games next year?

  • Ryan | December 7, 2008 at 8:12 am |

    The digital camo was certainly unique, but maybe a bit overdone. I don’t think the numbers needed to be camo. And to be honest I couldn’t read the back of Army’s jerseys until they shot a close-up.

    Navy had an excellent look IMO, but I think the patches on both teams’ jerseys were a bit large. With the ever shrinking jersey in football, large patches are just distracting.

  • Glen | December 7, 2008 at 8:54 am |

    I think the military uni’s are awesome! It probably is just a gimmick by Nike, but the different elements and shout outs to tradition are wonderful!

  • Bob | December 7, 2008 at 8:57 am |

    Another Nike gimmick, but the uniforms were OK.

  • David | December 7, 2008 at 9:16 am |

    Phil, terrific column. I saw the “West Point” language on one leg, but never saw the writing in the other leg for Army – great catch! I thought the uniforms were really nice. The camo just fits Army, and the splash of gold and blue for Navy really worked. I also like the idea of putting an anchor on the helmet.

    Overall, a very good uni day for the service academies.

  • Dave R | December 7, 2008 at 9:17 am |

    I generally hate Nike (and I’ll never forgive them for what they’ve done to basketball uniforms), but this was cool. I liked both the Army and Navy versions.

  • jesse | December 7, 2008 at 9:21 am |

    Couple of things, It’s called the Eagle, Globe and Anchor, not Globe and Anchor. Also, the “blood stripe” on the unis is closer to what officers wear on their evening dress trousers, not the dress blue trousers. Finally the Army uniforms were totally ridiculous.

  • Mike J | December 7, 2008 at 9:24 am |

    The camo on the Army uni wasn’t necessary for the numbers, though I think it was okay for the pants and helmet. Hopefully Nike doesn’t try to make a camo jersey. That would be too much. Also, I’m not a big fan of the slogans on the pants and back of the jersey. The writing is small and is difficult to see on TV. It’s probably even worse if you are in the stadium.

  • Richard Bruns | December 7, 2008 at 9:27 am |

    Sorry that this isn’t so much uni related but I hate it when people feel like they have to rip on Ohio State by putting things the “TOSU” to represent them. Get over the fact that they likely have a better program than the one year cheer for.

  • Shaftman | December 7, 2008 at 9:35 am |

    Phil…another solid weekend edition.

    I will preface this by saying that I am NOT a big college football fan. Other than USC, Ohio State and Notre Dame, I don’t have a great appreciation for the uniforms at this level.

    Having said that, I really like the new armed forces uni’s. I see some areas that it can be tweaked but on the my overall opinion is that Nike customized a uniform set that best represents what the school represents and I think that is the point to a uniform or logo.

    Tweaks I would make…

    Navy:
    – Either lose the unit patches or make them smaller and move them into the “shoulder boards”. In their current position it looks like they are tying to hard to have them fit.

    Army:
    – I have the same problem with the …but since you don’t have to deal with a lot of design work near the shoulders, I would just make the patch a little smaller.
    – Remove
    “Duty, Honor, Country” from the nameplate and have it moved to the back of the helmet running along the base. Like the Navy patches, it just screams of “trying to hard” (sorry Teebz).

    Both:
    REMOVE THE NIKE LOGO. When Phil Knight sends in a force of sneaker wearing commandos from Oregon, then he should be allowed to place corporate logos on our Armed Forces uniforms (sports or otherwise), until then, please just leave these collages logo free.

  • zep | December 7, 2008 at 9:37 am |

    I liked the Navy pants, and Marine logo on the jersey…shoulder boards were just OK.

    Loved the Army unis. Slogans should be cut out completely though as it seems alittle absurd….what if Alabama had Rammer Jammer on the pants…brutal

    Maybe unit patches should be stickers on the helmets…

  • JTH | December 7, 2008 at 9:42 am |

    Any time the Wizards break out these eyesores needs a worst uni matchup nomination.

    As for the Army-Navy unis, I liked them both.

    I really didn’t care for the “Blue Angel wings” semi-yoke on the Navy jerseys, but other than that I have no complaints on their unis.

    On the wide shots, I though Army looked great. Not so much on the closeups, though — I don’t like that digital print camo at all. The camo numerals were definitely a bit much as well. Solid-colored (gold — those unis definitely needed some gold.) numbers would have been nice. Also, the commas after “DUTY” and “HONOR” looked like periods (DUTY. HONOR. COUNTRY), so it just looked like they forgot to put one after “COUNTRY”.

    Late in yesterday’s comments the “generation gap” question was raised. I’m obviously 38, so mark that as a Yea vote from “Generation X” (ugh).
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Unfortunately, I didn’t get to catch any of UCLA-USC last night. The restaurant I was at was showing a bunch of episodes of Super Robot Red Baron on the big screen.

  • JTH | December 7, 2008 at 9:49 am |

    [quote comment="303916"]Sorry that this isn’t so much uni related but I hate it when people feel like they have to rip on Ohio State by putting things the “TOSU” to represent them. Get over the fact that they likely have a better program than the one year cheer for.[/quote]
    That need to “rip on Ohio State” couldn’t possibly stem from the fact that NFL players feel the need to shout “THE!… Ohio State University” during TV introductions, could it?

  • RugbyJosh | December 7, 2008 at 10:04 am |

    Stade France has definitely the worst unis ever, but Harlequins? Those are too classic to be ugly. About the Army/Navy game, though, I thought that the Army jerseys looked just awful until I saw that last picture of all the players lined up together. Maybe it was because that was a shot at a distance, but man, they looked pretty breathtaking.

  • Jeremy Brahm | December 7, 2008 at 10:05 am |

    Here is a little info about Harlequins Rugby Club/Rugby League.

    According to wikipedia, the design for Haqlequins’ Rugby League home shirt is very similar to the union club’s famous multi-colored quartered jersey (light blue, magenta, chocolate, French grey, black & light green). It does, however, incorporate a Rugby League twist with the quarters forming a slight “v” shape.

    That means that the team have six official colors.
    Most teams at most have four, but six!!

    Home uniform

    http://shop.quins.co...

    Paul would love their socks.

    http://shop.quins.co...

    Away uniform, probably during warmups for a match because it looks like the players have their initials on their shorts.

    http://en.wikipedia....

    Away uniform from the front

    http://shop.quins.co...

  • Nick Niedzwiadek | December 7, 2008 at 10:06 am |

    I didn’t know Oregon had a sister military school.
    Just kidding but Navy looked sharp, army would look better if they kept their own helmets and made the camo pants just a stripe of camo, keep the numbers. Good attempt

  • Matt B | December 7, 2008 at 10:12 am |

    Navy was OK, Army was terrible. The camo and the woodmarks were ridiculous, full stop.

  • Harris Smith | December 7, 2008 at 10:15 am |

    [quote comment="303923"]I didn’t know Oregon had a sister military school.
    Just kidding but Navy looked sharp, army would look better if they kept their own helmets and made the camo pants just a stripe of camo, keep the numbers. Good attempt[/quote]

    amen brotha

  • BWags06 | December 7, 2008 at 10:26 am |

    When all the other teams that have done military tributes and wear camouflage, I can’t stand it. But to me, the Army players are the ones who have the right to. Visually appealing or not.
    I know the the digital camouflage looked a little washed out and hard to see, but, um…. that’s exact definition of camouflage.

    I was expecting an unmitigated disaster, but I liked the effort. The cammo numbers were a little much though. I did like the Duty Honor Country, but not so much the words on the pants. I also think I saw a “The Corps” across the bottom of an Army helmet or two.

    I liked the Navy’s unis too. On tv the red stripe on the pants was VERY hard to see. It just looked gold until they showed a close up. The pants looked sharp though.

    Finally, the unit patches don’t bother me at all, and even if they are a little big, its a reminder that these young men aren’t playing football for the chance at a big payday. Those patches represent all the soldiers, sailors, and marines that they will someday be asked to lead.

  • Beardface | December 7, 2008 at 10:27 am |

    I thought the unis were a lil too much. The Navy uniforms could have gone without the shoulder boards. Didn’t think they needed that, but I did really like the blood line and the USMC logo on the side. It would actually be a pretty sweet uniform set if they just kept those things next year and eliminated the shoulder boards.

    Army… I like the attempt. The camo helmet and the camo pants I really liked, because it literally mimicked what they wear. The camo numbers and the Duty, Honor, Country and the wordmarks on the pants could go. Just keep the jersey itself the same as previous years but use the camo helmet and pants and that would be a good look for them as well.

    As for the BCS. We have some nice uni-matchups shaping up.

    NCG – UF vs OU
    Rose – PSU vs USC
    Fiesta – Texas vs tOSU

    3 very traditional uni matchups. Gotta love that.

    Sugar – Bama vs Utah
    Orange – VT vs Cinci

    2 games with traditional (if VT chooses their throwbacks… they are the ‘home’ team, so they get to choose… chances are very high they will go with the throwbacks) vs designer.

    If VT chooses to wear the throwbacks, you will have 8 Nike schools, 1 Adidas school, and 1 UnderArmor school in the BCS. ALL Nike schools will be in a traditional look, whereas the Adidas and UA schools will be in ‘designer’

    For all the crap Nike has infested college football with, I find this highly interesting.

  • LI Phil | December 7, 2008 at 10:49 am |

    [quote comment="303920"][quote comment="303916"]Sorry that this isn’t so much uni related but I hate it when people feel like they have to rip on Ohio State by putting things the “TOSU” to represent them. Get over the fact that they likely have a better program than the one year cheer for.[/quote]
    That need to “rip on Ohio State” couldn’t possibly stem from the fact that NFL players feel the need to shout “THE!… Ohio State University” during TV introductions, could it?[/quote]

    sorry…”TOSU” wasn’t meant to be a ‘shot’ at OSU (Ohio State), just makes it more quickly identifiable than typing out “ohio state university”, since OSU could also be the beavers or the cowboys, and not necessarily the buckeyes

    as far as what JTH said…he’s right, you know

  • BigMatt | December 7, 2008 at 10:50 am |

    The Army uniforms were awesome, especially the DUTY.HONOR.COUNTRY. It helps remind you that these men are more than football players, and should be respected for the sacrifices they make for us!
    As Dubya said, it makes you proud that you live in a country that has people of such high character

  • Ricko | December 7, 2008 at 10:52 am |

    I’m just thankful there isn’t a University for Barbers. Imagine what THOSE pants would look like.

    Or Upholstery. Paisely jerseys? A nice designer plaid? Perhaps rich, Corinthian leather with hammered brass tacks?

    Or Millinery? A dust ruffle at the knees?

    (shudder)

  • LI Phil | December 7, 2008 at 10:57 am |

    remember how the pats tried to “patent” 16-0 or some such nonsense last year?

    anyone know if the lions (or their ‘fans’) have made any such similar attempts to claim 0-16?

    (sorry…watching merrill and emmitt talk about the boys-steelers and they mentioned that ‘somewhere in cyberspace there’s an 0-16 t-shirt floating around’)

  • Macky | December 7, 2008 at 10:58 am |

    I love the Army unis! And those Speed helmets looked so great!

  • Ricko | December 7, 2008 at 11:01 am |

    Camo didn’t work. As usual, Navy had no trouble seeing them.

  • Stefan | December 7, 2008 at 11:06 am |

    How can the Milan-Palermo matchup be a worst uni matchup? Both teams play in their traditional colors. Should Palermo abandon their colorf in favour of a hipper color? This is european football, not a franchise driven system.

  • Bryan | December 7, 2008 at 11:23 am |

    [quote comment="303928"][quote comment="303920"][quote comment="303916"]Sorry that this isn’t so much uni related but I hate it when people feel like they have to rip on Ohio State by putting things the “TOSU” to represent them. Get over the fact that they likely have a better program than the one year cheer for.[/quote]
    That need to “rip on Ohio State” couldn’t possibly stem from the fact that NFL players feel the need to shout “THE!… Ohio State University” during TV introductions, could it?[/quote]

    sorry…”TOSU” wasn’t meant to be a ‘shot’ at OSU (Ohio State), just makes it more quickly identifiable than typing out “ohio state university”, since OSU could also be the beavers or the cowboys, and not necessarily the buckeyes

    as far as what JTH said…he’s right, you know[/quote]

    The legal name of the school is The Ohio State University.

    As for the Army – Navy game, I guess I’m the only one but I’d rather have seen both academies wearing their traditional unis.

  • Carl | December 7, 2008 at 11:31 am |

    [quote comment="303920"][quote comment="303916"]Sorry that this isn’t so much uni related but I hate it when people feel like they have to rip on Ohio State by putting things the “TOSU” to represent them. Get over the fact that they likely have a better program than the one year cheer for.[/quote]
    That need to “rip on Ohio State” couldn’t possibly stem from the fact that NFL players feel the need to shout “THE!… Ohio State University” during TV introductions, could it?[/quote]

    …ditto that. I don’t understand it, nor do I (or anyone from area outside 4-letter states with 3 vowels) think that it’s clever. It’s not as if there’s much confusion as to which state university in Ohio they’re referring to. It’s the galdarn flagship campus. We’re not dumb. We know this. Get down from your horse tOSU fans and please quit making the BigTen look bad by getting blown out in more national games.

    Kudos, however, to tOSU for the sparkly helmets and Buckeyes (awesome), beautiful football unis and an amazing stadium.

  • Steve | December 7, 2008 at 11:35 am |

    [quote comment="303936"][quote comment="303920"][quote comment="303916"]Sorry that this isn’t so much uni related but I hate it when people feel like they have to rip on Ohio State by putting things the “TOSU” to represent them. Get over the fact that they likely have a better program than the one year cheer for.[/quote]
    That need to “rip on Ohio State” couldn’t possibly stem from the fact that NFL players feel the need to shout “THE!… Ohio State University” during TV introductions, could it?[/quote]

    …ditto that. I don’t understand it, nor do I (or anyone from area outside 4-letter states with 3 vowels) think that it’s clever. It’s not as if there’s much confusion as to which state university in Ohio they’re referring to. It’s the galdarn flagship campus. We’re not dumb. We know this. Get down from your horse tOSU fans and please quit making the BigTen look bad by getting blown out in more national games.

    Kudos, however, to tOSU for the sparkly helmets and Buckeyes (awesome), beautiful football unis and an amazing stadium.[/quote]

    The College of New Jersey is like that, too. They even make the acronym “TCNJ” (selectively adding the “The” article but leaving out the “of”). Whenever my friends talk about going there I always say “How are things at THE CNJ?” to mock its emphasis.

  • Steve | December 7, 2008 at 11:39 am |

    [quote comment="303919"]
    Also, the commas after “DUTY” and “HONOR” looked like periods (DUTY. HONOR. COUNTRY), so it just looked like they forgot to put one after “COUNTRY”.
    [/quote]
    I was just going to comment on the same thing. It needed that third period or a better design for the commas.

  • Dennis Abrams | December 7, 2008 at 11:41 am |

    As an Army fan, it pains me to say it but they deserved to wear such awful uniforms.

    As for Navy, they looked really sharp.

  • JTH | December 7, 2008 at 11:50 am |

    [quote comment="303928"][quote comment="303920"][quote comment="303916"]Sorry that this isn’t so much uni related but I hate it when people feel like they have to rip on Ohio State by putting things the “TOSU” to represent them. Get over the fact that they likely have a better program than the one year cheer for.[/quote]
    That need to “rip on Ohio State” couldn’t possibly stem from the fact that NFL players feel the need to shout “THE!… Ohio State University” during TV introductions, could it?[/quote]

    sorry…”TOSU” wasn’t meant to be a ‘shot’ at OSU (Ohio State), just makes it more quickly identifiable than typing out “ohio state university”, since OSU could also be the beavers or the cowboys, and not necessarily the buckeyes

    as far as what JTH said…he’s right, you know[/quote]
    By the way, I didn’t mean to imply that I agreed with Richard’s inference that you were ripping or mocking The Ohio State University in any way. I, on the other hand, was definitely mocking.

    For the record, TOSU currently has far better program than the one I cheer for, and I’ve gotten over it.

  • Marty | December 7, 2008 at 11:54 am |

    I really liked Navy’s pants.
    I wish the Marines would get a big time academy. Coast Guard too. I would go back to school if that happened.
    The Marines could be “The Leathernecks”. Obviously.
    The Coast Guard could be called “The Coast Guarders”. They could have an orange yoke that extends down the front of the jersey, replicating a life jacket.
    Feed mayonnaise to the tuna.

  • Jamie | December 7, 2008 at 12:03 pm |

    I personally thought TOSU was pretty clever. I don’t have a problem with referring to it as the Ohio State University. I think it’s intended more to specify which state university you’re referring to (the OHIO state university) than to say “we’re from THE university, you’re from A university,” and it’s a shame NFL players had to ruin that.

  • JTH | December 7, 2008 at 12:07 pm |

    [quote comment="303941"]I really liked Navy’s pants.
    I wish the Marines would get a big time academy. Coast Guard too. I would go back to school if that happened.
    The Marines could be “The Leathernecks”. Obviously.
    The Coast Guard could be called “The Coast Guarders”. They could have an orange yoke that extends down the front of the jersey, replicating a life jacket.
    Feed mayonnaise to the tuna.[/quote]
    Devil Dogs would be a good option.

    And I realize that your post was dripping with sarcasm, but the Coast Guard Academy’s nickname is Bears and the football team does wear orange (helmets)

  • Ricko | December 7, 2008 at 12:07 pm |

    [quote comment="303941"]I really liked Navy’s pants.
    I wish the Marines would get a big time academy. Coast Guard too. I would go back to school if that happened.
    The Marines could be “The Leathernecks”. Obviously.
    The Coast Guard could be called “The Coast Guarders”. They could have an orange yoke that extends down the front of the jersey, replicating a life jacket.
    Feed mayonnaise to the tuna.[/quote]

    Didn’t Otto Graham coach the Coast Guard Acadamey football team at one time?

  • Podunk Texas | December 7, 2008 at 12:09 pm |

    my Army – Navy thoughts….

    the military academies are not normal universities, and their traditions are more than simple school spirit. i’m a Texas grad, but my pride for the Longhorns is not the same as a West Point grad’s pride for the Army. plus, you add on the large number of enlisted soldiers/sailers/marines, etc that have a connection to the academies without ever attending, simply because of their association with the armed forces, and it makes the military academies unique. therefore, i applaud the interesting unis. maybe there were a few too many swooshes, or maybe the pants would have been better with just camo accents… either way, i like the fact that tied in their unique aspects and traditions…

  • Stuby | December 7, 2008 at 12:12 pm |

    So what if the AC Milan-Palermo matchup featured their traditional jerseys? It was still ugly and when combined with the ball design and the hideous color worn by the ref (and, most likely, the goalkeepers) it was an explosion of color. That’s why I nominated it.

  • Mattysbirds | December 7, 2008 at 12:14 pm |

    I thought the Army-Navy uniforms were fantastic. Their usual unis are not much to write home about, and if any programs deserve something unique it’s these two (more so than Nike puppet Oregon). This may be a Nike stunt too, but these are working for me.

  • JTH | December 7, 2008 at 12:19 pm |

    [quote comment="303945"]my Army – Navy thoughts….

    the military academies are not normal universities, and their traditions are more than simple school spirit. i’m a Texas grad, but my pride for the Longhorns is not the same as a West Point grad’s pride for the Army. plus, you add on the large number of enlisted soldiers/sailers/marines, etc that have a connection to the academies without ever attending, simply because of their association with the armed forces, and it makes the military academies unique. therefore, i applaud the interesting unis. maybe there were a few too many swooshes, or maybe the pants would have been better with just camo accents… either way, i like the fact that tied in their unique aspects and traditions…[/quote]
    Happy birthday!

  • Frank from B-more | December 7, 2008 at 12:27 pm |

    As a Soldier who now lives in near the Naval Academy, this game is always special.
    I love the traditional uniform these schools usually wear, and was a little disappointed to hear Nike had designed some “special unis” for the 109th game.

    Navy:
    Thought the uni was a little too busy with too many logos (USMC, Anchor). Loved the NCO/Office USMC blood stripe on the pants, hated the shoulder board.

    Army:
    Loved the ACU helmet and pants. Hated all the mottos on the pants (way too much). The USMA could have worn their regular jerseys and been fine, ACU numbers were a little over the top.

    UNIT PATCHES
    One of the highlights of this game is finding the player who is wearing the patch of the unit you belong (or belonged to). Those are always actually size (no bigger then the giant bowl patches teams are forced to wear at bowls) and they actually represent something that matters, not (fill in your compnay here) bowl.

    All in all, with some tweeks both of these unis could be an interesting alternate option for 2 very traditional uni schools.

  • Podunk Texas | December 7, 2008 at 12:29 pm |

    [quote comment=\"303948\"][quote comment=\"303945\"]
    Happy birthday![/quote]

    Why thank you, fine sir! :)

  • tkcyclone | December 7, 2008 at 12:40 pm |

    [quote comment="303920"][quote comment="303916"]Sorry that this isn’t so much uni related but I hate it when people feel like they have to rip on Ohio State by putting things the “TOSU” to represent them. Get over the fact that they likely have a better program than the one year cheer for.[/quote]
    That need to “rip on Ohio State” couldn’t possibly stem from the fact that NFL players feel the need to shout “THE!… Ohio State University” during TV introductions, could it?[/quote]They are officially “The Ohio State University.”

    Navy’s unis were great, Army’s were a joke.

  • TSP | December 7, 2008 at 12:43 pm |

    The Army-Navy game is usually a big bore, so the uniform switch was awesome! I would love to see Army go to that camo uniform 90% of the time.

  • Stan aka The Took | December 7, 2008 at 12:47 pm |

    It’s too much stuff on one uniform (for both teams), the diffrent colors, the patches, the camo, the lines and stripes, etc etc.

    The Navy uniform reminds me of NFL Europe and the Army reminds of the baseball 1999 future uniforms.

    I prefer the original “traditional” looking uniforms but I agree someone said that there should be an anchor on the Navy helmets.

  • Zach Smith | December 7, 2008 at 12:51 pm |

    I definitely fall in to the category of liking both unis. Sure, I’d agree with Army using White numbers on the jerseys instead of cammo, but really no complaints here. I thought Navy’s uni’s were absolutely gorgeous, actually.

    One thing I noticed on Navy’s uni was that the Nike swoosh on the jersey was right in the middle of the chest. Usually they have it off to the left (army’s were this way) but I guess because of the large yokes/the two patches some players had to wear, the swoosh moved to the middle. I understand why they had to do this, but it does seem to make it more prominent, which obviously I’m less of a fan of. Still, that’s the way the business works, so whatever.

  • SQL | December 7, 2008 at 12:53 pm |

    A worst uni matchup is just that : a matchup. Two perfectly good uniforms could clash with one another and produce a worst uni matchup. In the cas of the Harlequins jersey, and even though I like the team name and concept I really think the colors are poorly chosen and even more arranged.
    And when it commes to awful jerseys it’s hard ti imagine something worse (or busier) than Stade Francçais’ third jersey.

  • Jeff E. | December 7, 2008 at 12:58 pm |

    I saw a couple posts that said they thought the patches were too big on the Army/Navy uniforms. I don’t know about Navy, but the Army unit patches are the same size as the ones worn on official uniforms, so I can definitely understand why the sizes were the way they were.
    It would have been a nice touch (and keeping with the camo theme) if the Army players wore the drab-colored unit patches that are used on their battle-uniforms instead of the colored ones that are worn on the dress uniforms.

  • Kevin | December 7, 2008 at 1:02 pm |

    as a michigan fan, i’ve now had about a month to look at michigan’s adidas bball unis. yesterday was the first look at the maize unis, normally worn for big games. is it me, or do michigan’s unis look almost retro, or high school-ish. i know they are plain, and i love them that way. but i just can’t put my finger on it. something about them just doesn’t seem right…

    http://sports.espn.g...

  • Stevo | December 7, 2008 at 1:03 pm |

    [quote comment="303951"][quote comment="303920"][quote comment="303916"]Sorry that this isn’t so much uni related but I hate it when people feel like they have to rip on Ohio State by putting things the “TOSU” to represent them. Get over the fact that they likely have a better program than the one year cheer for.[/quote]
    That need to “rip on Ohio State” couldn’t possibly stem from the fact that NFL players feel the need to shout “THE!… Ohio State University” during TV introductions, could it?[/quote]They are officially “The Ohio State University.”[/quote]

    The full name of Va Tech is Virginia Polytechnic and State University, but I din’t hear any of their NFL players saying that. Personally I plame the University itself, they’re the one that said “We want to be called The Ohio State University” a few years ago.

  • Marcus Ramsey | December 7, 2008 at 1:03 pm |

    I think the uni’s in the Army/Navy game were unique and considering who was wearing them it was fun. Making something new is good, sometimes it will look kind of cool (Navy) and sometimes it will look kind of bad (Army) but it least someone is trying something new.

  • Kevin M. | December 7, 2008 at 1:04 pm |

    Saints in monochrome black today.

  • mookatron | December 7, 2008 at 1:17 pm |

    I don’t know if it’s a rerun or not, but I noticed in tonight’s TV listings that CNBC has a show called Swoosh! Inside Nike airing tonight. I’m sure Paul already has the TIVO set. I might tune and give it a look see.

  • Mike Engle | December 7, 2008 at 1:23 pm |

    [quote comment="303954"]I definitely fall in to the category of liking both unis. Sure, I’d agree with Army using White numbers on the jerseys instead of cammo, but really no complaints here. I thought Navy’s uni’s were absolutely gorgeous, actually.

    One thing I noticed on Navy’s uni was that the Nike swoosh on the jersey was right in the middle of the chest. Usually they have it off to the left (army’s were this way) but I guess because of the large yokes/the two patches some players had to wear, the swoosh moved to the middle. I understand why they had to do this, but it does seem to make it more prominent, which obviously I’m less of a fan of. Still, that’s the way the business works, so whatever.[/quote]
    Michigan’s football uniforms had its one Swoosh on the neck too, as opposed to on the side. (Notice “had,” as Michigan is an Adidas school now. Picture it here.)
    *Potentially controversial opinion alert: I think I like it better this way. All Swooshes should be on the neckline, or maybe let them go “pro-style” above the sleeve numbers. But when the Swoosh is on the upper left chest (like most cases), it can result in a big cluster-fuck, depending on the school. Captains’ C’s, bowl patches, scholarship patches, conference patches, etc…there’s only so much room on a jersey for all those patches, and nobody will cover a Swoosh, so that means there is less available space than you think.
    Not that I’m endorsing so many gratuitous patches. I’m resigned to accept them as inevitable. So might as well make room for them, at the expense of the Swoosh. (Plus, neck Swooshes are smaller than most other Swooshes.)

  • Carl | December 7, 2008 at 1:25 pm |

    Re: Army camo unis

    To quote my wife during the Army-Navy game: “That’s what happens when you don’t let gays in the military”

  • Jordan Sogn | December 7, 2008 at 1:41 pm |

    My uni vote:
    Army: thumbs up
    Navy: thumbs down

    I just didn’t like the shoulders on Navy as to me it looked awkward. The only thing I didn’t like about Army’s was the name plate (over kill). I thought the helmet’s & pants were great!

  • LI Phil | December 7, 2008 at 1:44 pm |

    [quote comment="303942"]I personally thought TOSU was pretty clever. I don’t have a problem with referring to it as the Ohio State University. I think it’s intended more to specify which state university you’re referring to (the OHIO state university) than to say “we’re from THE university, you’re from A university,” and it’s a shame NFL players had to ruin that.[/quote]

    to reiterate, i didn’t think “TOSU” was a shot at them…in fact, i have much less of a problem with the NFL guys saying “joe schmoe, THE ohio state university”, than guys from a certain south florida institution merely stating “ima kryminahl, the U!

  • Carl | December 7, 2008 at 1:47 pm |

    [quote comment="303957"]as a michigan fan, i’ve now had about a month to look at michigan’s adidas bball unis. yesterday was the first look at the maize unis, normally worn for big games. is it me, or do michigan’s unis look almost retro, or high school-ish. i know they are plain, and i love them that way. but i just can’t put my finger on it. something about them just doesn’t seem right…

    http://sports.espn.g...

    Classic, clean and altogether an aestheic kit. However, I agree that something seems to be missing. Did Michigan ever have a side panel-to-shorts strip, or something of that sort? Here’s a womens’ bball pic – I like the double blue side panel stripe,
    http://www.mgoblue.c...(W)/Articles/2000s/2007-2008/Recaps/clement-120807_300.jpg

    Maybe what’s missing is the top of the shorts stripe from years past –
    http://mgoblue.com/i...

  • Carl | December 7, 2008 at 1:50 pm |

    …sorry, here’s the Michigan women’s link
    http://www.mgoblue.c...(W)/Articles/2000s/2007-2008/Recaps/clement-120807_300.jpg

  • Carl | December 7, 2008 at 1:52 pm |

    …okay, I’m done. It’s too cold in Minnesota to futz with linking today. Please take my word on that link.

  • Matt | December 7, 2008 at 1:54 pm |

    I’m an Ohio State alum, and I have to say I think we brought the whole “The” thing upon ourselves. When I was a student there, my father pointed out to me that “The” was on the university’s seal. I have no objections to its usage, however the one thing that grates on me is when I hear the phrase “The Ohio State” with out the inclusion of “University.”

    As far as Michigan’s unis, I attribute the slight “throwback” look to the old-schoolish neck trim. M’s unis are one of the few these days that have (from the front view – there’s an ‘M’ on the rear neck) uninterupted collar striping, or a collar with out either blocking or some other type of sculpting. I was hoping for something more out of the basketball unis when UM went to adidas, but all in all, the look isn’t too bad. Just sort of plain – somehow by going for less-is-more (always a good thing), they’ve captured bland as well.

  • jon | December 7, 2008 at 1:55 pm |

    [quote comment="303957"]as a michigan fan, i’ve now had about a month to look at michigan’s adidas bball unis. yesterday was the first look at the maize unis, normally worn for big games. is it me, or do michigan’s unis look almost retro, or high school-ish. i know they are plain, and i love them that way. but i just can’t put my finger on it. something about them just doesn’t seem right…

    http://sports.espn.g...

    theyre impossibly boring?

  • Teebz | December 7, 2008 at 1:58 pm |

    [quote comment="303968"]…okay, I’m done. It’s too cold in Minnesota to futz with linking today. Please take my word on that link.[/quote]

    This cold snap in the midwest sucks, doesn’t it?

    In my neck of the woods, we’re getting a solid snowfall and it feels like -13F with the wind.

    Oh, and it’s 32F a mere six hours to the west.

  • LI Phil | December 7, 2008 at 2:01 pm |

    [quote comment="303971"][quote comment="303968"]…okay, I’m done. It’s too cold in Minnesota to futz with linking today. Please take my word on that link.[/quote]

    This cold snap in the midwest sucks, doesn’t it?

    In my neck of the woods, we’re getting a solid snowfall and it feels like -13F with the wind.

    Oh, and it’s 32F a mere six hours to the west.[/quote]

    says here it’s -15

    ;o)

  • Dan the Goalie | December 7, 2008 at 2:06 pm |

    I liked the Navy unis in general. The only thing I noticed was that the jerseys looked unbalanced in the back because of the “Blue Angels” yoke. Navy’s regular unis are NOB, maybe that would have balanced things out.

    As an Army veteran, I liked the idea of doing something special with the Army unis, but unfortunately, I thought the digital camo helmets looked like watermelons. Army went back to their classic look with their regular unis this season, putting the numerals back on the sides of the gold helmets w/the black center stripe. I like that one better.

    As far as the unit patches go, those are the actual patches of the actual units, and as such they should not be made smaller. They may clutter up the unis a bit, but they should be there. I always like seeing the Army player who’s wearing the patch of the unit I served with.

  • mike 2 | December 7, 2008 at 2:07 pm |

    One thing that I didn’t see discussed about the Army helmets was the matte finish.

    Am I right in thinking this is something completely new? I don’t remember ever seeing a matte finish on a football helmet before.

    Its something I’ve thought about before, that some helmets would look great with a matte finish – Steelers or Bears for example.

    Thoughts?

  • Stevo | December 7, 2008 at 2:12 pm |

    [quote comment="303957"]as a michigan fan, i’ve now had about a month to look at michigan’s adidas bball unis. yesterday was the first look at the maize unis, normally worn for big games. is it me, or do michigan’s unis look almost retro, or high school-ish. i know they are plain, and i love them that way. but i just can’t put my finger on it. something about them just doesn’t seem right…

    http://sports.espn.g...

    I think it’s the lack of any kind of patches in the shoulder area. No flags, no memorials, no anniversaries.

  • Andrew C | December 7, 2008 at 2:16 pm |

    Not to wade too deeply into the tOSU debate, but the argument about “it’s in the official name” has never carried too much water with me. If you look, it’s in a *lot* of college names. I believe it’s “The Pennsylvania State University,” and I know that my dear, dear alma mater is “The Ohio University.”

    The only thing is that nobody else feels the need to point it out so regularly. I’m ok with the fact that OU is really bad at football, and that where I’m at now has awful claws on their pants, but geez, the Buckeyes get enough love in the state of Ohio without needing the “The.”

  • Ben | December 7, 2008 at 2:22 pm |

    [quote comment="303958"][quote comment="303951"][quote comment="303920"][quote comment="303916"]Sorry that this isn’t so much uni related but I hate it when people feel like they have to rip on Ohio State by putting things the “TOSU” to represent them. Get over the fact that they likely have a better program than the one year cheer for.[/quote]
    That need to “rip on Ohio State” couldn’t possibly stem from the fact that NFL players feel the need to shout “THE!… Ohio State University” during TV introductions, could it?[/quote]They are officially “The Ohio State University.”[/quote]

    The full name of Va Tech is Virginia Polytechnic and State University, but I din’t hear any of their NFL players saying that. Personally I plame the University itself, they’re the one that said “We want to be called The Ohio State University” a few years ago.[/quote]

    Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University and people call it VPI all the time.

  • Stevo | December 7, 2008 at 2:27 pm |

    [quote comment="303977"][quote comment="303958"][quote comment="303951"][quote comment="303920"][quote comment="303916"]Sorry that this isn’t so much uni related but I hate it when people feel like they have to rip on Ohio State by putting things the “TOSU” to represent them. Get over the fact that they likely have a better program than the one year cheer for.[/quote]
    That need to “rip on Ohio State” couldn’t possibly stem from the fact that NFL players feel the need to shout “THE!… Ohio State University” during TV introductions, could it?[/quote]They are officially “The Ohio State University.”[/quote]

    The full name of Va Tech is Virginia Polytechnic and State University, but I din’t hear any of their NFL players saying that. Personally I plame the University itself, they’re the one that said “We want to be called The Ohio State University” a few years ago.[/quote]

    Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University and people call it VPI all the time.[/quote]

    But I don’t hear NFL players from there saying “Ruff Ruffman, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University” when they announce themselves. It’s always Virginia Tech. The same goes for the Georgia Institute of Technology.

  • LI Phil | December 7, 2008 at 2:29 pm |

    how BOUT them giants!

  • Sammy | December 7, 2008 at 2:40 pm |

    [quote comment="303970"][quote comment="303957"]as a michigan fan, i’ve now had about a month to look at michigan’s adidas bball unis. yesterday was the first look at the maize unis, normally worn for big games. is it me, or do michigan’s unis look almost retro, or high school-ish. i know they are plain, and i love them that way. but i just can’t put my finger on it. something about them just doesn’t seem right…

    http://sports.espn.g...

    theyre impossibly boring?[/quote]

    I like the uni. There is no reason to add anything more to it: keep it simple. The only thing that I noticed was that it looked much brighter. Maybe it was just my TV, but it seemed like the Nike maize was not as neon-colored. The football pants seemed to be similarly brighter. I remember that one of the issues during the adidas transition finding the right maize color was a little bit of a problem. I actually like it better in the brighter color.

    As for Army-Navy, I was not a big fan of the camo on first glance, but I’m starting to like them more the more I see them with today’s post. I really liked the matte finish on the helmet, but overall the uniform wasn’t bright enough. I feel like there should have been a little more white. An outline on the camo numbers, maybe?

    Navy was good, but I could have done without the yoke. With the patches and everything, it just confused things, and was unnecessary. The blood stripe was nice, but I couldn’t see it on TV.

    Overall, a pretty good matchup, and better than I expected. Army’s were a little bit jarring, but good nonetheless, and Navy’s were not too unusual to be bad.

  • Matt | December 7, 2008 at 2:41 pm |

    anyone know the deal with lapel pin the commentators on fox are wearing?

  • The Hemogoblin | December 7, 2008 at 2:44 pm |

    [quote comment="303981"]anyone know the deal with lapel pin the commentators on fox are wearing?[/quote]

    It’s for some charity.

    This question’s definitely the new “What’s the green dot?”

  • Rick | December 7, 2008 at 2:50 pm |

    With a son on track to be commissioned this May in Annapolis, I’ve followed the Army-Navy game a lot more closely these past four years. While I pull for Navy every time, I always wish the best to Army. These young men and women represent the best in all of us. If the new uni’s brings more positive attention to both Academies, then I am all for the change, even if for the one time. Navy looked classy, Army was a little too busy.

  • austin | December 7, 2008 at 2:56 pm |

    Navy pants are patterned after the Evening Dress uniform pants. Note the pants in the center and far right.
    http://en.wikipedia....

  • jc | December 7, 2008 at 3:01 pm |

    i know several colleges have had matte finishes on their helmets…texas tech used to not only have matte, but also have a like ripple on their helmet…and if im not mistaken, clemson used to have a matte helmet, but i could be very wrong

  • Dan King | December 7, 2008 at 3:06 pm |

    my take on the army-navy uniforms. i liked the camo for army, just not the slogans everywhere. navy’s pants looked good, but there was just too much going on up top.

    quick note, and not sure if very many of you care, it seems that UNC is wearing mismatched kits during the Women’s Cup final (national title game). sorry, no pics

  • MH | December 7, 2008 at 3:08 pm |

    Re: Service Academy Unis: They had me at “Duty, Honor, Country” for NOBs. Period. Who cares who won. I sincerely hope Nike donated the unis, as well as the time necessary to create them (Paul can you confirm?) For what these legitimate student-athletes do for all of us, they deserve the best unis possible.

  • u2-horn | December 7, 2008 at 3:17 pm |

    [quote comment="303976"]Not to wade too deeply into the tOSU debate, but the argument about “it’s in the official name” has never carried too much water with me. If you look, it’s in a *lot* of college names. I believe it’s “The Pennsylvania State University,” and I know that my dear, dear alma mater is “The Ohio University.”
    [/quote]
    Yep, they pretty much all have “The” at the beginning

    http://www.cs.utexas...

    http://polaris.gseis...

    http://luckyjane.fil...

    http://mscarpenter.e...

  • mtjaws | December 7, 2008 at 3:30 pm |

    [quote comment="303918"]I liked the Navy pants, and Marine logo on the jersey…shoulder boards were just OK.

    Loved the Army unis. Slogans should be cut out completely though as it seems alittle absurd….what if Alabama had Rammer Jammer on the pants…brutal

    Maybe unit patches should be stickers on the helmets…[/quote]

    Helmet stickers would clean up the uniforms more, but the actual military units wear those patches,s so the players wear the same patches. I don’t think they’re too crowding on the chest, and they do represent those unique units.

    I agree that the slogans were too small to look good, but the overall designs are alright. These academies are unique and have such connections to uniforms/designs outside of sports, so trying to incorporate them all is alright with me.

    These players will be protecting us for years to come, and I’m sure they are having fun playing football now in whatever uniform they have.

  • Katie | December 7, 2008 at 3:32 pm |

    About the TOSU thing. I went on a tour of the university when I was looking at different schools and they said that the “The” was added in about the 1870s, and became more emphasized later on when there was a clash with Ohio University. This is what is was over (from the Milwaukee Journal):

    It seems that in 1993, Ohio University crept to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and registered the name “Ohio.” That gave Ohio University the exclusive right to use the name commercially in connection with sporting and entertainment events and on licensed merchandise. “We want to be known as Ohio, and we don’t want anyone else to be known as Ohio,” John Burns, director of legal affairs for Ohio University.

    After this, the “The” was emphasized even more to kind of one-up Ohio U. They also made it very clear that it was either Ohio State or The Ohio State University and it’s NEVER The Ohio State

  • Bobby A | December 7, 2008 at 3:46 pm |

    Army’s unis were not bad – for a once in awhile change. Navy was ugly.

  • Jeremy | December 7, 2008 at 4:11 pm |

    Kentucky is wearing black jerseys with “Keightley” on the backs of all of the uni’s as their final honor to Bill Keightley.

  • Steve | December 7, 2008 at 4:16 pm |

    Nice call on the Giants. Hopefully you’re also wrong about he ‘Skins tonight. I do hope you’re right about the Steelers over the Cokeboys though!

  • warren thompson | December 7, 2008 at 4:24 pm |

    [quote comment="303937"][quote comment="303936"][quote comment="303920"][quote comment="303916"]Sorry that this isn’t so much uni related but I hate it when people feel like they have to rip on Ohio State by putting things the “TOSU” to represent them. Get over the fact that they likely have a better program than the one year cheer for.[/quote]
    That need to “rip on Ohio State” couldn’t possibly stem from the fact that NFL players feel the need to shout “THE!… Ohio State University” during TV introductions, could it?[/quote]

    …ditto that. I don’t understand it, nor do I (or anyone from area outside 4-letter states with 3 vowels) think that it’s clever. It’s not as if there’s much confusion as to which state university in Ohio they’re referring to. It’s the galdarn flagship campus. We’re not dumb. We know this. Get down from your horse tOSU fans and please quit making the BigTen look bad by getting blown out in more national games.

    Kudos, however, to tOSU for the sparkly helmets and Buckeyes (awesome), beautiful football unis and an amazing stadium.[/quote]

    The College of New Jersey is like that, too. They even make the acronym “TCNJ” (selectively adding the “The” article but leaving out the “of”). Whenever my friends talk about going there I always say “How are things at THE CNJ?” to mock its emphasis.[/quote]

    If your truly wish to twit your friends about their institution, try calling it by its original name, Trenton State College. The latter is world’s away from The College of New Jersey. :)

  • Gregory Morris | December 7, 2008 at 4:24 pm |

    Has anyone noticed that Roethlisberger is wearing a sweatshirt against Dallas today. It is really baggy. You think that would interfere with his passing…

  • mdunner28 | December 7, 2008 at 4:37 pm |

    Denver is in orange.

  • Chris | December 7, 2008 at 4:38 pm |

    I wonder how many people would have a problem with the Army v Navy unis if they were made by Adidas or Under Armour, or anything other than Nike.

    The criticism seems more Nike oriented than the actual uniforms.

  • Alex | December 7, 2008 at 4:39 pm |

    T.O. is wearing a visor today. Has he worn one before?

  • Stevo | December 7, 2008 at 4:41 pm |

    [quote comment="303995"][quote comment="303937"][quote comment="303936"][quote comment="303920"][quote comment="303916"]Sorry that this isn’t so much uni related but I hate it when people feel like they have to rip on Ohio State by putting things the “TOSU” to represent them. Get over the fact that they likely have a better program than the one year cheer for.[/quote]
    That need to “rip on Ohio State” couldn’t possibly stem from the fact that NFL players feel the need to shout “THE!… Ohio State University” during TV introductions, could it?[/quote]

    …ditto that. I don’t understand it, nor do I (or anyone from area outside 4-letter states with 3 vowels) think that it’s clever. It’s not as if there’s much confusion as to which state university in Ohio they’re referring to. It’s the galdarn flagship campus. We’re not dumb. We know this. Get down from your horse tOSU fans and please quit making the BigTen look bad by getting blown out in more national games.

    Kudos, however, to tOSU for the sparkly helmets and Buckeyes (awesome), beautiful football unis and an amazing stadium.[/quote]

    The College of New Jersey is like that, too. They even make the acronym “TCNJ” (selectively adding the “The” article but leaving out the “of”). Whenever my friends talk about going there I always say “How are things at THE CNJ?” to mock its emphasis.[/quote]

    If your truly wish to twit your friends about their institution, try calling it by its original name, Trenton State College. The latter is world’s away from The College of New Jersey. :)[/quote]

    Iowa fans do that sometimes, calling Iowa State “Ames College” and UNI “Iowa Teachers College”. It’s all part of their “Big Brother” complex.

  • max | December 7, 2008 at 5:01 pm |

    Helmet Decal Problems with Vonta Leach in the final drive of the Packers Texans game.

    Denver deserves to lose wearing those uni’s. Just wear the throwback if you really feel the need to wear orange jerseys.

    The Army matte finish on the helmets really gave them a good almost cloth-like feel. But Nike overall tried to do too much. The Navy uni was plain bad, but the Army just needed to have the slogans removed. The unit patches are a sound idea, make them smaller, and then redo the Army typeface that is on the front.

    Back to orange uni’s, Mix them with the KC home jerseys and you’re a neon yellow away from a blacklight party. It hurts the eyes, they could at least wear them against the Raiders.

  • david stoops | December 7, 2008 at 5:13 pm |

    As a former equipment manager and someone who has helped design uniforms.
    I must say, Navy looked awful.
    Army-the helmets and pants were okay-but I really love the old gold stripes and numbers of their traditional unis. I think Nike needs to keep their hands off tradition. Oregon, Arizona and other schools look just awful. Navy had some classy unis and now-they look like everyone else. I hope this is a one time thing for each.

  • Brandon | December 7, 2008 at 5:37 pm |

    [quote comment="304001"]Helmet Decal Problems with Vonta Leach in the final drive of the Packers Texans game.

    Denver deserves to lose wearing those uni’s. Just wear the throwback if you really feel the need to wear orange jerseys.

    The Army matte finish on the helmets really gave them a good almost cloth-like feel. But Nike overall tried to do too much. The Navy uni was plain bad, but the Army just needed to have the slogans removed. The unit patches are a sound idea, make them smaller, and then redo the Army typeface that is on the front.

    Back to orange uni’s, Mix them with the KC home jerseys and you’re a neon yellow away from a blacklight party. It hurts the eyes, they could at least wear them against the Raiders.[/quote]

    Max, the only issue I have with what you said is reducing the sizes of the unit patches. As an Army Veteran, Those patches are the exact patches that are worn on the uniform. With the standard black/gold uni they are the patches that go on the Class A uniform(Colors). With the ACU camo pattern used for the 2008 game I would have like for them to use the ACU subdued unit patches. It makes more sense to me as you wouldn’t see a Colored patch on camo. But for TV it pops better with the color.

  • Pete | December 7, 2008 at 5:54 pm |

    File the whole Nike Army-Navy effort under “trying too hard”.

    Yeah, I know there is loads of symbolism in both schools and the services they represent.

    But look at their dress uniforms: simple, elegant, classic. These football uni’s are none of that. Camo is needed in battle, it’s not needed here. Now they both look like euro-league teams: way too much business going on the jerseys, they’ve mucked up a classic helmet, slapping slogans on jerseys and pants … it all adds up to a giant clusterfork. It’s a mess. Uniforms are meant to be uniform still, right?

    I hope they both ditch these duds. Soon.

  • besty | December 7, 2008 at 5:56 pm |

    Oklahoma probably had fewer uniform violations last night than most NFL teams on a regular basis. Almost all had red leggings with white at the bottom. Looked really good. TO post # 35: Great Night Shift quote. A very quotable movie that you don’t hear much about.

  • Ricko | December 7, 2008 at 6:02 pm |

    [quote comment="304004"]File the whole Nike Army-Navy effort under “trying too hard”.

    Yeah, I know there is loads of symbolism in both schools and the services they represent.

    But look at their dress uniforms: simple, elegant, classic. These football uni’s are none of that. Camo is needed in battle, it’s not needed here. Now they both look like euro-league teams: way too much business going on the jerseys, they’ve mucked up a classic helmet, slapping slogans on jerseys and pants … it all adds up to a giant clusterfork. It’s a mess. Uniforms are meant to be uniform still, right?

    I hope they both ditch these duds. Soon.[/quote]

    Interesting way to look at it, Pete. One team played football wearing evening dress pants and the other played in camo. Based on the longstanding military provisos regarding being attired properly based on occasion, duty assignment, time of day and climate, you could say both teams were out of uniform.

  • Brandon | December 7, 2008 at 6:24 pm |

    [quote comment="304006"][quote comment="304004"]File the whole Nike Army-Navy effort under “trying too hard”.

    Yeah, I know there is loads of symbolism in both schools and the services they represent.

    But look at their dress uniforms: simple, elegant, classic. These football uni’s are none of that. Camo is needed in battle, it’s not needed here. Now they both look like euro-league teams: way too much business going on the jerseys, they’ve mucked up a classic helmet, slapping slogans on jerseys and pants … it all adds up to a giant clusterfork. It’s a mess. Uniforms are meant to be uniform still, right?

    I hope they both ditch these duds. Soon.[/quote]

    Interesting way to look at it, Pete. One team played football wearing evening dress pants and the other played in camo. Based on the longstanding military provisos regarding being attired properly based on occasion, duty assignment, time of day and climate, you could say both teams were out of uniform.[/quote]

    How would Army have been out of uniform again?
    I understand the comparison to the Marine dress pant. The Army ACU is a duty uniform. I consider the Army Navy game as a Training Exercise. ACU would be worn During a Training Exercise.

  • Stevo | December 7, 2008 at 6:45 pm |

    [quote comment="304007"]
    How would Army have been out of uniform again?
    I understand the comparison to the Marine dress pant. The Army ACU is a duty uniform. I consider the Army Navy game as a Training Exercise. ACU would be worn During a Training Exercise.[/quote]

    At the risk of sounding like an ignorant civilian, couldn’t the game also be considered a special event of the kind that would require the colors, hence making the Navy pants appropriate?

  • Johnny O | December 7, 2008 at 6:48 pm |

    Get your 2008 AFC South Division Champions shirt here:

    http://www.nflshop.c...

    Hat:
    http://www.nflshop.c...

    I kind of like the retro “reebok” word mark on the merchandise.

  • Ricko | December 7, 2008 at 6:48 pm |

    [quote comment="304007"][quote comment="304006"][quote comment="304004"]File the whole Nike Army-Navy effort under “trying too hard”.

    Yeah, I know there is loads of symbolism in both schools and the services they represent.

    But look at their dress uniforms: simple, elegant, classic. These football uni’s are none of that. Camo is needed in battle, it’s not needed here. Now they both look like euro-league teams: way too much business going on the jerseys, they’ve mucked up a classic helmet, slapping slogans on jerseys and pants … it all adds up to a giant clusterfork. It’s a mess. Uniforms are meant to be uniform still, right?

    I hope they both ditch these duds. Soon.[/quote]

    Interesting way to look at it, Pete. One team played football wearing evening dress pants and the other played in camo. Based on the longstanding military provisos regarding being attired properly based on occasion, duty assignment, time of day and climate, you could say both teams were out of uniform.[/quote]

    How would Army have been out of uniform again?
    I understand the comparison to the Marine dress pant. The Army ACU is a duty uniform. I consider the Army Navy game as a Training Exercise. ACU would be worn During a Training Exercise.[/quote]

    The Military issues gear for gym class, for pete’s sake. And I wasn’t being toally serious, was just saying normally the military would say, “This what we wear for football”…and hold to it. In the case of both these teams they’ve done that, Most of he time that has been, for years, old gold pants, for example.

    Just saying was unusual in that the military is—as it should be—generally unbending on such things.

    And I’ll say I’d consider playing om the academy football team to be a unique assignment, not just a routine Training Exercise. Just as is, say, playing in the remarkable Marine Corps Band.

    Meant the “out of uniform” thing as an offbeat observation, not as something to be earnestly compared to military dress codes.

    Honestly, in serious times such as these, I thought the unis were overly frivolous. It’s one thing to do something disinctive for the special game against your traditional service rival. It’s another to just be silly and play “dress up”. That seems to fly in the face of the dignity of the Academies.

  • klay | December 7, 2008 at 6:51 pm |

    [quote comment="303999"]T.O. is wearing a visor today. Has he worn one before?[/quote]
    started wearing one against washington

  • Brandon | December 7, 2008 at 6:52 pm |

    [quote comment="304008"][quote comment="304007"]
    How would Army have been out of uniform again?
    I understand the comparison to the Marine dress pant. The Army ACU is a duty uniform. I consider the Army Navy game as a Training Exercise. ACU would be worn During a Training Exercise.[/quote]

    At the risk of sounding like an ignorant civilian, couldn’t the game also be considered a special event of the kind that would require the colors, hence making the Navy pants appropriate?[/quote]
    I suppose. That could be the case, For those in attendance. The players however not so much. On the 2 occasions I attended an ‘after six’ event the only reason I was sweating was from being a bit parinoid of doing something stupid in from of my superiors.

  • Carl | December 7, 2008 at 6:55 pm |

    [quote comment="303990"]About the TOSU thing. I went on a tour of the university when I was looking at different schools and they said that the “The” was added in about the 1870s, and became more emphasized later on when there was a clash with Ohio University. This is what is was over (from the Milwaukee Journal):

    It seems that in 1993, Ohio University crept to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and registered the name “Ohio.” That gave Ohio University the exclusive right to use the name commercially in connection with sporting and entertainment events and on licensed merchandise. “We want to be known as Ohio, and we don’t want anyone else to be known as Ohio,” John Burns, director of legal affairs for Ohio University.

    After this, the “The” was emphasized even more to kind of one-up Ohio U. They also made it very clear that it was either Ohio State or The Ohio State University and it’s NEVER The Ohio State[/quote]

    Interesting. So it’s been a bit of back and forth between the schools. I find it especially interesting that the flagship university would engage with such a game of oneupmanship given the huge disparity in size and athletic exposure of the institutions.

    On other topics, does anyone have ideas for decorating homes in uni-related fasion for the holidays? I’m trying to come up with something that’s slightly less tacky than a giant Vikings logo in my yard.
    http://www.allholida...

  • Jeremy | December 7, 2008 at 6:59 pm |

    pics of kentucky in the black unis to honor keightley today…

    http://vmedia.rivals...

    http://vmedia.rivals...

    … i havent found a pic of “keightley” on the back of all of the unis.

  • Stevo | December 7, 2008 at 7:02 pm |

    [quote comment="304012"][quote comment="304008"][quote comment="304007"]
    How would Army have been out of uniform again?
    I understand the comparison to the Marine dress pant. The Army ACU is a duty uniform. I consider the Army Navy game as a Training Exercise. ACU would be worn During a Training Exercise.[/quote]

    At the risk of sounding like an ignorant civilian, couldn’t the game also be considered a special event of the kind that would require the colors, hence making the Navy pants appropriate?[/quote]
    I suppose. That could be the case, For those in attendance. The players however not so much. On the 2 occasions I attended an ‘after six’ event the only reason I was sweating was from being a bit parinoid of doing something stupid in from of my superiors.[/quote]

    Well, the players were performing in front of their ultimate superior, the Commander in Chief, and I’d be really worried that I’d do something stupid, like fumble in front of POTUS.

    I’d also like to take this moment to thank everyone who puts their life on the line so we can sit here and debate this kind of thing.

  • Brandon | December 7, 2008 at 7:23 pm |

    I guess I should clarify that I was afraid of imbibing a few too many and then making a fool of myself.

    Of course that is still the case in civilian life so not much has changed.

  • Mike N. | December 7, 2008 at 7:29 pm |

    I guess its official that Georgia Tech will play LSU in the Chick Fil-A Bowl. Since these teams both wear white jerseys primarily, does anyone know who might be wearing their color jersey for this game? Georgia Tech never wore their gold jerseys this season. Did LSU ever wear their purple jerseys in 2008?

  • Jeremy | December 7, 2008 at 7:30 pm |

    i think troy made lsu wear the purples.

  • jon | December 7, 2008 at 7:30 pm |

    [quote comment="304014"]pics of kentucky in the black unis to honor keightley today…

    http://vmedia.rivals...

    http://vmedia.rivals...

    … i havent found a pic of “keightley” on the back of all of the unis.[/quote]

    those look great. i especially like how it makes the checkerboard at the waist pop out.

  • Dan | December 7, 2008 at 7:36 pm |

    [quote comment="304017"]I guess its official that Georgia Tech will play LSU in the Chick Fil-A Bowl. Since these teams both wear white jerseys primarily, does anyone know who might be wearing their color jersey for this game? Georgia Tech never wore their gold jerseys this season. Did LSU ever wear their purple jerseys in 2008?[/quote]

    LSU wore their purple uniforms twice this year against Tulane and Troy

    GW is wearing gold uniforms tonight against Maryland which creates a color vs. color

    Those UK Black Uniforms are really nice, a lot better than Florida’s and Miami’s

  • Mike Engle | December 7, 2008 at 7:40 pm |

    [quote comment="304019"][quote comment="304014"]pics of kentucky in the black unis to honor keightley today…

    http://vmedia.rivals...

    http://vmedia.rivals...

    … i havent found a pic of “keightley” on the back of all of the unis.[/quote]

    those look great. i especially like how it makes the checkerboard at the waist pop out.[/quote]
    Not to be the devil’s advocate, but wouldn’t liking the memorial jerseys be giving a thumbs up to non-school color colored jerseys? (And maybe an Upshaw-esque over-memorial? Black band, black K, empty seat…black sets now?)
    I guess I’ll bash the Kentucky black jerseys when they have players’ real NOB.

  • Jeremy | December 7, 2008 at 7:45 pm |

    supposedly, the black jerseys were for today and today only.

  • LI Phil | December 7, 2008 at 7:56 pm |

    [quote comment="304022"]supposedly, the black jerseys were for today and today only.[/quote]

    let us hope so

    BFBS (or even if there’s a ‘memorial’ cause) just is no good…a one-shot deal i can live with

  • Brandon | December 7, 2008 at 8:00 pm |

    Watching the BCS show on Fox. Any one know what the lapel pins the guys are wearing? Rose,Pitts,Switzer and Johnson are all wearing it on the left lapel. It is not the same pin as the NFL broadcast which is for the childrens health fund.

  • Brandon | December 7, 2008 at 8:05 pm |

    [quote comment="304024"]Watching the BCS show on Fox. Any one know what the lapel pins the guys are wearing? Rose,Pitts,Switzer and Johnson are all wearing it on the left lapel. It is not the same pin as the NFL broadcast which is for the childrens health fund.[/quote]

    It kind of looks like a snake on the move. My google skills are failing me.

  • iran | December 7, 2008 at 8:06 pm |

    very nice & interesting . good luck .

  • Pete | December 7, 2008 at 8:10 pm |

    My point on the whole Army and Navy unis is this: Nike f*cked it up.

    They just can’t leave well enough alone. I suppose it just kills them that they got the Penn State deal and they can’t cram panels, fades, horizontal and diagonal strips, tassels, unitards, gold-lame loin-cloths and every imaginable “innovation” on the uniform.

    Really, if Nike knew how to produce such “design innovations” that “optimize performance” then how did they get so out-foxed by Speedo, a brand with a fraction of the R&D budget of them?

    Do us all a favor Nike, get your paws off the classics and work on indoor football unis only.

  • LI Phil | December 7, 2008 at 8:15 pm |

    HA!

    did anyone hear the BSC selection show just emphasize the “THE” in “THE ohio state university”

  • The Hemogoblin | December 7, 2008 at 8:17 pm |

    AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAND

    Boise State got fucked.

    Even though they’re higher in the standings than Ohio State and beat better teams.

    Ahh, conference bias… where would we be without it?

  • Brandon | December 7, 2008 at 8:17 pm |

    [quote comment="304028"]HA!

    did anyone hear the BSC selection show just emphasize the “THE” in “THE ohio state university”[/quote]

    Chris Rose does that every time tOSU comes out of his mouth. I usualy abbreivate it tOSU to set it apart from Oregon St. & Okie St. When speaking I just say Ohio State.

  • Marcus from B-More | December 7, 2008 at 8:19 pm |

    didnt read through all the posts, but ravens in black jerseys and white pants

  • Brandon | December 7, 2008 at 8:19 pm |

    [quote comment="304029"]AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAND

    Boise State got fucked.

    Even though they’re higher in the standings than Ohio State and beat better teams.

    Ahh, conference bias… where would we be without it?[/quote]

    Boise St. needs to either ditch the WAC and move to MWC. The MWC might have the clout to get themselves included in the BCS or force a change in the system.

  • The Hemogoblin | December 7, 2008 at 8:23 pm |

    [quote comment="304032"][quote comment="304029"]AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAND

    Boise State got fucked.

    Even though they’re higher in the standings than Ohio State and beat better teams.

    Ahh, conference bias… where would we be without it?[/quote]

    Boise St. needs to either ditch the WAC and move to MWC. The MWC might have the clout to get themselves included in the BCS or force a change in the system.[/quote]

    That’s a novel idea.

  • Brandon | December 7, 2008 at 8:26 pm |

    [quote comment=\"304033\"][quote comment=\"304032\"][quote comment=\"304029\"]AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAND

    Boise State got fucked.

    Even though they\’re higher in the standings than Ohio State and beat better teams.

    Ahh, conference bias… where would we be without it?[/quote]

    Boise St. needs to either ditch the WAC and move to MWC. The MWC might have the clout to get themselves included in the BCS or force a change in the system.[/quote]

  • Terri | December 7, 2008 at 8:28 pm |

    [quote comment="303979"]how BOUT them giants![/quote]

    I blame you for that loss.
    I thought every Giants fan knew to never EVER brag about them until the game was over. Need we talk about the fumble again?

  • LI Phil | December 7, 2008 at 8:34 pm |

    [quote comment="304035"][quote comment="303979"]how BOUT them giants![/quote]

    I blame you for that loss.
    I thought every Giants fan knew to never EVER brag about them until the game was over. Need we talk about the fumble again?[/quote]

    it’s all my fault, i know…i wasn’t wearing my lucky cap…

    at least i nailed the BCS predictions

    and the G-men did win the NFC east (thanks to the steelers)…hate backing in though

  • Marcus from B-More | December 7, 2008 at 8:56 pm |

    i did the best i could with a screen shot of the ravens in black tops white pants

  • LI Phil | December 7, 2008 at 9:00 pm |

    welcome to the american dream…a billionaire using public funds to construct a private playground for the rich and powerful

    CMB

  • duker | December 7, 2008 at 9:14 pm |

    Le’Ron McClain of the Ravens just had the beak knocked off of his helmet decal.

  • Jordan | December 7, 2008 at 9:14 pm |

    De’ron McClain just had the beak knocked off of his right-side helmet decal at about 14:20 left of the 2nd Qtr.

  • Jordan | December 7, 2008 at 9:15 pm |

    [quote comment="304039"]Le’Ron McClain of the Ravens just had the beak knocked off of his helmet decal.[/quote]

    I guess I owe you a coke.

  • duker | December 7, 2008 at 9:21 pm |

    yeah, but i spelled his name right ;)

  • jeag | December 7, 2008 at 9:21 pm |

    [quote comment="303980"][quote comment="303970"][quote comment="303957"]as a michigan fan, i’ve now had about a month to look at michigan’s adidas bball unis. yesterday was the first look at the maize unis, normally worn for big games. is it me, or do michigan’s unis look almost retro, or high school-ish. i know they are plain, and i love them that way. but i just can’t put my finger on it. something about them just doesn’t seem right…

    http://sports.espn.g...

    theyre impossibly boring?[/quote]

    I like the uni. There is no reason to add anything more to it: keep it simple. The only thing that I noticed was that it looked much brighter. Maybe it was just my TV, but it seemed like the Nike maize was not as neon-colored. The football pants seemed to be similarly brighter. I remember that one of the issues during the adidas transition finding the right maize color was a little bit of a problem. I actually like it better in the brighter color.[/quote]

    It’s that the neck and arm holes are so big. The recent Nike trend, even for non-System of Dress teams, has been more form-fitting shirts with baggy shorts. Say what you will about Nike, but we look a little sloppier this year.

  • Stevo | December 7, 2008 at 9:29 pm |

    [quote comment="304032"][quote comment="304029"]AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAND

    Boise State got fucked.

    Even though they’re higher in the standings than Ohio State and beat better teams.

    Ahh, conference bias… where would we be without it?[/quote]

    Boise St. needs to either ditch the WAC and move to MWC. The MWC might have the clout to get themselves included in the BCS or force a change in the system.[/quote]

    The MWC is already a part of the BCS, as is the WAC and every other FBS conference. Boise St going to the MWC would give that conference 3 very powerful teams (Utah, BYU, BSU) who will beat up on each other every year. All that does is make the job easier for the BCS, because they only have to worry about one of those 3 being eligible instead of 2.

  • Skycat | December 7, 2008 at 9:40 pm |

    Sorry I don’t have a screen grab, but Oregon is making another one of their fashion statements as they play the purple-clad jayhawks of Kansas State. It’s as if Oregon is trying to keep its identity a secret or is so arrogant that it believes a large “O” on their shorts is enough to identify them. On closer inspection, I also noticed a miniscule “Oregon” printed across the shoulder stripe. I appreciate a minimalistic approach as much as the next person, but I still don’t get why the NOB looks like it was written in invisible ink.

  • The Hemogoblin | December 7, 2008 at 9:43 pm |

    [quote comment="304045"]Sorry I don’t have a screen grab, but Oregon is making another one of their fashion statements as they play the purple-clad jayhawks of Kansas State. It’s as if Oregon is trying to keep its identity a secret or is so arrogant that it believes a large “O” on their shorts is enough to identify them. On closer inspection, I also noticed a miniscule “Oregon” printed across the shoulder stripe. I appreciate a minimalistic approach as much as the next person, but I still don’t get why the NOB looks like it was written in invisible ink.[/quote]

    Because we’re trying to make it so nobody notices our basketball program this year.

  • Stevo | December 7, 2008 at 9:45 pm |

    [quote comment="304045"]Sorry I don’t have a screen grab, but Oregon is making another one of their fashion statements as they play the purple-clad jayhawks of Kansas State. It’s as if Oregon is trying to keep its identity a secret or is so arrogant that it believes a large “O” on their shorts is enough to identify them. On closer inspection, I also noticed a miniscule “Oregon” printed across the shoulder stripe. I appreciate a minimalistic approach as much as the next person, but I still don’t get why the NOB looks like it was written in invisible ink.[/quote]

    I really don’t care much about K-State, and I hate KU even more, but I do feel obligated to point out that KU is the Jayhawks in blue, K-State the Wildcats in purple.

  • Skycat | December 7, 2008 at 10:14 pm |

    [quote comment="304047"][quote comment="304045"]Sorry I don’t have a screen grab, but Oregon is making another one of their fashion statements as they play the purple-clad jayhawks of Kansas State. It’s as if Oregon is trying to keep its identity a secret or is so arrogant that it believes a large “O” on their shorts is enough to identify them. On closer inspection, I also noticed a miniscule “Oregon” printed across the shoulder stripe. I appreciate a minimalistic approach as much as the next person, but I still don’t get why the NOB looks like it was written in invisible ink.[/quote]

    I really don’t care much about K-State, and I hate KU even more, but I do feel obligated to point out that KU is the Jayhawks in blue, K-State the Wildcats in purple.[/quote]
    I always get those two confused, but I have no excuse. Please accept my apology.

  • scott | December 7, 2008 at 10:23 pm |

    [quote comment="304045"]Sorry I don’t have a screen grab, but Oregon is making another one of their fashion statements as they play the purple-clad jayhawks of Kansas State. It’s as if Oregon is trying to keep its identity a secret or is so arrogant that it believes a large “O” on their shorts is enough to identify them. On closer inspection, I also noticed a miniscule “Oregon” printed across the shoulder stripe. I appreciate a minimalistic approach as much as the next person, but I still don’t get why the NOB looks like it was written in invisible ink.[/quote]

    At least the Ducks still play in one of the coolest college basketball arenas.

  • MPowers1634 | December 7, 2008 at 10:28 pm |

    I am officially breaking “radio” silence.

    1. I loved both uniforms, although I preferred that of the USMA.

    2. I LOVED Army’s nameplates emblazoned with thefamous words of General MacArthur, “Duty, Honor, Country”.

    3. From all of the pics that I have seen, Army only wore Revolution or Revolution Speed helmets.

    On a separate note:

    Last night I was watching College Gameday Final with Davis, Holtz, and May.

    They were giving helmet merit decals to those teams that deserved them.

    Whaddya know, Holtz held up an East Carolina helmet, NO SHIT!

    What struck me…Rece Davis picked up a VaTech helmet and it was a SCHUTT!

    According to my research, and my phone call a while back with the VaTech E.M., they have only had one in their existance and it was a prototype.

    I know, I know it was just an ornamental helmet, but it struck me as wierd.

    And how beautiful was that USC-UCLA matchup?

  • Cosmo Kramer | December 7, 2008 at 10:31 pm |

    As the dad of a West Point cadet, I couldn’t be more pleased with the uniforms. West Point is about DUTY HONOR COUNTRY. These young men are selfless and have their priorities clearly in focus. Having the WP slogan on their unis instead of their names is most appropriate. Defending freedom around the world is what they are all about. Football is secondary. Also, BOOTS ON THE GROUND clearly differentiates Army and their graduates from the other academies. Go Army. We’re proud of you boys.

    I just don’t like NIKE’s moniker of The Enforcer. Too marketing-influenced. More accurately, they should be called The Liberators or The Patriots.

    PS — Army has worn unit patches for years. This isn’t a new NIKE thing.

    BTW — Ricko doesn’t get it. Give it up, boy. You’re trying too hard.

  • JTH | December 7, 2008 at 10:42 pm |

    [quote comment="304050"]
    Last night I was watching College Gameday Final with Davis, Holtz, and May.[/quote]
    WHAT? You weren’t watching the “pop-up video” versions of HSM & HSM2 last night on Disney?

  • LI Phil | December 7, 2008 at 10:44 pm |

    [quote comment="304052"][quote comment="304050"]
    Last night I was watching College Gameday Final with Davis, Holtz, and May.[/quote]
    WHAT? You weren’t watching the “pop-up video” versions of HSM & HSM2 last night on Disney?[/quote]

    what were you watching last night ;)?

  • MW | December 7, 2008 at 10:53 pm |

    Butt-crack, live in slo-mo. Gotta be a high point for NBC. Knee was down.

  • Stevo | December 7, 2008 at 10:53 pm |

    [quote comment="304050"]
    According to my research, and my phone call a while back with the VaTech E.M., they have only had one in their existance and it was a prototype.

    I know, I know it was just an ornamental helmet, but it struck me as wierd.
    [/quote]

    Schutt supplies all the helmets for the Helmet Stickers segment, no matter what each school uses.

  • LI Phil | December 7, 2008 at 10:54 pm |

    [quote comment="304054"]Butt-crack, live in slo-mo. Gotta be a high point for NBC. Knee was down.[/quote]

    apparently not

  • MPowers1634 | December 7, 2008 at 10:56 pm |

    [quote comment="304053"][quote comment="304052"][quote comment="304050"]
    Last night I was watching College Gameday Final with Davis, Holtz, and May.[/quote]
    WHAT? You weren’t watching the “pop-up video” versions of HSM & HSM2 last night on Disney?[/quote]

    what were you watching last night ;)?[/quote]

    I guess that was his birthday present!

  • JTH | December 7, 2008 at 10:56 pm |

    [quote comment="304053"][quote comment="304052"][quote comment="304050"]
    Last night I was watching College Gameday Final with Davis, Holtz, and May.[/quote]
    WHAT? You weren’t watching the “pop-up video” versions of HSM & HSM2 last night on Disney?[/quote]

    what were you watching last night ;)?[/quote]
    This.

  • MW | December 7, 2008 at 10:57 pm |

    I’m DVR’ing the game, the live shot was very different than what the replays NBC showed, no? Could the crack shot interfere with the right call??

  • DenverGregg | December 7, 2008 at 11:00 pm |

    [quote comment="304032"][quote comment="304029"]AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAND

    Boise State got fucked.

    Even though they’re higher in the standings than Ohio State and beat better teams.

    Ahh, conference bias… where would we be without it?[/quote]

    Boise St. needs to either ditch the WAC and move to MWC. The MWC might have the clout to get themselves included in the BCS or force a change in the system.[/quote]
    Add Boise to the MWC and split the two current two automatic BCS spots that go to weaker conferences (this year, Cincinnati and Penn State) between those two eastern conferences and the MWC based on recent BCS performance.

  • Ricko | December 7, 2008 at 11:03 pm |

    [quote comment="304051"]As the dad of a West Point cadet, I couldn’t be more pleased with the uniforms. West Point is about DUTY HONOR COUNTRY. These young men are selfless and have their priorities clearly in focus. Having the WP slogan on their unis instead of their names is most appropriate. Defending freedom around the world is what they are all about. Football is secondary. Also, BOOTS ON THE GROUND clearly differentiates Army and their graduates from the other academies. Go Army. We’re proud of you boys.

    I just don’t like NIKE’s moniker of The Enforcer. Too marketing-influenced. More accurately, they should be called The Liberators or The Patriots.

    PS — Army has worn unit patches for years. This isn’t a new NIKE thing.

    BTW — Ricko doesn’t get it. Give it up, boy. You’re trying too hard.[/quote]

    Doesn’t get what, that I think Saturday’s uniforms were gimmicky and kitchy and beneath what I belive the academies should stand for? Yeah, that’s my opinion. The teams may not be the college powerhouses they were when I was a kid (Davis, Blanchard, Dawkins, Carpenter era), but I personally would like to see them more pay more respect to tradition and not fall in line with some of the current football uniform nonsense, that’s all. A certain amount of dignity comes with the Academies. They aren’t about changing for the hell of it. I think they should remember that.

    And I served in the Army, so I’m not standing on the outside looking in.

    (I don’t like that they devalued the black beret, either. But, again, that’s my opinion.)

    —Ricko

  • Andrew Bolte | December 7, 2008 at 11:09 pm |

    [quote comment="304044"][quote comment="304032"][quote comment="304029"]AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAND

    Boise State got fucked.

    Even though they’re higher in the standings than Ohio State and beat better teams.

    Ahh, conference bias… where would we be without it?[/quote]

    Boise St. needs to either ditch the WAC and move to MWC. The MWC might have the clout to get themselves included in the BCS or force a change in the system.[/quote]

    The MWC is already a part of the BCS, as is the WAC and every other FBS conference. Boise St going to the MWC would give that conference 3 very powerful teams (Utah, BYU, BSU) who will beat up on each other every year. All that does is make the job easier for the BCS, because they only have to worry about one of those 3 being eligible instead of 2.[/quote]

    Texas Christian might have something to say about your assumed triumvirate.

    In any case, there have been rumors off and on about the MWC inviting Boise on board – I’m all for it, as the conference needs to make its mark somehow in football and basketball.

  • Stevo | December 7, 2008 at 11:14 pm |

    [quote comment="304062"][quote comment="304044"][quote comment="304032"][quote comment="304029"]AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAND

    Boise State got fucked.

    Even though they’re higher in the standings than Ohio State and beat better teams.

    Ahh, conference bias… where would we be without it?[/quote]

    Boise St. needs to either ditch the WAC and move to MWC. The MWC might have the clout to get themselves included in the BCS or force a change in the system.[/quote]

    The MWC is already a part of the BCS, as is the WAC and every other FBS conference. Boise St going to the MWC would give that conference 3 very powerful teams (Utah, BYU, BSU) who will beat up on each other every year. All that does is make the job easier for the BCS, because they only have to worry about one of those 3 being eligible instead of 2.[/quote]

    Texas Christian might have something to say about your assumed triumvirate.

    In any case, there have been rumors off and on about the MWC inviting Boise on board – I’m all for it, as the conference needs to make its mark somehow in football and basketball.[/quote]

    I’d say the MWC has already made their mark, with Utah’s BCS success and the strength of the conference as a whole in basketball.

  • LI Phil | December 7, 2008 at 11:20 pm |

    so what’s everybody’s verdict on the ravens oreo uniforms?

    not a fan of the black, but it matches their lids and it’s better than the purple

  • mmwatkin | December 7, 2008 at 11:21 pm |

    [quote comment="304029"]AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAND

    Boise State got fucked.

    Even though they’re higher in the standings than Ohio State and beat better teams.

    Ahh, conference bias… where would we be without it?[/quote]

    I think the only people that didn’t see this coming were delusional Boise State fans.

    Ohio State is the bigger name=bigger ratings=bigger $$$$

    BSU never stood a chance.

  • Skycat | December 7, 2008 at 11:21 pm |

    On the subject of purple, I must admit the Ravens’ black jerseys with purple trim are kinda neat. I know the concept of the black alternate has been overused, but this time it’s really an improvement.

  • MPowers1634 | December 7, 2008 at 11:21 pm |

    [quote comment="304061"][quote comment="304051"]As the dad of a West Point cadet, I couldn’t be more pleased with the uniforms. West Point is about DUTY HONOR COUNTRY. These young men are selfless and have their priorities clearly in focus. Having the WP slogan on their unis instead of their names is most appropriate. Defending freedom around the world is what they are all about. Football is secondary. Also, BOOTS ON THE GROUND clearly differentiates Army and their graduates from the other academies. Go Army. We’re proud of you boys.

    I just don’t like NIKE’s moniker of The Enforcer. Too marketing-influenced. More accurately, they should be called The Liberators or The Patriots.

    PS — Army has worn unit patches for years. This isn’t a new NIKE thing.

    BTW — Ricko doesn’t get it. Give it up, boy. You’re trying too hard.[/quote]

    Doesn’t get what, that I think Saturday’s uniforms were gimmicky and kitchy and beneath what I belive the academies should stand for? Yeah, that’s my opinion. The teams may not be the college powerhouses they were when I was a kid (Davis, Blanchard, Dawkins, Carpenter era), but I personally would like to see them more pay more respect to tradition and not fall in line with some of the current football uniform nonsense, that’s all. A certain amount of dignity comes with the Academies. They aren’t about changing for the hell of it. I think they should remember that.

    And I served in the Army, so I’m not standing on the outside looking in.

    (I don’t like that they devalued the black beret, either. But, again, that’s my opinion.)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    As I’ve already said, I liked both uniforms.

    However, I can see whaere Ricko is coming from.

    Both academies seem above such PR type promotions.

    I can’t speak for Annapolis, but I live and work 15 to 20 minutes away from the USMA and I can honestly say, it is one of the most awe-inspiring,
    breathtaking, and motivating places that I have ever been.

    It saddens me that I can no longer, on a whim, drive up the Palisades or 9W, pass through the Thayer gate and walk around the campus and Michie Stadium, with an INCREDIBLE view of the Hudson in the distance.

  • Johnny O | December 7, 2008 at 11:21 pm |

    Double helmet decal issues over in Baltimore for McLain tonight on Sunday Night Football:

    http://i147.photobuc...

    http://i147.photobuc...

    http://i147.photobuc...

  • Stevo | December 7, 2008 at 11:22 pm |

    [quote comment="304064"]so what’s everybody’s verdict on the ravens oreo uniforms?

    not a fan of the black, but it matches their lids and it’s better than the purple[/quote]

    I would’ve gone with white, just to force the Skins to go Ron Burgundy.

  • BuckeyeMark | December 7, 2008 at 11:24 pm |

    absolutely adored the army uni. want a jersey. want the hat the corp of cadets were wearing. normally cheer for Navy (I don’t know why – didn’t serve, no one in my family did either) but cheered madly for Army. “boots on the ground” rocks and “duty honor country” was just awesome.

    didn’t like Navy’s uni. especially the shoulder boards.

    digital camo is just sweet. I especially loved the uni numbers on the black jersey. that was greatness.

  • Pretty Boy Paulie | December 7, 2008 at 11:31 pm |

    Sorry I didn’t bother to read anybody else’s comments after looking at the pics from yesterday’s Army-Navy game….but those uniforms are FREAKIN AWESOME!!

    I thought both teams had such cool uniforms. Lots of character and uniqueness. I will say good job Nike.

    I’m sure others will cringe once they see my comment hahahaha!

  • USMADawg | December 7, 2008 at 11:35 pm |

    Anyone with commentary about the “size of patches” or “patches were too busy” clearly haven’t earned the right to make such a comment. I have worn a unit patch on my uniform both during that game and in combat. If you think the patch is too large–go ahead…take your shot at tearing it off.

  • Brandon | December 7, 2008 at 11:47 pm |

    [quote comment="304072"]Anyone with commentary about the “size of patches” or “patches were too busy” clearly haven’t earned the right to make such a comment. I have worn a unit patch on my uniform both during that game and in combat. If you think the patch is too large–go ahead…take your shot at tearing it off.[/quote]

    USMADawg, Hoping you can clear something up for me that I’ve been thinking about. Of the Officers that were in my unit that were alums of USMA I never had one that played football so they were not sure. How are the Unit Patches assigned to players? Are there any Unit affilliations while at Westpoint?
    What Unit Patch did you wear while at USMA, and What Units were you assigned to after Westpoint?
    I was assigned to 1/3 ACR at Fort Carson from 2000-2005

  • mdunner28 | December 7, 2008 at 11:47 pm |

    [quote comment="304072"]Anyone with commentary about the “size of patches” or “patches were too busy” clearly haven’t earned the right to make such a comment. I have worn a unit patch on my uniform both during that game and in combat. If you think the patch is too large–go ahead…take your shot at tearing it off.[/quote]

    LOL. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. It’s free speech. You apparently defended it. If someone thinks the patches were too large or busy they certainly have a right to say so, especially here, on a blog dedicated to uniforms. And what’s with the hostility?

  • Shaftman | December 7, 2008 at 11:53 pm |

    [quote comment="304072"]Anyone with commentary about the “size of patches” or “patches were too busy” clearly haven’t earned the right to make such a comment. I have worn a unit patch on my uniform both during that game and in combat. If you think the patch is too large–go ahead…take your shot at tearing it off.[/quote]

    As one of the first posts of the day and one that suggested making the patches smaller I would like to respond to your post.

    I have not served in the military but have the utmost respect for those that have, those that are, and those that will serve. However, my suggestion for making the patches smaller is merely a reaction to the aesthetics of the uniform. It has nothing to do with the respect (or lack thereof) I have for our soldiers.

    I stand by my critique of the uniforms.

  • Shaftman | December 7, 2008 at 11:55 pm |
  • Brandon | December 7, 2008 at 11:59 pm |

    [quote comment="304074"][quote comment="304072"]Anyone with commentary about the “size of patches” or “patches were too busy” clearly haven’t earned the right to make such a comment. I have worn a unit patch on my uniform both during that game and in combat. If you think the patch is too large–go ahead…take your shot at tearing it off.[/quote]

    LOL. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. It’s free speech. You apparently defended it. If someone thinks the patches were too large or busy they certainly have a right to say so, especially here, on a blog dedicated to uniforms. And what’s with the hostility?[/quote]

    I wouldn’t call it hostility, more passionate.
    With the Unit Patches for Army. They should either be the actual patches or not at all. Navy on the other hand there are no tellin what that stuff is about.

  • LI Phil | December 8, 2008 at 12:00 am |

    maybe i shouldn’t have posted this on pearl harbor day…

    or at least acknowledged that it was the 67th anniversary of the “Day that will live in infamy”

    so now i am

    /thanks to all who served, then and now!

  • Tim | December 8, 2008 at 12:05 am |

    [quote comment="304069"][quote comment="304064"]so what’s everybody’s verdict on the ravens oreo uniforms?

    not a fan of the black, but it matches their lids and it’s better than the purple[/quote]

    I would’ve gone with white, just to force the Skins to go Ron Burgundy.[/quote]

    I don’t know if Jim Zorn really has that “no burgundy” mentality like Gibbs; when they did the Sean Taylor tribute last week, the Redskins wore burgundy at home.

  • Ricko | December 8, 2008 at 12:10 am |

    [quote comment="304078"]maybe i shouldn’t have posted this on pearl harbor day…

    or at least acknowledged that it was the 67th anniversary of the “Day that will live in infamy”

    so now i am

    /thanks to all who served, then and now![/quote]

    Best line in A FEW GOOD MEN:
    When asked why she so staunchly defends the Marines on trial, Demi Moore’s character replies…

    “Because they stand on a wall and say, ‘No one will hurt you tonight, not on my watch.'”

    So, yeah, thanks indeed.

    —Ricko

  • Brian | December 8, 2008 at 12:16 am |

    I didn’t have big problems with either Uni-set.
    I like Army, but I thought it was a tad busy.
    Really liked Navy, especially the yolk.

  • Marcus from B-More | December 8, 2008 at 1:05 am |

    [quote comment="304066"]On the subject of purple, I must admit the Ravens’ black jerseys with purple trim are kinda neat. I know the concept of the black alternate has been overused, but this time it’s really an improvement.[/quote]

    Black should be the primary color

  • Lwiedy | December 8, 2008 at 1:51 am |

    [quote comment="304061"][quote comment="304051"]As the dad of a West Point cadet, I couldn’t be more pleased with the uniforms. West Point is about DUTY HONOR COUNTRY. These young men are selfless and have their priorities clearly in focus. Having the WP slogan on their unis instead of their names is most appropriate. Defending freedom around the world is what they are all about. Football is secondary. Also, BOOTS ON THE GROUND clearly differentiates Army and their graduates from the other academies. Go Army. We’re proud of you boys.

    I just don’t like NIKE’s moniker of The Enforcer. Too marketing-influenced. More accurately, they should be called The Liberators or The Patriots.

    PS — Army has worn unit patches for years. This isn’t a new NIKE thing.

    BTW — Ricko doesn’t get it. Give it up, boy. You’re trying too hard.[/quote]

    Doesn’t get what, that I think Saturday’s uniforms were gimmicky and kitchy and beneath what I belive the academies should stand for? Yeah, that’s my opinion. The teams may not be the college powerhouses they were when I was a kid (Davis, Blanchard, Dawkins, Carpenter era), but I personally would like to see them more pay more respect to tradition and not fall in line with some of the current football uniform nonsense, that’s all. A certain amount of dignity comes with the Academies. They aren’t about changing for the hell of it. I think they should remember that.

    And I served in the Army, so I’m not standing on the outside looking in.

    (I don’t like that they devalued the black beret, either. But, again, that’s my opinion.)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Not to worry, Rick. When I hear “you don’t get it” I know I’m probably flying right.

  • Lwiedy | December 8, 2008 at 1:55 am |

    [quote comment="304078"]“Men, I want you just thinking of one word all season. One word and one word only: Super Bowl.” — former Houston Oilers Head Coach Bill Peterson[/quote]

    “If you think I’m gonna take a loss standing down, you’ve got another thou…thing comin'” –Bill Peterson.

  • Lwiedy | December 8, 2008 at 1:57 am |

    [quote comment="304082"][quote comment="304066"]On the subject of purple, I must admit the Ravens’ black jerseys with purple trim are kinda neat. I know the concept of the black alternate has been overused, but this time it’s really an improvement.[/quote]

    Black should be the primary color[/quote]

    So that’s how it works? Wow, the NFL has a lot of work to do.

  • Lwiedy | December 8, 2008 at 2:04 am |

    [quote comment="304078"]maybe i shouldn’t have posted this on pearl harbor day…

    or at least acknowledged that it was the 67th anniversary of the “Day that will live in infamy”

    so now i am

    /thanks to all who served, then and now![/quote]

    Also the 33rd anniversary of my first NFL game. G-men vs. Colts at Shea. Remember reading a PH piece in the NYT magazine section on the train ride out the Flushing. Next year it will be as long since that game then that game was from 12/7/41. Makes me feel old.

  • david | December 8, 2008 at 2:18 am |

    i would just like to say enough with all this nike bashing. I think nike deserves alot of credit for making sports interesting for uniform enthusiasts like ourselves. Because every year your going to see something new and innovative from them in football basketball or whatever. Like it or not it’s something to talk about and get people like myself excited to see something new. I’ll admit it is hit or miss and this weekends Army Navy game is a perfect example of that (Navy-hit, Army-miss) but its fun. And the army,navy unis arent permanent they’re just one time things, which may be alternates down the line at most. Which brings up another thing you have to give them credit for is Nike respects tradition. Yes, they screw with Oregons uniforms but they aren’t a college football team with great herritage. And honestly I am 100 percent more interseted in Oregon every week because I dont know which helmet they will be wearing with which jersey or which jersey theyll be wearing with which pants and so on. If they didn’t have crazy uniforms I honestly would have no interest in them at all. You will never see Ohio State, Oklahome, Penn State, or any team with great tradition (especially uniform tradition) come out with ridiculous uniforms. They know who they can screw around with and who they cant, and who can really blame nike for trying to breathe life into teams who have little to no tradition?

  • Lwiedy | December 8, 2008 at 2:24 am |

    [quote comment="304087"]i would just like to say enough with all this nike bashing.[/quote]

    Like it or not Nike is going to do what they do AND like it or not many are going to rip them for it. Wouldn’t hold you breath waiting for compliance with you request.

  • Frank kaiser | December 8, 2008 at 6:44 am |

    i loved the new unis that navy and army sported, wish we could see them more often

  • Frank kaiser | December 8, 2008 at 7:03 am |

    [quote comment="303943"][quote comment="303941"]I really liked Navy’s pants.
    I wish the Marines would get a big time academy. Coast Guard too. I would go back to school if that happened.
    The Marines could be “The Leathernecks”. Obviously.
    The Coast Guard could be called “The Coast Guarders”. They could have an orange yoke that extends down the front of the jersey, replicating a life jacket.
    Feed mayonnaise to the tuna.[/quote]
    Devil Dogs would be a good option.

    And I realize that your post was dripping with sarcasm, but the Coast Guard Academy’s nickname is Bears and the football team does wear orange (helmets)[/quote]
    [quote comment="303943"][quote comment="303941"]I really liked Navy’s pants.
    I wish the Marines would get a big time academy. Coast Guard too. I would go back to school if that happened.
    The Marines could be “The Leathernecks”. Obviously.
    The Coast Guard could be called “The Coast Guarders”. They could have an orange yoke that extends down the front of the jersey, replicating a life jacket.
    Feed mayonnaise to the tuna.[/quote]
    Devil Dogs would be a good option.

    And I realize that your post was dripping with sarcasm, but the Coast Guard Academy’s nickname is Bears and the football team does wear orange (helmets)[/quote]

    there’s a reason the USMC doesn’t have their own service academy, the USMC is the navy’s land force, therefore forever stuck as part of the navy

  • DJ | December 8, 2008 at 7:54 am |

    They know who they can screw around with and who they cant, and who can really blame nike for trying to breathe life into teams who have little to no tradition?

    Only a fool would say that Army and Navy have “little to no [football] tradition.”

  • Pit | December 8, 2008 at 10:01 am |

    As usual I will stand up for Nike and say that I think they did a great job on the jerseys. In particular I thought that the Army uni’s were awesome. The camo pants and numerals – very nice touch. I would love to get my hands on an authentic to see the quality of the materials.

    I wish that the teams I support wore Nike – Notre Dame and UCLA.

  • david | December 8, 2008 at 12:11 pm |

    Only a fool would say that Army and Navy have “little to no [football] tradition.”

    I noted that the the Army, Navy uniforms were most likely temporary or alternates… no more than lets say the Celtics wearing those gross Green/black road alternates. I know that they have great tradition… if they are permanent I withdraw everything I said.

  • Tyson | December 8, 2008 at 12:39 pm |

    The Army/Navy game poses an interesting dilemma: the men on the field also wear uniforms off the field. For this reason, their onfield uniforms are under more scrutiny for accuracy/details.

    The connections made between their onfield and off-field uniforms should be commended! The camoflaged helmets and pants were an amazing tribute to their “other” uniforms. The Navy’s uniforms felt a bit contrived in their overt/multi elemented symbolism. I would have thought that there could have been more infused with the white “crackerjack” or the blue “winter blues.”

    Tweaks:

    Jersey Numbers – Not camo
    Patches – TV Number location or outside of arm

  • Eli | December 8, 2008 at 1:07 pm |

    Three words about Army’s uniform: BEST. UNIFORM. EVER. As a 3rd generation sailor and having served proudly in the Navy for 8 years, I’ve been watching this game since I was in diapers. Navy’s uniform looked better than it ever has, but the Army blew away any uniform I’ve ever seen. No team will ever top that Army uniform!! The camo pants, camo helmet, and SOB (slogan on back) put to shame every jersey that’s ever been worn on a gridiron, diamond, rink, or court. Period.

  • Andrew | December 9, 2008 at 1:20 am |

    What popped out to me- the Navy uniforms seem to mimic aspects of officer/elite unit/dress uniforms (blood stripes, Blue Angel shoulder boards), while the Army unis seems to lean more towards images of the ‘grunt’ enlisted men (camos, recruiting slogans).

  • Matt L. | December 9, 2008 at 5:39 pm |

    Overall, I like the two attempts. Both were overdone in places but they can be scaled back.

    From my wish list:

    Army’s players display off-field achievements as merit stickers on their helmets. Ranger tabs, jump wings, etc.

    Navy matching their number font to those you see on actual ships, white with black shading.

  • Colts18 | December 9, 2008 at 6:47 pm |

    I think the Army uniforms were pretty sweet looking with the black a camo. The Navy ones just looked like a different style of their normal uniform to me, but the Army uniforms were awesome and I hope they keep them.

    http://classic17.wor...

  • USARMYMP | December 10, 2008 at 8:45 am |

    [quote comment="304112"]As usual I will stand up for Nike and say that I think they did a great job on the jerseys. In particular I thought that the Army uni’s were awesome. The camo pants and numerals – very nice touch. I would love to get my hands on an authentic to see the quality of the materials.[/quote]

    You can buy game worn helmets on the USMA’s offical sports site. They’re a little on the pricey side, but I for one am hoping to get one for Christmas.
    https://www.nmnathle...

    As far as for the jerseys, the best I could find is here: https://www.nmnathle...
    Unfortunately, it’s only a replica, but what are you going to do?

  • Terry | December 10, 2008 at 10:27 am |

    Great comments by one and all concerning the Army Navy Uniforms. Would love to hear what you think about the baseball version at http://www.americand...

  • Josh Hunsucker | December 12, 2008 at 2:37 pm |

    The West Point uniforms were terrible. I have friends who both played for and/or went to USMA and they were frankly embarrassed by the ACU patterned uniforms. Moreoever, word is that the players only found out about the “uniform change” hours before the game. Imagine having to play in the biggest game of the season not only as huge underdogs that have lost a record number of games in a row to their arch rivals and have to overcome the thought of future ridicule of the uniforms that they are about to wear by friends, alumni, and service members alike.

    The Navy uniforms were bad but not as over the top and rediculous. I thought the pant design was subtle enough to remain somewhat classic but the shoulder boards and double logos on the jersey were too much.

    Nike is single handedly killing tradition and it must be stopped.

  • Josh Hunsucker | December 12, 2008 at 2:42 pm |

    one more thing, did anyone notice the Ranger tab pride stickers on the back of the army helmets?