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

Road Uni Poll Results … And Please Tell Us: What’s The Worst. Uni. Ever.?

road uni header2

By Phil Hecken & James Huening, with Adam Walter

Back again with UW pollster James Huening, who is here to tell us the results of our second Uni Watch poll, in which we asked you to rate the NFL road uniforms. At the conclusion of this piece, we’re going to describing our next poll, and it’s one that requires the ultimate in reader participation. Be sure to keep reading after the road uni review. With that, I give you James, who has his write up on the last poll. Here’s James:

~~~

The results are in for the second part of our NFL uniform survey. The turnout wasn’t quite as good this time around, but we still got a respectable number of responses (1,535). That was to be expected, though. I mean, the NFL road uniforms are pretty dull compared to their home counterparts, right? Of course I’m right. The numbers bear that out. We’ll get to that in a bit.

OK, let’s get to it. Here are our top ten and bottom five.

The Best

1) Colts
2) Packers
3) Steelers
4) 49ers
5) Raiders
6) Jets
7) Bears
8) Saints
9) Redskins
10) Giants

The Worst (from 5th-worst to absolute worst)

5) Seahawks
4) Vikings
3) Jaguars
2) Bengals

and the worst road uniform in the NFL, as decided by you, the reader:

1) Bills

When we compare the previous lists, the bottom 5 is virtually unchanged. The only difference is that the Vikings and Seahawks swapped places. The top 10, on the other hand, had quite a few changes. Most notably, the Bears plummeted all the way from the top spot down to #7. The Colts jumped from #4 all the way to the top. The Chargers dropped out completely and the Redskins move in to the ninth spot. The last major change is the Giants dropping from #7 to #10.

Again, no really big surprises here. I’m certainly not surprised the Bears fell from the top spot. However, I wasn’t expecting the drop to be quite so drastic. Are their road unis really that much worse than their home ones? As you may recall, when we asked for your choices for best and worst, we also asked for a brief explanation why you chose them. Perhaps this comment can partially explain this phenomenon: “I think they didn’t deserve the top spot early so I’m voting them last now. Revenge.” Hmmmm …

Anyway, I mentioned that the numbers will show that the road unis are far less interesting than the home versions. What I mean by that is in the home survey, we had four teams (Bears, Packers, Steelers and Colts) that averaged more than four points per response. This time around, NOBODY averaged more than four. The Colts came the closest at 3.988. Interestingly enough, the Bills road unis were actually rated a bit higher, but they still failed to average better than a full point (0.983).

And speaking of the Bills, let’s take a look at some of the reasons why you chose them as the worst once again.

~~~

* They look like the Montreal Alouettes, which is french for ‘If it looks like crap and plays like crap, its probably crap.’

* again … it looks like a differet committee did each part — pants, jersey, helmet, etc. — in the dark.

* The only good thing I can say about it is that it would make an okay minor league hockey uniform.

* I cannot help but wonder if the person who created the design for the modern jersey bet his friends that he could create the worst jersey in the history of mankind and still convince the Bills ownership to give it the OK.

* Look like a semi-pro team sponsored by a used car lot.

* Jim Kelly is turning in his grave at these eyesores.

* They resemble toddlers’ pajamas

* This could be the worst uniform in ALL OF SPORTS.

* My roommate is a bills fan, and I honestly think the uniform alone makes him cry himself to sleep every night

* They aren’t modern; they aren’t classic; they can’t even figure out how to be bad correctly.

* They suck out loud. I think they let my mom design those uniforms, and she has a habit of wearing homemade bedazzled sweatpants.

~~~

OK, bottom line: what’s the lesson here? We need color-on-color in the NFL. Bears in their navy jerseys vs. the Packers in green? Not enough contrast you say? Take a look. Plenty of contrast, I say.

Again, thanks to all of you for responding. And an extra thanks goes to Adam Walter again. He’s the man behind the curtain. Take a look at the fantastic PowerPoint and PDF files he put together from the data we collected.

Oh, one other thing that I found interesting. When Paul wrote the Page 2 Column with his own version of the NFL survey, he linked back to our post with the results of the home survey where we introduced the road survey. At that point, the responses picked up. All of the top 10 teams on this list got lower scores in the responses submitted after the ESPN column went up than in the responses that came in beforehand and all of the bottom 10 teams got higher scores.

~~~

barber poleThanks James and Adam. Awesome stuff, as usual. And now, on to the next poll: Worst. Uni. Ever.

OK, much has been made recently, on the UW boards, about these “Worst Uniform Ever” polls. We’ve rightly mocked them as incomplete, lame, or just not good — in fact, it was Ricko’s sending me one of those very same “Worst Uniform Ever” pieces that got us started on this whole polling thing.

So, it’s time to put our money where our mouths are. Here’s how we’re going to do this, and it requires YOUR help.

We want to come up with a “Worst. Uni. Ever.” poll/survey that will once and for all put the eternal question of “what’s the worst uniform ever?” to rest. What do we want from you?

Please post, in the comments below, your nominee(s) for what you consider to be the worst uniform in the history of uniforms. There aren’t too many guidelines here (as our crack staff will narrow these down for next week’s poll), but there are a few:

(1) Professional teams (with the exception of NCAA Division I — or whatever it’s called these days — football or basketball) only. No high school teams. Sorry — we have to draw the line somewhere

(2) The uniform you are nominating MUST have been worn at least once and in a regular season game. This means you can nominate a “one and done” uniform, but it had to appear in a regular season game.

(3) Team sports only (so, no tennis or golf outfits, please).

(4) North American sports only. We apologize, but if a Zimbabwe rugby squad has a really awful kit, we can’t consider it. I know there’s a few french football (soccer) kits that are really terrible, but for the purposes of this survey, we can’t include them.

That’s pretty much it. The rest is up to you. We haven’t quite decided upon the parameters of the survey yet, but we will before we ask you to actually vote. For now, we want YOU to provide us with your nominee in the category of WORST UNI EVER. If you don’t know how to post a link, all you need to do is find a picture of what you consider to be the worst uniform, then “right click” your mouse on the address bar. Simply copy the address (you’ll be prompted with options — simply hit copy) and paste it into your post.

It’s that simple. We’ll keep this particular thread open all week, so if you’re reading this (or were directed to it through a link), please post your nomination IN THIS THREAD. If you don’t want to post in the comments, or if you have a question about this request, you can send me an email — simply put “WORST UNI NOMINEE” in the subject line.

OK? OK!

Let the “Worst Uniform Ever” nominations begin.

~~~~~~~~~~

Q & A with JTHWell, with two amazing polls already completed, and a third in the works (don’t forget to nominate your worst uni ever below), and we still haven’t “officially” met the man behind all this, James Huening, who is one of the stalwart posters on Uni Watch. But I couldn’t go any longer without giving “JTH” his Q & A due. So, let’s meet James in a little more intimate detail:

Phil Hecken: So James, what led you to UW?

James T. Huening: I don’t specifically remember what led me to the Page 2 column. I’m pretty sure I was doing an image search. Maybe something related to a throwback uni someone was wearing and I was looking for pics of the originals in action. I do remember how I ended up at uniwatchblog.com, though. It was the e-mail from Paul announcing the launch of the blog. I didn’t check my messages that day, though. So I can’t say I’ve been reading since Day One. It’s actually Day Two. I did submit one of the very first ticker items (before it was called the ticker) and I’m happy to report that the link I sent in is not dead yet.

PH: So how long would you say that you’ve been into athletics aesthetics?

JTH: Pretty much as long as I can remember. Most of the sports disappointments I had as a kid had nothing to do with things like tough losses, being on bad teams or favorite players being traded, but rather being on poorly-dressed teams, getting bad replica merchandise, etc. I remember my parents took me to a Cubs game when I was about 5 or so and they bought me a cap. The underbill was green plaid. When I complained about it, my mom assured me that it was exactly like what the players wore. But I knew better.

Then there were my little league teams. One year we were the Padres. We had replica jerseys of the previous year’s style. That was bad enough, but to make matters worse, the caps had the “swinging friar” logo instead of the interlocking SD. A few years later, it was the Tigers — replica road jersey with a white D on the cap instead of orange. In football, I was on the Redskins one year. Our jerseys looked like the real thing — almost. They were burgundy with the correct stripe pattern on the sleeves. But they had yellow numbers and we wore yellow pants with them. Such a letdown.

PH: I know you made some “specialized” Bears shorts — are you into the DIY scene?

JTH: Not so much. Other than the shorts, I doctored up a White Sox jersey to make it kinda look like a 1959 throwback. I helped my wife make a Hallowe’en costume for one of the kids tonight, does that count?

I did a fair amount of DIY stuff as a kid. The first one I remember was that I made a Cubs “jersey” out of one of my dad’s t-shirts using a marker. My dad was not pleased. I don’t know if he was more mad that I ruined his shirt or that I did a terrible job. It was supposed to be a Bobby Murcer jersey and he gave me a hard time for putting a serif on the 7 because “that’s not what the Cubs’ 7s look like.” Oh, and because I used a black marker, too.

A really cool DIY thing that I did with and a couple of my friends was a “baseball stadium” in the vacant lot across the street from my house. The lot was just about the perfect shape for a baseball diamond and my front yard had a chain link fence that faced it. We measured the distance from home plate to the fence at various spots — down the line, the power alley and as close to center field as we could get. Then we painted signs with the distances on them and hung them on the fence every time we would play. We also would mow basepaths into the grass.

PH: OK, last question. A lot of the folks who read and post on UW are jersey/uniform collectors, or cap collectors, or memorabilia collectors. What about you?

JTH: I don’t really consider myself a collector, but I do have quite a few jerseys and caps. You’ve seen the pic of my Bears jerseys. I have 7 of them. I also have some other random NFL teams’ jerseys. There are some baseball, basketball and hockey as well. Also, for some reason, I have quite a few soccer jerseys even though I never watch or play the sport. I played it for half a season in kindergarten and it wasn’t my thing (also, incidentally, that was another one of my uni-disappointments as a kid).

PH: Awesome, James. Thanks again for all your help with these UW polls. Really looking forward to seeing the nominations for the “Worst. Uni. Ever.” We should have some fun with that.

~~~~~~~~~~

cap design headerDesign-A-Cap Winner! If you folks remember the Design-A-Cap Contest which resulted in over 20 OUTSTANDING nominees held a few weeks ago, I’m pleased to announce that Coach Jerome Nemanich and his Sartell Sabres have selected a winner. After careful deliberation and consideration (and really, they were all outstanding), Coach has chosen Dan Grieve as the winner! Here’s The Cap that Dan designed. All the nominees were great, but only one could be the chosen one.

Next week, I hope to announce the next contest, and this one should be a full-blown “Design A Uniform” contest for a baseball team. Prize(s) to be announced as well, so be sure to check back for that. Based on the outstanding submissions we received for the Design-A-Cap contest, I’m sure we can expect more great stuff when we move on to a complete uni overhaul! Thanks again to Coach Nemanich and all who participated.

~~~~~~~~~~

mailBagGot a great E-Mail this week from Fred Strohm — you remember Fred, he’s the one who gave us this Seahawks mockup (plus some other great stuff I’ve used in the past). Fred sent me this, which is so awesome, I need to share it with you:

Hey Phil – I was at my parent’s house over the weekend and found a book that might be interesting to the Uniwatch community. It’s Richard Kaplan’s “Great Linebackers of the NFL” from 1970. I’ve scanned and uploaded the pictures from the book to here. Captions are added where provided, and they’re named in order how they are in the book, plus by the name of the person being discussed.

Man those are some purdy pictures, Fred. Thanks for sharing!

~~~~~~~~~~

benchies header Ricko’s got a double header worth of Benchies today, since tomorrow we’re gonna have something really special from the man, the myth the legend. So, without further ado enjoy:

Mick and Mike and Mike and Mick

~~~~~~~~~~

scoreboardGuess The Game From The Scoreboard: As the baseball season winds down, and the baseball winds are blowing towards the World Series every Mets fan absolutely dreams of (hint…hint), comes today’s Guess the Scoreboard game. Sure, the actual scoreboard might be a little difficult to make out, but all the clues you need are right there in front of you. And what a be-youtiful picture this is. The stadium and teams will be instantly recognizable. All that’s left if for you to figure out the date, and the final score. Please post the LINK to the answer, rather than the answer itself, in the comments. Good luck. Guess The Game From The Scoreboard.

~~~~~~~~~~

That will do it for today. You have your assignment. Now, go out and find a pic of what you consider that “Worst Uniform Ever” and post it in the comments below. We’ll consider all the nominations and narrow it down for our next poll next weekend. C’mon Uni Watchers — give us your best worst!

 

267 comments to
Road Uni Poll Results … And Please Tell Us: What’s The Worst. Uni. Ever.?

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 7:54 am |

    I’m sure I’ll be in the minority on this… but I’ll vote for these as worst ever, in football anyway.

    http://i21.photobuck... (Bears 1994 throwback)

    and

    http://cdn.faniq.com... (Steelers 1994 throwback)

    I’d throw in the Arena teams that used Zubaz patterns as well, but I can’t really find any [i]good[/i] pics of those.

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 7:55 am |

    [quote comment=”356007″]I’m sure I’ll be in the minority on this… but I’ll vote for these as worst ever, in football anyway.

    http://i21.photobuck... (Bears 1994 throwback)

    and

    http://cdn.faniq.com... (Steelers 1994 throwback)

    I’d throw in the Arena teams that used Zubaz patterns as well, but I can’t really find any [i]good[/i] pics of those.[/quote]

    damn wrong code…

  • Nicholas | October 24, 2009 at 8:05 am |
  • KF | October 24, 2009 at 8:07 am |

    1980s Vancouver Canucks

    http://i.imgur.com/t...

  • Brian H. | October 24, 2009 at 8:11 am |

    You know, I really wouldn’t be opposed to American sports leagues going the way of the Football League in Britain, which is to say that every team wears color unless their uniform clashes too much with the home team. Of course, that really wouldn’t matter in baseball, as everybody wears white or grey anyways.

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 8:19 am |

    To throw a couple more into the fray, and show that I do occasionally watch more than just football…

    http://soulhonky.com... (Detroit Pistons throwing away whatever dignity they had and fully embracing the teal & black trend of the late 90’s)

    http://media.photobu... (Washington Wizards in the mismatched black & gold thing)

  • Patrick M | October 24, 2009 at 8:28 am |

    My nominees

    Eagles 1994 throwback
    http://madpwnage.net...

    Cavaliers black, blue & orange (bruise colored) uniforms from 1994

    Oregon football 2006. A million multiple options and they’re all ugly
    http://www.usatoday....

    Vancouver Canucks
    http://assets.nydail...

    I’d also nominate the Notre Dame baskeball team’s puke green jerseys from Digger Phelps’s final year but I can’t find a link.

  • shaftman | October 24, 2009 at 8:31 am |
  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 8:37 am |

    re: Color-on-color. We really need to give it up. Other than in a certain few color combinations it just isn’t practical.

    In the example of Packers vs. Bears…
    http://i853.photobuc...
    …those two colors and simply too close in terms of light-to-dark value—both containing too much black—to work.

    From high in the stands or in a TV full shot (at snap of the ball), many (if not most) color-on-color combos would just plain be too close. My office and bedroom TVs are a 13-inchers, and it wouldn’t be good at all on those little things. Not everyone watches in huge-screen HD. And I imagine coaches would hate it. Game “fims” keep all 22 players on-screen at all time, and the figures are pretty small.

    I mean, think about it. It isn’t that we COULDN’T tell them apart. It’s that it wouldn’t be EASY to tell them apart. And that’s the whole point of one-team-in-white.

    —Ricko

  • John T | October 24, 2009 at 8:40 am |

    [quote comment=”356014″]Worst Uni EVER!!!![/quote]

    Don’t let Teebz hear you say that…..

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 8:40 am |

    [quote comment=”356015″]re: Color-on-color. We really need to give it up. Other than in a certain few color combinations it just isn’t practical.

    In the example of Packers vs. Bears…
    http://i853.photobuc...
    …those two colors and simply too close in terms of light-to-dark value—both containing too much black—to work.

    From high in the stands or in a TV full shot (at snap of the ball), many (if not most) color-on-color combos would just plain be too close. My office and bedroom TVs are a 13-inchers, and it wouldn’t be good at all on those little things. Not everyone watches in huge-screen HD. And I imagine coaches would hate it. Game “fims” keep all 22 players on-screen at all time, and the figures are pretty small.

    I mean, think about it. It isn’t that we COULDN’T tell them apart. It’s that it wouldn’t be EASY to tell them apart. And that’s the whole point of one-team-in-white.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I’m talking only football. Too many big clutches of tangled up people. Need visual separation.

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 8:43 am |

    [quote comment=”356015″]re: Color-on-color. We really need to give it up. Other than in a certain few color combinations it just isn’t practical.

    In the example of Packers vs. Bears…
    http://i853.photobuc...
    …those two colors and simply too close in terms of light-to-dark value—both containing too much black—to work.

    From high in the stands or in a TV full shot (at snap of the ball), many (if not most) color-on-color combos would just plain be too close. My office and bedroom TVs are a 13-inchers, and it wouldn’t be good at all on those little things. Not everyone watches in huge-screen HD. And I imagine coaches would hate it. Game “fims” keep all 22 players on-screen at all time, and the figures are pretty small.

    I mean, think about it. It isn’t that we COULDN’T tell them apart. It’s that it wouldn’t be EASY to tell them apart. And that’s the whole point of one-team-in-white.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Bah. If I can play that combination in Madden and win, you can watch it on TV.

    If the green & blue is too close (which, it isn’t, but whatever), then you could have the Bears in orange or the Pack in yellow. Hell, they both wore blue against each other in the 30s & 40s. I’m sure the NFL teams have access to sufficient technology for a “game film” to be a high enough resolution to not be an issue.

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 8:48 am |

    [quote comment=”356018″][quote comment=”356015″]re: Color-on-color. We really need to give it up. Other than in a certain few color combinations it just isn’t practical.

    In the example of Packers vs. Bears…
    http://i853.photobuc...
    …those two colors and simply too close in terms of light-to-dark value—both containing too much black—to work.

    From high in the stands or in a TV full shot (at snap of the ball), many (if not most) color-on-color combos would just plain be too close. My office and bedroom TVs are a 13-inchers, and it wouldn’t be good at all on those little things. Not everyone watches in huge-screen HD. And I imagine coaches would hate it. Game “fims” keep all 22 players on-screen at all time, and the figures are pretty small.

    I mean, think about it. It isn’t that we COULDN’T tell them apart. It’s that it wouldn’t be EASY to tell them apart. And that’s the whole point of one-team-in-white.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Bah. If I can play that combination in Madden and win, you can watch it on TV.

    If the green & blue is too close (which, it isn’t, but whatever), then you could have the Bears in orange or the Pack in yellow. Hell, they both wore blue against each other in the 30s & 40s. I’m sure the NFL teams have access to sufficient technology for a “game film” to be a high enough resolution to not be an issue.[/quote]

    Also, if color vs color were to become standard, I’m sure a few teams would start using lighter or more distinct colors. Denver could go to orange as their full time uniform, the green teams could start using Kelly again, some of the navy could get converted back into royal… it really would be a good thing.

  • Lyman D Hunt | October 24, 2009 at 8:49 am |

    It is a tie between the Los Angeles Kings and the Anaheim Mighty Ducks for the abominations they wore as alternate jerseys during the 1995-96 season. If a tie-breaker is truly needed, then hand it to the Kings since they apparently thought it a good idea to humiliate Wayne Gretzky in one of these.

  • shaftman | October 24, 2009 at 8:57 am |

    [quote comment=”356016″][quote comment=”356014″]Worst Uni EVER!!!![/quote]

    Don’t let Teebz hear you say that…..[/quote]

    I’m actually looking forward to his response. Teebz and I have been a fighting about this point for a number of years.

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 9:04 am |

    [quote comment=”356018″][quote comment=”356015″]re: Color-on-color. We really need to give it up. Other than in a certain few color combinations it just isn’t practical.

    In the example of Packers vs. Bears…
    http://i853.photobuc...
    …those two colors and simply too close in terms of light-to-dark value—both containing too much black—to work.

    From high in the stands or in a TV full shot (at snap of the ball), many (if not most) color-on-color combos would just plain be too close. My office and bedroom TVs are a 13-inchers, and it wouldn’t be good at all on those little things. Not everyone watches in huge-screen HD. And I imagine coaches would hate it. Game “fims” keep all 22 players on-screen at all time, and the figures are pretty small.

    I mean, think about it. It isn’t that we COULDN’T tell them apart. It’s that it wouldn’t be EASY to tell them apart. And that’s the whole point of one-team-in-white.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Bah. If I can play that combination in Madden and win, you can watch it on TV.

    If the green & blue is too close (which, it isn’t, but whatever), then you could have the Bears in orange or the Pack in yellow. Hell, they both wore blue against each other in the 30s & 40s. I’m sure the NFL teams have access to sufficient technology for a “game film” to be a high enough resolution to not be an issue.[/quote]

    Yeah, Madden’s reality.

    You think football coaches didn’t love it when one-team-in-white came in? You think that didn’t make watching game films easier?

    Anyone who’s ever studied game films for hours and hours on end knows it makes things easier.

    Granted, there are some combos that aren’t much trouble: Red vs. Royal, for example.

    And I’ll say it one more time. Not that we couldn’t tell them apart, but that it isn’t EASY to tell them apart.

    Somewhere, reality and practicality have to be considered.

    Not in Madden, of course, but in real football.

    Here’s another reality: Yeah, they’re gonna eliminate the ability to market a whole league-ful of white jerseys. Oh, right, like THAT’s gonna happen.

    —Ricko

  • Stuby | October 24, 2009 at 9:06 am |

    I gotta go with the first thing that popped into my head, and that would be the BYU uniforms from 1999.

    This was one of the first (but unfortunately not the last) Nike train wrecks in college football.

    http://www.deseretne...

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 9:12 am |

    [quote comment=”356023″]I gotta go with the first thing that popped into my head, and that would be the BYU uniforms from 1999.

    This was one of the first (but unfortunately not the last) Nike train wrecks in college football.

    http://www.deseretne...

    Lordy, yes. Never know the common BYU colors are royal and white, would ya. Then again, Oregon’s wearing white with tar and slug (or whatever) today.

    Ever get a feeling that in the Oregon Media Guide it says…
    School Colors: Ask Nike

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 9:14 am |

    [quote comment=”356022″][quote comment=”356018″][quote comment=”356015″]re: Color-on-color. We really need to give it up. Other than in a certain few color combinations it just isn’t practical.

    In the example of Packers vs. Bears…
    http://i853.photobuc...
    …those two colors and simply too close in terms of light-to-dark value—both containing too much black—to work.

    From high in the stands or in a TV full shot (at snap of the ball), many (if not most) color-on-color combos would just plain be too close. My office and bedroom TVs are a 13-inchers, and it wouldn’t be good at all on those little things. Not everyone watches in huge-screen HD. And I imagine coaches would hate it. Game “fims” keep all 22 players on-screen at all time, and the figures are pretty small.

    I mean, think about it. It isn’t that we COULDN’T tell them apart. It’s that it wouldn’t be EASY to tell them apart. And that’s the whole point of one-team-in-white.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Bah. If I can play that combination in Madden and win, you can watch it on TV.

    If the green & blue is too close (which, it isn’t, but whatever), then you could have the Bears in orange or the Pack in yellow. Hell, they both wore blue against each other in the 30s & 40s. I’m sure the NFL teams have access to sufficient technology for a “game film” to be a high enough resolution to not be an issue.[/quote]

    Yeah, Madden’s reality.

    You think football coaches didn’t love it when one-team-in-white came in? You think that didn’t make watching game films easier?

    Anyone who’s ever studied game films for hours and hours on end knows it makes things easier.

    Granted, there are some combos that aren’t much trouble: Red vs. Royal, for example.

    And I’ll say it one more time. Not that we couldn’t tell them apart, but that it isn’t EASY to tell them apart.

    Somewhere, reality and practicality have to be considered.

    Not in Madden, of course, but in real football.

    Here’s another reality: Yeah, they’re gonna eliminate the ability to market a whole league-ful of white jerseys. Oh, right, like THAT’s gonna happen.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Do we not all generally agree that the Texans/Cowboys game with blue vs red was cool? There’s plenty of combinations that would be doable, even if it wasn’t completely league wide.

    Red vs blue, orange vs green, yellow/gold/silver vs pretty much any dark color… even powder blue vs navy is probably acceptable, at least for the Chargers, probably not the Titans.

    So you don’t go dark green vs navy or navy vs black. There’s still a good amount of reasonable combinations.

    And the NFL could obviously find ways to market new alternate jerseys. If they can sell pink jerseys, they can sell other colored ones.

  • Stuby | October 24, 2009 at 9:16 am |

    James, I’m not trying to bust yer balls here, but I’m just curious how you ended up with a Bears jersey with the wrong number font (The #55 Lance Briggs jersey on the right).

    http://i853.photobuc...

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 9:18 am |

    [quote comment=”356025″][quote comment=”356022″][quote comment=”356018″][quote comment=”356015″]re: Color-on-color. We really need to give it up. Other than in a certain few color combinations it just isn’t practical.

    In the example of Packers vs. Bears…
    http://i853.photobuc...
    …those two colors and simply too close in terms of light-to-dark value—both containing too much black—to work.

    From high in the stands or in a TV full shot (at snap of the ball), many (if not most) color-on-color combos would just plain be too close. My office and bedroom TVs are a 13-inchers, and it wouldn’t be good at all on those little things. Not everyone watches in huge-screen HD. And I imagine coaches would hate it. Game “fims” keep all 22 players on-screen at all time, and the figures are pretty small.

    I mean, think about it. It isn’t that we COULDN’T tell them apart. It’s that it wouldn’t be EASY to tell them apart. And that’s the whole point of one-team-in-white.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Bah. If I can play that combination in Madden and win, you can watch it on TV.

    If the green & blue is too close (which, it isn’t, but whatever), then you could have the Bears in orange or the Pack in yellow. Hell, they both wore blue against each other in the 30s & 40s. I’m sure the NFL teams have access to sufficient technology for a “game film” to be a high enough resolution to not be an issue.[/quote]

    Yeah, Madden’s reality.

    You think football coaches didn’t love it when one-team-in-white came in? You think that didn’t make watching game films easier?

    Anyone who’s ever studied game films for hours and hours on end knows it makes things easier.

    Granted, there are some combos that aren’t much trouble: Red vs. Royal, for example.

    And I’ll say it one more time. Not that we couldn’t tell them apart, but that it isn’t EASY to tell them apart.

    Somewhere, reality and practicality have to be considered.

    Not in Madden, of course, but in real football.

    Here’s another reality: Yeah, they’re gonna eliminate the ability to market a whole league-ful of white jerseys. Oh, right, like THAT’s gonna happen.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Do we not all generally agree that the Texans/Cowboys game with blue vs red was cool? There’s plenty of combinations that would be doable, even if it wasn’t completely league wide.

    Red vs blue, orange vs green, yellow/gold/silver vs pretty much any dark color… even powder blue vs navy is probably acceptable, at least for the Chargers, probably not the Titans.

    So you don’t go dark green vs navy or navy vs black. There’s still a good amount of reasonable combinations.

    And the NFL could obviously find ways to market new alternate jerseys. If they can sell pink jerseys, they can sell other colored ones.[/quote]
    I don’t want to see orange vs. yellow. I want to see Bears/Packers in their “traditional” colors. Maybe the Bears wore orange against the Pack at some point in the 30s, but the Packers would have been wearing blue.

    Anyway, to Ricko’s point about the jersey colors being too close to each other: sure, the JERSEYS are too similar in color to make this color-on-color combo viable, but I think the contrasting pants and helmets might make it work, even on a tiny TV (unless that TV is black & white). To cite a couple examples, Bears/Vikings would not work and Bears/Steelers would be pushing it (unless Pittsburgh wears the throwbacks), but the Packers just might work. Bears/Raiders? Also probably pushing it.

    At any rate, there’s only one way to find out, and I’d like the opportunity to be proven wrong.

  • shaftman | October 24, 2009 at 9:26 am |

    [quote comment=”356027″][quote comment=”356025″][quote comment=”356022″][quote comment=”356018″][quote comment=”356015″]re: Color-on-color. We really need to give it up. Other than in a certain few color combinations it just isn’t practical.

    In the example of Packers vs. Bears…
    http://i853.photobuc...
    …those two colors and simply too close in terms of light-to-dark value—both containing too much black—to work.

    From high in the stands or in a TV full shot (at snap of the ball), many (if not most) color-on-color combos would just plain be too close. My office and bedroom TVs are a 13-inchers, and it wouldn’t be good at all on those little things. Not everyone watches in huge-screen HD. And I imagine coaches would hate it. Game “fims” keep all 22 players on-screen at all time, and the figures are pretty small.

    I mean, think about it. It isn’t that we COULDN’T tell them apart. It’s that it wouldn’t be EASY to tell them apart. And that’s the whole point of one-team-in-white.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Bah. If I can play that combination in Madden and win, you can watch it on TV.

    If the green & blue is too close (which, it isn’t, but whatever), then you could have the Bears in orange or the Pack in yellow. Hell, they both wore blue against each other in the 30s & 40s. I’m sure the NFL teams have access to sufficient technology for a “game film” to be a high enough resolution to not be an issue.[/quote]

    Yeah, Madden’s reality.

    You think football coaches didn’t love it when one-team-in-white came in? You think that didn’t make watching game films easier?

    Anyone who’s ever studied game films for hours and hours on end knows it makes things easier.

    Granted, there are some combos that aren’t much trouble: Red vs. Royal, for example.

    And I’ll say it one more time. Not that we couldn’t tell them apart, but that it isn’t EASY to tell them apart.

    Somewhere, reality and practicality have to be considered.

    Not in Madden, of course, but in real football.

    Here’s another reality: Yeah, they’re gonna eliminate the ability to market a whole league-ful of white jerseys. Oh, right, like THAT’s gonna happen.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Do we not all generally agree that the Texans/Cowboys game with blue vs red was cool? There’s plenty of combinations that would be doable, even if it wasn’t completely league wide.

    Red vs blue, orange vs green, yellow/gold/silver vs pretty much any dark color… even powder blue vs navy is probably acceptable, at least for the Chargers, probably not the Titans.

    So you don’t go dark green vs navy or navy vs black. There’s still a good amount of reasonable combinations.

    And the NFL could obviously find ways to market new alternate jerseys. If they can sell pink jerseys, they can sell other colored ones.[/quote]
    I don’t want to see orange vs. yellow. I want to see Bears/Packers in their “traditional” colors. Maybe the Bears wore orange against the Pack at some point in the 30s, but the Packers would have been wearing blue.

    Anyway, to Ricko’s point about the jersey colors being too close to each other: sure, the JERSEYS are too similar in color to make this color-on-color combo viable, but I think the contrasting pants and helmets might make it work, even on a tiny TV (unless that TV is black & white). To cite a couple examples, Bears/Vikings would not work and Bears/Steelers would be pushing it (unless Pittsburgh wears the throwbacks), but the Packers just might work. Bears/Raiders? Also probably pushing it.

    At any rate, there’s only one way to find out, and I’d like the opportunity to be proven wrong.[/quote]

    Sometimes we have the tendency to forget the people who are actually wearing the uniforms.

    I remember reading in one of Wayne Gretzky’s autobiographies that he had difficulties playing against the Islanders (when he was with the Oilers) because the shorts (pants, breezers, whatever) were very similar colors. Apparently he only glanced from side to side, never lifting his head, and ended up passing to the wrong team on numerous occasions.

    My point is, just because it’s OK on TV and generates revenue, shouldn’t we consider if the color on color would actually effect the play of the game. We don’t want QB’s passing to the wrong teams because of this. Some of them have enough issues as is is.

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 9:30 am |

    [quote comment=”356025″][quote comment=”356022″][quote comment=”356018″][quote comment=”356015″]re: Color-on-color. We really need to give it up. Other than in a certain few color combinations it just isn’t practical.

    In the example of Packers vs. Bears…
    http://i853.photobuc...
    …those two colors and simply too close in terms of light-to-dark value—both containing too much black—to work.

    From high in the stands or in a TV full shot (at snap of the ball), many (if not most) color-on-color combos would just plain be too close. My office and bedroom TVs are a 13-inchers, and it wouldn’t be good at all on those little things. Not everyone watches in huge-screen HD. And I imagine coaches would hate it. Game “fims” keep all 22 players on-screen at all time, and the figures are pretty small.

    I mean, think about it. It isn’t that we COULDN’T tell them apart. It’s that it wouldn’t be EASY to tell them apart. And that’s the whole point of one-team-in-white.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Bah. If I can play that combination in Madden and win, you can watch it on TV.

    If the green & blue is too close (which, it isn’t, but whatever), then you could have the Bears in orange or the Pack in yellow. Hell, they both wore blue against each other in the 30s & 40s. I’m sure the NFL teams have access to sufficient technology for a “game film” to be a high enough resolution to not be an issue.[/quote]

    Yeah, Madden’s reality.

    You think football coaches didn’t love it when one-team-in-white came in? You think that didn’t make watching game films easier?

    Anyone who’s ever studied game films for hours and hours on end knows it makes things easier.

    Granted, there are some combos that aren’t much trouble: Red vs. Royal, for example.

    And I’ll say it one more time. Not that we couldn’t tell them apart, but that it isn’t EASY to tell them apart.

    Somewhere, reality and practicality have to be considered.

    Not in Madden, of course, but in real football.

    Here’s another reality: Yeah, they’re gonna eliminate the ability to market a whole league-ful of white jerseys. Oh, right, like THAT’s gonna happen.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Do we not all generally agree that the Texans/Cowboys game with blue vs red was cool? There’s plenty of combinations that would be doable, even if it wasn’t completely league wide.

    Red vs blue, orange vs green, yellow/gold/silver vs pretty much any dark color… even powder blue vs navy is probably acceptable, at least for the Chargers, probably not the Titans.

    So you don’t go dark green vs navy or navy vs black. There’s still a good amount of reasonable combinations.

    And the NFL could obviously find ways to market new alternate jerseys. If they can sell pink jerseys, they can sell other colored ones.[/quote]

    I never meant say some aren’t doable (I love powder vs. cardinal for UCLA-USC, for example…or the powder vs. maroon UCLA-Minnesota Rose Bowl). Just saying that if anyone is advocating eliminating one-team-in-white (or league-defined alternatives to white such as Lakers gold) as the standard, they’re dreaming.

    Forest vs. Navy or Navy vs. Black just ain’t gonna happen. And trying to write guidelines would be almost insanity. That’s where practicality kicks in. Better to say one-team-in-white, and consider anything else on a case-by-case basis.

    Hell, in the current NFL, the Seahawks could wear that neon green against any other jersey in the league, for example. Well, maybe not vs. the Broncos Legacy gold, LOL (Ooo, that really would look like something somebody hocked up, wouldn’t it).

    Hey, The Jeff, do that one in Madden and post a screen grab, willya?

    —Ricko

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 9:32 am |

    [quote comment=”356026″]James, I’m not trying to bust yer balls here, but I’m just curious how you ended up with a Bears jersey with the wrong number font (The #55 Lance Briggs jersey on the right).

    http://i853.photobuc...
    Good eye. I was wondering if someone would point that out. It’s counterfeit.

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 9:33 am |

    I know, Madden isn’t reality. But this is what it looks like:

    http://img14.imagesh...

    (Note that this was a picture of the TV then resized again, so it looks a bit better in practice than the picture shows)

    I do think Orange vs Green or Navy vs Gold is probably the better option in this case. But this is still playable to me.

  • scott | October 24, 2009 at 9:36 am |

    [quote comment=”356015″]re: Color-on-color. We really need to give it up. Other than in a certain few color combinations it just isn’t practical.

    In the example of Packers vs. Bears…
    http://i853.photobuc...
    …those two colors and simply too close in terms of light-to-dark value—both containing too much black—to work.

    From high in the stands or in a TV full shot (at snap of the ball), many (if not most) color-on-color combos would just plain be too close. My office and bedroom TVs are a 13-inchers, and it wouldn’t be good at all on those little things. Not everyone watches in huge-screen HD. And I imagine coaches would hate it. Game “fims” keep all 22 players on-screen at all time, and the figures are pretty small.

    I mean, think about it. It isn’t that we COULDN’T tell them apart. It’s that it wouldn’t be EASY to tell them apart. And that’s the whole point of one-team-in-white.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Thank you for being the voice of reason, Ricko. I like things the way they are in football, with one team usually in white and the other team in a dark uniform. Color-on-color looks awful, in my opinion. I’ve seen it enough in baseball in recent years to know that it’s not something I’d want to see football do on a regular basis.

    Also, I wonder what would happen to the Packers and Bears’ jerseys if they ended up playing in wet conditions. My guess is the green and black would look very similar.

  • Juke Early | October 24, 2009 at 9:37 am |

    Kudos to Dan Grieve for getting the cap design. Nice job.

  • Shane | October 24, 2009 at 9:38 am |

    [quote comment=”356030″][quote comment=”356026″]James, I’m not trying to bust yer balls here, but I’m just curious how you ended up with a Bears jersey with the wrong number font (The #55 Lance Briggs jersey on the right).

    http://i853.photobuc...
    Good eye. I was wondering if someone would point that out. It’s counterfeit.[/quote]

    Ahhh, that makes sense. I saw the patch on the chest and just figured it was a practice jersey or something. What is that patch, anyway?

  • Adam | October 24, 2009 at 9:41 am |

    Worst Uni Ever Nomination:

    I am going to go with the monochrome orange of our friends at UTEP. (for bonus, it also has weird blue side panels)

    http://media.college...

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 9:42 am |

    [quote comment=”356034″][quote comment=”356030″][quote comment=”356026″]James, I’m not trying to bust yer balls here, but I’m just curious how you ended up with a Bears jersey with the wrong number font (The #55 Lance Briggs jersey on the right).

    http://i853.photobuc...
    Good eye. I was wondering if someone would point that out. It’s counterfeit.[/quote]

    Ahhh, that makes sense. I saw the patch on the chest and just figured it was a practice jersey or something. What is that patch, anyway?[/quote]
    This.

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 9:42 am |

    [quote comment=”356027″][quote comment=”356025″][quote comment=”356022″][quote comment=”356018″][quote comment=”356015″]re: Color-on-color. We really need to give it up. Other than in a certain few color combinations it just isn’t practical.

    In the example of Packers vs. Bears…
    http://i853.photobuc...
    …those two colors and simply too close in terms of light-to-dark value—both containing too much black—to work.

    From high in the stands or in a TV full shot (at snap of the ball), many (if not most) color-on-color combos would just plain be too close. My office and bedroom TVs are a 13-inchers, and it wouldn’t be good at all on those little things. Not everyone watches in huge-screen HD. And I imagine coaches would hate it. Game “fims” keep all 22 players on-screen at all time, and the figures are pretty small.

    I mean, think about it. It isn’t that we COULDN’T tell them apart. It’s that it wouldn’t be EASY to tell them apart. And that’s the whole point of one-team-in-white.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Bah. If I can play that combination in Madden and win, you can watch it on TV.

    If the green & blue is too close (which, it isn’t, but whatever), then you could have the Bears in orange or the Pack in yellow. Hell, they both wore blue against each other in the 30s & 40s. I’m sure the NFL teams have access to sufficient technology for a “game film” to be a high enough resolution to not be an issue.[/quote]

    Yeah, Madden’s reality.

    You think football coaches didn’t love it when one-team-in-white came in? You think that didn’t make watching game films easier?

    Anyone who’s ever studied game films for hours and hours on end knows it makes things easier.

    Granted, there are some combos that aren’t much trouble: Red vs. Royal, for example.

    And I’ll say it one more time. Not that we couldn’t tell them apart, but that it isn’t EASY to tell them apart.

    Somewhere, reality and practicality have to be considered.

    Not in Madden, of course, but in real football.

    Here’s another reality: Yeah, they’re gonna eliminate the ability to market a whole league-ful of white jerseys. Oh, right, like THAT’s gonna happen.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Do we not all generally agree that the Texans/Cowboys game with blue vs red was cool? There’s plenty of combinations that would be doable, even if it wasn’t completely league wide.

    Red vs blue, orange vs green, yellow/gold/silver vs pretty much any dark color… even powder blue vs navy is probably acceptable, at least for the Chargers, probably not the Titans.

    So you don’t go dark green vs navy or navy vs black. There’s still a good amount of reasonable combinations.

    And the NFL could obviously find ways to market new alternate jerseys. If they can sell pink jerseys, they can sell other colored ones.[/quote]
    I don’t want to see orange vs. yellow. I want to see Bears/Packers in their “traditional” colors. Maybe the Bears wore orange against the Pack at some point in the 30s, but the Packers would have been wearing blue.

    Anyway, to Ricko’s point about the jersey colors being too close to each other: sure, the JERSEYS are too similar in color to make this color-on-color combo viable, but I think the contrasting pants and helmets might make it work, even on a tiny TV (unless that TV is black & white). To cite a couple examples, Bears/Vikings would not work and Bears/Steelers would be pushing it (unless Pittsburgh wears the throwbacks), but the Packers just might work. Bears/Raiders? Also probably pushing it.

    At any rate, there’s only one way to find out, and I’d like the opportunity to be proven wrong.[/quote]

    Again, now the eye has to check the pants, etc., to tell the difference? Why make it tougher to tell the teams apart? It’s supposed to be INSTANT. That is, one more time, the point of it.

    I was gonna mention the players (and officials, btw) needing to readily tell the difference (as Shaftman did) but figured someone would bring up the pre-TV era. And then I’d have to explain, again, that things were different. Back then teams threw the ball, what, 10-20 precent of the time, at the most? And players were, by comparison to today’s racers, carrying hod. Was a different world.

    Can’t set the 2009 template down on the entire history of football.

    —Ricko

  • Stuby | October 24, 2009 at 9:43 am |

    [quote comment=”356034″][quote comment=”356030″][quote comment=”356026″]James, I’m not trying to bust yer balls here, but I’m just curious how you ended up with a Bears jersey with the wrong number font (The #55 Lance Briggs jersey on the right).

    http://i853.photobuc...
    Good eye. I was wondering if someone would point that out. It’s counterfeit.[/quote]

    Ahhh, that makes sense. I saw the patch on the chest and just figured it was a practice jersey or something. What is that patch, anyway?[/quote]

    SB XLI?
    http://cdn3.ioffer.c...

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 9:44 am |

    You guys do realize that I was only half-serious about color-on-color all the time in the NFL, right?

  • Alec | October 24, 2009 at 9:46 am |

    RHI had some world class fugly jerseys, and this one may be the worst:
    Detroit Motor City Mustangs

    Purple, green and orange?

    Color on Color in the NFL is pretty problematic, but in the NHL it should almost be mandatory.

  • Eli | October 24, 2009 at 9:47 am |

    Anybody know why both teams appear to have NFL logos on their helmets in this pic from the linebackers book?
    ” title=”26-dave-robinson”>

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 9:50 am |

    [quote comment=”356031″]I know, Madden isn’t reality. But this is what it looks like:

    http://img14.imagesh...

    (Note that this was a picture of the TV then resized again, so it looks a bit better in practice than the picture shows)

    I do think Orange vs Green or Navy vs Gold is probably the better option in this case. But this is still playable to me.[/quote]

    See, that’s what I meant. Too much the same. Just a lousy look for TV.

    Speaking from a broacasting standpoint, that’s a really dull image to be sending out to my viewers. One team in white not only brightens the overall image I’m sending out but makes it easier for my viewers to follow the game. And that’s, y’know, what I’m trying to do…bring them the game.

    Were I a network exec and had the power to do so, I’d veto the snot out of that combination, just on the basis that it doesn’t “go home” well at all.

    —Ricko

  • Eli | October 24, 2009 at 9:51 am |

    [quote comment=”356041″]Anybody know why both teams appear to have NFL logos on their helmets in this pic from the linebackers book?
    ” title=”26-dave-robinson”>[/quote]

    I screwed up the URL, it’s 26-dave-robinson

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 9:51 am |

    [quote comment=”356039″]You guys do realize that I was only half-serious about color-on-color all the time in the NFL, right?[/quote]

    Well I’m not. I want color on color. I’d let the white helmet teams keep a white jersey as an option, and that’d be about it. But I’ll admit to being crazy, so whatever.

    http://img21.imagesh... Another Madden shot, green vs orange.

    (I’d do the Seahawks, but the green isn’t in the game yet, sorry)

  • Stuby | October 24, 2009 at 9:54 am |

    [quote comment=”356043″][quote comment=”356041″]Anybody know why both teams appear to have NFL logos on their helmets in this pic from the linebackers book?
    ” title=”26-dave-robinson”>[/quote]

    I screwed up the URL, it’s 26-dave-robinson[/quote]
    I’m guessing it was the Pro Bowl.

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 9:56 am |

    [quote comment=”356041″]Anybody know why both teams appear to have NFL logos on their helmets in this pic from the linebackers book?
    ” title=”26-dave-robinson”>[/quote]

    Pro Bowl. One of the last ones before the merger.

    —Ricko

  • shaftman | October 24, 2009 at 9:59 am |

    [quote comment=”356043″][quote comment=”356041″]Anybody know why both teams appear to have NFL logos on their helmets in this pic from the linebackers book?
    ” title=”26-dave-robinson”>[/quote]

    I screwed up the URL, it’s 26-dave-robinson[/quote]

    based on the caption “Two All-Pros, Cleveland’s Leroy Kelly and Green Bay’s Robinson, try to outfox each other.” I would assume it was the 1968 Pro-Bowl.

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 10:00 am |

    Just because I can, and I’m a horrible person…

    one more Madden shot…

    http://img39.imagesh...

    (sorry)

    I’m done now.

  • Peter | October 24, 2009 at 10:00 am |

    According to the NY Jets website, they are wearing the white Titans throwbacks 2 weeks in a row (@ Oakland & Vs. Miami)…I love the Jets, don’t get me wrong…but why wear it 2 weeks in a row (especially since they haven’t worn it or use it before)?

    I really don’t like their Titans uni’s and am growing tired of seeing it as frequently as I do…

    25% of their games are “Throwbacks”…sorry, but more that twice a year (one home/one road) is way too much

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 10:06 am |

    [quote comment=”356047″][quote comment=”356043″][quote comment=”356041″]Anybody know why both teams appear to have NFL logos on their helmets in this pic from the linebackers book?
    ” title=”26-dave-robinson”>[/quote]

    I screwed up the URL, it’s 26-dave-robinson[/quote]

    based on the caption “Two All-Pros, Cleveland’s Leroy Kelly and Green Bay’s Robinson, try to outfox each other.” I would assume it was the 1968 Pro-Bowl.[/quote]

    For those who don’t remember, this is what the Pro Bowl looked like for years and years, before the gold helmets (which came very late) and before the merger. This is from the 1960 game. Eastern Conference in red. Western Conference in white. #82 is Redskins’ TE Bill Anderson (who wore #42 with ‘Skins; someone else on East must have had prior claim to 42, trying to figure out who it would be, LOL).
    http://farm3.static....

    —Ricko

  • Goalie007 | October 24, 2009 at 10:09 am |

    My worst uni ever nominees –
    1. 1960 Denver Broncos (enough said)
    2. Current Denver Broncos
    3. Nashville Predators gold alt uni (horrific)
    4. Regular Nashville Predators (awful in general)
    5. Atlanta Thrashers alt uni

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 10:10 am |

    [quote comment=”356049″]According to the NY Jets website, they are wearing the white Titans throwbacks 2 weeks in a row (@ Oakland & Vs. Miami)…I love the Jets, don’t get me wrong…but why wear it 2 weeks in a row (especially since they haven’t worn it or use it before)?

    I really don’t like their Titans uni’s and am growing tired of seeing it as frequently as I do…

    25% of their games are “Throwbacks”…sorry, but more that twice a year (one home/one road) is way too much[/quote]

    I love the throwbacks, even though only two teams did 1960 accurately…but I agree with you. One home game and one road game would have been enough. And all should have come in the first eight games. For everyone.

    —Ricko

  • hgmercury | October 24, 2009 at 10:14 am |

    If the Chicago Bears road uniform consisted of white jerseys with navy blue pants it should have been in the top 5 for road uniforms! That is a classic road uniform look! If the Chicago Bears road uniform is white jerseys with white pants then it shouldn’t have been in the top 10, that is a boring look especially with the three stripe socks that they use with it. Why didn’t San Diego Chargers road jersey and Kansas City Chiefs road jersey not make it in the top 10? Those are nice road jerseys.

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 10:14 am |

    [quote comment=”356052″][quote comment=”356049″]According to the NY Jets website, they are wearing the white Titans throwbacks 2 weeks in a row (@ Oakland & Vs. Miami)…I love the Jets, don’t get me wrong…but why wear it 2 weeks in a row (especially since they haven’t worn it or use it before)?

    I really don’t like their Titans uni’s and am growing tired of seeing it as frequently as I do…

    25% of their games are “Throwbacks”…sorry, but more that twice a year (one home/one road) is way too much[/quote]

    I love the throwbacks, even though only two teams did 1960 accurately…but I agree with you. One home game and one road game would have been enough. And all should have come in the first eight games. For everyone.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    And does anyone else besides me think it’s just a bit silly that the Chargers won’t even be wearing their navy jerseys until week 10. So they’ll wear their throwbacks thrice (2× powder 1× white) and their powder alt once before they ever wear their “primary” home uniform.

  • Matt L. | October 24, 2009 at 10:18 am |

    The Tampa Bay “BOLTS” jerseys.

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 10:18 am |

    [quote comment=”356050″][quote comment=”356047″][quote comment=”356043″][quote comment=”356041″]Anybody know why both teams appear to have NFL logos on their helmets in this pic from the linebackers book?
    ” title=”26-dave-robinson”>[/quote]

    I screwed up the URL, it’s 26-dave-robinson[/quote]

    based on the caption “Two All-Pros, Cleveland’s Leroy Kelly and Green Bay’s Robinson, try to outfox each other.” I would assume it was the 1968 Pro-Bowl.[/quote]

    For those who don’t remember, this is what the Pro Bowl looked like for years and years, before the gold helmets (which came very late) and before the merger. This is from the 1960 game. Eastern Conference in red. Western Conference in white. #82 is Redskins’ TE Bill Anderson (who wore #42 with ‘Skins; someone else on East must have had prior claim to 42, trying to figure out who it would be, LOL).
    http://farm3.static....

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Just noticed…for the Pro Bowl they managed to get royal blue helmets to match the royal on the rest of the unis. Wonder why was so tough for Giants, Rams and (later) others like Chargers?

    –Ricko

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 10:21 am |

    [quote comment=”356054″][quote comment=”356052″][quote comment=”356049″]According to the NY Jets website, they are wearing the white Titans throwbacks 2 weeks in a row (@ Oakland & Vs. Miami)…I love the Jets, don’t get me wrong…but why wear it 2 weeks in a row (especially since they haven’t worn it or use it before)?

    I really don’t like their Titans uni’s and am growing tired of seeing it as frequently as I do…

    25% of their games are “Throwbacks”…sorry, but more that twice a year (one home/one road) is way too much[/quote]

    I love the throwbacks, even though only two teams did 1960 accurately…but I agree with you. One home game and one road game would have been enough. And all should have come in the first eight games. For everyone.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    And does anyone else besides me think it’s just a bit silly that the Chargers won’t even be wearing their navy jerseys until week 10. So they’ll wear their throwbacks thrice (2× powder 1× white) and their powder alt once before they ever wear their “primary” home uniform.[/quote]

    Yup, probably should have ditched the alts for those eight teams this season. Makes them start to look like Oregon.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 10:24 am |

    So many candidates for worst uni.
    The red jersey version of this one always struck as just a lame trainwreck…
    http://www.ssur.org/...

    —Ricko

  • Stuby | October 24, 2009 at 10:24 am |

    [quote comment=”356057″][quote comment=”356054″][quote comment=”356052″][quote comment=”356049″]According to the NY Jets website, they are wearing the white Titans throwbacks 2 weeks in a row (@ Oakland & Vs. Miami)…I love the Jets, don’t get me wrong…but why wear it 2 weeks in a row (especially since they haven’t worn it or use it before)?

    I really don’t like their Titans uni’s and am growing tired of seeing it as frequently as I do…

    25% of their games are “Throwbacks”…sorry, but more that twice a year (one home/one road) is way too much[/quote]

    I love the throwbacks, even though only two teams did 1960 accurately…but I agree with you. One home game and one road game would have been enough. And all should have come in the first eight games. For everyone.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    And does anyone else besides me think it’s just a bit silly that the Chargers won’t even be wearing their navy jerseys until week 10. So they’ll wear their throwbacks thrice (2× powder 1× white) and their powder alt once before they ever wear their “primary” home uniform.[/quote]

    Yup, probably should have ditched the alts for those eight teams this season. Makes them start to look like Oregon.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Wow, they only wear their primary home jersey 3 times at home. I guess it’s not so “Primary” now, is it? Pretty dumb.

  • Bob A | October 24, 2009 at 10:27 am |

    I considered this but this won out.

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 10:27 am |

    [quote comment=”356056″][quote comment=”356050″][quote comment=”356047″][quote comment=”356043″][quote comment=”356041″]Anybody know why both teams appear to have NFL logos on their helmets in this pic from the linebackers book?
    ” title=”26-dave-robinson”>[/quote]

    I screwed up the URL, it’s 26-dave-robinson[/quote]

    based on the caption “Two All-Pros, Cleveland’s Leroy Kelly and Green Bay’s Robinson, try to outfox each other.” I would assume it was the 1968 Pro-Bowl.[/quote]

    For those who don’t remember, this is what the Pro Bowl looked like for years and years, before the gold helmets (which came very late) and before the merger. This is from the 1960 game. Eastern Conference in red. Western Conference in white. #82 is Redskins’ TE Bill Anderson (who wore #42 with ‘Skins; someone else on East must have had prior claim to 42, trying to figure out who it would be, LOL).
    http://farm3.static....

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Just noticed…for the Pro Bowl they managed to get royal blue helmets to match the royal on the rest of the unis. Wonder why was so tough for Giants, Rams and (later) others like Chargers?

    –Ricko[/quote]

    Considering that photo, and the 70’s Broncos, I’m starting to think the Giants & Rams were either an intentional mismatch, or that the Broncos color was the only other blue available and they chose to be too dark instead of too light.

  • JeffM | October 24, 2009 at 10:28 am |

    May not be the worst but it might at least make the discussion. The “Cat Eyes” alternate from the Independent Fort Worth Cats. Even when I worked there and saw the jersey for myself, I couldn’t believe it.

    http://farm3.static....

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 10:29 am |

    [quote comment=”356053″]If the Chicago Bears road uniform consisted of white jerseys with navy blue pants it should have been in the top 5 for road uniforms! That is a classic road uniform look! If the Chicago Bears road uniform is white jerseys with white pants then it shouldn’t have been in the top 10, that is a boring look especially with the three stripe socks that they use with it. Why didn’t San Diego Chargers road jersey and Kansas City Chiefs road jersey not make it in the top 10? Those are nice road jerseys.[/quote]
    Going with the Bears in white over white was a tough call. That decision was based on the fact that over the last few years, they’ve gone white-on-white far more often than white-over-blue. Plus, they had a long history of white/white before they reintroduced the blue pants in the mid-80s. So far this year, they’ve only worn white pants once (the season opener in Lambeau) vs. two times for the blue.

    Not that you mentioned them, but for the Browns, we went with the white pants instead of brown for the same reasons. Just because they’ve worn them a couple times so far this season and Mangini has decreed that they’ll wear the brown pants on the road all year doesn’t mean they’ll necessarily stick to that plan. History says that they’re a white trousers team.

    I don’t really know why the Chiefs didn’t crack the top 10. They definitely make my personal top 10.

    I wouldn’t say the same for the Chargers, though. My personal feeling is that the blue pants really just don’t work for them. Especially since they go with the dark socks for the “unitard” effect. I’m sure that turned off a lot of others as well.

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 10:30 am |

    [quote comment=”356062″]May not be the worst but it might at least make the discussion. The “Cat Eyes” alternate from the Independent Fort Worth Cats. Even when I worked there and saw the jersey for myself, I couldn’t believe it.

    http://farm3.static....

    That is so bad… that’s it’s totally awesome.

  • Alec | October 24, 2009 at 10:30 am |

    [quote comment=”356051″]My worst uni ever nominees –
    3. Nashville Predators gold alt uni (horrific)
    [/quote]

    That’s mustard, not gold, and for some bizarre reason I think it’s a pretty solid jersey that was easily the best jersey that team had. It’s a shame they got rid of it.

  • Jimmy | October 24, 2009 at 10:32 am |

    [quote comment=”356023″]I gotta go with the first thing that popped into my head, and that would be the BYU uniforms from 1999.

    This was one of the first (but unfortunately not the last) Nike train wrecks in college football.

    http://www.deseretne...

    Kinda looks like they’re wearing a bib.

    Here’s one for basketball. Charles Barkley said that these looked like something his daughter drew with a crayon (1994 Sixers)
    http://www.sportslog...

    And them damn UFL jerseys that every team in the league wears. When I see them, I think two things. One, they look like a Seahawks alt dipped in toxic waste. And two, they should have a warning about epileptic seizures before every UFL telecast.

    http://sportsbusines...

  • Noah | October 24, 2009 at 10:34 am |

    Here’s a really bad logo, but I couldn’t find the corresponding uniform
    http://www.sportslog...

  • shaftman | October 24, 2009 at 10:39 am |

    [quote comment=”356067″]Here’s a really bad logo, but I couldn’t find the corresponding uniform
    http://www.sportslog...

    Here you go.

  • Noah | October 24, 2009 at 10:40 am |

    Another one that popped into my head right away…
    http://www.sportslog...

  • Sarran | October 24, 2009 at 10:42 am |

    How bout ugliest warm-ups?
    http://www.nba.com/m...

  • Derek | October 24, 2009 at 10:49 am |

    http://www.classicfo...

    This could be MLS’s turn on the uni stage. They’ve had some disasters. The EPL and Bundesliga are darn lucky there’s a regional restriction, too.

    Another fave, which has achieved UniWatch glory before:

    http://4.bp.blogspot...

    NBA has gotten a bit less cartoonish, but they’ll never live this down:

    http://hoopedia.nba....

    Nor this, my pick for the all-time worst:

    http://www.grandstan...

    I think you can figure out which of the jerseys I’m talking about. It’s a regular in these “worst uni” polls for a reason. You have to balance exposure (importance of the league) with awfulness. Otherwise, the list should be 100% minor league hockey.

  • Komet17 | October 24, 2009 at 10:50 am |

    Interesting story and REALLY interesting jersey at the Kingston Frontenacs Don Cherry Military Appreciation night:

    http://sports.yahoo....

  • Derek | October 24, 2009 at 10:51 am |

    Whoops — COMPLETELY forgot another NBA staple. Looks like something you find in a cereal box:

    http://arsenalist.fi...

  • LI Phil | October 24, 2009 at 10:57 am |

    [quote]Yeah, Madden’s reality[/quote]

    COTD nominee

    and so true

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 10:58 am |

    [quote comment=”356070″]How bout ugliest warm-ups?
    http://www.nba.com/m...
    If they were actually worn on the court during a regular season (or postseason, I suppose) game for some reason other than a lost luggage-type issue, yes. Otherwise, no.

  • LI Phil | October 24, 2009 at 11:00 am |

    [quote]You have to balance exposure (importance of the league) with awfulness. Otherwise, the list should be 100% minor league hockey.[/quote]

    so true…i was just discussing this with james — we’ll consider minor league teams, but they’ll be given the appropriate weight they deserve…we could have a whole top 20 list of the worst las vegas wrangler alt unis alone…and that’s not happening

  • Derek | October 24, 2009 at 11:04 am |

    Starting off on the wrong foot. Take your pick, and note that the only team with a halfway acceptable jersey was dominant in the early years.

    http://www.newsoccer...

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 11:04 am |

    Just a thought (and to narrow the known universe a bit) shouldn’t Ugliest Uni sorta be about regular home or road unis?

    No alts.

    No “Don Cherry” Nights.

    No aberrations or experiments like the White Sox shorts (what, four games at most?)

    Cuz, y’know, some of them were worn BECAUSE they were ugly.

    Shouldn’t it be limited to a standard uni concept some poor saps actually thought looked GOOD?

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 11:07 am |

    [quote comment=”356078″]Just a thought (and to narrow the known universe a bit) shouldn’t Ugliest Uni sorta be about regular home or road unis?

    No alts.

    No “Don Cherry” Nights.

    No aberrations or experiments like the White Sox shorts (what, four games at most?)

    Cuz, y’know, some of them were worn BECAUSE they were ugly.

    Shouldn’t it be limited to a standard uni concept some poor saps actually thought looked GOOD?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Damn you and your generally making good points.

    Scratch my first post about the Bears & Steelers throwbacks then… the teal Pistons remains however.

  • LI Phil | October 24, 2009 at 11:12 am |

    [quote comment=”356078″]Just a thought (and to narrow the known universe a bit) shouldn’t Ugliest Uni sorta be about regular home or road unis?

    No alts.

    No “Don Cherry” Nights.

    No aberrations or experiments like the White Sox shorts (what, four games at most?)

    Cuz, y’know, some of them were worn BECAUSE they were ugly.

    Shouldn’t it be limited to a standard uni concept some poor saps actually thought looked GOOD?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    fair points rick

    the POINT of this exercise is to solicit reader suggestions for what they consider the “worst uni ever” … not to simply provide them with “our” preconceived list of the standard “worst” unis of all time…we will consider everything, and narrow it down…and then come back with a ‘votable’ list…we’re hoping to get nominees that aren’t on the ‘standard’ lists and that may or may not include the usual suspects

    right now, all we want are nominees…nothing is definitive yet

    maybe there’s a crazy awful uni that has so far escaped everyone’s notice, or something like that

    surprised we haven’t received a caribou(s) uni or any TATC nominees yet…but for right now, we need to consider everything — in order to have a reader-driven, definitive list for voting

  • Adam | October 24, 2009 at 11:14 am |

    Heres one I have always hated
    93 Suns
    http://i70.photobuck...

  • LarenR | October 24, 2009 at 11:16 am |

    Off topic but I need some help with a DIY project. I want to create a “uniform” of “everything that’s wrong with baseball.” Maybe it’ll be for Halloween, maybe just to wear in protest to a game next year.

    Of course I’m starting with a pair of three-sizes-too-big pants. I’ll borrow a red and yellow Yankees 5950 fashion cap from my 14 year old brother. I’ve got a pill bottle (or syringe, I haven’t decided yet) on a chain to wear around my neck and I’ll make a pair of $275 obstructed-view tickets for a Sunday night World Series game to stick out of a pocket. I have a blank white button-up jersey that I’ll adorn with a big “$” on the left chest and as many swooshes as I can reasonably use (one on each sleeve, back collar, right chest, anywhere else?).

    I’m still trying to decide on an NOB (maybe, “Your Sponsorship Here”) and number. What else do I need?

  • Derek | October 24, 2009 at 11:16 am |

    [quote comment=”356078″]Just a thought (and to narrow the known universe a bit) shouldn’t Ugliest Uni sorta be about regular home or road unis?

    No alts.

    No “Don Cherry” Nights.

    No aberrations or experiments like the White Sox shorts (what, four games at most?)

    Cuz, y’know, some of them were worn BECAUSE they were ugly.

    Shouldn’t it be limited to a standard uni concept some poor saps actually thought looked GOOD?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    There are “alts” and then there are ALTS. Some third jersey/ alternates are supposed to be someone’s idea of hip, e.g., the Wizards’ Lunar Lander foil ‘n’ boxer shorts idiocy.

    I’d think third jerseys/alt should qualify, as long as we’re not talking about something gimmicky like the over-referenced “Turn Ahead the Clock” Mercury Mets unis.

    On a side note, my prediction is that these are one day recognized for the monstrosities that they are:

    http://gossiponthis....

    Satin bathrobes?

  • Derek | October 24, 2009 at 11:18 am |

    [quote comment=”356082″]Off topic but I need some help with a DIY project. I want to create a “uniform” of “everything that’s wrong with baseball.” Maybe it’ll be for Halloween, maybe just to wear in protest to a game next year.

    Of course I’m starting with a pair of three-sizes-too-big pants. I’ll borrow a red and yellow Yankees 5950 fashion cap from my 14 year old brother. I’ve got a pill bottle (or syringe, I haven’t decided yet) on a chain to wear around my neck and I’ll make a pair of $275 obstructed-view tickets for a Sunday night World Series game to stick out of a pocket. I have a blank white button-up jersey that I’ll adorn with a big “$” on the left chest and as many swooshes as I can reasonably use (one on each sleeve, back collar, right chest, anywhere else?).

    I’m still trying to decide on an NOB (maybe, “Your Sponsorship Here”) and number. What else do I need?[/quote]

    You could just wear a Bonds jersey, and that would accomplish the same thing.

    OK, I’ll stop. . . .

  • LI Phil | October 24, 2009 at 11:20 am |

    [quote]I want to create a “uniform” of “everything that’s wrong with baseball.” [/quote]

    you’d have to start with everyone the pirates traded (maybe a pirates vest with “TRADED” on the back) or can you DIY this?

  • Derek | October 24, 2009 at 11:21 am |

    surprised we haven’t received a caribou(s) uni or any TATC nominees yet…

    Fine: http://farm4.static....

    If it has the requisite ACT score and hasn’t spoken with Deion Sanders, it’s very, very tough to top.

  • hgmercury | October 24, 2009 at 11:22 am |

    [quote comment=”356053″]If the Chicago Bears road uniform consisted of white jerseys with navy blue pants it should have been in the top 5 for road uniforms! That is a classic road uniform look! If the Chicago Bears road uniform is white jerseys with white pants then it shouldn’t have been in the top 10, that is a boring look especially with the three stripe socks that they use with it. Why didn’t San Diego Chargers road jersey and Kansas City Chiefs road jersey not make it in the top 10? Those are nice road jerseys.[/quote]

    I forgot to mention the Cleveland Browns road jerseys, which consists of white jerseys, white pants, and striped socks. That uniform should be in the top 5 and one could make a case that it should be number one overall for road uniforms. I believe that the Browns organization will do away with the Brown pants once they decide to fire Eric Mangini.

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 11:31 am |

    [quote comment=”356024″][quote comment=”356023″]I gotta go with the first thing that popped into my head, and that would be the BYU uniforms from 1999.

    This was one of the first (but unfortunately not the last) Nike train wrecks in college football.

    http://www.deseretne...

    Lordy, yes. Never know the common BYU colors are royal and white, would ya. Then again, Oregon’s wearing white with tar and slug (or whatever) today.

    Ever get a feeling that in the Oregon Media Guide it says…
    School Colors: Ask Nike

    —Ricko[/quote]
    I suppose when I think of BYU, I think of a team that wears royal blue, but aren’t the official colors like navy & taupe or something?

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 11:32 am |

    [quote comment=”356083″][quote comment=”356078″]Just a thought (and to narrow the known universe a bit) shouldn’t Ugliest Uni sorta be about regular home or road unis?

    No alts.

    No “Don Cherry” Nights.

    No aberrations or experiments like the White Sox shorts (what, four games at most?)

    Cuz, y’know, some of them were worn BECAUSE they were ugly.

    Shouldn’t it be limited to a standard uni concept some poor saps actually thought looked GOOD?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    There are “alts” and then there are ALTS. Some third jersey/ alternates are supposed to be someone’s idea of hip, e.g., the Wizards’ Lunar Lander foil ‘n’ boxer shorts idiocy.

    I’d think third jerseys/alt should qualify, as long as we’re not talking about something gimmicky like the over-referenced “Turn Ahead the Clock” Mercury Mets unis.

    On a side note, my prediction is that these are one day recognized for the monstrosities that they are:

    http://gossiponthis....

    Satin bathrobes?[/quote]

    So North Carolina looks like that, too?
    Or are you saying it’s the powder blue and satin combo?

    Cuz, y’know, sometimes a color gets slammed (orig. Bucs light orange) but strangely it’s okay on Tennessee.

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 11:32 am |

    [quote comment=”356087″][quote comment=”356053″]If the Chicago Bears road uniform consisted of white jerseys with navy blue pants it should have been in the top 5 for road uniforms! That is a classic road uniform look! If the Chicago Bears road uniform is white jerseys with white pants then it shouldn’t have been in the top 10, that is a boring look especially with the three stripe socks that they use with it. Why didn’t San Diego Chargers road jersey and Kansas City Chiefs road jersey not make it in the top 10? Those are nice road jerseys.[/quote]

    I forgot to mention the Cleveland Browns road jerseys, which consists of white jerseys, white pants, and striped socks. That uniform should be in the top 5 and one could make a case that it should be number one overall for road uniforms. I believe that the Browns organization will do away with the Brown pants once they decide to fire Eric Mangini.[/quote]

    I disagree on the Browns all-white on the grounds of the inconsistency of having orange as the outside color on the pant stripes while using brown as the outside color on everything else.

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 11:36 am |

    [quote comment=”356088″][quote comment=”356024″][quote comment=”356023″]I gotta go with the first thing that popped into my head, and that would be the BYU uniforms from 1999.

    This was one of the first (but unfortunately not the last) Nike train wrecks in college football.

    http://www.deseretne...

    Lordy, yes. Never know the common BYU colors are royal and white, would ya. Then again, Oregon’s wearing white with tar and slug (or whatever) today.

    Ever get a feeling that in the Oregon Media Guide it says…
    School Colors: Ask Nike

    —Ricko[/quote]
    I suppose when I think of BYU, I think of a team that wears royal blue, but aren’t the official colors like navy & taupe or something?[/quote]

    I know, the wikipedia isn’t always the most reliable source… but it says BYU’s official colors are “dark blue, white and tan”

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 11:38 am |

    [quote comment=”356087″][quote comment=”356053″]If the Chicago Bears road uniform consisted of white jerseys with navy blue pants it should have been in the top 5 for road uniforms! That is a classic road uniform look! If the Chicago Bears road uniform is white jerseys with white pants then it shouldn’t have been in the top 10, that is a boring look especially with the three stripe socks that they use with it. Why didn’t San Diego Chargers road jersey and Kansas City Chiefs road jersey not make it in the top 10? Those are nice road jerseys.[/quote]

    I forgot to mention the Cleveland Browns road jerseys, which consists of white jerseys, white pants, and striped socks. That uniform should be in the top 5 and one could make a case that it should be number one overall for road uniforms. I believe that the Browns organization will do away with the Brown pants once they decide to fire Eric Mangini.[/quote]
    See comment #57.

    By the way, The Browns and Chiefs were #11 and 12, respectively.

  • Derek | October 24, 2009 at 11:38 am |

    [quote comment=”356089″][quote comment=”356083″][quote comment=”356078″]Just a thought (and to narrow the known universe a bit) shouldn’t Ugliest Uni sorta be about regular home or road unis?

    No alts.

    No “Don Cherry” Nights.

    No aberrations or experiments like the White Sox shorts (what, four games at most?)

    Cuz, y’know, some of them were worn BECAUSE they were ugly.

    Shouldn’t it be limited to a standard uni concept some poor saps actually thought looked GOOD?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    There are “alts” and then there are ALTS. Some third jersey/ alternates are supposed to be someone’s idea of hip, e.g., the Wizards’ Lunar Lander foil ‘n’ boxer shorts idiocy.

    I’d think third jerseys/alt should qualify, as long as we’re not talking about something gimmicky like the over-referenced “Turn Ahead the Clock” Mercury Mets unis.

    On a side note, my prediction is that these are one day recognized for the monstrosities that they are:

    http://gossiponthis....

    Satin bathrobes?[/quote]

    So North Carolina looks like that, too?
    Or are you saying it’s the powder blue and satin combo?

    Cuz, y’know, sometimes a color gets slammed (orig. Bucs light orange) but strangely it’s okay on Tennessee.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    It’s the entire uniform — the color, loose fit, and sheen combo is hideous. The incongruous font and gold accents somehow worsen the effect. It looks like they should have champagne glass hot tubs in the clubhouse. Basketball unis are in a very grim period in their history, what with the Nike SODs in colleges and these kimono-like get-ups. Better than the comic strip era, but not by much.

  • Dude | October 24, 2009 at 11:41 am |

    Here’s the guess the game!
    http://www.baseball-...

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 11:47 am |

    [quote comment=”356091″][quote comment=”356088″][quote comment=”356024″][quote comment=”356023″]I gotta go with the first thing that popped into my head, and that would be the BYU uniforms from 1999.

    This was one of the first (but unfortunately not the last) Nike train wrecks in college football.

    http://www.deseretne...

    Lordy, yes. Never know the common BYU colors are royal and white, would ya. Then again, Oregon’s wearing white with tar and slug (or whatever) today.

    Ever get a feeling that in the Oregon Media Guide it says…
    School Colors: Ask Nike

    —Ricko[/quote]
    I suppose when I think of BYU, I think of a team that wears royal blue, but aren’t the official colors like navy & taupe or something?[/quote]

    I know, the wikipedia isn’t always the most reliable source… but it says BYU’s official colors are “dark blue, white and tan”[/quote]

    According to what I found buried in a story on the new navy and white BYU football unis, they changed to dark blue, white and tan in 1999. Prior to that the colors had been blue and white for decades (most often interpreted on Cougar athletic teams as royal and white).

    So my question is, how closely did the color change accompany those dopey Nike unis?

    —Ricko

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 11:50 am |

    [quote comment=”356093″]It’s the entire uniform — the color, loose fit, and sheen combo is hideous. The incongruous font and gold accents somehow worsen the effect. It looks like they should have champagne glass hot tubs in the clubhouse. Basketball unis are in a very grim period in their history, what with the Nike SODs in colleges and these kimono-like get-ups. Better than the comic strip era, but not by much.[/quote]
    Even a supposedly “classic” basketball uni can be ruined by the baggy fit and satin material.

    Here’s a perfect example.

  • bartusball | October 24, 2009 at 11:55 am |

    The NBA circa 1991-2001 had some of the most horrible uniforms of all time. Apparently someone thought that sublaminated jerseys actually looked great. Thus we had abominations like these:

    1995-1999 Atlanta Hawks
    1995-2001 Detroit Pistons
    1995-2003 Houston Rockets
    1991-1994 Philadelphia 76ers
    1992-2000 Phoenix Suns
    1995-1999 Toronto Raptors

    And this biggest heap of steaming feces, your 1996-2004 Utah Jazz!

  • Fleeser | October 24, 2009 at 11:55 am |

    I think you can take this discussion a number of directions. Obviously, you can base your nomination solely on what is most visually objectionable. For me, it’s hard to separate the look from the context. If a team has always worn mediocre uniforms, that’s a shame. But if a team abandons an awesome look for a mediocre (or worse) uniform, that’s criminal.

    That said, I think the worst uniforms ever are the current Minnesota Vikings uniforms. (The throwbacks they wore against Green Bay are the awesome ones I’m talking about, by the way.)

    Honorable mention (with excellent alternative in parentheses):University of Michigan road football uniforms (Beautiful)Detroit Lions current and the set from the Millen era (Barry Sanders era)Buffalo Bills current (AFL throwbacks)Minnesota football uniforms (simple, perfect)New England Patriots (AFL throwbacks)Colorado football (Kordell era)Denver Broncos (Orange Crush)I guess there are other sports besides football… I’ll have to think about it…Toronto Blue Jays (Joe Carter era, but with the white front caps)

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 11:59 am |

    [quote comment=”356095″]According to what I found buried in a story on the new navy and white BYU football unis, they changed to dark blue, white and tan in 1999. Prior to that the colors had been blue and white for decades (most often interpreted on Cougar athletic teams as royal and white).

    So my question is, how closely did the color change accompany those dopey Nike unis?

    —Ricko[/quote]
    I guess my question would be whether the University’s official colors were also changed at that time or if Nike decided to capitalize on navy “selling better” by the fact that they could go to the darker color for football by conforming to the University’s color scheme?

  • LI Matt | October 24, 2009 at 12:02 pm |

    My vote is for the Eagles throwback pictured in comment #7, although it was worn in 2007 and not 1994.

    If you want to throw out the White Sox’s “Bermuda shorts” outfit as a short-lived gimmick, remember that they wore those shirts with standard pants and (non-stirrup) socks as their regular uniform for several years.

  • jesse | October 24, 2009 at 12:02 pm |

    any camouflage baseball uniform for “military appreciation”

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 12:03 pm |

    I am grudgingly getting used to the Vikings’ jerseys. Of course, much of that may be due to simply seeing them so often.

    But the pants-trim design still is just too…unexplainable.

    —Ricko

  • M.Princip | October 24, 2009 at 12:08 pm |

    Could someone help me out here, trying to compile my list for worst uniform ever. What football team was it that wore that green jersey with the huge bulldog on it? I believe it was an NFL europe team from the early 90s?

  • bartusball | October 24, 2009 at 12:18 pm |

    Off topic a bit. What is the purpose of the bicep bands that so many football players seem to be wearing these days? Other than another piece of logo creep, what gives?

  • Lauren | October 24, 2009 at 12:21 pm |

    1980-1982 Vancouver Canucks:

    http://www.gasolinea...

    http://rynomi.files....

    Also, I don’t know if they count, but the 1992 Orlando Thunder. It hurts just to look:

    http://stuffmateolik...

  • Stuby | October 24, 2009 at 12:23 pm |

    When did Terrelle Pryor start wearing the Revolution helmet? I don’t think he started the season with it.

  • Patrick | October 24, 2009 at 12:23 pm |

    While these may not be the ugliest, these are uniforms that I don’t like: The Mets black alternate, the Blue Jays black alternate and the Lions black jersey.

    BRING BACK BLUE!

  • concealed78 | October 24, 2009 at 12:33 pm |

    Since I’m a baseball guy, I’m going with that sport. Worst uni ever: Houston Astros 1975-86 Tequila Sunrise uniforms. I don’t care how beloved they are. This isn’t about “fun” and they are just god damn hideous. Thick horizontal stripes wrapping a baseball jersey?? Seriously?? This is also the precursor of putting thick stripes on shoulders & down the sleeves in the modern era, a trend we haven’t seen done since the mid-1990s Tigers roads.

    If the Tequila Sunrise jerseys were re-introduced in the late 90s, it would be a smooth gradient pattern.

  • duker | October 24, 2009 at 12:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”356015″]re: Color-on-color. We really need to give it up. Other than in a certain few color combinations it just isn’t practical.

    In the example of Packers vs. Bears…
    http://i853.photobuc...
    …those two colors and simply too close in terms of light-to-dark value—both containing too much black—to work.

    From high in the stands or in a TV full shot (at snap of the ball), many (if not most) color-on-color combos would just plain be too close. My office and bedroom TVs are a 13-inchers, and it wouldn’t be good at all on those little things. Not everyone watches in huge-screen HD. And I imagine coaches would hate it. Game “fims” keep all 22 players on-screen at all time, and the figures are pretty small.

    I mean, think about it. It isn’t that we COULDN’T tell them apart. It’s that it wouldn’t be EASY to tell them apart. And that’s the whole point of one-team-in-white.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I think the biggest reason for not doing color on color is that 5-8% of males are color blind (in some form or another). That is just too high a percentage to eliminate from your viewing audience. I know most of this is not full color blindness but I’m sure there are uni-combinations that would be indistinguishable.

    Also with such a high percentage I’m sure there are a few color blind players. The only one I’ve ever heard of was Vinny Testaverde. I’m not sure if this was just a joke after a high interception game or if it was actually true.

  • LarenR | October 24, 2009 at 12:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”356084″][quote comment=”356082″]Off topic but I need some help with a DIY project. I want to create a “uniform” of “everything that’s wrong with baseball.” Maybe it’ll be for Halloween, maybe just to wear in protest to a game next year.

    Of course I’m starting with a pair of three-sizes-too-big pants. I’ll borrow a red and yellow Yankees 5950 fashion cap from my 14 year old brother. I’ve got a pill bottle (or syringe, I haven’t decided yet) on a chain to wear around my neck and I’ll make a pair of $275 obstructed-view tickets for a Sunday night World Series game to stick out of a pocket. I have a blank white button-up jersey that I’ll adorn with a big “$” on the left chest and as many swooshes as I can reasonably use (one on each sleeve, back collar, right chest, anywhere else?).

    I’m still trying to decide on an NOB (maybe, “Your Sponsorship Here”) and number. What else do I need?[/quote]

    You could just wear a Bonds jersey, and that would accomplish the same thing.

    OK, I’ll stop. . . .[/quote]
    Yeah, but I’m a Giants fan, so Barry’s off limits… ;o)
    [quote comment=”356085″][quote]I want to create a “uniform” of “everything that’s wrong with baseball.” [/quote]

    you’d have to start with everyone the pirates traded (maybe a pirates vest with “TRADED” on the back) or can you DIY this?[/quote]
    I like the TRADED idea. FREE AGENT could work, as well.

  • M.Princip | October 24, 2009 at 12:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”356103″]Could someone help me out here, trying to compile my list for worst uniform ever. What football team was it that wore that green jersey with the huge bulldog on it? I believe it was an NFL europe team from the early 90s?[/quote]

    I did an NFL Europa search, however, could not find the team? I believe it was a green jersey they wore? Bull Dogs……Mad Dogs…..No Dogs??? I don’t know, some shit like that? I just remember the HUGE dog on the jersey and how ridiculous it looked.

  • M.Princip | October 24, 2009 at 12:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”356111″][quote comment=”356103″]Could someone help me out here, trying to compile my list for worst uniform ever. What football team was it that wore that green jersey with the huge bulldog on it? I believe it was an NFL europe team from the early 90s?[/quote]

    I did an NFL Europa search, however, could not find the team? I believe it was a green jersey they wore? Bull Dogs……Mad Dogs…..No Dogs??? I don’t know, some shit like that? I just remember the HUGE dog on the jersey and how ridiculous it looked.[/quote]

    FOUND IT! Memphis Maddogs.

  • M.Princip | October 24, 2009 at 12:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”356112″][quote comment=”356111″][quote comment=”356103″]Could someone help me out here, trying to compile my list for worst uniform ever. What football team was it that wore that green jersey with the huge bulldog on it? I believe it was an NFL europe team from the early 90s?[/quote]

    I did an NFL Europa search, however, could not find the team? I believe it was a green jersey they wore? Bull Dogs……Mad Dogs…..No Dogs??? I don’t know, some shit like that? I just remember the HUGE dog on the jersey and how ridiculous it looked.[/quote]

    FOUND IT! Memphis Maddogs.[/quote]

    Interestingly, a CFL team from 1995.

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 12:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”356111″][quote comment=”356103″]Could someone help me out here, trying to compile my list for worst uniform ever. What football team was it that wore that green jersey with the huge bulldog on it? I believe it was an NFL europe team from the early 90s?[/quote]

    I did an NFL Europa search, however, could not find the team? I believe it was a green jersey they wore? Bull Dogs……Mad Dogs…..No Dogs??? I don’t know, some shit like that? I just remember the HUGE dog on the jersey and how ridiculous it looked.[/quote]

    Memphis Mad Dogs, CFL, mid 90’s.

  • aflfan | October 24, 2009 at 12:49 pm |

    I don’t watch Nebraska enough to know this, are they wearing some sort of throwbacks today? The sleeve strips are yellow and the cheerleader are wearing red and white vertically striped sweaters.

  • Stuby | October 24, 2009 at 12:56 pm |

    Baylor in monochrome light gold today against Okie State. It’s the one on the left and an awful look.

    http://img.coxnewswe...

  • M.Princip | October 24, 2009 at 12:56 pm |
  • =bg= | October 24, 2009 at 1:09 pm |

    WORST UNI EVER debate begins and ends here. And I’m not even a hockey fan, eh.
    http://media.photobu...

    “The Canucks introduced the jerseys, which none of the players had seen prior to the game, at the season opener in Minnesota. As Stan Smyl said, “I’ve never been ashamed to wear the Canuck’s uniform, but that night none of us wanted to leave the dressing room.”

    They were met with much derision around the NHL and were often referred to as “those Halloween suits”. Vancouver nearly got the last laugh however, as they made it all the way to the Stanley Cup Finals in 1982 before running into the New York Islanders dynasty which was in full stride. Time has settled on the nickname of “The Flying V” for these jerseys.”

    Good jersey site too: (sorry, ‘sweater’)
    http://thirdstringgo...

  • bartusball | October 24, 2009 at 1:16 pm |

    Holy shit!!! You’ve got to check out The Hockey News Greatest Jerseys of All-Time

    This is is unbelievable! View online via the link above.

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 1:23 pm |

    http://www.oursports...

    Nah, those big graphic CFL jerseys were great.
    I mean, if we can have one team in navy and one team in forest, we obviously don’t need to be able to see the numbers easily, either.

    Cuz considerations like that are irrelevant.

    Right?

    —Ricko

  • Giancarlo | October 24, 2009 at 1:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”356061″]
    Considering that photo, and the 70’s Broncos, I’m starting to think the Giants & Rams were either an intentional mismatch, or that the Broncos color was the only other blue available and they chose to be too dark instead of too light.[/quote]
    Exactly what I suspect. That Pro Bowl helmet is really edging toward a sky blue instead of the royal of the Giants, Rams, etc. Maybe a slightly too light helmet looks a little weird over royal.

  • M.Princip | October 24, 2009 at 1:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”356120″]Holy shit!!! You’ve got to check out The Hockey News Greatest Jerseys of All-Time

    This is is unbelievable! View online via the link above.[/quote]

    Wow! Very kewl!

  • whiteray | October 24, 2009 at 1:29 pm |

    I imagine others will nominate this one as well, but I have to go with the Vancouver Canucks’ awful V jersey:

    http://rynomi.files....

    I also thought about the Chicago White Sox’ softball shorts, the first tiger-striped helmet uni of the Cincinnati Bengals, and the last uni worn by the California Golden Seals. The first two of those are pretty well known, I think, but here’s the Seals:

    http://1.bp.blogspot...

  • M.Princip | October 24, 2009 at 1:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”356121″]http://www.oursportscentral.com/cflinamerica/nelson.jpg

    Nah, those big graphic CFL jerseys were great.
    I mean, if we can have one team in navy and one team in forest, we obviously don’t need to be able to see the numbers easily, either.

    Cuz considerations like that are irrelevant.

    Right?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Rats right Ricko (Scooby Doo).

  • SWC Susan (aka Tex) | October 24, 2009 at 1:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”356116″]Baylor in monochrome light gold today against Okie State. It’s the one on the left and an awful look.

    http://img.coxnewswe...
    The commentators just discussed this on air. Commenting how hard it was from where they were to tell the white jerseys from the gold jerseys. They asked an ex-player and he said it was NO BIG DEAL! One more mark in the color-on-color column (unis different enough that less contrast no problem)!

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 1:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”356122″][quote comment=”356061″]
    Considering that photo, and the 70’s Broncos, I’m starting to think the Giants & Rams were either an intentional mismatch, or that the Broncos color was the only other blue available and they chose to be too dark instead of too light.[/quote]
    Exactly what I suspect. That Pro Bowl helmet is really edging toward a sky blue instead of the royal of the Giants, Rams, etc. Maybe a slightly too light helmet looks a little weird over royal.[/quote]

    Thought that, too. But it’s awfully close to the color of the socks. Much closer than navy.

    But I do agree that the darker helmets probably were a choice. If not by the teams, then by the helmet manufacturer. Imagine they thought the true royal looked like a big gumball. And they may have been right.

    (I’m trying to envision the current Giants helmet without the themos bottle sparklies; it might look TOO light).

    Ole Miss. Looks odd cuz paired with Navy, but something to think about. Or is that helmet true royal, and do it and the Orange Crush helmets just LOOK like Air Force blue because we saw so any dark “royal” helmets for so many years?
    http://sportsillustr...

    —Ricko

  • whiteray | October 24, 2009 at 1:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”356062″]May not be the worst but it might at least make the discussion. The “Cat Eyes” alternate from the Independent Fort Worth Cats. Even when I worked there and saw the jersey for myself, I couldn’t believe it.

    http://farm3.static....

    As an alt, I like this one a lot!

  • Stuby | October 24, 2009 at 1:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”356127″][quote comment=”356122″][quote comment=”356061″]
    Considering that photo, and the 70’s Broncos, I’m starting to think the Giants & Rams were either an intentional mismatch, or that the Broncos color was the only other blue available and they chose to be too dark instead of too light.[/quote]
    Exactly what I suspect. That Pro Bowl helmet is really edging toward a sky blue instead of the royal of the Giants, Rams, etc. Maybe a slightly too light helmet looks a little weird over royal.[/quote]

    Thought that, too. But it’s awfully close to the color of the socks. Much closer than navy.

    But I do agree that the darker helmets probably were a choice. If not by the teams, then by the helmet manufacturer. Imagine they thought the true royal looked like a big gumball. And they may have been right.

    (I’m trying to envision the current Giants helmet without the themos bottle sparklies; it might look TOO light).

    Ole Miss. Looks odd cuz paired with Navy, but something to think about. Or is that helmet true royal, and do it and the Orange Crush helmets just LOOK like Air Force blue because we saw so any dark “royal” helmets for so many years?
    http://sportsillustr...

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Nice color-on-color example, Ricko.

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 1:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”356124″]I imagine others will nominate this one as well, but I have to go with the Vancouver Canucks’ awful V jersey:

    http://rynomi.files....

    I also thought about the Chicago White Sox’ softball shorts, the first tiger-striped helmet uni of the Cincinnati Bengals, and the last uni worn by the California Golden Seals. The first two of those are pretty well known, I think, but here’s the Seals:

    http://1.bp.blogspot...

    Indeed. One of the largely forgotten strange unis of the big four (MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL).
    http://2.bp.blogspot...

    —Rickjo

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 1:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”356129″][quote comment=”356127″][quote comment=”356122″][quote comment=”356061″]
    Considering that photo, and the 70’s Broncos, I’m starting to think the Giants & Rams were either an intentional mismatch, or that the Broncos color was the only other blue available and they chose to be too dark instead of too light.[/quote]
    Exactly what I suspect. That Pro Bowl helmet is really edging toward a sky blue instead of the royal of the Giants, Rams, etc. Maybe a slightly too light helmet looks a little weird over royal.[/quote]

    Thought that, too. But it’s awfully close to the color of the socks. Much closer than navy.

    But I do agree that the darker helmets probably were a choice. If not by the teams, then by the helmet manufacturer. Imagine they thought the true royal looked like a big gumball. And they may have been right.

    (I’m trying to envision the current Giants helmet without the themos bottle sparklies; it might look TOO light).

    Ole Miss. Looks odd cuz paired with Navy, but something to think about. Or is that helmet true royal, and do it and the Orange Crush helmets just LOOK like Air Force blue because we saw so any dark “royal” helmets for so many years?
    http://sportsillustr...

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Nice color-on-color example, Ricko.[/quote]

    Hey, I said some of them are no problem, just that to expect “one-team-in-white” to go away as the standard was dreaming.

    —Ricko

  • Michael Kelley | October 24, 2009 at 1:48 pm |

    This gets my vote. Although the Padres “tacos” uniforms are pretty damn close.

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 1:56 pm |

    duker’s post (#103) about the high percentage of men who are color blind is valid, and it also points to a simple rule of thumb regarding color-on-color.

    If the difference couldn’t be seen instaneaously in a black and white photo of the game, the combo’s probably not a good idea.

    That’s what gets around the color blindness factor.

    —Ricko

  • Stuby | October 24, 2009 at 1:57 pm |

    [quote comment=”356126″][quote comment=”356116″]Baylor in monochrome light gold today against Okie State. It’s the one on the left and an awful look.

    http://img.coxnewswe...
    The commentators just discussed this on air. Commenting how hard it was from where they were to tell the white jerseys from the gold jerseys. They asked an ex-player and he said it was NO BIG DEAL! One more mark in the color-on-color column (unis different enough that less contrast no problem)![/quote]
    The strange this is that everywhere else you look, you see the dark green and yellow — midfield logo, endzone, coaching staff, fans. That gold doesn’t fit.

  • dilbert719 | October 24, 2009 at 1:59 pm |

    A few nominations:

    I’ll see all your black “Flying V” jerseys, and raise you the yellow version:
    http://3.bp.blogspot...

    Yellow and brown: a debacle that must never again be brought to light. San Diego’s the worst, but Denver needs to bury their throwbacks, too.
    http://assets.nydail...

    Cleveland Indians, mono-blood (for an extra bonus, this one was from a Uni Watch column on Slate):
    http://img.slate.com...

    The Phoenix Coyotes. Were they drunk?:
    http://inlinethumb61...

    There are more, but these are the egregious ones that come to mind.

  • Dave | October 24, 2009 at 2:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”356097″]The NBA circa 1991-2001 had some of the most horrible uniforms of all time. Apparently someone thought that sublaminated jerseys actually looked great. Thus we had abominations like these:

    1995-1999 Atlanta Hawks
    1995-2001 Detroit Pistons
    1995-2003 Houston Rockets
    1991-1994 Philadelphia 76ers
    1992-2000 Phoenix Suns
    1995-1999 Toronto Raptors

    And this biggest heap of steaming feces, your 1996-2004 Utah Jazz![/quote]

    I throw my full support behind the Raptors, Rockets, Pistons and Hawks on this list. I’d also like to add the short-lived Vancouver grizzlies to this list of crazy 1990s NBA uniforms.

    However, count me as one who liked the Jazz’s mountain design of the late 90s.

  • mako | October 24, 2009 at 2:16 pm |

    Wow, so much badness.

    My first thought was the White Sox shorties, but if those are ineligible due to insufficient exposure (heh heh), I might have to go with any of the gradient jerseys, like that nasty Hawks thing mentioned in #113, or the Canucks’ old red-blue ones from the early 2000s. And I think the current Vikings are pretty hideous, too.

    But – is this piling on? – when all is said and done, I might have to go with the Bills. AGAIN.

  • Jonee | October 24, 2009 at 2:19 pm |

    That weird LA Kings sweater from 95-96 has to be the worst uniform. Total WTF. And, I’ll be sad if my beloved mustard and brown Padres win (or lose) this vote.

    http://www.totalpros...

  • interlockingtc | October 24, 2009 at 2:20 pm |

    All things considered, this one smells the worst….

    http://www.basketbal...

  • Phil | October 24, 2009 at 2:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”356063″][quote comment=”356053″]If the Chicago Bears road uniform consisted of white jerseys with navy blue pants it should have been in the top 5 for road uniforms! That is a classic road uniform look! If the Chicago Bears road uniform is white jerseys with white pants then it shouldn’t have been in the top 10, that is a boring look especially with the three stripe socks that they use with it. Why didn’t San Diego Chargers road jersey and Kansas City Chiefs road jersey not make it in the top 10? Those are nice road jerseys.[/quote]
    Going with the Bears in white over white was a tough call. That decision was based on the fact that over the last few years, they’ve gone white-on-white far more often than white-over-blue. Plus, they had a long history of white/white before they reintroduced the blue pants in the mid-80s. So far this year, they’ve only worn white pants once (the season opener in Lambeau) vs. two times for the blue.

    Not that you mentioned them, but for the Browns, we went with the white pants instead of brown for the same reasons. Just because they’ve worn them a couple times so far this season and Mangini has decreed that they’ll wear the brown pants on the road all year doesn’t mean they’ll necessarily stick to that plan. History says that they’re a white trousers team.

    I don’t really know why the Chiefs didn’t crack the top 10. They definitely make my personal top 10.

    I wouldn’t say the same for the Chargers, though. My personal feeling is that the blue pants really just don’t work for them. Especially since they go with the dark socks for the “unitard” effect. I’m sure that turned off a lot of others as well.[/quote]
    Agreed the “unitard” effect is the worst with them. The throwback road uni they have for this season is a great look with the white jersey, helmet and pants. Their current uni set could have a nice road look if they would ever wear their white pants with their white jerseys and helmets.

  • Sully | October 24, 2009 at 2:23 pm |

    White Sox uniforms from 1982 to 1986

    http://sullybaseball...

  • Andrew Dixon | October 24, 2009 at 2:23 pm |

    You know what is awesome about that Guess the Game from the Scoreboard picture? I’d read lots of times that the Phillies purchased the old scoreboard from Yankee Stadium when the Yankees got a new one in 1957 or 1958, but up until now I’d never really seen a photograph that one could use to verify that story’s truth. But if you look at the picture here, you can pretty clearly see that it’s the same scoreboard, and, especially, the same clock on top of the scoreboard. When they installed it at Connie Mack Stadium (AKA Shibe Park), they did add a baner advertisement for Ballantine Beer between the scoreboard and the clock, but it’s nevertheless pretty obviously the same scoreboard.

  • Andrew Dixon | October 24, 2009 at 2:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”356141″]White Sox uniforms from 1982 to 1986

    http://sullybaseball...

    Second.

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 2:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”356137″]Wow, so much badness.

    My first thought was the White Sox shorties, but if those are ineligible due to insufficient exposure (heh heh), I might have to go with any of the gradient jerseys, like that nasty Hawks thing mentioned in #113, or the Canucks’ old red-blue ones from the early 2000s. And I think the current Vikings are pretty hideous, too.

    But – is this piling on? – when all is said and done, I might have to go with the Bills. AGAIN.[/quote]
    As per the rules:

    (2) The uniform you are nominating MUST have been worn at least once and in a regular season game. This means you can nominate a “one and done” uniform, but it had to appear in a regular season game.

    Since they were worn during the regular season, the Sox’ shorts are definitely fair game.

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 24, 2009 at 2:27 pm |

    I have 2 suggestions.

    Worst regular uni.

    Worst gimmick uni.

  • Kurt Allen | October 24, 2009 at 2:32 pm |

    My missionary work for the day – they’re auctioning the ’99 home jerseys on the BYU site…

  • Derek | October 24, 2009 at 2:38 pm |

    Guess I missed out by not paying much attention to hockey on the west coast, but yeah, the “Mighty” Ducks may sweep this one. That weird (Burger) Kings jersey is also up there.

    I had forgotten (mercifully) about the “Red sarong” Hawks. I think the gradient Hawks and tie-dyed Nets are neck and neck.

  • Kurt Allen | October 24, 2009 at 2:41 pm |

    Where I work, someone has been wearing an old Mighty Ducks jacket – I REALLY miss the old eggplant and jade…

  • Kurt Allen | October 24, 2009 at 2:42 pm |

    And the logo with the duck-mask was classic…

  • Kurt Allen | October 24, 2009 at 2:43 pm |

    Baylor is playing just as bad as that urine-ish uniform selection today – and that’s saying something…

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 24, 2009 at 2:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”356149″]And the logo with the duck-mask was classic…[/quote]
    I think that’s the real shame of it. The logo was cool though the colors were questionable, but ‘Wild Wing’, or whatever he’s called, is incredibly lame in all his forms.

  • DenverGregg | October 24, 2009 at 2:57 pm |

    There are lots of really bad ones: Wild Wing, Burger King, Mooterus, current Atlanta Falcons, TATC D-backs, late 1990s Angels, but I think this beats them all.

  • LarryB | October 24, 2009 at 3:02 pm |

    worst uniform ever

    http://www.femalefan...

  • Derek | October 24, 2009 at 3:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”356152″]There are lots of really bad ones: Wild Wing, Burger King, Mooterus, current Atlanta Falcons, TATC D-backs, late 1990s Angels, but I think this beats them all.[/quote]

    No, any football team that looks like early 1980s “Adventure People” is actually cool.

    In a sick way, I prefer those to “BibYU.”

  • Greenie | October 24, 2009 at 3:05 pm |

    I nominate the Buffaslug, Gordon’s Fisherman, Tampa Bay Devil Ray’s first season multi-colored pukefest, The Colorado Rockies whole current set, The Jacksonville Jaguars current set, The Bucco Bruce Creamsicles, The Cavaliers mid-90’s disasters, and The teal Pistons.

    -Greenie

  • Jim Nedelka | October 24, 2009 at 3:05 pm |

    The Islanders CHANGING to the “Fisherman” uni was a HUGE mistake – a marketing disaster of the first order. However, while the Fisherman illustration itself is actually pretty good — I can see it be resurrected by a hockey team called the Mariners or Seafarers or the Stan Fischlers –what ruins the Fisherman illustration is everything else associated with it: the “Islanders” wordmark below it plus what it’s attached to — the ridiculously over-designed uniform with the wavy lines ripped from the helmets of the old Portland Breakers.
    Restoring the classic Isles’ logo was a step in the right direction but it always reminded me of when the Grinch tied a twig on his pet’s head and called him a reindeer!

  • Derek | October 24, 2009 at 3:11 pm |

    [quote comment=”356153″]worst uniform ever

    http://www.femalefan...

    I figured we’d see some people hacking away at the classics as too simple, or just because they don’t like the team, etc.

    As a horrible anti-classic, much of what the current Maryland Terrapins wear is just vile. http://www.thesunnew... They manage to embody everything bad about UnderArmor/ Nike-style uni-fiddling, but do it in a totally half-arsed way bereft of any character. Little stripes and swooshes and gussets thrown in for no reason at all. They’re garish and generic at the same time. Ick.

  • ZachBrady | October 24, 2009 at 3:16 pm |

    Not the WORST… but i hate this uni

    http://www.everyjoe....

  • Derek | October 24, 2009 at 3:20 pm |

    It’s as beaten to death as the TATC jerseys, but I HAVE to link what would have been a sure-fire winner . . . but it was never actually worn.

    http://images.google...

  • John in DC | October 24, 2009 at 3:21 pm |

    Boston Red Sox road unis 1938-68, 1979-89. Boooooooooooooorrrrring.

  • timmy b | October 24, 2009 at 3:25 pm |

    On football, color vs color, back in the days of yore:

    Packers played the Bears from 1941-1949 and again from 1955-1956 at least once each year when both wore navy blue jerseys and socks (though in 41 & 42 many players went bare calved). But then the Bears had a navy helmet, orange numerals (41-48)and stripes or white numerals (49, 55-56) on the jerseys and white pants while the Packers wore yellow helmets, a yellow shoulder insert and yellow numerals on their jerseys and pants. So it looks like they could’ve had enough contrast on the accessories to get away with it.

    There was a packers-Rams game c.1952 where both wore yellow/gold tops at the Coliseum. The Rams coach (Joe Stydahar??) filed a protest with the league as the Rams didn’t have a backup set of jerseys (they only wore yellow that season). I think the league took no action against the Packers.

    On the Pro Bowl: The East always wore red helmets while the West wore blue helmets. One season they added white numerals to the helmets (1/1958, I believe) but from 1/1951 thru 1/1965 this was always the case. From the 1/1966 thru 1/1969 games, they wore the gold helmets with the NFL shield and in 1/1970, they used the 50/NFL shield on the helmets.

  • Derek | October 24, 2009 at 3:29 pm |

    And if there’s ever a Spanish edition, this could be the worst uniform worn by anyone doing anything, ever:

    http://www.unosafici...

  • Skycat | October 24, 2009 at 3:32 pm |

    I’ve always hated these:
    http://www.sportslog...

  • Dave | October 24, 2009 at 3:40 pm |

    Current Blue Jays blacks are quite miserable, and I would like to second the LA Kings and Mighty Ducks gimmick jerseys that were posted above.

    I’m surprised to see Penn State’s whites pop up in this thread though. I’ve always really liked them.

  • Kevin Allen | October 24, 2009 at 3:43 pm |

    I kind of disagree with the poll. I think sometimes you are just a bunch of old school uniform apologists. We fear innovation. I don’t see anything wrong with the Seahawks uniforms. Yeah, it’s a non-traditional color scheme and look, but that doesn’t mean it is bad. And the Bengals is very unique with it’s mascot incorporation. A lot of you start fondling each other when you see a plain “vanilla” uniform and scoff at new styles. Seriously! How does the Redskins gear get voted in the top 10? Is it because it reminds you of your junior high getups in the 70’s? Let’s not shun innovation or originality.

  • Zach | October 24, 2009 at 3:48 pm |

    I don’t know if I just missed this or not but this is quite possibly the worst uniform ever…

    http://www.premiersh...

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 24, 2009 at 4:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”356165″]I kind of disagree with the poll. I think sometimes you are just a bunch of old school uniform apologists. We fear innovation. I don’t see anything wrong with the Seahawks uniforms. Yeah, it’s a non-traditional color scheme and look, but that doesn’t mean it is bad. And the Bengals is very unique with it’s mascot incorporation. A lot of you start fondling each other when you see a plain “vanilla” uniform and scoff at new styles. Seriously! How does the Redskins gear get voted in the top 10? Is it because it reminds you of your junior high getups in the 70’s? Let’s not shun innovation or originality.[/quote]
    Innovation and originality are not the problem. In fact, if you look at all of the ‘traditional’ uniforms that are admired here you will see that each is original and innovative in it’s own way. I think what drives many of us here nuts is when teams add elements or change their uniforms solely to up the total at the gift shop cash register. Ie, if the Mets had adopted black and orange originally (Giants colors) we’d have been fine with that. But to add black later so you can sell more jerseys and caps? Lame.

  • Michael | October 24, 2009 at 4:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”356115″]I don’t watch Nebraska enough to know this, are they wearing some sort of throwbacks today? The sleeve strips are yellow and the cheerleader are wearing red and white vertically striped sweaters.[/quote]

    They are not throwbacks, but I noticed the yellowed look on the sleeve stripes. However I didn’t notice it on some of the defensive players. Beats me what it is.

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 4:11 pm |

    [quote comment=”356167″][quote comment=”356165″]I kind of disagree with the poll. I think sometimes you are just a bunch of old school uniform apologists. We fear innovation. I don’t see anything wrong with the Seahawks uniforms. Yeah, it’s a non-traditional color scheme and look, but that doesn’t mean it is bad. And the Bengals is very unique with it’s mascot incorporation. A lot of you start fondling each other when you see a plain “vanilla” uniform and scoff at new styles. Seriously! How does the Redskins gear get voted in the top 10? Is it because it reminds you of your junior high getups in the 70’s? Let’s not shun innovation or originality.[/quote]
    Innovation and originality are not the problem. In fact, if you look at all of the ‘traditional’ uniforms that are admired here you will see that each is original and innovative in it’s own way. I think what drives many of us here nuts is when teams add elements or change their uniforms solely to up the total at the gift shop cash register. Ie, if the Mets had adopted black and orange originally (Giants colors) we’d have been fine with that. But to add black later so you can sell more jerseys and caps? Lame.[/quote]
    I’m sure a lot of people disagree with these results. The Bengals actually received a dozen nominations for best road uni. There are two teams that made the top 5 that don’t even make my top 20. In fact, I gave the Seahawks a higher score than one of them.

    Just because I see things a bit differently than the majority doesn’t mean the results are wrong, though.

    As for the top 10 unis, I don’t think any of them qualify as “vanilla.”

  • Kurt Allen | October 24, 2009 at 4:12 pm |

    Noticed Air Force did away with the retro-Raider like silver road numbers…

  • Kurt Allen | October 24, 2009 at 4:14 pm |

    Now toggle between Utah’s game, and Alabama’s game, and Oklahoma’s game – and determine who wears crimson and who proclaims to wear Clemson but is in reality just plain red… (I know Ricko, it’s been red since the glory days of Lee Grosscup)

  • Jeff E. | October 24, 2009 at 4:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”356110″][quote comment=”356084″][quote comment=”356082″]Off topic but I need some help with a DIY project. I want to create a “uniform” of “everything that’s wrong with baseball.” Maybe it’ll be for Halloween, maybe just to wear in protest to a game next year.

    Of course I’m starting with a pair of three-sizes-too-big pants. I’ll borrow a red and yellow Yankees 5950 fashion cap from my 14 year old brother. I’ve got a pill bottle (or syringe, I haven’t decided yet) on a chain to wear around my neck and I’ll make a pair of $275 obstructed-view tickets for a Sunday night World Series game to stick out of a pocket. I have a blank white button-up jersey that I’ll adorn with a big “$” on the left chest and as many swooshes as I can reasonably use (one on each sleeve, back collar, right chest, anywhere else?).

    I’m still trying to decide on an NOB (maybe, “Your Sponsorship Here”) and number. What else do I need?[/quote]

    You could just wear a Bonds jersey, and that would accomplish the same thing.

    OK, I’ll stop. . . .[/quote]
    Yeah, but I’m a Giants fan, so Barry’s off limits… ;o)
    [quote comment=”356085″][quote]I want to create a “uniform” of “everything that’s wrong with baseball.” [/quote]

    you’d have to start with everyone the pirates traded (maybe a pirates vest with “TRADED” on the back) or can you DIY this?[/quote]
    I like the TRADED idea. FREE AGENT could work, as well.[/quote]

    How about just a plain asterisk?

  • Chris | October 24, 2009 at 5:19 pm |

    The Oregon black, white/silver, black combo is very HD friendly. Looks a lot better than I thought it would thinking about it this week. I really like the black since unlike a lot of black out there it isn’t shiny.

  • Teebz | October 24, 2009 at 5:34 pm |

    Fisherman Isles jerseys rule. ‘Nuff said.

    ‘Specially you, Shaftman. ;o)

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 5:45 pm |

    If I may revive this dead horse topic to resume the beating, Clemson in orange/white/orange vs. Miami in white/orange/white is tougher to watch on a 13″ TV than a Bears vs. Packers color-on-color matchup would be.

  • Billy Smith | October 24, 2009 at 6:11 pm |

    Love this idea. Here’s some that I generally can’t stand, or couldn’t stand at the time.

    1) Old LA Kings alternate: http://www.totalpros...

    2) Fisherman Islanders: http://espn.go.com/i...

    3) My Buffalo Bills AWFUL road uni: http://prod.static.b...

    4) This Astros nonsense: http://watchmojo.com...

    5) AND the White Sox cricket unis WITH the shorts. Really, these are possibly so awful and unbelievable they actually become cool in some cyclical thing… but whatever. They suck. http://dubsism.files...

    And whoever said the Penn State uniform was among the worst ever… unbelievable. Clean. Classy. Classic. The road’s are a less exciting than some, but this here is the sharpest looking uniform in all of sports: http://blog.pennlive...

  • Gill | October 24, 2009 at 6:12 pm |

    NBA Worst. I think the Knick jersey with the “Knicks” below the number should be on this list.

    http://nba.fanhouse....

  • bruce j | October 24, 2009 at 6:13 pm |

    Not sure if this has been mentioned yet…

    http://www.proxifoot...

  • bruce j | October 24, 2009 at 6:16 pm |

    Never mind…someone already got it….

    [quote comment=”356178″]Not sure if this has been mentioned yet…

    http://www.proxifoot...

  • LarryB | October 24, 2009 at 6:25 pm |

    Most of the worst unis were all a temporary thing. Penn State’s ugly road whites have been ugly for many decades.

    Just because they have used them since the 1930’s or maybe 1940’s does not make them attractive.

  • Harvey Lee | October 24, 2009 at 6:27 pm |

    Worst unis ever?

    Colorado Caribou of the NASL:

    http://www.nasljerse...

    The fringe is unique but awful. The fringe also forces the number to be small. Can you imagine asking a serious soccer player (e.g. Conor Casey) to don these duds?

  • LarryB | October 24, 2009 at 6:31 pm |

    [quote comment=\”356106\”]When did Terrelle Pryor start wearing the Revolution helmet? I don\’t think he started the season with it.[/quote]

    I wondered that too. I wonder if it had anything to do with him losing his helmet a few weeks ago. He had to use another players helmet and maybe stuck with that model

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 6:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”356165″]I kind of disagree with the poll. I think sometimes you are just a bunch of old school uniform apologists. We fear innovation. I don’t see anything wrong with the Seahawks uniforms. Yeah, it’s a non-traditional color scheme and look, but that doesn’t mean it is bad. And the Bengals is very unique with it’s mascot incorporation. A lot of you start fondling each other when you see a plain “vanilla” uniform and scoff at new styles. Seriously! How does the Redskins gear get voted in the top 10? Is it because it reminds you of your junior high getups in the 70’s? Let’s not shun innovation or originality.[/quote]

    Yeah, there are some people here who really love traditional unis, but that’s pretty broad brush you’re stroking with there.

    See, there also are some here who seem to think anything that happened (or was designed) before they were born has no value because, well, they weren’t alive yet to make life worth living for the rest of us and to, of course, tell us what looks good and what doesn’t.

    Now, if you take umbrage with that last statement then you have, by you own admission, put yourself in the latter group. Consider yourself generalized.

    How’s it feel?

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 7:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”356175″]If I may revive this dead horse topic to resume the beating, Clemson in orange/white/orange vs. Miami in white/orange/white is tougher to watch on a 13″ TV than a Bears vs. Packers color-on-color matchup would be.[/quote]

    Scrambling subjects, aren’t you? Not about that. About identifying players from each team instantly. I’m watching that game on a 13-inch screen right now, and I can least tell which team is which without having to make a conscious effort to do so.

    “Hard on the eyes” or “ugly game” isn’t the issue. If it were, Packers-Bears both in dark would qualify, though. Would be hard on the eyes cuz of so much dark. There’s getting hit between the eyes with bright colors, and there’s straining to “see in the dark” so to speak.

    We ARE only talking jerseys, right? Or should there be some great Recognizer of Taste who says, “Sorry, too much orange, Clemson. Go put on our white or purple pants”?

    For more than 50 years now, football has understood the only logicistically feasible way to NOT get involved with such nonsense is simply to say, “one team in white.”

    —Ricko

  • aflfan | October 24, 2009 at 7:05 pm |

    I would also nominate this for the fact it is actually a queen’s crown on the front.

    http://media.photobu...

  • LarenR | October 24, 2009 at 7:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”356172″][quote comment=”356110″][quote comment=”356084″][quote comment=”356082″]Off topic but I need some help with a DIY project. I want to create a “uniform” of “everything that’s wrong with baseball.” Maybe it’ll be for Halloween, maybe just to wear in protest to a game next year.

    Of course I’m starting with a pair of three-sizes-too-big pants. I’ll borrow a red and yellow Yankees 5950 fashion cap from my 14 year old brother. I’ve got a pill bottle (or syringe, I haven’t decided yet) on a chain to wear around my neck and I’ll make a pair of $275 obstructed-view tickets for a Sunday night World Series game to stick out of a pocket. I have a blank white button-up jersey that I’ll adorn with a big “$” on the left chest and as many swooshes as I can reasonably use (one on each sleeve, back collar, right chest, anywhere else?).

    I’m still trying to decide on an NOB (maybe, “Your Sponsorship Here”) and number. What else do I need?[/quote]

    You could just wear a Bonds jersey, and that would accomplish the same thing.

    OK, I’ll stop. . . .[/quote]
    Yeah, but I’m a Giants fan, so Barry’s off limits… ;o)
    [quote comment=”356085″][quote]I want to create a “uniform” of “everything that’s wrong with baseball.” [/quote]

    you’d have to start with everyone the pirates traded (maybe a pirates vest with “TRADED” on the back) or can you DIY this?[/quote]
    I like the TRADED idea. FREE AGENT could work, as well.[/quote]

    How about just a plain asterisk?[/quote]
    Yes! I’ll use an asterisk in place of a number. Great idea, thanks.

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 7:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”356180″]Most of the worst unis were all a temporary thing. Penn State’s ugly road whites have been ugly for many decades.

    Just because they have used them since the 1930’s or maybe 1940’s does not make them attractive.[/quote]

    Yet the Yankees unis are “classic.” Go figure.

    The U.S. Constitution is more than 200 years old. That automatically make it suspicious as bad law?

    —Ricko

  • Brian Weingartz | October 24, 2009 at 7:11 pm |

    The padres camoflauge uniforms. I support the reason they wear them but they are not baseball uniforms.

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 7:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”356184″][quote comment=”356175″]If I may revive this dead horse topic to resume the beating, Clemson in orange/white/orange vs. Miami in white/orange/white is tougher to watch on a 13″ TV than a Bears vs. Packers color-on-color matchup would be.[/quote]

    Scrambling subjects, aren’t you? Not about that. About identifying players from each team instantly. I’m watching that game on a 13-inch screen right now, and I can least tell which team is which without having to make a conscious effort to do so.

    “Hard on the eyes” or “ugly game” isn’t the issue. If it were, Packers-Bears both in dark would qualify, though. Would be hard on the eyes cuz of so much dark. There’s getting hit between the eyes with bright colors, and there’s straining to “see in the dark” so to speak.

    We ARE only talking jerseys, right? Or should there be some great Recognizer of Taste who says, “Sorry, too much orange, Clemson. Go put on our white or purple pants”?

    For more than 50 years now, football has understood the only logicistically feasible way to NOT get involved with such nonsense is simply to say, “one team in white.”

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Scrambling subjects? Not at all. My whole point is that sometimes, white vs. color is not exactly high-contrast. Close-up shots, sure. Wide shots are a bit tougher to distinguish who’s who. But your point was that color-vs-color would make things tough for the teams watching game film

    And at no point today have I been only talking about the jerseys.

  • Chris | October 24, 2009 at 7:24 pm |

    Not uni-related but still fun.
    http://www.maxim.com...

  • Nick | October 24, 2009 at 7:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”356007″]I’m sure I’ll be in the minority on this… but I’ll vote for these as worst ever, in football anyway.

    http://i21.photobuck... (Bears 1994 throwback)

    and

    http://cdn.faniq.com... (Steelers 1994 throwback)

    I’d throw in the Arena teams that used Zubaz patterns as well, but I can’t really find any [i]good[/i] pics of those.[/quote]

    The worst unis ever?

    I totally disagree on the Steelers and Bears throwbacks. For proof, those two 1994 Throwback jerseys are the most in demand jerseys EVER sold on EBAY. They regularly demand 300%-500% the price of comparable throwbacks or gamers.

    Put a store-bought 1994 Steelers authentic jersey, non-gamer on EBAY and just see the price it fetches. Bears 1994 throwbacks are even more rare – they did not make authentics for store sale, and have a very cheap replica version that regularly fetches $200.00-$300.00 apiece on EBAY.

    As far a ZUBAZ goes, now we are in 100% argeement. The fact that the WHOLE ARENA FOOTBALL LEAGUE (except for one team? The Detroit Drive?) wore the ZUBAZ unis at the same time creates a multiplier effect that probably institutionalizes the ZUBAZ unis as the worst ever – for at least the 20th Century.

    I say we seek out the guy who was in authority with the one team that rejected/resisted the ZUBAZ and we create some kind of award for him.
    A comon sense award or something like that. Either that, or put him on the U.S. Supreme Court – sight unseen.

    My only caveat would be if he made the decision solely to save money by using the previous seasons’ unis – thus making the choice to reject ZUBAZ one of Cheapskatedness instead of good taste – which in that case we should make him the head of the Office of Federal Budget! (Or whatever they call it)

  • aflfan | October 24, 2009 at 7:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”356191″][quote comment=”356007″]I’m sure I’ll be in the minority on this… but I’ll vote for these as worst ever, in football anyway.

    http://i21.photobuck... (Bears 1994 throwback)

    and

    http://cdn.faniq.com... (Steelers 1994 throwback)

    I’d throw in the Arena teams that used Zubaz patterns as well, but I can’t really find any [i]good[/i] pics of those.[/quote]

    The worst unis ever?

    I totally disagree on the Steelers and Bears throwbacks. For proof, those two 1994 Throwback jerseys are the most in demand jerseys EVER sold on EBAY. They regularly demand 300%-500% the price of comparable throwbacks or gamers.

    Put a store-bought 1994 Steelers authentic jersey, non-gamer on EBAY and just see the price it fetches. Bears 1994 throwbacks are even more rare – they did not make authentics for store sale, and have a very cheap replica version that regularly fetches $200.00-$300.00 apiece on EBAY.

    As far a ZUBAZ goes, now we are in 100% argeement. The fact that the WHOLE ARENA FOOTBALL LEAGUE (except for one team? The Detroit Drive?) wore the ZUBAZ unis at the same time creates a multiplier effect that probably institutionalizes the ZUBAZ unis as the worst ever – for at least the 20th Century.

    I say we seek out the guy who was in authority with the one team that rejected/resisted the ZUBAZ and we create some kind of award for him.
    A comon sense award or something like that. Either that, or put him on the U.S. Supreme Court – sight unseen.

    My only caveat would be if he made the decision solely to save money by using the previous seasons’ unis – thus making the choice to reject ZUBAZ one of Cheapskatedness instead of good taste – which in that case we should make him the head of the Office of Federal Budget! (Or whatever they call it)[/quote]

    It was the Detroit Drive that did not wear the ZUBAZ. An since the owner of the Drive was Mike Ilitch, I doubt it was to save a buck. However he did sell the team to Mass. since the Drive were outdrawing the Tigers at the time.

  • EddieAtari | October 24, 2009 at 8:21 pm |

    I nominate every San Diego Padres uniform since 1991 for ditching brown as their base color.

  • Stuby | October 24, 2009 at 8:24 pm |

    They just showed Taylor Mays of USC (I think – it was a close up) and he had stuff written on his face shield in silver pen. Anyone see that?

  • Phil | October 24, 2009 at 8:34 pm |

    Hey did anyone else notice the chipped paint on Kapron Lewis-Moore #89’s helmet during the Notre Dame Boston College game.

  • Stuby | October 24, 2009 at 8:44 pm |

    Yep, its Taylor Mays. Can anyone get a screen grab of his face shield? I know most of the country is probably getting Texas-Mizzou on ABC.

  • Anil | October 24, 2009 at 8:49 pm |

    Egads, that Caribou uniform is horrific . . . you know its bad when you can’t tell if it is a uniform for a sports team or a Broadway show.

    Perhaps another factor to consider is not just the uniform itself, but what it replaced. So, for example, you may think the Bengals unis and the new Bronco unis are tied for the worst, but in that scenario I would argue the Broncos is the worst because it replaced a pretty nice looking uniform, while the Bengals didn’t.

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 8:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”356189″][quote comment=”356184″][quote comment=”356175″]If I may revive this dead horse topic to resume the beating, Clemson in orange/white/orange vs. Miami in white/orange/white is tougher to watch on a 13″ TV than a Bears vs. Packers color-on-color matchup would be.[/quote]

    Scrambling subjects, aren’t you? Not about that. About identifying players from each team instantly. I’m watching that game on a 13-inch screen right now, and I can least tell which team is which without having to make a conscious effort to do so.

    “Hard on the eyes” or “ugly game” isn’t the issue. If it were, Packers-Bears both in dark would qualify, though. Would be hard on the eyes cuz of so much dark. There’s getting hit between the eyes with bright colors, and there’s straining to “see in the dark” so to speak.

    We ARE only talking jerseys, right? Or should there be some great Recognizer of Taste who says, “Sorry, too much orange, Clemson. Go put on our white or purple pants”?

    For more than 50 years now, football has understood the only logicistically feasible way to NOT get involved with such nonsense is simply to say, “one team in white.”

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Scrambling subjects? Not at all. My whole point is that sometimes, white vs. color is not exactly high-contrast. Close-up shots, sure. Wide shots are a bit tougher to distinguish who’s who. But your point was that color-vs-color would make things tough for the teams watching game film

    And at no point today have I been only talking about the jerseys.[/quote]

    But that’s the only thing controlled by the rules.
    Everything else is just someone’s opinion of what looks good. I’ve been talking about the rule and the visual properties that are the reason for it’s existence.

    I thought it was an academic discussion, looking at the objective elements of it.

    But if it’s subjective, if all we’re doing is taking turns saying things like, “Wouldn’t it be fun to see the Seahawks in mono dark against the Bears in mono navy…in Seattle…in November…in the rain” then I have nothing more to add.

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | October 24, 2009 at 9:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”356192″]

    I totally disagree on the Steelers and Bears throwbacks. For proof, those two 1994 Throwback jerseys are the most in demand jerseys EVER sold on EBAY. They regularly demand 300%-500% the price of comparable throwbacks or gamers.

    Put a store-bought 1994 Steelers authentic jersey, non-gamer on EBAY and just see the price it fetches. Bears 1994 throwbacks are even more rare – they did not make authentics for store sale, and have a very cheap replica version that regularly fetches $200.00-$300.00 apiece on EBAY.

    [/quote]

    Being rare and demanding a high price from collectors hardly stops a jersey from being ugly.

    Those damn things are probably that pricey and rare BECAUSE they’re ugly as hell.

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 9:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”356199″][quote comment=”356192″]

    I totally disagree on the Steelers and Bears throwbacks. For proof, those two 1994 Throwback jerseys are the most in demand jerseys EVER sold on EBAY. They regularly demand 300%-500% the price of comparable throwbacks or gamers.

    Put a store-bought 1994 Steelers authentic jersey, non-gamer on EBAY and just see the price it fetches. Bears 1994 throwbacks are even more rare – they did not make authentics for store sale, and have a very cheap replica version that regularly fetches $200.00-$300.00 apiece on EBAY.

    [/quote]

    Being rare and demanding a high price from collectors hardly stops a jersey from being ugly.

    Those damn things are probably that pricey and rare BECAUSE they’re ugly as hell.[/quote]

    I think the point of wearing those old style jerseys for the 75th Anniversary was to point out how differently teams could dress in the era before television made demands on how the game looked “going home”.

    It would seem that some consideration ought to given to whether the jersey was considered ugly even it its own time. It’s really easy to look at a necktie from the 1940’s and say, “Man that’s ugly.” Yes, if you wore it today it probably would be. But it’s own time context, maybe not.

    Most of the nominees today do qualify as generally not being wildy well thought of in their day. The Caribou thing, for example, is and was just ridiculous. On a rodeo queen, okay. On an athletic team, not so much.

    —Ricko

  • Dan | October 24, 2009 at 9:30 pm |

    Paul helping you out on the NCAA Basketball piece. After watching the promos it appears that Oregon (new white jersey), Georgetown, DePaul, and Louisville have new threads for this year as well as California but that was already covered

  • LarryB | October 24, 2009 at 9:34 pm |

    And I am another one who liked those Steeler and Bear throwbacks with the strips on the front. That era uniforms are probably my favorite era. From the late 1920’s to late 1930’s

  • Eric M | October 24, 2009 at 9:54 pm |

    im going to second this one

  • Nick | October 24, 2009 at 10:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”356202″]And I am another one who liked those Steeler and Bear throwbacks with the strips on the front. That era uniforms are probably my favorite era. From the late 1920’s to late 1930’s[/quote]

    Larry, I am glad someone out there agrees.

    The 1994 throwbacks are unique and stand out. They capture – as Ricko says – the game “going home” to its roots. On their own,, the jerseys I believe are pretty boss. It is amazing to me how some Steelers and Bears fans continue to carp on and complain about them and resent the two-three game 1994 break from the sickening monotony today’s uni drone-style represent.

    Sorry, Rain-Men, we’ll go all the way back to Walmart just so we can get you your fishsticks!

    But nobody has to like them, or anything else. The Baskin Robbins’ of the world are full of flavors that I’d never try, but other people love.

    I too agree that the 1920s-1930s era is the best in football unis. There were unique designs and templates for many teams, and the detail to the unis, particularly the jerseys, were many.

    Materials were different, colors were different, actual cuts of the unis and templates were different. And helmets, made by many different companies and with different coaches believing different helmets were superior to others, were very unique to many teams.

    All of this is interesting.

    Friction strip jerseys were great, and in many cases manufacterers fashioned the strips into letters or logos on the jersey chests. My former High School had an Eagles’ head on the chest and wings stretching out over the shoulders of the jersey (Sorry PL, but in Purple and Old Gold).

    In 1942, after we entered the war, they took that design and changed the team’s colors to Red/White/Blue, added stars to the Eagle jersey, and did a Patriotic uni. That type of move is unheard of today.

    Take a look at “Football Digest” from the 1930’s and see what I mean. Even in Black & White photos, the detail and uniqueness of the era are impressive.

    Such detail and individuality is IMPOSSIBLE today, where detail is cookie-cutter teplates and the “manufacterer” is really just which company pays to put its tags and logos on a jersey.

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 10:40 pm |

    re: Old and new. Classic vs. Innovation. And how it’s all in the execution. Was thinking of an analogy…

    The holidays. You drive down one street and there’s a decorated house that’s just…perfect. Thousands of lights masterfully positioned. Lots going on, for sure, but it’s the house every kid loves. Reminds us of the childhood joy of it all.

    A second street. A house with only a single star, but it’s in exactly the right place to create a dramatic effect. And it beautifully reflects another aspect of the holidays.

    Yet another street. The Griswolds. And Clarks’s thinking about adding a flashing sign: “Give Gift Cards from Macy’s”.

    Get it?

    —Ricko

  • Benjamin | October 24, 2009 at 10:42 pm |

    There’s a reason they only lasted one game. http://www.sportslog...

  • Ricko | October 24, 2009 at 10:44 pm |

    Or maybe that’s a metaphor. LOL

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | October 24, 2009 at 10:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”356153″]worst uniform ever

    http://www.femalefan...

    you are kidding with that, right larry?

    cuz, ya know, if you’re serious, i may just have to ban you ;)

  • LarryB | October 24, 2009 at 11:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”356208″][quote comment=”356153″]worst uniform ever

    http://www.femalefan...

    you are kidding with that, right larry?

    cuz, ya know, if you’re serious, i may just have to ban you ;)[/quote]

    Uh ya Phil. For reasons I stated. Just way too generic. Solid white pants. White jersey with no stripes. a white helmet with single blue stripe.

    Not crazy about the collar trim and it seems to have gotten bigger over time.

    Other uglies were temporary. PSU ugly has been ugly since the 1940’s or so.

    For a period hey had blue stripe along the pants and when they had numbers on the helmets that was not as bad

  • LarryB | October 24, 2009 at 11:20 pm |

    That picture of the Eagles throwbacks seems too bright. Maybe the helmet design did not translate well either. And I wonder if Frankford had white pants at that time or the typical khaki.

    I knew Nick and maybe a couple of others are some of the few who think the late 20’s to late 30’s was the best era. Nick did a good job of explaining why.

  • LarryB | October 24, 2009 at 11:25 pm |

    Imagine this Texas Tech uniform in color. I did try and colorize it a while back but did not like the way the red looked. I may try it again.

    From what I read the pants were red too. And not the T T in the middle. SO this would be black and red

    http://img.photobuck...

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 11:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”356198″]But that’s the only thing controlled by the rules.
    Everything else is just someone’s opinion of what looks good. I’ve been talking about the rule and the visual properties that are the reason for it’s existence.[/quote]
    And today’s discussion has revolved around changing the rule, like has been done in the NCAA. And, like the NCAA, the matchups would have to be evaluated case by case.

    [quote]I thought it was an academic discussion, looking at the objective elements of it.[/quote]
    Academic? I don’t think anyone here’s preparing a master’s thesis on the relative benefits of color vs. color in football.
    [quote]But if it’s subjective…[/quote]
    Of course it’s subjective.
    [quote]…if all we’re doing is taking turns saying things like, “Wouldn’t it be fun to see the Seahawks in mono dark against the Bears in mono navy…in Seattle…in November…in the rain” then I have nothing more to add.[/quote]
    Now that’s just silly. Nobody with any sense thinks that’s a good idea.

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 11:43 pm |

    Yes, Ricko, I do realize that isn’t the connotation of “academic” you were going for. I’m just having a bit of fun witcha.

  • JTH | October 24, 2009 at 11:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”356204″][quote comment=”356202″]And I am another one who liked those Steeler and Bear throwbacks with the strips on the front. That era uniforms are probably my favorite era. From the late 1920’s to late 1930’s[/quote]

    Larry, I am glad someone out there agrees.

    The 1994 throwbacks are unique and stand out. They capture – as Ricko says – the game “going home” to its roots. On their own,, the jerseys I believe are pretty boss. It is amazing to me how some Steelers and Bears fans continue to carp on and complain about them and resent the two-three game 1994 break from the sickening monotony today’s uni drone-style represent.

    Sorry, Rain-Men, we’ll go all the way back to Walmart just so we can get you your fishsticks!

    But nobody has to like them, or anything else. The Baskin Robbins’ of the world are full of flavors that I’d never try, but other people love.

    I too agree that the 1920s-1930s era is the best in football unis. There were unique designs and templates for many teams, and the detail to the unis, particularly the jerseys, were many.

    Materials were different, colors were different, actual cuts of the unis and templates were different. And helmets, made by many different companies and with different coaches believing different helmets were superior to others, were very unique to many teams.

    All of this is interesting.

    Friction strip jerseys were great, and in many cases manufacterers fashioned the strips into letters or logos on the jersey chests. My former High School had an Eagles’ head on the chest and wings stretching out over the shoulders of the jersey (Sorry PL, but in Purple and Old Gold).

    In 1942, after we entered the war, they took that design and changed the team’s colors to Red/White/Blue, added stars to the Eagle jersey, and did a Patriotic uni. That type of move is unheard of today.

    Take a look at “Football Digest” from the 1930’s and see what I mean. Even in Black & White photos, the detail and uniqueness of the era are impressive.

    Such detail and individuality is IMPOSSIBLE today, where detail is cookie-cutter teplates and the “manufacterer” is really just which company pays to put its tags and logos on a jersey.[/quote]
    I’m a big fan of the friction strip look as well. Yesterday, I went to my kid’s school for a teacher conference and I saw some kids getting their football gear on. One of the kids had a long-sleeve t-shirt on that was done up like a Staleys/Bears’ jersey. It did my heart proud to know that a 7th or 8th grader Gets It. (Or that’s what I like to think. The truth is that he might just wear it under his football gear because he thinks it’s hideous and doesn’t give a shit if it gets ruined.)

  • Stuby | October 24, 2009 at 11:56 pm |

    I’ll be on the lookout for a better shot, but you can sort of see Taylor Mays’ (#2) face shield writing here, although I have no idea what it says. …

    http://a.espncdn.com...

    Nice ‘JESUS’ prison tattoo, though.

  • DenverGregg | October 24, 2009 at 11:58 pm |

    [quote comment=”356197″]Egads, that Caribou uniform is horrific . . . you know its bad when you can’t tell if it is a uniform for a sports team or a Broadway show.

    Perhaps another factor to consider is not just the uniform itself, but what it replaced. So, for example, you may think the Bengals unis and the new Bronco unis are tied for the worst, but in that scenario I would argue the Broncos is the worst because it replaced a pretty nice looking uniform, while the Bengals didn’t.[/quote]
    That’s part of my rationale for saying the Atlanta Falcons’ current unis are among the very worst ever.

    It’s also worth noting that there were bad unis in the distant past, but we don’t have color pix to illustrate. The bad unis of the 1930s were killed and buried. The bad unis of today are still with us, so they get more attention relative to bad unis of the past. It isn’t about hating innovation, it’s about hating bad design.

  • M.Princip | October 24, 2009 at 11:58 pm |

    Nick Wrote:

    “Friction strip jerseys were great, and in many cases manufacterers fashioned the strips into letters or logos on the jersey chests. My former High School had an Eagles’ head on the chest and wings stretching out over the shoulders of the jersey (Sorry PL, but in Purple and Old Gold).”

    I’d love to see that, any pics you can share?

    For the record, I thought those 1994 Bears and Steeler throwbacks were amazing. Especially that Steeler jersey.

  • Ricko | October 25, 2009 at 12:02 am |

    [quote comment=”356213″]Yes, Ricko, I do realize that isn’t the connotation of “academic” you were going for. I’m just having a bit of fun witcha.[/quote]

    So we basically agree it would have to be on game-by-game basis.

    I can’t believe either the NCAA or NFL wants to spend time (and therefore money) farting around with approving a ton of requested matchups every weekend. Eventually, they’d just say, “Screw it, go back to ‘one team in white'” because the only other option, which would be throwing the door wide open, just isn’t workable. Shoot, teams now aren’t smart enough to—or don’t put in the time and effort to–say, avoid wearing their dark pants when the other team is wearing theirs, too. Why should we believe they’d pay MORE attention to it?

    And those are the practical realities.

    As to whether it could work, the exceptions when NFL teams did go dark-on-dark that TimmyB pointed out kinda make the point already…because they ARE exceptions. If it had worked, they wouldn’t have stopped doing it.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | October 25, 2009 at 12:14 am |

    btw, Texas without BFBS looked pretty good.

    And while some may hate the high white socks, they did it at least give the game that “later in the season, chilly weather look” that’s kinda fun…and feels like football.

    —Ricko

  • LarryB | October 25, 2009 at 12:14 am |

    My PBS has Red Grange Remembers at 5PM Sunday. It is on WQED Pittsburgh and should be on other PBS channels maybe at other times

    http://will.illinois...

  • flip | October 25, 2009 at 12:20 am |

    [quote comment=”356062″]May not be the worst but it might at least make the discussion. The “Cat Eyes” alternate from the Independent Fort Worth Cats. Even when I worked there and saw the jersey for myself, I couldn’t believe it.

    http://farm3.static....

    Kind of a cool warm-up jersey, though

  • JimV19 | October 25, 2009 at 12:21 am |

    I’m not voting this as worst uni ever, but thought some of you might: http://toddzilla.fil...

  • Ricko | October 25, 2009 at 12:27 am |

    And Oregon in tar and slug—at least in the highlight package on ESPN–doesn’t look readily different than if the helmets and pants had been forest.

    So it’s more the principle: Neither tar nor slug are Oregon school colors, and the only school color in evidence was the yellow “O” on helmet.

    I wonder, if for next year USC decides their road unis will be black helmets and slate gray pants, with black numbers and shoulder arches on their white jerseys, but with the gold trojan on the helmet…would people think that’s okay?

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | October 25, 2009 at 12:31 am |

    [quote comment=”356220″]My PBS has Red Grange Remembers at 5PM Sunday. It is on WQED Pittsburgh and should be on other PBS channels maybe at other times

    http://will.illinois...

    Who cares. He played before I was born, for god’s sake. Probably wore ugly, old-fashioned unis, too. Bet his facemask didn’t even match his jersey. ;)

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | October 25, 2009 at 12:37 am |

    Just kidding. This is one of my favorite Rober Riger drawings. Gotta have this scan printed and framed one of these days. Just such a great reminder of how mjuch the game, and the media, has changed.
    http://farm3.static....

    And, thanks, I’ll definitely be checking my local PBS listings.

    —Ricko

  • JimV19 | October 25, 2009 at 12:39 am |

    Again, I’m not voting for these (I’m not even sure they were ever used), but check them out: http://images112.fot...

  • Ricko | October 25, 2009 at 12:46 am |

    [quote comment=”356226″]Again, I’m not voting for these (I’m not even sure they were ever used), but check them out: http://images112.fot...

    West Virgina once wore a version of one of them.
    http://farm3.static....

    —Ricko

  • JTH | October 25, 2009 at 12:53 am |

    [quote comment=”356227″][quote comment=”356226″]Again, I’m not voting for these (I’m not even sure they were ever used), but check them out: http://images112.fot...

    West Virgina once wore a version of one of them.
    http://farm3.static....

    —Ricko[/quote]
    [quote comment=\”356227\”][quote comment=\”356226\”]Again, I\’m not voting for these (I\’m not even sure they were ever used), but check them out: http://images112.fot...

    West Virgina once wore a version of one of them.
    http://farm3.static....

    —Ricko[/quote]
    They kinda-sorta resemble this old Bears look.

  • JimV19 | October 25, 2009 at 12:54 am |

    Worst uni ever: http://www.sptimes.c...

    Just his uni. I’m not fond of the Bucs’ latest, but Mr. Hovan takes a mediocre uni and makes it terrible.

  • JimV19 | October 25, 2009 at 1:01 am |

    My serious vote for worst uni ever:
    http://cdn.bleacherr...

    At least this year the wings are duck-related. Those diamondplate shoulders always reminded me of manhole covers. By far one of the worst things I have seen.

    By the way, I had to skim the comments since I was late to the game, but I didn’t notice anyone voting for one of my favorites, the ’80s Nuggets.

  • Ricko | October 25, 2009 at 1:02 am |

    [quote comment=”356229″]Worst uni ever: http://www.sptimes.c...

    Just his uni. I’m not fond of the Bucs’ latest, but Mr. Hovan takes a mediocre uni and makes it terrible.[/quote]

    That brings up a whole other poll:
    “Worst WEARING of a Uni Ever”

    Let’s see. Hovan? Fielder? That Jays’ pitcher?

    Hmmmmm…

    —Ricko

  • JTH | October 25, 2009 at 1:34 am |

    [quote comment=”356231″][quote comment=”356229″]Worst uni ever: http://www.sptimes.c...

    Just his uni. I’m not fond of the Bucs’ latest, but Mr. Hovan takes a mediocre uni and makes it terrible.[/quote]

    That brings up a whole other poll:
    “Worst WEARING of a Uni Ever”

    Let’s see. Hovan? Fielder? That Jays’ pitcher?

    Hmmmmm…

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Maravich?

  • Steve Naismith | October 25, 2009 at 2:17 am |

    “Coach has chosen Dan Grieve as the winner! Here’s The Cap that Dan designed.”

    If I had known that Coach had absolutely no sense of style or good design, I wouldn’t have paid attention to this whole charade. Plenty of the submitted designs were better than Dan’s… but congratulations, I guess.

  • Nick | October 25, 2009 at 2:27 am |

    [quote comment=”356217″]Nick Wrote:

    “Friction strip jerseys were great, and in many cases manufacterers fashioned the strips into letters or logos on the jersey chests. My former High School had an Eagles’ head on the chest and wings stretching out over the shoulders of the jersey (Sorry PL, but in Purple and Old Gold).”

    I’d love to see that, any pics you can share?

    For the record, I thought those 1994 Bears and Steeler throwbacks were amazing. Especially that Steeler jersey.[/quote]

    At some point I will learn how to scan and attach here and I will. I will make a run at it this week.

  • Nick | October 25, 2009 at 2:33 am |

    [quote comment=”356232″][quote comment=”356231″][quote comment=”356229″]Worst uni ever: http://www.sptimes.c...

    Just his uni. I’m not fond of the Bucs’ latest, but Mr. Hovan takes a mediocre uni and makes it terrible.[/quote]

    That brings up a whole other poll:
    “Worst WEARING of a Uni Ever”

    Let’s see. Hovan? Fielder? That Jays’ pitcher?

    Hmmmmm…

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Maravich?[/quote]

    ABSOLUTELY.

    The droopy socks, the shaggy hair, the Gold numerals on the White LSU jersey. Not even a hesitation….

    As I understand it, he actually wore those socks, the same pair, for every LSU game until he got to the NBA.

    Their are other Louisianans that know more detail about Pistol Pete Marivich than I, so please chime in f you are out there.

  • JeffB | October 25, 2009 at 3:02 am |

    [quote comment=”356120″]Holy shit!!! You’ve got to check out The Hockey News Greatest Jerseys of All-Time

    This is is unbelievable! View online via the link above.[/quote]

    I actually wrote and article for that issue that starts on page 58. It’s essentially a Top Ten Worst jerseys list and I’m also the person who writes the Third String Goalie blog mentioned in post #112 above. http://thirdstringgo...

    The magazine is an awesome collection of photos and stories in addition to or despite my feeble contribution.

  • Bernd | October 25, 2009 at 3:36 am |

    [quote comment=”356233″]”Coach has chosen Dan Grieve as the winner! Here’s The Cap that Dan designed.”

    If I had known that Coach had absolutely no sense of style or good design, I wouldn’t have paid attention to this whole charade. Plenty of the submitted designs were better than Dan’s… but congratulations, I guess.[/quote]

    I couldn’t care less either way about the contest, but this comment makes me angry on so many levels.

    Even if that cap were ugly as sin, it’d still be more of an accomplishment than your contribution, which consists of a snarky, unfunny, unfounded evisceration of the man’s work with nothing argumentative backing it whatsoever.

    What I find even more outrageous is the disrespect inherent. So many people on this board share intensely personal stuff, reflecting their hobbies and creativity and a unique interest they don’t find a lot of places to share. Comments like yours are worse than spam. Spam is annoying. But what you did was just discourage every single person on this board to share something of theirs. You’re actively hurting the board. You’re worse than a spammer.

    I’m sure you’re a nice guy, and maybe you did some work of your own and were disappointed by the non-recognition. But that doesn’t change the fact that all things considered, that was a pretty horseshit comment.

  • Cameron Rose | October 25, 2009 at 5:28 am |

    In regards to color on color, I coach rec league football and we only get one team color jersey(instead of team color and white) so we have all of our games as color on color. If it works for the rec league, then why wouldn’t it work for a pro league?

  • JTH | October 25, 2009 at 8:33 am |

    [quote comment=”356237″][quote comment=”356233″]”Coach has chosen Dan Grieve as the winner! Here’s The Cap that Dan designed.”

    If I had known that Coach had absolutely no sense of style or good design, I wouldn’t have paid attention to this whole charade. Plenty of the submitted designs were better than Dan’s… but congratulations, I guess.[/quote]

    I couldn’t care less either way about the contest, but this comment makes me angry on so many levels.

    Even if that cap were ugly as sin, it’d still be more of an accomplishment than your contribution, which consists of a snarky, unfunny, unfounded evisceration of the man’s work with nothing argumentative backing it whatsoever.

    What I find even more outrageous is the disrespect inherent. So many people on this board share intensely personal stuff, reflecting their hobbies and creativity and a unique interest they don’t find a lot of places to share. Comments like yours are worse than spam. Spam is annoying. But what you did was just discourage every single person on this board to share something of theirs. You’re actively hurting the board. You’re worse than a spammer.

    I’m sure you’re a nice guy, and maybe you did some work of your own and were disappointed by the non-recognition. But that doesn’t change the fact that all things considered, that was a pretty horseshit comment.[/quote]
    Amen, brother.

    What’s wrong with that cap design, anyway? Sure, it might not look great on Major Leaguers, but I think it works perfectly for a high school team.

  • Matthew Glidden | October 25, 2009 at 8:45 am |

    I nominate the 70s Houston affiliate Tucson Toros for worst uni. Avocado, lime, strawberry, and lemon make an interesting blender drink. On a player, ugh.

    http://phoenix.fanst...

    Bonus: orange pants!

  • dc | October 25, 2009 at 10:27 am |

    Colorado Rockies Black and purple vests

  • WarDamnEagle | October 25, 2009 at 11:42 am |

    Pittsburgh Pirates red alternate uni

  • PyroMessiah | October 25, 2009 at 12:52 pm |

    Hockey:

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

    Baseball:

    http://i33.tinypic.c...

    Basketball:

    http://i37.tinypic.c...

    Football:

    http://i33.tinypic.c...

    (dis)Honorable Minor League Mention:

    http://i35.tinypic.c...

  • Charles | October 25, 2009 at 2:14 pm |

    Raptors with the dinosaur. Hawks with the hawk. Cavs with the pastels.

    By the way, the poll should only be uniforma worn for an ENTIRE season. One and dones are gimmicks, not a poll-worthy bad decisions.

  • JDupe | October 25, 2009 at 3:58 pm |

    just off the top of my head

    1997 Anaheim Angles Alt:
    http://www.sportslog...

    Shawn Kemp Cavs:
    http://sportsillustr...

  • Nick | October 25, 2009 at 4:55 pm |

    [quote comment=”356241″]I nominate the 70s Houston affiliate Tucson Toros for worst uni. Avocado, lime, strawberry, and lemon make an interesting blender drink. On a player, ugh.

    http://phoenix.fanst...

    Bonus: orange pants![/quote]

    FINALLY, the all-time worst uniform of any sport, ever.

    as Tony Kornheiser would say,

    “That’s It! That’s the List !!!!!”

  • Traxel | October 25, 2009 at 11:01 pm |

    http://www.bigsoccer...

    I didn’t run through the comments to see if this was posted before, but the Colorado Caribou of the old NASL has to be shortlisted for the worst. However, it is on my list of “so bad it’s good” unis. Really bad ones IMO are just plain bad and can never be so bad they are good.

  • Traxel | October 25, 2009 at 11:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”356346″][quote comment=”356241″]I nominate the 70s Houston affiliate Tucson Toros for worst uni. Avocado, lime, strawberry, and lemon make an interesting blender drink. On a player, ugh.

    http://phoenix.fanst...

    Bonus: orange pants![/quote]

    FINALLY, the all-time worst uniform of any sport, ever.

    as Tony Kornheiser would say,

    “That’s It! That’s the List !!!!!”[/quote]
    Wow. Those will be hard to beat.

  • Matt L. | October 26, 2009 at 9:01 am |

    Ineligible for nomination: Colgate football. Their helmets say ‘gate. (They’re not Division 1, so it won’t count, but I had to say something, somewhere.)

  • Mitch | October 26, 2009 at 10:52 am |

    WORST UNI EVER

    http://espn.go.com/i...

  • Steve May | October 26, 2009 at 12:02 pm |

    You have to be very specific on the worst Canuck uniform ever. The first iteration of the V’s (78-79) were the worst with the chevrons on the socks – and the patchiness of the whole thing. The tinkering in later years improved the jersey slightly.
    http://nhluniforms.c... (worst)
    http://nhluniforms.c... (slightly better – better sock stripe – black goes all the way down the arm)

  • Steve H. | October 26, 2009 at 12:23 pm |

    February 28, 1988. For some unknown reason the Syracuse Orangemen decided to wear blue uniforms in a basketball game..sigh..at Kentucky. Yeah, great idea.

    =”http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1393/1200099930_dbaa20e3de_o.png”>Next time remember your nickname

    They wore them again in a 2008 game vs Notre Dame but I can’t find any pictures, thank goodness.

  • Steve H. | October 26, 2009 at 12:25 pm |

    Formatted that wrong, sorry. Syracue blue uni:

    http://farm2.static....

  • tommy | October 26, 2009 at 1:49 pm |

    Always hated the logo, the number font is brutal and then they turned around and stuck it all on a third jersey.

    Barf-o-rama:
    http://media.photobu...

    http://www.nhlunifor...

  • Gemnr | October 26, 2009 at 2:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”356103″]Could someone help me out here, trying to compile my list for worst uniform ever. What football team was it that wore that green jersey with the huge bulldog on it? I believe it was an NFL europe team from the early 90s?[/quote]

    Memphis Mad Dogs of the CFL?

  • Gemnr | October 26, 2009 at 2:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”356162″]And if there’s ever a Spanish edition, this could be the worst uniform worn by anyone doing anything, ever:

    http://www.unosafici...

    Yeah, these Porto kits are from the “WTF” era.

  • Gemnr | October 26, 2009 at 2:45 pm |

    [quote comment=\”356166\”]I don\’t know if I just missed this or not but this is quite possibly the worst uniform ever…

    http://www.premiersh...

    I third this nomination along with the 1980 Tuscon Toros:

    http://phoenix.fanst...

    As a Fanster user named Eric Myers said, \”Sweet Jesus! It’s hard to make that alternate Coyote jersey look good but the Toros pulled it off.\”

  • Gemnr | October 26, 2009 at 2:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”356206″]There’s a reason they only lasted one game. http://www.sportslog...

    The 1978 Phillies’ “Saturday Night Special” lasted only one game, too.

  • Gemnr | October 26, 2009 at 2:56 pm |

    Don’t forget the 1993 Notre Dame lime green basketball jerseys.

    The River City Rascals 2006/7

    1916 New York Giants — purple plaid!

    Milwaukee Admirals “Triscuit” jersey for Bob Uecker

    And, of course, the Quad City Mallards “cowboy” jersey.

    Though, IMHO, the winner-winner-chicken-dinner jersey has to be Colorado Caribous or Tuscon Toros.

  • Philip | October 26, 2009 at 3:20 pm |

    In your poll graphic, You know that’s a barber, pole, right? Or are you conducting a “Barber Poll” next?

  • will risinger | October 26, 2009 at 3:50 pm |

    Houston Texans in Red. Terrible. Seizure inducing. Coupled with that poor knock of a longhorns helmet it just makes me long for the beloved Houston Oilers.

  • ChrisN | October 26, 2009 at 8:12 pm |
  • mako | October 26, 2009 at 10:55 pm |

    [quote comment=\”356396\”][quote comment=\”356346\”][quote comment=\”356241\”]I nominate the 70s Houston affiliate Tucson Toros for worst uni. Avocado, lime, strawberry, and lemon make an interesting blender drink. On a player, ugh.

    http://phoenix.fanst...

    Bonus: orange pants![/quote]

    FINALLY, the all-time worst uniform of any sport, ever.

    as Tony Kornheiser would say,

    \”That\’s It! That\’s the List !!!!!\”[/quote]
    Wow. Those will be hard to beat.[/quote]

    Okay, yup, call in the dogs. It\’s over. You win. I just hate the fact that that… thing… is now imprinted in my memory forever.

  • Rainbow Guts | October 26, 2009 at 11:43 pm |

    Just one more:

    What about a yellow Providence Bruins jersey trimmed in black, white, orange, and pink? They were the team’s warmup jerseys sponsored by Dunkin Donuts.

  • Erik Swanson | October 27, 2009 at 4:30 am |

    We have a winner. Hands down. THE AMERICAN DEFENDERS OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. Nashua, NH’s Can-Am League affiliate for the years 2009-2009. Hideous.

    http://www.heraldnew...

    What could be worse than a Baseball team wearing camouflage uniforms? And pretending to be “defending America” when, you know, there are two wars on and they could actually BE defending America by being soldiers instead of PLAYING BASEBALL?

    Well, how about the “S” in USA as a YELLOW F*CKING RIBBON. Come home troops! I’d come replace you, but, um, I don’t want to die, and I like baseball a lot more than defending America…”

    Yes, that’s Brian Daubach, the Defenders’ manager/platoon leader.

    Seriously, I don’t think you even need to vote. These win hands down for ugliness, insanity, and offensiveness (to both liberals and republicans. Against the war? Offensive! Support the troops? Offensive! They even had the gall to charge $9.11 for admission).

    http://farm4.static....

    One more pic…yes, this is one of the Defenders’ non-American players…Even though I am not from America, I am happy to wear the uniform of its military. At least I’m not shirking my responsibilities to my county’s defense like my teammates!

  • Erik Swanson | October 27, 2009 at 5:17 am |

    I’m pretty new here…is Ricko always this easy to troll?

    I’m confounded by how many people have nominated the “so bad they’re awesome” uniforms. Some of these are all-time favorites of mine.

    To me, the worst uniform is either truly offensive (see above) or both ugly AND boring. A uniform that will never be on a most-interesting list. Just lame and sad and forgotten as soon as possible. And its even worse if it replaced a great look for no apparent reason…like the Pats unis.

    To me, the WORST example of this is the 1997-2009 76ers unis. http://www.sportslog...

    That logo is so awful, and such a travesty, it’s hard to fathom how it could have happened. Bland, ugly, stupid, and it totally ignores the sixers’ glory years. And black home uniforms?? Yes, the early 90’s Sixers unis are bad, but these are just SO much lamer.

    I’m glad the Sixers are going back to their 70’s-80s look, finally.

  • Al | October 27, 2009 at 9:04 am |

    As one who came to a Uniwatch party with a number of these hideous monstrosities, I heartily endorse:

    1978 Colorado Caribous
    1978 Phillies Saturday Special
    1975 Cleveland all-reds
    2005 Mavericks Hefty Bag
    2006 Providence Bruins Donuts
    1916 New York Giants
    1980 Tuscon Toros
    1979 Charleston Charlies
    1980 Vancouver Canucks
    1933 Pittsburgh Steelers
    1960 Denver Broncos
    2007 River City Rascals
    Denver Bears “strikezone” jerseys and pants
    1973 Baltimore Bullets
    1989 New Jersey Nets
    1995 Toronto Raptors
    North Carolina State and Seton Hall singlets
    1993 Notre Dame neon green basketball
    1994 Anaheim “Wild Wing”
    1994 Los Angeles “Burger” Kings

    SPECIAL MENTION

    Year 1 of Major League Soccer (except D.C. United)

    Marco Andretti with the racing suit that was supposed to make him look like Indiana Jones with a belt and a whip sewn into the fireproof fabric

    The last four years of uniforms coming out of the University of Oregon, where not even women’s lacrosse is safe! Special dishonor for the black jerseys with the patent leather leathering.

    Anything Jorge Campos wore before FIFA changed an entire section of its rulebook to mandate solid-color tops.

  • nfl game news | October 27, 2009 at 9:05 am |

    comprehensive solution for the reason of you can see the Rugby jerseys that made in china in various place of the Rugby league match

  • Al | October 27, 2009 at 9:07 am |

    Damn. One more:

    2007 USA Inline hockey team:

    http://www.hockeyjer...

  • mako | October 27, 2009 at 9:48 am |

    [quote comment=”356620″]comprehensive solution for the reason of you can see the Rugby jerseys that made in china in various place of the Rugby league match[/quote]

    WTF?

  • Geen! | October 27, 2009 at 1:27 pm |

    In case you were wondering:

    http://i22.photobuck...

    Quad City Mallards!

  • Geen! | October 27, 2009 at 5:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”356600″]Just one more:

    What about a yellow Providence Bruins jersey trimmed in black, white, orange, and pink? They were the team’s warmup jerseys sponsored by Dunkin Donuts.[/quote]

    Here’s how bad that jersey is … I can’t find a photo of it anywhere.

    There is an ESPN Page 2 profile of a band called The Zambonis, and one of the band members has 300 hockey jerseys. His quote on the Dunkin Donuts jersey: “Ugly beyond belief.”

    The ProBruins are wasting a marketing opportunity!

  • DW | October 28, 2009 at 9:49 am |

    The worst uniform ever – has to be the Mercury Mets,
    with the second worst going to any Mets combination that has black in it. Note to Mets management and MLB properties – that ’90’s phenomenon is OVAH! Old-school rules.