Best Super Bowl Match-up Ever?

SB Uni Matchup Hed

By Phil Hecken

Tomorrow’s the big day, of course, when two of the most storied franchises in the National Football League meet up in the ultimate game. The green and yellow gold versus the black and yellow gold. No one knows how the game will play out, but one thing we do know for certain — it just might be the best looking game in decades. Maybe in the history of ever. That’s because the two combatants, the Packers and the Steelers, have two of the best looking uniforms in the game. Will it be the best, uni-wise? Probably not, if only because both teams sport gold pants. Not that that, in and of itself, will make this a bad looking game — but it just might be a bit too much gold. The only other time we’ve had two gold-pants teams play each other was way back in Super Bowl XIV. That doesn’t look so bad, right? Well, in the gorgeous light of the sun’s gold rays, no. But once the lights went on, the gold trou really stuck out. With the sheen on the Pack and Steelers’ pants, under the bright lights of the Jerrydome, we may be seeing too much gold again tomorrow.

But, what was the best looking Super Bowl ever? Ask 10 people, and you’ll probably get 9 different answers. And that’s fine, because opinions, like certain parts of the anatomy, have something in common: everybody has one. What I may prefer, you may hate, and what Jim Vilk likes, everyone will hate. It’s just that simple.

So, with that in mind, several weeks ago, I was approached by Caleb Borchers, who asked me if he could “rank” every Super Bowl matchup for the past 44 years, based on the quality of uniform of both teams — similar to what Jim does with his “5 & 1″ bits. Only, there would be no five good and one bad…just a straight up ranking. Caleb came through with a tremendous effort — while I personally don’t agree with his rankings, I know he put a boatload of time and energy into this, and a lot of thought too. What follows, then, is Caleb’s personal ranking of each game played to date. You may agree or disagree, but you have to admit, it’s quite possibly the most comprehensive list of this nature ever compiled. Of course, Jim will have his own “5 & 1″ down below…so you can see how different mindsets work. I may even give you my own personal favorite(s). Feel free to add your own.

Here’s Caleb:

~~~

Ranking The Super Bowl Unis
By Caleb Borchers

A few years back, Page 2 over at ESPN ran a ranking of the best quarterbacks to play in the Super Bowl. Actually, they ranked them all, so it was a ranking of the worst as well (hello Kerry “Pick Six” Collins). Others have ranked the best teams to play in the Super Bowl or even the best half time shows. As the big game comes closer (and as I admire the weekly 5&1 segment), I got to thinking, “Why not rank the Super Bowls based on the unis?” Surely a run down from the ugliest to the sharpest would be fun.

So, what follows are my rankings. Like any list it is largely swayed by personal opinion. I am the first to admit they are woefully inconsistent. I don’t like the red and orange clash of Broncos v. Skins, but don’t mind it so much with the 49ers and Bengals. I call ‘em how I see ‘em and that may not make sense in any brain but my own. I have tried to avoid putting too much emphasis on any one decade or team.

As far as criteria, they are simple. Primarily the question is what game looked the best? The game as a whole is taken into account. So, if a classic uni were to play an ugly modern monstrosity, the game will not be as highly ranked as if both teams looked great. Also, it is possible that two great looking teams play, but the uniforms’ color combos clash or they’re too similar. A pair of contrasting but complementing teams is best. The environment of the game can play a factor (I find that the early Super Dome games tended to look like they were played in an airplane hanger with flood lights) but probably not much of one. Also, I will individually rank rematches of the games, as rare as they are (ex. X, XIII, and XXX), but they are clumped for obvious reasons. Finally, a really large, gaudy Super Bowl patch (particularly ones clashing with the jerseys due to the use of color schemes reminiscent of the mid 1990s Detroit Pistons) might sway me. So, away we go…

1. Super Bowl XXVI — All three primary colors, nicely balanced, on the field at once. Even a dome game in Minneapolis couldn’t ruin this one.

2. Super Bowl I — This is a very nice beginning to America’s favorite game. The packers look great in their classic jerseys, complete with full sleeve stripes. I also think that the red of the Chiefs plays nicely off the green of the Pack. If you don’t like this match-up, you are as drunk as Max McGee was the night before the game.

3. Super Bowl XLI — Two of the best unis in NFL history were pitted against each other as the Colts in classic white and the Bears in traditional blue played for a championship in the rain. I feel like the precipitation added to effect, like a poor man’s snow. Even the gaudy patches seemed to fit the two teams nicely.

4. Super Bowl X — The only Super Bowl match-up to happen three times was beautiful the first go round. Some of the photos make the Cowboys pants look more blue, but generally they still don’t look like they do now days. Generally, this was a game between two classic teams in their classic jerseys.

5. Super Bowl XIII — This entry really has to go with the one above. Same comments apply. This edition does not have the huge patches on the Steelers’ shoulders, but I also think daylight games were better back then (these photos just seem so dark), giving the edge to X. This was also the first Super Bowl were a team chose to wear a white jersey when designated the home team.

6. Super Bowl XXX — A third go at this match-up, with shorter sleeves and bluer Cowboy pants. Oh, and Diana Ross looked crazy at halftime.


7. Super Bowl VII — This match-up is a perfect example of some classic 1970’s looks. Those yellow pants on the Skins look great. Also, big bonus for the beautiful LA Coliseum in the background. Perfect season ending in a perfect location.

8. Super Bowl XXXII — In this match-up, we see two jerseys that sort of define the generation of NFL unis from which they come. Some hate the Broncos overhaul, but I don’t mind it. The contrast between the two and the beautiful San Diego night made it a memorable scene.

9. Super Bowl XIXMarino v. Montana. San Francisco and Miami both looked great. I’m struck by how well striped (helmet, sleeves, and socks) the two were.

10. Super Bowl XXXIV — I liked the look of this game, but I’m not really sure why. The blue and yellow of the Rams had a sharpness they miss nowadays.

11. Super Bowl XXVII — The Bills looked great and the Boys, well, they are the oddly blue pantsed Cowboys. This game is ranked above the next year’s mostly due to the palm tree beauty of Pasadena that served as a backdrop.


12. Super Bowl XXVIII — A rematch of the year before. Thanks to the Cowboys and Redskins love of white, this was a third straight loss for the Bills in blue.

13. Super Bowl XII — Watching old Broncos clips will make you long for the days of the orange crush. Generally the jerseys just balance each other well (and I love the Broncos sock stripes). Would have been even better if the lighting of the Super Dome back then wasn’t so bad (note classic Landry pose in the background).

14. Super Bowl XX — The only Super Bowl appearance for Pat Patriot. I love how both teams can have similar color schemes, but the differences in shades can make such a difference. The Bears always look solid.

15. Super Bowl XVII — A rematch of ten years earlier, yet this game looked different because Washington elected to wear white. I love it when white jerseys and colored pants face a team in the opposite, and the green/red contrast is nice.

16. Super Bowl IIIShoulder hoops heaven! Joe Namath’s famous guaranteed win featured two teams that rocked the stripes around the shoulder as well as anybody. They also are two teams that have a lot of white. In some ways, this one looked better in black and white.

17. Super Bowl XXXVI — This is one that will definitely be dated. It was the early 00’s and the lure of chrome-izing everything was too much for New England, St. Louis, and Regis Philbin. Metallic paint flecks aside, it still was a pretty good looking game.

18. Super Bowl VI — Amazing how much better the Cowboys look when they actually wear grey pants. The sunny New Orleans weather made this game easy on the eyes.


19. Super Bowl XXI — The Giants had a pretty solid uni set back then, and looked good in blue. John Elway and company were a little less exciting in all white. A little too much similarity in color schemes to be higher up.


20. Super Bowl XLIV — I am more or less ambivalent about the Saints unis and the Colts always look good. Definitely was not a fan of the giant orange blob sitting on the black and gold of New Orleans.

21. Super Bowl XVIII — Two good unis in a solid if not spectacular match-up.


22. Super Bowl XLIII — This one is a hard one to place. The Cardinals are bumper stickered to death. On the other hand, the Steelers look classy like always. In the end, this is a game that just settles nicely on the eyes.

23. Super Bowl VIII — This game is hard to get too excited about, unless you love aqua and/or purple. Fascinating just how deep the Vikes purple used to be, particularly on the helmet.

24. Super Bowl IX — The Steelers first trip to the Super Bowl was less than a home run aesthetically. In some shots it almost looks like both teams wore black helmets. Just not much to catch the eye.


25. Super Bowl XXV — The Giants and Bills played the Norwood-missed-kick Bowl. While this Super Bowl had a nice patriotic feel as the country was headed into Iraq War I, two teams with exactly the same color schemes is not super exciting.


26. Super Bowl XLII — This game suffered the same problem as XV, except the jerseys were not as good looking and the patch was uglier than sin.

27. Super Bowl XXIII — This was a far better looking game then seven years earlier when these two played in reversed home and road jerseys. The white Bengal jerseys looked good, considering they have animal print.

28. Super Bowl XXXIX — Both teams looked sharp in this one. The Patriots made their only appearance in the Elvis era in white and the Eagles had their modern green unis. Much like XXXVI, I think this will be one that years from now will hold up, but will be locked into a certain period in uni history.

29. Super Bowl II — Super Bowl II was a match-up between two classic franchises and two classic uniforms. The black of the Raiders and white of the Packers led to a rather dry color palette, however. The game looked fine, but nothing exciting.

30. Super Bowl V — Without the helmet logos, one would be forgiven for thinking this was an inter-squad scrimmage. This game is known as the blunder bowl. Maybe the two teams couldn’t remember which team was which. Special note: this is the only of the Cowboys eight Super Bowls in which they wore blue jerseys.

31. Super Bowl XIV — Ditto some of the thoughts on Super Bowl V. Way too much yellow, and the dark blue and black provide little pop outside of it.

32. Super Bowl XVI — Like their Bay area counterparts, San Fransisco’s white jerseys are no where near as good as their home unis. The Bengals looked better than today, but not by much. As a native Detroiter I hate to say it, but Pontiac during a blizzard was just a weird place to have a Super Bowl as well, leading to that haze effect.

33. Super Bowl XXII — Red and orange aren’t the best combo. Still two classic unis.


34. Super Bowl XXXVII — This game sort of looked like a pocket full of change: all silver and copper. Oddly, those metal tones actually fit together. While the game patches were present, they had yet to explode into the monstrosities we see recently.

35. Super Bowl XXIV — Similar deal here as XXII. The red, gold, and orange all sort of mute each other out.

36. Super Bowl XXIX — This is a game that would have been beautiful had it come along at another point in history. Take the 49ers white pants experiment and add in the baby blue-less Chargers and you get two teams playing at the low ebb of their uni history.

37. Super Bowl IV — This is a perfect case of the combo being worse than the individual parts. Red and purple just flunk color theory 101. Bonus points, however, for the awesome AFC patch that the Chiefs wore on their shoulder.

38. Super Bowl XXXV — Traditionalists may hate me, but the grey pants make the Giants more bland than their 80s counterparts. On the other side of the field, the boring black and white of Baltimore would make even Mr. Lukas question whether a little more purple could help.

39. Super Bowl XXXVIII — Word to the wise, if you don’t want to see Janet Jackson’s boob, don’t Google image search Super Bowl XXXVIII. That’s just one of several reasons the word “wardrobe” is not usually related to unis in the case of this game. Carolina did not bring much to the party, leading to a pretty average looking game.

40. Super Bowl XXXIIIZZZZZZZ. This bland bowl is another example where a franchise had the misfortune of finally reaching the bad game at a point where their jerseys were at their worst. Denver’s new look works alright with another well dressed team, but can’t do much when the other side brings nothing to the table. (Side note: do the Broncos really want to trust their future to this guy?)

41. Super Bowl XL — Three words: Seattle Seahawks Monochrome. The saddest part is that Pittsburgh could have elected to wear black and saved our eyeballs.

42. Super Bowl XXXI — Did this game feature perhaps the best jersey in the NFL? Yes. Did it also feature a team that didn’t look like they belong in the NFL? Yes. Those garish Pats jerseys looked like the MLB turn ahead the clock promotion vomited onto an NFL shoulder pad. The overwhelming ugliness of the Patriots (what is with that number font?) drags this one really low. The bottom was only avoided by the beauty of Green Bay.


43. Super Bowl XV — A lot of things went wrong here for me. Silver predominates, and I just don’t think of the Eagles as a team who belongs in silver pants. The Philly sleeve stripes are a mess and the pant stripes aren’t much better. And again, the Super Dome used to make games look like they were being played in a London fog storm.


44. Super Bowl XIPurple and silver. Yuck. The game would have been much better with black Raider jerseys and white Viking unis, but alas it did not fall on the right year. I generally find the Raiders away look uninspiring (plus don’t those silver pants look almost white in some of these photos?), and the Vikings aren’t my favorite either.

~~~

Whew. Thanks, Caleb. That’s a tremendous effort.

What say you Uni Watchers — what’s your “best matchup” of all time? How’d Caleb do? The floor is yours.

~~~~~~~~~

throwback_vote_1911Back to Brooklyn?

What you’re looking at is one of three “throwback” possibilities for the LA Dodgers next year. That’s the “1911″ version (although they wore similar versions in 1910 and 1913). I actually wrote about that back when my posts were shorter than the list of Detroit Lions Super Bowl appearances.

Beginning this Monday (February 7), fans (and Uni Watchers) will have the opportunity to vote on one of three designs to be worn on six different dates in 2011. The second choice is this 1931 model, which is also a fantastic choice. I loved that one as well, and colorized a shot of that uni a ways back. The third choice is the “1940s” version, which was of course, the satin uni (which I covered here). A number of colorizers also tried their hand at that uni (see here, here and here). They really can’t go wrong with any of those.

They’ll all be worn on weekday afternoons, so while the “satin” throwback might be really sweet, it won’t make much sense if they’re wearing it in the daylight. Paul did some checking and he confirmed that the 1940s throwback, if selected, would be made of modern materials (likely the cool base) although James Huening suggested it’s possible they could also be made from “dazzle.” I’m kind of hoping that one goes down now.

As James pointed out, the only drawback is that the Dodgers will be wearing a road uniform at home — but I think that’s a small price to pay. Personally, I’d love to see the 1911 version, because the vertical placket is awesome, but any of the three would be great.

~~~~~~~~~~

Benchies HeaderBest of Benchies

Purple Wildcats, Burgundy Cougars, Teal Jaguars, Green Eagles? What a joke. Everyone knows a uni should look EXACTLY like the animal, right? I mean, c’mon, already, there should be FAR more brown and tan unis out there. Well, thank goodness at least one broomball team took the time to get it right, for pete’s sake.

~~~

d-Broom unis

~~~~~~~~~~

all sport uni tweaksUni Tweaks

Lots and lots of tweaks keep pouring in, so obviously this is a popular feature. A bunch new to get to today. If you have a tweak, change or concept for any sport, send them my way.

Remember, if possible, try to keep your descriptions to ~50 words (give or take) per tweak. You guys have been great a keeping to that, and it’s much appreciated!

Got a big set of tweaks today…so lets get right into it:

~~~

Starting off the show is Brandon Sims, who had some ideas for what the NFC Championship could have looked like, if, ya know, Nike had the clothing contract:

Hey Phil,

You have no clue how excited I was to see my tweak in your post the other day. I’ve been messing around with the pro combat templates a lot and experimenting with some of the things Nike might do to our poor teams when they get a hold of the unis.

Today I took advantage of the classic NFC Championship game and put in some of my ideas. I really like the ability that Nike has to combine classic and modern elements in a jersey. In this one I redid both helmets with different base colors. I played with it a lot and I really really really like the idea of a white lid for the Packers. Also if you look closely I used a more green green than the Packers use now.

On the Chicago side my main change was the jersey font. The one they use now is thin and not at all bear-like, if you know what I mean. I used the same shape and idea with a much bolder font. I’m not 100 percent sure what I think about the shoulder but I think I like it (I really dislike sleeve stripes, especially on sleeveless jerseys, I think it is a cheep way to add a little flare to your jersey.)

That’s about it. I love the blog and I hope to keep sending tweaks.

Brandon.

P.S. Please excuse my combo of yellow socks and shoes, I couldn’t resist.

~~~

Next up is Kyle Allebach, who has created uniforms for the “Hershey Bears.” Check it out:

Hey Phil,

I read about the debacle about the Hershey Bears putting the logos of the teams they beat on their jersey, and it got me thinking about adding a football team to Hershey, PA (I live about an hour away, and the UFL only wants to target “small markets”). Keeping in step with the hockey team, I named these guys the Hershey Bears as well. I chose Maroon, Gold (or as close as I could get to gold), and Silver as colors. I made the home and away standard uni’s, and then an alternate idea. Note; I’d rather not see monochrome maroon for the alternate home, but teambuilder is rather limited in my opinion.

Thanks for your time,
Kyle Allebach

~~~

Closing out the tweak show today is Coachie Ballgames, who has some soccer concepts for us:

I tried combining France’s old crest with their newly unveiled jersey because I feel like the throwback look of their new shirt does not mesh with their very modern logo. And I removed the swoosh because everything looks better without the manufacturer’s logo.

I also did a review of the new France shirt and discussed the throwback design trend in general here

Regards,
Coachie Ballgames

~~~

And that will do it for today. Check back tomorrow for more tweaks, concepts and redesigns.

~~~~~~~~~~

Deep Freeze Part DuhIMPROMPTU INFORMAL UNOFFICIAL UNI-WATCH GATHERING?

Scott Rogers (“RSRogers”) will be in the Twin Cities this week. He and Ricko will be meeting at Bunnys—where Paul and Ricko watched the Vikings-Saints during the Deep Freeze last year—at 7 p.m., Thursday, February 10. Any U-W’rs are more than welcome to join them.

They promise not to get into a fistfight over whether the Nationals should, or should not, wear Washington Senators throwbacks.

Anyone interested can let Ricko know.

Bunny’s Bar & Grill, St. Louis Park, MN
(on Excelsior Blvd., just west of Highway 100 and east of Methodist Hospital)

OK, so Paul & I won’t be there, but it should be a great time. Stop on by and pay your respects to Rick & Scott.

~~~~~~~~~~

vilk 5 & 1-B 5 & 1, Super Bowl Edition

And now, the part of the post you’ve all been waiting for: The 5 & 1.

The Mothervilker doesn’t usually touch the pro game, with good reason, but with no olympics to keep him occupied, the Cavs hopelessly inept, and no professional hockey in the State (wait, do the Jackets count?)…Jim has plenty of free time on his hands these days…some might say too much.

So, in what may be his final 5 & 1 for a long time, Jim has compiled a special All-Time Super Bowl 5 & 1. Really.

~~~

5. XXXI: Patriots/Packers — To prove I’m not a complete fuddy-duddy…Flying Elvis 1.0 was pretty cool.

4. XXII: Redskins/Broncos — My Super Color Palette Special.

3. XX: Bears/Patriots — Any Pat Patriot version beats any Flying Elvis, and this was Pat at his absolute best.

2. XIV: Rams/Steelers — I love yellow gold, so the SI cover says it all.

1. IV: Vikings/Chiefs — The Chiefs have my favorite NFL unis…and those old Vikings (and the mud) make them look even better.

And the bad one: XXXIX: Patriots/Eagles — Both teams’ unis have downgraded so much…no wonder McNabb got sick in the huddle.

~~~

Thanks, Jim.

Now you know why he’s not doing any pro 5 & 1′s again.

~~~~~~~~~

twitter_bird…and finally

So, I’ve avoided this “facebook” and “twitter” stuff forever, but one of my spring classes actually requires me to get a twitter account and to “tweet” (or whatever it’s called). So, I figured, I guess I can’t fight this anymore. So if any of you guys do this twitter thing and want to follow me (or have me follow you), my “handle” is philhecken. I’m already following a few choice writers and sites, so I should be able to bring some good uni (and other sports related info) pretty quickly, and offer some UW updates as we consider some possible future changes around here. So check me out, or not. OK? OK!

~~~~~~~~~~

Time to shut down this massive post. My ultimate bestest Super Bowl Uni Matchup? Almost impossible to say, since there are a few I particularly enjoyed, but most of the early ones were great. I’d say SB I, III and V (for some reason, the Boys in blue versus the Colts was just awesome) were great, and more recently, the Bears vs the Colts was pretty sweet as well. The worst, without question, was the suicide-blue monochrome-clad Seabirds versus the Stillers. Just awful. What say you?

Have a great Saturday, folks. The big day is almost upon us.

~~~

Baseball is as much a set of stories as it is a set of stats. How else could you take a card with a table of numbers that would make an actuary comatose, slap a photo on the other side, and make a precious memory? — “DJ”

 

117 comments to Best Super Bowl Match-up Ever?

  • jC... | February 5, 2011 at 7:49 am |

    The Steelers and Packers do NOT wear gold pants. The Saints and Rams wear gold. The Steelers and Packers wear yellow. They may call it gold, but its yellow.

    • Ricko | February 5, 2011 at 8:27 am |

      Ah, another claim that what I see trumps existing and traditional terminology.

      Sure, let’s rewrite a nomenclature that’s been around for 50 years just because it either a) doesn’t suit us or b) we don’t want to take the time to learn it.

      As long as I have been following football (since about 1953), teams like the Packers and Steelers have been described as wearing gold, for one thing because it’s what they and the uni manufactuers called it, and still do. The distinction was made, when necessary, for teams like Notre Dame and the Saints by calling their unis “old gold”, which everyone knew meant the metallic variety.

      I’m sorry if that’s too complicated to follow.

      Michigan and Oregon wear yellow. If we say that’s the same color as the Packers and Steelers, then Air Force Blue and Columbia Blue can just be called “Blue”

      You call your cellphone your “pocket communicator,” do you?

      —Ricko

      • Mad Adam | February 5, 2011 at 8:37 am |

        They can call it gold if they want, and officially it can be gold. I get the tradition, history and the pride involved in the teams and the colors. I don’t want to be critical of what those colors are..

        BUT…

        If you had the big box of crayons and had to color the uniforms of the two teams you would pass over the gold crayon and head straight for the yellow.

        • Ricko | February 5, 2011 at 8:48 am |

          Then you’d be wrong (and since when do we use crayons as the definiting factor around Uni-Watch, anyway?).

          From a paint/ink/dye mixing point of view, the gold they wear is process (canary) yellow with a bit of red added. Add a like amount of red to white and it most definitely becomes pink. No one in their right mind would still call that new color “white”.

          It’s a shade of yellow called “gold.” Too bad it never got called “Sunset” or something, but the fact is that a bright yellow-gold (non-metallic) has been in the color pallette probably for thousands of years.

          But let’s just “lazy out” and call it yellow, shall we.

          —Ricko

        • Ricko | February 5, 2011 at 8:52 am |

          Let’s make it simple. If we can take the time to type or say “Navy Blue” or “Royal Blue” why is it so tough to do the same with “Yellow Gold” or “Old/Vegas Gold”? Is that some kind of hardship? That just tucker us out? Make our brain hurt to think that much?

          —Ricko

        • JTH | February 5, 2011 at 9:12 am |

          If you have the big box of crayons and you pick the yellow one, you’ve made the wrong choice. Something like “goldenrod” would be the way to go.

          Yellow would be suitable if you only have the SMALL box of crayons to play with. But in that case (metallic) gold wouldn’t even be an option.

          I said it yesterday and I’ll say it again. It’s not wrong to refer to the Packers and Steelers (among others) as wearing yellow pants. But it is incorrect to say that they DON’T wear gold.

        • Ricko | February 5, 2011 at 9:19 am |

          That’s the real point, Jimbo, and you’re right.
          We can say the Bears went “mono Blue” and that’s just fine.

          What is wrong is to proclaim the Packers and Steelers do NOT wear gold but rather yellow.

          THAT is just plain inaccurate, especially at a place like this.

          Althugh I must ask, just out of curiosity, how would those “insistors” describe the color of the words “Uni Watch” at the top of this page? In uni catalog terms, that is; something like “Amber” is not an option. Isn’t metallic. Isn’t yellow…

          —Ricko

      • The Jeff | February 5, 2011 at 9:43 am |

        Why should we hold on to an archaic name? Once upon a time, we didn’t have the ability to make metallic paints and dyes. The “gold” shade of yellow was called that because, at the time, it was the closest we could get to matching the color of the metal. That’s no longer the case. Now, we *can* make metallic colors. So, why shouldn’t we change the name? It’s a non-metallic alternative that really only works in cartoons and comic books – things like Scrooge McDuck’s vault of coins, and that’s about it. Let’s move into the present. Call it “Sport Yellow” or “Golden Yellow” or something and get over it, because it ain’t “gold” any more than a Catfish is a feline.

        • JTH | February 5, 2011 at 9:55 am |

          The name exists. Deal with it.

        • Ricko | February 5, 2011 at 10:06 am |

          What color is the edge on the lead photo today?
          What color is the edge on the “Benchies” wordmark?
          Are they the same?
          No. The former is Yellow Gold, the latter Yellow.

          And I ask again, is “Yellow Gold” harder to type (or say) than “Powder Blue”?

          This is starting to sound like the old crap about how we shouldn’t call an Ace Bandage “flesh” because not everyone’s flesh is that color.

          Or that a manhole cover should be called a personhole cover. On that women’s basketball teams shouldn’t call it “man-to-man” defense (I remember one woman player saying, “We tried calling it ‘chick-to-chick’ but that just didn’t work”).

          Not because the root sentiments are the same, but because of the “revisionist sanctimony”—the shining of the light on the path for others to follow—of it.

          —Ricko

      • Terry Proctor | February 5, 2011 at 10:59 am |

        Ricko, I’ve been in the uniform business since 1967. I have NEVER heard of the color used by the Pack and the “Stillers” referred to anything other than “Light Gold.” True Old Gold has a darker tint than Vegas Gold. VG has generally taken over for OG. Here are the color charts from Webster Fabric which is owned by Liebes who have been the premier lettering and numbering company for the last 80+ years. Click on:
        http://www.websterfa... and look through it. Hopefully it will put this topic to rest. Hey, I do what I can to help out a brother uni-junkie.

        • The Jeff | February 5, 2011 at 11:15 am |

          Well at least that shows a difference between “light gold” and “gold”. It also shows that sports teams are afraid of using “yellow”. There’s ONE color on that whole page that actually says yellow under it – and it’s Yellow Strike – so it’s still got an aggressive tone to it. Lightning? Come on now.

          …and apparently I need to adjust my monitor a bit, the color that looks closest to Packer Yellow to me is the Maize color near the bottom of the page. The “light golds” all look too dark.

        • Ricko | February 5, 2011 at 11:24 am |

          “Light Gold” is what I’ve always known it to be, too, Terry (may have seen some supplier call it “bright gold” somewhere along the way, also). I suggested “yellow gold” as some sort of compromise because “Athletic Gold” seems to grate on so many people, and they apparently think “yellow” is the only alternative.

          But “Light Gold” IS the long-time supplier name for it.

          —Ricko

    • James Hayden | February 5, 2011 at 10:35 am |

      Of course, there’s always the less-than-flattering phrase to describe the color in question that a 1970′s Cowboys player used when referring to the pants the Redskins were wearing at the time…

      • Ricko | February 5, 2011 at 11:01 am |

        “You seen a guy in a piss yellow deuce coupe?”

        Bob Falfa (Harrison Ford) in AMERICAN GRAFFITTI

        —Ricko

    • Oakville Endive | February 5, 2011 at 2:40 pm |

      Why I understand why a uniform neophyte would call the Packers and Steelers yellow, the reality is in the world of sports uniforms yellow is this http://www.ottershoc...

      • StLMarty | February 5, 2011 at 4:03 pm |

        Lisa Simpson making a copy order:
        “I’d like 25 on canary, 25 on goldenrod, 25 saffron, and 25 on paella.”
        Smart ass clerk’s (a character I always loved) response:
        “O.K… 100 yellow.”

    • Donald | February 5, 2011 at 11:15 pm |

      God seriously. We had this debate 2 weeks ago when the teams were determined. Get over it.

  • timmy b | February 5, 2011 at 7:54 am |

    Speaking of Super Bowls…apparently a gem of a find:

    http://online.wsj.co...

    Hope we get to see some of this soon!!

    • LI Phil | February 5, 2011 at 8:02 am |

      awesome find timmy!

    • LarryB | February 5, 2011 at 12:43 pm |

      Now that was fascinating.

  • Ryan | February 5, 2011 at 7:55 am |

    was going through some old photos of my Grandfather and found these (may be interesting Colorizing topics):

    1939 Colgate University (Maroon and White):
    http://flic.kr/p/9fL...
    http://flic.kr/p/9fL...

    This hockey photo http://flic.kr/p/9fK... I don’t know if its from Colgate (Maroon and White) or Hebron Academy (ME), which is Green and White.

    Any help??

    • StLMarty | February 5, 2011 at 4:05 pm |

      Maybe gold?

  • Terry Proctor | February 5, 2011 at 7:57 am |

    Great work. But those Hershey Bears football uniforms are a little too close to the Redskins’ look.

  • Oakville Endive | February 5, 2011 at 8:07 am |

    I’m glad that the Pittsburgh/Arizona game wasn’t completely slogged, I’m one that would rank that game near the top. With the exception of Arizona’s over-design the game had a lot going for it. Great colours, Great colour contrast , Great Helmets and Great Helmet contrast – and didn’t it essentially make the cover of EA Sports?

    I think my overall choice would be Washington/Miami

    Tomorrow’s game is clear a case of the sum of the parts are less than the two uniforms on their own.

    Hershey should have a NFL team – they’ll be the Green Bay of the East.

    • Ricko | February 5, 2011 at 8:41 am |

      Y’know, I grew up watching the Packers in the pre-Viking years, so I have tremendous affection for them. But in those days they split their home schedule between Milwaukee and Green Bay.

      Has everyone forgotten that?

      It’s easy to imagine that a small market situation like that could be repeated, but the basic premise is wrong. The Packers, through all the NFL’s critical growing years, were (and still are, to a huge extent) also a Milwaukee team. Indeed, a Wisconsin team.

      I have nothing against the Packers, honest, but it simply isn’t the same thing as if, say, Casper, Wyoming had somehow sustained an NFL team since the 1930s.

      —Ricko

      • JTH | February 5, 2011 at 9:27 am |

        That’s crazy talk, Rick. What about the Akron Pros or the Muncie Flyers or the Canton Bulldogs or the Rock Island Independents…

        Seriously, though, would the Bears exist today if they had stayed in Decatur? I’m guessing that they would not.

      • Leatherhead | February 5, 2011 at 1:02 pm |

        Its a regional appeal, Don’t forget the UP of Michigan, many more packer backers than Lion’s fans. When Lambeau and Calhoun started the Indian Packing Company team in 1919, Those packers were independent for the first two seasons, they played Kaukauna, Marinette Wisconsin & Menominee Michigan and the tough Miners of Stambaugh Michigan.
        Yet both realized long term, beating up on town teams was a money loser! They had to join the the big league APFA (NFL 1922) in 21′ Plus Milwaukee had the Badgers who failed in a couple of seasons in which the packers filled the gap.

        The brew city was a key part of Green Bay’s staying power.

        -Leatherhead

      • EMD | February 5, 2011 at 2:51 pm |

        Today’s Columbus Dispatch has a story about the Portsmouth Spartans/Chicago Bears 1932 NFL Championship Game. The Spartans played the Packers in their final home game of the regular season.

        The league office at that time was in Columbus, Ohio.

        • LarryB | February 5, 2011 at 7:06 pm |

          Good article and picture.

    • James Hayden | February 5, 2011 at 10:39 am |

      Weren’t the 1951 Dallas Texans headquarterd in Hershey when they were a “road team” (and before they were re-located to Baltimore in 1952 and became the Colts to replace the former AAFC team that had folded)??

    • johnj | February 5, 2011 at 10:49 am |

      I agree… when it came up on the list I had one of the “hmmm” moments and realized that it really was a pretty good looking game color-wise.

      Like most, I think the cardinals would do better if they toned it down but there’s always room for a nice vivid red

      (Then again, that could just be the Rutgers alum in me)

      • johnj | February 5, 2011 at 10:59 am |

        Then again, maybe there was something more subliminal about the game that made everyone enjoy the aesthetics…

        http://deadspin.com/...

        • Dave Mac | February 5, 2011 at 11:33 am |

          I live in Milwaukee, and Ricko is right. The Packers are a team that truly belongs to the entire state of Wisconsin. It’s not just a Green Bay thing at all. That’s probably a major misconception.

  • WFY | February 5, 2011 at 8:55 am |

    Senators throwbacks are okay for the Nats. Expos ones are not.

    • Ricko | February 5, 2011 at 9:12 am |

      So when the Twins wore Senators throwbacks a few years ago it was wrong?

      But the Mets could wear Dodger or Giant throwbacks?

      Really depends on the presentation. Senators are NOT the history of the Nationals franchise. History of baseball in Washington, absolutely.

      If a company moves and changes its operating name it doesn’t make it different company, not does it mean their old operating name belongs to the city, or a business in the city, they once called home.

      I know fans want to say, “But sports is different.” No, it isn’t. The new company still needs the blessing of the old company (absent some pre-arrangement such as the Browns Anomaly). And if they choose to withhold that blessing they are 100% within their rights.

      —Ricko

      • FormerDirtDart | February 5, 2011 at 9:59 am |

        The nationals could try to wriggle in a “Washington Baseball” derivative, sort of like the Mets “New York National League” throwbacks a couple seasons back.

        • Ricko | February 5, 2011 at 10:12 am |

          Absolutely. Presented as a community’s baseball history, and with the permission of the previous team, why not.

          But for the Nats to hint at a direct MLB link to the Senators, as a franchise, would be just plain historically ianccurate.

          —Ricko

        • FormerDirtDart | February 5, 2011 at 10:26 am |

          Personally, I’d like to see the Nationals play a home stand of inter-league games against both the Rangers and Twins, with all decked out in Washington “inspired” throwbacks.

      • WFY | February 6, 2011 at 8:59 am |

        City history > corporate history

  • MEMAL | February 5, 2011 at 8:59 am |

    Good article today, though I got caught up in the ESPN list ranking the Super Bowl participants, something I’ve read a few times before and can never remember how it tops out.

    As unbiased as I can be about many things, I find it impossible to not rank a Steelers/Cowboys matchup at the top. I like to think that’s it’s not so much for a “homer” reason than for the three great games that took place between them on the biggest stage in American sports.

    I suppose if you were to stick a gun to my head and make me pick something else that I would go with Super Bowl XXXII. That was a great game in a great setting between two teams in uniforms I like.

  • Patrick_in_MI | February 5, 2011 at 9:15 am |

    Caleb, good job on quite the daunting task. Personally, I would have ranked SB V a little higher due to the Cowboys blue, I think they look best in blue and I’m not even a Cowboy fan. I also liked SB IX since it’s the only SB the Vikes wore purple, I think. Also, didn’t know you were a Detroit guy. I think there’s enough of us to have a mini-UW gathering. I hear the Silverdome is reopening the Main Event as a sports bar, not sure when though.

  • FormerDirtDart | February 5, 2011 at 9:18 am |

    Please ignore the “Dodger Throwback Days” email I just sent in. Knew I should have checked here before I hit send…lol

    I’m with you Phil, I’d like to see how the ’13 3/4 vertical placket turns out.
    Didn’t you guys do a posting a while back, about a high school that tried to get a similar jersey done? But,they couldn’t find anyone to make one for them.

    • FormerDirtDart | February 5, 2011 at 9:25 am |

      I. of course, meant 1911, when I typed ’13.

  • Caleb | February 5, 2011 at 9:44 am |

    Patrick, I was born and raised in Clarkston but no longer live there.

    Looking forward to some other peoples thoughts. My rankings are totally my taste, fascinated what others like, don’t like.

  • daveclt | February 5, 2011 at 9:45 am |

    The problem with this Super Bowl is that the Packers green doesn’t look good in a dome. It comes off as dull. Even in a semi-dome, it doesn’t work.

    • J.D. | February 5, 2011 at 11:37 am |

      I’m not completely sure about this, but it seems to me like the Packers used a slightly different green in the 90s when they had Starter jerseys. It was a little bit lighter and more washed-out, but a little bit more olive at the same time. Their current green, in comparison, seems a little bit deeper and more forest-green.

      Compare –
      90s: http://www3.jsonline...
      Current: http://dalockerroom....

  • Natron | February 5, 2011 at 9:57 am |

    mmmmm, Bunny’s.

    Free taco bar at 10:00pm, and 25¢ wings after 9:00. Get the szechuan along with a Fulton.

  • Jay Bittle | February 5, 2011 at 10:23 am |

    Long time lurker and Bills/Sabres fan;

    Just noticed something strange in the Super Bowl XXVII pic -

    http://i.cdn.turner....

    Look at Jim Kelly’s and Howard Ballard’s (#75) leg stripe – blue/red/blue. Just like all the other Super Bowl pics.

    Now look at Kent Hull’s (#67) leg stripe. Red/blue/red.

    Ok, back to lurking!

    • scott | February 5, 2011 at 10:25 am |

      Did the Bills have different pant striping for their “home” and “road” uniforms?

      • The Jeff | February 5, 2011 at 10:30 am |

        Looks like someone gave #67 a pair of Giants pants.

        Good eye.

        • JTH | February 5, 2011 at 10:40 am |

          Yeah, I was thinking the same thing, but the pants the Giants of that era used had equal-width stripes, not a wide red stripe flanked by two thin blue stripes.

          Practice pants?

        • The Jeff | February 5, 2011 at 10:51 am |

          Well, they do seem close to what the Bills wear today…

          Maybe Hull was a time traveler. Maybe the Bills winning 4 Super Bowls opened up some kind of portal to hell, and the only way to close it was to go back in time and stop them…

      • =bg= | February 5, 2011 at 10:37 pm |

        I know that most all of the Bills has Champion logos, but Kelly’s uni showed Apex on the jersey and pants.

    • traxel | February 5, 2011 at 10:39 am |

      Reminds me of my high school days. I don’t think we ever had matching uniforms. And from day 1 I’ve hated those red Bills helmets.

    • Mark K | February 5, 2011 at 10:59 am |

      It’s quite possible his pants were soiled after the first couple of series.

    • J.D. | February 5, 2011 at 11:44 am |

      Look at this photo.
      http://cdn.bleacherr...
      Andre Reed (in the background) has the same blue-red-blue striping as Hull. Perhaps the Bills changed their striping at some point, and in the photo you posted Hull is wearing the “old” pants?

      It seems like every other photo of the Bills from that era shows the red-blue-red striping, though.

      • The Jeff | February 5, 2011 at 12:05 pm |

        That does seem like a possibility. If FUP&P is correct, the Bills did use blue-red-blue through 1989 and started with the red-blue-red in 1990.

        • J.D. | February 5, 2011 at 1:08 pm |

          I think they switched at some point, but I’m not sure 1989/1990 was the dividing line. Here’s a photo of the Bills in 1989 with blue-red-blue:
          http://im3.ebidst.co...

          Here’s a photo of the Bills from October 6, 1990, still going blue-red-blue:
          http://www.gettyimag...

          And here’s a photo from Super Bowl XXV (after the 1990 season) where all the Bills in the photo are red-blue-red:
          http://www.buffalone...

          It seems like sometime during the 1990 season they switched.

  • johnj | February 5, 2011 at 10:33 am |

    So I saw a special on Bristol Motor Speedway and a part of it discussed them holding a football exhibition between the eagles and redskins there. I immediatley assumed I good find something about it in uniwatchs ‘back issues’.

    Low and behold all I found was Paul asking if anyone had any more info on it… really wish I took the time to take some screenshots cause this was a really unique thing

    One thing I can answer is that it was held in July of 1961. The Eagles were reigning champions

    • Silver Creek Doug | February 5, 2011 at 12:16 pm |

      Rumors in this part of the country fly regularly that Tennessee and Virginia Tech are going to play a game there, as it is very close to both campuses.

      I would love to see it. It would be the most unique neutral site game I’ve ever seen. 150000+ people in “The Bullring” for football would be amazing.

      • johnj | February 5, 2011 at 12:44 pm |

        Man, that’d be pretty neat. I’m sure itd go over better than the first time.

        Apparently the game was basically played on concrete. I saw one picture of it and there were cars lining the field and the nearest spectator would been the length of the infield and track away… im sure they could set some kind of attendance record if they did it right

  • Phil | February 5, 2011 at 10:34 am |

    Caleb-
    Great work although I have to say I disagree with your emphasis on contrast. The unis that the Bills and Skins donned in Super Bowl XXVI were in my opinion, neither the best looking unis in the history of the Super Bowl nor the best looking unis in the history of those two franchises. Had the Redskins been wearing their 70′s unis like in Super Bowl VII and had the Bills been wearing their old AFL unis from the 60′s, I would not have disagreed with you had you ranked that matchup number one from both a contrast and an aesthetical point of view.
    Based on the unis you had to work with from each Super Bowl, I would have ranked Super Bowl I as the best looking Super Bowl since there was sufficient contrast between both teams and both teams were wearing in my opinion, the best looking unis in the history of their franchises.

    • rpm | February 5, 2011 at 11:30 am |

      rankings are always difficult because of their subjectivity, but i thought the cat did a great job. the fact that he emphasized contrast shows how much he gets it, it is a huge component in a strong aesthetic matchup(horchata). nobody is going to agree with every choice, and everyone is going to have a personal favourite that they thought was snubbed(broncos-cowboys), but all and all that was a bang-up job. i wouldn’t have put that game number 1 either, but he supported why it was there, and i see his point. i too liked chiefs-packers at 1, but when i saw it at 2, i knew caleb was going to bring it strong.

      and one more thing, just because the skins-bills were not wearing their best uniforms is irrelevant to it’s rank, there are games where the teams individual uniforms in a vacum look bad, but when paired with the perfect partner can look good, or even great. best example of this i can think of was that usf-clemson bowl game. i know i know, purple pants are bad, whatever. but i didn’t like either uniform individually, hated them actually, but that was a great looking game because they were paired with each other(horchata).

  • skydog7 | February 5, 2011 at 10:36 am |

    funny how much of a mess the undefeated Dolphins uni’s were. In just that one photo, Paul Warfield and Csonka are wearing jerseys with different sleeves.

    • timmy b | February 5, 2011 at 11:33 am |

      Now I could be wrong on this, but I think when the 1972 season first started, all the Dolphins had the striped sleeved white jerseys. I seem to remember that being the case in the early season match in Minnesota. But as the season progressed, for whatever reason, several players started wearing the recycled 1971 stripeless sleeve white jerseys. To the point that by SB VII, players like Csonka, Greise, Scott wore the 71 style, while most others (Morris, Buoniconti, Warfield, etc.) stuck with the 72′s.

      Please boot me if I mis-remember.

  • Phil | February 5, 2011 at 10:39 am |

    And had the Cardinals donned this uni in Super Bowl XLIII-http://www.weirdwolf.net/FFP/images/1960/StLouis61.gif

    I think this game could have been in the top ten.

  • jdreyfuss | February 5, 2011 at 10:56 am |

    http://cdn.bleacherr...

    Elway’s on the right, correct?

    • The Jeff | February 5, 2011 at 10:59 am |

      Correct.

    • LI Phil | February 5, 2011 at 11:00 am |

      well, he’s the one with the bigger teeth

      your call

    • johnj | February 5, 2011 at 11:33 am |

      I don’t know how the Broncos’ front office will get anything done, they “naaaayyyys” will always have it…

      ba-dum-dum

    • possum | February 5, 2011 at 11:50 am |

      Love it!! He IS the Denver Bronco! Just like John Cheney IS the Temple Owl.

    • EMD | February 5, 2011 at 2:54 pm |

      Never gets old.

  • AlvinK | February 5, 2011 at 11:02 am |

    Off SB topic, but an interesting note-but no pics-in St Cloud(MN) times this morning…The Albany boys bball team was dressed as Perham Yellowjackets during Thursday’s home game with Milaca, a 59-42 loss. The jersey switch was to honor Jason Gabbard, a junior at Perham who collapsed during a game. Gabbard had open-heart surgery and is now in a hospital in the Twin Cities. Gabbard played AAU basketball last summer with the St. Cloud Comets. One of his friends and teammates is Albany senior guard Kyle Lieser. That’s where the idea to honor Gabbard by wearing Perham jerseys came from.

  • M.Princip | February 5, 2011 at 11:50 am |

    Have to go back to the vertical lettering for the throwbacks. What a nice revisit to that article Phil. This look is so elegant and badass. The tie for a baseball jersey.

    http://farm4.static....

  • interlockingtc | February 5, 2011 at 11:59 am |

    SB III is the easiest on the eyes….

    http://assets.nydail...

    …and I would argue that playing outdoors, on actual grass, under the sun or clouds or rain or wind in mud and dirt contributes significantly to the games aesthetics. Those conditions can make a crappy looking uniform game tolerable (mostly).

    Super Bowl Death: Indoors…Fake Grass…Under The Lights…Sleeveless Jerseys.

  • LarryB | February 5, 2011 at 12:31 pm |

    The picture to open today’s column made me remember the 1st Super Bowl’s images from SI.

    We did not have color TV until several years later. So when SI came out with those bright color photos of Green Bay and Kansas City, it was great.

  • rpm | February 5, 2011 at 12:39 pm |

    ??? ever seen that before?

  • mike 2 | February 5, 2011 at 12:43 pm |

    Welcome to Twitter!

    When I looked you up the two “similar” pages that Twitter suggested were Rob Neyer and Tao of Stieb, so I have three new feeds to follow.

  • mike 2 | February 5, 2011 at 12:45 pm |

    I don’t mine the first Flying Elvis set. The shoulder logo was a little big, but the home blue set (with the contrasting texture stripes on the jersey) were unique and (IMO) pretty sweet looking. Far better than what followed.

    http://itiswhatitis....

    • The Jeff | February 5, 2011 at 1:05 pm |

      That’s actually the 3rd flying elvis set. The first was the best one, with the red numbers and pant striping that mimicked the logo. Then there was the boring toned down version with white numbers and normal striping… then that one.

      It was unique with the jersey stripes, I’ll give it that. At the time I remember thinking it was too soccer-ish.

      • mike 2 | February 5, 2011 at 2:45 pm |

        You’re right about them being the third set – I was grouping all of those together as a set, and thinking of the current set with the darker blue as the second set.

        I never realized that the white road uniforms had the stripes as well – it wasn’t as obvious in those pre-HD days. It is soccer-ish but its also a good way to look unique without just adding bumperstickers.

        http://www.postcresc...

    • johnj | February 5, 2011 at 2:57 pm |

      I remember the first time I saw that uni-set I tried to gouge my eyes out. They Bled-so much….

      ughh sorry, cabin fever

      I did like the alternating stripes, for some reason I remember the flying elvis sitting a little lower on the sleeve at some point? Maybe I’m mixing up the past and present…

      • johnj | February 5, 2011 at 3:08 pm |

        Here we go, from 1994:

        http://www.boston.co...

        not really a good look overall

        • JTH | February 5, 2011 at 3:17 pm |

          That’s 1993, actually.

          They improved them a bit by reversing the colors on the numbers and going with more traditional pants striping in 1994.

        • johnj | February 5, 2011 at 3:53 pm |

          yep sorry, thats what i meant, couldnt find a 1994… definitley an improvment. Its odd to see them without the red facemask like in 93

    • EMD | February 5, 2011 at 2:57 pm |

      What they should do now is incorporate the Flying Elvis stripes on the shoulders (rather than the grey, and mimic that same stripe pattern on the pants.

      Navy over Silver, White over Silver, and White over Navy options.

      Maybe I’ll mock something up.

  • -Monty- | February 5, 2011 at 1:03 pm |

    re “the only drawback is that the Dodgers will be wearing a road uniform at home”

    That would be an interesting project. How many times has a baseball home team worn its road uniforms? And vice-versa?

    • JTH | February 5, 2011 at 3:34 pm |

      The Blue Jays do it every time they wear their powder blue fauxbacks.

      Astros did it to protest their Milwaukee home games against the Cubs.

    • FormerDirtDart | February 5, 2011 at 4:32 pm |

      Technically, since they are from “Brooklyn”, Los Angeles is a “road” game

  • Jeff Franklin | February 5, 2011 at 1:18 pm |

    Super Bowl III has the best unis in my opinion.

    The Dodgers should wear the 1931 uni.

    Also, sorry that you had to get a twitter account for your class. I personally can’t stand twitter. I understand that your class requires it, but I think that most people that have a twitter account have issues with their ego.

    • LI Phil | February 5, 2011 at 1:30 pm |

      i know…

      i had to figure out how to stop typing my *tweets* on my underwood, scanning them, converting them into pdfs, then uploading them

      i just realized i can do it all on this here machine…it’s like some form of dark magic, i tells ya

    • mike 2 | February 5, 2011 at 2:47 pm |

      Most people that I know who have twitter accounts use it primarily to follow other people or organizations they’re interested in.

      The ones with ego problems are the ones who tweet every ten minutes or feel the need to inform everyone what they had for breakfast. But I think they’re in the minority.

  • LM | February 5, 2011 at 1:43 pm |

    I wonder if Riddell has worked out a deal with any player(s) to wear their new 360 helmet in tomorrows Super Bowl?

  • Silver Creek Doug | February 5, 2011 at 1:52 pm |

    UGA basketball has debuted their FOURTH different uniform this year.

    We are wearing silver/grey at home versus Auburn in blue. I actually like this one, as it looks very similar to the famous “silver britches”.

    I don’t have the ability to do screen grabs, so I hope someone else will oblige…

  • Oakville Endive | February 5, 2011 at 2:58 pm |

    I”m somewhat surprised at Minnesota / Oakland being rated last – at the time I remember an article describing the Vikings look as elegant and drawing a sharp comparison to the menancing silver and black of Oakland – I don’t remember too many Super Bowls – where some scribe – used the uniforms to draw a comparison between the two teams, that should be worth something.

  • ChrisN | February 5, 2011 at 3:18 pm |

    Maybe I missed it on an earlier day… I’m watching the UCLA / St. John’s game. Neither team has an “NCAA approved” patch on the left chest, but both have the maker’s logo (Nike for StJ, Adidas for UCLA) on the right chest. I thought teams weren’t going to be allowed to wear the maker’s logo on the jersey without also wearing the NCAA patch.

    Both teams have memorial patches on the left chest (UCLA’s, of course, is for John Wooden) – are they allowed to skip the NCAA patch if they have a memorial patch?

    • Corey | February 5, 2011 at 3:45 pm |

      I noticed during the Duke game Sunday that St. John’s patch was on their shorts. http://espn.go.com/m... not sure about UCLA though

  • StLMarty | February 5, 2011 at 3:54 pm |

    I showed my wife the article about the kittens this morning. The first thing that came to her mind was Bubbles’ Kittyland Love Center. I can’t believe that didn’t pop in my head.
    http://www.youtube.c...

    • StLMarty | February 5, 2011 at 3:54 pm |

      into my head

      • SoCalDrew | February 5, 2011 at 8:25 pm |

        Trailer Park Boys RULE!

  • Jim Vilk | February 5, 2011 at 4:24 pm |

    “I call ‘em how I see ‘em and that may not make sense in any brain but my own.”

    Ah, a man I can relate to…even if some of his “worst” picks were some of my “best” pics….

    Great job, Caleb. Seems as if we attack this the same way, just with different tastes. I agree on XLI. That one just missed my Top 5. And you’re right about how the Steelers could have made XL a much nicer matchup if they would have worn their black jerseys.

    Maybe someday I’ll sit down and rank ‘em all, but for now I’ll just include numbers 6-10.
    6. XLI, Colts/Bears.
    7. XXIII, Bengals/49ers.
    8. III, Jets/Colts.
    9. VIII, Vikings/Dolphins.
    10. XII, Broncos/Cowboys.

    And after further consideration, I may just have to flip-flop XX and XIV on my list. Even though it’s in the Superdome, that Bears/Pats matchup was like Walter Payton…sweetness.

  • Mael | February 5, 2011 at 4:46 pm |

    CHIEFS as best NFL uni? One of the barfiest unis around. Down there with the Redskins.

    • Jim Vilk | February 5, 2011 at 5:21 pm |

      The only reason they’re the best is because these aren’t around anymore:
      http://cdn.bleacherr...
      But yeah, the Chiefs are a solid pick.
      What’s your best?

    • StLMarty | February 5, 2011 at 6:15 pm |

      Have you ever seen barf?

  • Giancarlo | February 5, 2011 at 5:38 pm |

    I and VII stand out as great ones, though most of the early ones were pretty good.

    Of the first XX, I think XIV was the ugliest. Light gold vs. light gold. That’s why I’m not so jazzed about this year’s matchup.

    The aqua vs. purple of VIII looks slightly nauseating too, it should be said.

  • Mike D | February 5, 2011 at 6:05 pm |

    Cool list. I think the Giants road uniforms are one of the best, if not the best, in football. I know a lot of people don’t like the mix of colors (blue, white, red, gray), but it looks classic. Despite the Patriots uniforms, I would have ranked Super Bowl XLII a little higher.

  • JTH | February 5, 2011 at 6:51 pm |

    Wow.

    Them GSW “hardwood classics” ain’t too shabby.

    • Jim Vilk | February 5, 2011 at 10:51 pm |

      Dang, he did that again this year?
      http://www.youtube.c...
      I’m tellin’ ya, Brinke…this kid’s in your back yard and you gotta go see him play.

      • JTH | February 6, 2011 at 12:16 am |

        On WGN now. Can watch him go up against Derrick Rose.

        Incidentally, those unis: gold; the paint on that court: yellow.

  • A.G | February 5, 2011 at 7:15 pm |

    Does anyone remember or have an image of Super Bowl XV (Raiders/Eagles) where a player for the Eagles had a crazy insane facemask where it seemed there were more “bars” on the side of the helmet than on the front of it. I’m thinking it was a TE or a DB. Holler if know of anything. It was kinda far out for that era in time.

    THanks!!!

  • Pflava | February 5, 2011 at 8:26 pm |

    Getting to the party a little late, but I can’t believe Raiders-Vikings was ranked dead last. Behind Eagles-Pats, which was one of the all time uni-turds. I’d put that Oakland-Minny game in the top ten. I do appreciate the effort from Caleb, though. I don’t agree with a lot of the choices, but it was a good read.

    In a pinch, I’d have to put the first Dallas-Pittsburgh game at the top. Uniform perfection.

  • LarryB | February 5, 2011 at 10:02 pm |

    Once again football was played before the Superbowl.
    Wonder how uni matchups for championships before would look?

  • Patrick_in_MI | February 5, 2011 at 10:56 pm |

    College hockey note: Miami U wore a memorial jersey (not just a patch) against Michigan tonight. Link to story here, includes a slideshow
    http://www.muredhawk...

  • Latrisha Dancoes | February 6, 2011 at 12:01 am |

    Pretty good post, I learned a few things I didn’t already know. I just stumbled upon your blog; it’s pretty informative. I’m going to have to check out some of your other articles.

  • Brian C | February 6, 2011 at 5:10 pm |

    Late to this party but just checking the post today. I’m sad to see my Falcons ranked so low on the list. I still hope to see the current logo retained but the 1st all BLACK Glanville era uniforms come back to replace the ugly red clown suits they have now. All that old look needs is some black pants on the road & all will be right in the world. The Falcons should NEVER wear red uniforms OR a red helmet ever again!!!!

  • june Smith | February 9, 2011 at 4:16 am |

    Thank you for posting this article. I also plugged the show on Face book, with mixed results from my friends. All I ask of people, whether they are familiar with homeopathy or not, is to watch the story. http://www.bridalgow...