Sunday Morning Uni Watch

South Carolina Battle Costume

by Phil Hecken

Week seven of the NCAA College Football season is now in the books, and while there was some chicanery, some hijinx, some machinations in the uniform department, thankfully, it was more *normal* than not. There were some atrocities to be certain, the obligatory BFBS and GFGS offerings, some nice new looks and top 5 matchups, plus a few bad weather games.

But thiswasjustawful.

Terry will have all that (or most of that) and more below, as we kick off our Week 7 …

. . .

Sunday Morning Uni Watch
by Terry Duroncelet

Some good. Some bad. Some ugly. Some pony. Let’s do this.

• On Thursday, Colorado went full-Vader against Arizona State. First time they wore the black helmets this season.

• On Friday, Central Michigan wore mono-gold against Navy, who went with navy trousers for the second straight week. I can definitely get used to the latter.

• On Saturday, Lee Corso got in the South Bend spirit by wearing this.

• BYU went BFBS against Oregon State. Beyond disappointing. At least they corrected some common BFBS mistakes (mistakeception), such as wearing a black helmet so that the color balance isn’t off, unlike other schools who’ve given in to the trend. They also made sure that you can actually see the numbers, which is another mistake I see with other schools. Still doesn’t make it right, though. “But wait! Black is the color used for our slacks! Does this mean you hate the way we dress?” No. I love Pinkie Pie, but that doesn’t make this mess any more or less right than this or this. Please never do this again, Cougars.

• Maryland wore their black helmets and LED pants for the second straight week against Virginia. Yes, I know that that pattern is on all of the Maryland football pants, but the black ones in particular just remind me of LEDs.

• Rice wore what look to be throwback uniforms against UTSA.

• In the Northwestern/Minnesota game, the Wildcats wore their black pants with the white jerseys for the first time this season. I freakin’ LOVED how this game looked! Yeah, I would’ve preferred that they wear their purple pants, but I’m more than happy with this. In that same game, Donnell Kirkwood (#20 for Minn.) traded blows with a Wildcat that resulted in his right-side helmet decal breaking off. Here’s the video showing what happened (if you can’t get that video clip to work, try this one instead). One last thing from that game: they aired a promotional commercial for NU, showing a Wildcat football player with the old Adidas uniform. Odd that they don’t have that updated, or at least a cover-up patch, unless they filmed this before they agreed to terms with UnderArmour. Still, why not a purple censor blur?

• We now move on to a game of apples and oranges. This isn’t the first time that Rutgers has worn mono-scarlet this season (obviously), but I think that this is the first time that they’ve worn this look with the grey facemasks.

• UNLV went full-Putty Patrol against Nevada in the “Battle for the Fremont Cannon”. From Eddie (Reno, NV): “UNLV changed their helmet decals to one that incorporated a red cannon. Too bad the cannon will remain blue, as University of Nevada won again!”

• West Virginia wore one of their two grey helmets (canary ‘WV’ with navy outline) against Texas Tech, who wore their red jerseys in that same game.

• Oklahoma State wore these new helmets against Kansas. Eh, I never liked white or near-white accents on a grey field.

• Hmmm… did the Fighting Irish really win? I could be wrong on this, but from what I see in the gif that Phil sent me, I don’t think anything definitive touched the ground before he broke the plain, but with so many bodies twice as big as me flying around (at 6’2, 183 lbs, I’m about the size of a slightly underweight WR… with fewer muscles), it’s hard to tell.

• The Florida State Eagles played against the Boston College Seminoles.

• Vanderbilt wore their gold tops with the black shoulders for the first time this season against Florida.

• It’s tough to see, but TCU wore their purple chrome helmets (or whatever they’re called) against Baylor. Snazzy. Speaking of Baylor, consider this: both they and Washington normally wear gold helmets and pants, they both have these costumes in their wardrobe, and it just so happens that both of them have dark numbers with a gold outline, they usually wear gold helmets with their BFBS uniforms, and both Baylor and Washington wore white helmets and white pants with their dark (non-black) jerseys on Saturday (Washington played against USC). What were we taking about again?

• Arkansas wore their anthracite suits against Kentucky. Just curious: am I the only one who thinks of a type of poison when I hear the word “anthracite”?

• Can someone tell me what happened here? From Alex Argenio (who spotted this): “I guess they never repainted the field from last year’s bowl game.”

• South Carolina wore this mess against LSU. I am now on the search for fire so I can kill this. Seriously, what is that? Did somebody divide by zero when “creating” this? I’ll be honest: I would’ve tolerated this “Battle Uniform” a lot more if they had a cleaner uniform design, but it doesn’t even have that! The only real thing that it has going for it is the dark grey. At least it isn’t… you know, dingy grey/white or white/grey. But overall, this uniform needs to be burned, re-burned, burned again, and then thrown into the deepest, darkest depths of the non-material world, never to see the light of day again.

So there you go. Definitely (and thankfully) not as much tomfoolery this week compared to last week, but that South Carolina costume makes me want to jump in a vat of molasses, just so there’s something thick enough to protect me from that eyesore. Only one cure for something as ugly as what the Gamecocks wore against LSU: a Persian kitten that somehow defies the laws of cuteness. See you next week.

Oh! Almost forgot to thank Anthony Zogas, Jesse Larson, Eddie from Reno, NV, Alex Argenio, and Phil for some of the things that I missed.

. . .

Another superb job Terry. Now don’t ever post any ‘cute kittens’ vids again! Thanks again for the fine, fine wrapup.

~~~~~~~~~~

Screen Shot 2012-06-24 at 10.32.36 PM

“Benchies” first appeared at U-W in 2008, and has been a Saturday & Sunday feature here for the past two years.

. . . . .

Some nights you’re just plain over-matched…

10-14-12 s-Dates

Click to enlarge

~~~~~~~~~~~

all sport uni tweaksUni Tweaks Concepts

We have another new set of tweaks, er…concepts today. After discussion with a number of readers, it’s probably more apropos to call most of the reader submissions “concepts” rather than tweaks. So that’s that.

So if you’ve concept for any sport, or just a tweak or wholesale revision, send them my way.

Please do try to keep your descriptions to ~50 words (give or take) per image — if you have three uniform concepts in one image, then obviously, you can go a little over, but no novels, OK? OK!. You guys have usually been good with keeping the descriptions pretty short, and I thank you for that.

Just one set (and it’s a bigg’un) for today, and it comes from Dettrick L. Maddox, who goes by the interwebs monicker of “Mr. Design Junkie.” Gonna run this as a slideshow (with his very short writeup to follow):

~~~

Hey Phil,

I’ve submitted before! Here are some new and updated concepts! Good day!

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Mr-Design-Junkie/208307940215


“Mr. Design Junkie”
Dettrick L. Maddox
mrdesignjunkie@gmail.com

. . .

OK then. That’s quite the um, set of concepts MDJ. What say you readers — anything there that strikes your fancy? I actually like the Michigan (Great Lakes) map concept, although I’m not quite sure that would translate all that well into a jersey, and that “U” collar for the Canes has potential.

~~~~~~~~~~

Catherine 5 & 1 animated Catherine Ryan’s 5 & 1

The five and one has been a staple of Uni Watch for three years, usually ably administered by Jim Vilk. But he got old and tired, so we needed someone young and fresh. And we’ve found that someone in this year’s new 5 & 1 decider…Catherine Ryan.

After a rough day (and night) at Yankee Stadium (Catherine works for the Bombers), but a day during which we traded some college football banter (she’s on top of things even while working!), I’m curious to see how the NCAAFB will fare in this week’s 5 & 1. I have a few choices (and I’m sure we’ll differ) as to my top 5, and the “And One” could go to a number of games. So here’s the list…

. . .

Happy Sunday, UniWatchers! Just when I think I have won some of you over, you turn on me the next week. It definitely keeps things spicy. Let’s hear your thoughts on this weekend!

5. Louisville v. Pittsburgh: I wanted to kick this countdown off by going with the late Beano Cook’s Panthers. A great man and a great looking game!

4. USC v. Washington: I’ve been giving Washington some love with year and I think they deserve it! They look great and I’m actually a big fan of USC in white.

3. Stanford v. Notre Dame: My insufferable-ND-alum-of-a-sister will be happy to see I included the Irish on the list.

2. Texas v. Oklahoma: I wanted to include this classic game because I consider it synonymous with college football. Also, the simplicity of it is just beautiful.

1. Kansas State v. Iowa State: I have always liked Kansas State’s uniforms and it was a nice change of pace to see them ditch the purple. Iowa State looked great in the home red as well.

And the bad one…

+1 Syracuse v. Rutgers: Ok. Syracuse doesn’t even look bad. But this. Awful.

+1 Honorable Mention: Good God, Maryland.

. . .

Thanks Catherine! I still don’t agree with a couple of those top 5, but your #1 is SPOT ON! And the worst spot was easily a toss-up between Rutgers/Cuse and LSU/SCAR, so well done indeed! Readers? What do you think?

~~~~~~~~~~

And that will tie a bow on this SMUW. Thanks, as always, to Terry, Catherine and Ricko. If you’re wondering where the Duck Tracker is, it’s on hiatus — since the Qucakheads had a bye this week, there was nothing to track.

Enjoy the pink show in the league where they play for pay today. Catch you next weekend.

~~~

“Just flipping thru and caught some of the Baylor game. They had a close-up of the goal line pylon and it had…a Nike logo on it. Check that, FOUR swooshes on it. One on each side of course. Why does a pylon have a corporate logo on it at all? To be fair, I’d be just as furious if it were Coca-Cola or Alpo. What’s next, the 40-yard line sponsored by Schlitz Malt Liquor? The red zone sponsored by Tampax?”
–Patrick in MI

 

109 comments to Sunday Morning Uni Watch

  • Simply Moono | October 14, 2012 at 7:36 am |

    IT’S ALL ABOUT THE J!

    Also, from the COTD: “What’s next, the 40-yard line sponsored by Schlitz Malt Liquor? The red zone sponsored by Tampax?”

    Dead XD

  • The Jeff | October 14, 2012 at 7:43 am |

    South Carolina’s uniforms seem very reminiscent of these: http://www.arenafoot... , only worse.

  • Dave R | October 14, 2012 at 8:17 am |

    Love ‘em or hate ‘em…the Yankees without Jeter aren’t the same. No one has represented the pinstripes better. His absence will be difficult to overcome.

  • Kevin P. | October 14, 2012 at 8:26 am |

    The name of the stadium in Louisiana is the Advocare Independence Bowl.. like the Cotton Bowl, only with corporate douchebaggerry attached…

  • Johnny | October 14, 2012 at 8:32 am |

    I like the concepts…as concepts. But once you free yourself from preconceived designs, you do hit on some things that look good.

    The one thing I never knew was that Boise State has a capital “B” in the horse’s neck muscles…until I realized it was a “3.”

  • Gary | October 14, 2012 at 8:53 am |

    While the Gamecocks “Battle Uniforms” are candidates for design criticism, the Under Amour Wounded Warrior Project they support is not.

    • Jimmie | October 14, 2012 at 9:41 am |

      Right on brother! Those uniforms might not be pretty but Phil and Terry need to chill out on bashing them so much. They are supporting the WWP which gives them the freedom to write on this website everyday!

      • The Jeff | October 14, 2012 at 9:44 am |

        Surely they can support it without looking utterly stupid, can’t they?

      • Phil Hecken | October 14, 2012 at 10:37 am |

        “Those uniforms might not be pretty but Phil and Terry need to chill out on bashing them so much.”

        ~~~

        excuse me?

        first off, neither i nor terry said anything about the WWP, so to infer there is bashing going on because of that is sorely mistaken

        secondly, the uni (IMHO) looks like shit … this is a site about athletics aesthetics, first and foremost — and if a uni looks like shit, i (or terry or paul or whomever) is going to say it looks like shit

        pink accoutrements may or may not support a good cause (breast cancer research & funding) but if they make a uniform look like shit, we’ll say so

        i don’t care if a uniform actually CURES cancer or AIDS or third world hunger (and i highly doubt any uniform has that power…but if it does, that’s great), but if it looks like utter crap, well then, dammit, i’m going to say so

        ~~~

        on another note — i did like the gray tops, but with the white lids, and the bluish-gray camo undersleeves and pants, it looked like bad zubaz…

        pair that gray top with black, red or white pants, and that has potential for lots of win

    • Andrew Seagraves | October 14, 2012 at 10:28 am |

      I do agree with Terry on the shade of Grey! I love that shade of grey. The garnet, I believe, could have worked well with it. I am in a small, very small, probably just me, who does like camo (I just like camo – not to be a G.I. Joe wannabe, I just like it), and I feel they could have done the pants a bit better with the garnet stripe up the side.

  • David B$ | October 14, 2012 at 9:09 am |

    Catherine: Surprised that Arkansas-Kentucky didn’t earn the +1 “honors,” since both unis were terrible in their own ways. And I can’t support Louisville ever making the top 5 until they get rid of their helmet logo: a cardinal with TEETH? Awful. Anyway, there were a few good games that might have taken Louisville’s spot: Rice-UTSA was great-looking; UCLA-Utah was also an appealing game; Michigan-Illinois was good too; even Florida-Vanderbilt was an attractive contrast based in the school colors (no BFBS with Vandy).

    • daveclt | October 14, 2012 at 12:02 pm |

      Why can’t a cardinal have teeth? It’s called anthropomorphism, and it’s done all the time.

  • Rob H | October 14, 2012 at 9:18 am |

    I like the BYU BFBS uniforms. The contrast with the blue Y on the white on the helmet really pops. The only thing, the sleeve and pants stripe looks like it should be blue-white-blue instead of blue-blue-blue to match the helmet stripe.

    USC, on the other hand, looked awful. It’s tough when the team you’re rooting is #3 in the nation and they lose looking like that. Either do all-gray, or do all-camo. But as bad as those two choices would have been, (The all-gray not so bad) mixing the gray jersey with the camo sleeves and camo pants was 2x horrible. And they stuck with the white helmet. If you’re gonna screw it up, screw it up all the way with a gray helmet. Or a camo helmet. Heck, with that outfit, they should’ve had one side gray and the other camo. Would’ve fit right in.

    • Andrew Seagraves | October 14, 2012 at 10:31 am |

      The Blue Y was raised on the helmet. Another reason it pops out too! It’s a neat concept. I agree on the Blue-White-Blue stripe. Plus, I know this sounds silly, yet in my mind it makes a little sense, a “Blackout” sounds better than a “Blueout”…

      • The Jeff | October 14, 2012 at 10:45 am |

        There’s no rule that states it needs to be an (insert color)-out. Just tell the fans that they want to stadium to look like a Sea of Blue. There ya go, problem solved.

      • Andrew Seagraves | October 14, 2012 at 12:37 pm |

        The Jeff, what I should have added to my comment, with the way BYU has been losing players to injury lately, if they did have a “blueout” it might be even more of a jinx (as in “blew my knee out”). Hence me saying “blackout” is better than a blueout.

        • Rob H. | October 14, 2012 at 1:10 pm |

          …or they got “blew out” 48-3

    • Dan Taylor | October 14, 2012 at 2:22 pm |

      i also liked BYU’s jerseys. after the wack jerseys we had in the 90’s as long as they stick with the classic design they can make em in what ever color they want, except red of course

    • CCJ | October 14, 2012 at 2:32 pm |

      BYU’s uniforms looked like crap. Period.

      • JEDI54 | October 15, 2012 at 2:50 pm |

        They looked great to me, plus they had black hats. If you gonna wear black tops and bottoms, you need black hats.

  • Kyle Lamers | October 14, 2012 at 9:20 am |

    Was watching the South Carolina/LSU game with some friends who don’t care about uniforms at all and make fun of me for talking about them all the time, but even they, the second they saw South Carolina, said that was one of the ugliest things they had every seen.

  • Trainerdave | October 14, 2012 at 9:53 am |

    Does the Y on the BYU helmets look 3D to anyone else? Certain angles make it look similar to the C on the Cubs batting helmets???

    • Andrew Seagraves | October 14, 2012 at 10:33 am |

      Here’s an article from BYU’s athletic site about the technology used behind the raised Y on the helmets. Second paragraph – http://byucougars.co...

      • The Jeff | October 14, 2012 at 10:48 am |

        High-Tech Puffy Stickers.

      • Trainerdave | October 15, 2012 at 1:21 pm |

        Thank you for the info!! I thought maybe I was just seeing things.

  • Paul Stave | October 14, 2012 at 9:54 am |

    I dont have a screen shot. Maybe someone else does. But E Washington U broke out black helmets vs Montana St yesterday. Believe thats a first.

  • Geoff | October 14, 2012 at 10:08 am |

    Catherine come on! Your last picture for Pitt/UL is a different year. Different UL helmets and Pitt was in mono blue for that game. Not a bad list though and I think the +1 was only bad because of the mono red. Too much color similarity between the red and orange

  • Rob S | October 14, 2012 at 10:28 am |

    Phil, the “new looks” link at the top (http://blog.newsok.c...) only works in Chrome. All other browsers I’ve tried return a 403 Forbidden when clicking on the link.

    • Rob S | October 14, 2012 at 10:29 am |

      Okay, odd, the moment I post that, the link starts working okay in Firefox.

      Weird.

      • The Jeff | October 14, 2012 at 10:39 am |

        It’s one of those weird copy/paste things… if I click it, it gives me a 403, if I copy the address and go there manually it works.

  • Andy | October 14, 2012 at 10:52 am |

    Also re: the Texas A&M – La Tech game, the Independence Bowl has a synthetic turf-grass surface, so the logos are permanently stitched into the field, not painted.

  • DenverGregg | October 14, 2012 at 11:28 am |

    The “new look” link in the opening graf is wonky – at least from my setup.

    Old Wyo looked uniquely terrible against AFA yesterday.

    Rutgers would have looked fine with white or silver pants.

    • Simply Moono | October 14, 2012 at 12:53 pm |

      I totally missed that! (and kinda glad I did)

  • Mainspark | October 14, 2012 at 11:43 am |

    Yes. Notre Dame really won. The score was 20-13. What does this have to do with the “Obsessive Study of Athletics Asthetics”? And why is this the only non-uniform related post?

    • Tim E. O'B | October 14, 2012 at 11:56 am |

      Oh, they won, but on a terrible call. Officiating experts agree, that was a touchdown.

      And as for, “the only non-uniform related post?”, that Persian kitten post seems to be a bit non-uniform related, no?

      Congrats to yet another ND fan proving why they suck: Win on a bad call, then bitch about it when it gets mentioned and finally martyr yourself on the fact that “everyone” is out to get you.

      You won on a bad call (by a Hochuli, I might add…) take your irish luck and just be happy you weren’t on the opposite end of said call.

      • Mainspark | October 14, 2012 at 12:03 pm |

        Thanks for making my point. Do we (you) want the comments to devolve in to arguments over officials’ calls, game strategy, scheduling, etc.? Or do we want to keep the discussion about uniforms?

        • Tim E. O'B | October 14, 2012 at 12:10 pm |

          You’re the one who made it an issue by ignoring everything else in the post that wasn’t directly uniform related.

          Were you bitching when the Seattle Green Bay play got brought up? No?

          Do you bitch when Culinary Corner gets posted? No?

          Because while watching for Athletic Aesthetics, a controversial play happened against two top 25 teams. It would’ve been brought up no matter who was playing.

          Get over yourselves, it was a bad call and that’s why people are on the other side, it has nothing to do with your fantasized persecution.

      • Jeff | October 14, 2012 at 12:05 pm |

        Tim, what “officiating experts” are you referring to? Every credible post game analysis on the planet agreed with the call. You don’t have to be a Notre Dame fan to call out an incredible comment.

        • Tim E. O'B | October 14, 2012 at 12:11 pm |

          I posted a link to one of the foremost officiating experts in the world saying it was a touchdown. If you choose to ignore my link, yeah, I guess I wouldn’t know who I was talking about either…

          (Seriously?!)

        • DJ | October 14, 2012 at 1:51 pm |

          As knowledgable as Mike Pereira is, he is one person. Doesn’t count as “football experts”, plural.

        • Tim E. O'B | October 14, 2012 at 2:01 pm |

          DJ,

          So if I posted two experts, that would be enough for you? No? How about three? See what I’m getting at?

          One is all I need to post, you and I both know there are many others on both sides of this call, but my link is to a man universally praised as one of the best rules gurus in all of football – professional or amateur.

    • Jeff | October 14, 2012 at 11:56 am |

      I agree Spark. It was absolutely a win – the complete and indisputable stop of forward motion, twice, proved that. I questioned the placement of that jab in the blog as well…

      • Tim E. O'B | October 14, 2012 at 12:02 pm |

        Progress wasn’t ruled stopped on the field, but don’t let facts get in the way of a Notre Dame win: https://twitter.com/...

        Keep on ND fans, don’t be modest and just admit you won on a bad call, dig in and insist you know more than football experts…

        Class.

        • Mainspark | October 14, 2012 at 12:24 pm |

          I invite the Uni Watch readers to peruse the two threads and determine for themselves who is exhibiting “class.”

        • DJ | October 14, 2012 at 1:45 pm |

          Progress wasn’t ruled stopped on the field, but don’t let facts get in the way of a Notre Dame win

          But what was the linesman doing running toward the pile (before the Stanford runner got the ball into the end zone)? He was spotting the ball, which is what he does when he determines forward progress has stopped.

          Even if the call gets reversed, which required indisputable video evidence, it merely takes the game to a second OT. It’s hardly a safe bet to assume Stanford would then win.

          I wonder what bugs Timmy more — that Notre Dame won the game on a controversial call, or that posters are calling him out for being a whiner? It’s not worth getting stoked over. Just Move. On.

        • Tim E. O'B | October 14, 2012 at 1:56 pm |

          DJ,

          You’re right, if that play was called correctly, an Extra point was still between Stanford and a tie game. That’s why I never said, Stanford was about to win, going to win or should’ve won.

          What I DID say was that Notre Dame won on a bad call. Which is true.

          Now I don’t know your credentials, but the former head of referees of the NFL said that upon replay he could determine that forward progress was never ruled stopped. Instead, the runner was ruled down by contact before he crossed the plane, which is an incorrect call.

          I also am not the one whining, nor has anyone beside you just now called me a whiner here today, so I’ll just stick with the facts and the well informed comments of football rules experts and continue to know that ND got lucky and won.

          Luck is putting yourself in the position to take advantage of a situation. ND played that goal line stand near perfectly, and because of that excellent play, they benefited from a bad call. Good teams get lucky, I just don’t get why ND fans can’t admit that they got lucky.

        • Phil Hecken | October 14, 2012 at 2:06 pm |

          timmah…

          Beating-a-dead-horse

        • Tim E. O'B | October 14, 2012 at 2:11 pm |

          fair enough…

        • Mike Engle | October 14, 2012 at 2:46 pm |

          That “beating a dead horse” gif gets me every single damn time…

        • CWac19 | October 14, 2012 at 2:57 pm |

          Against my better judgment, I’ll enter this fray — can anyone here really say that the ball carrier’s elbow indisputably did not touch the ground before the ball crossed the plane??? Putting aside the forward progress question, I don’t think the replay proved that the runner was not down before the final lunge. Just one impartial college football fan’s thoughts…

        • -Johnny- | October 15, 2012 at 8:26 pm |

          Forward progress was absolutely stopped (and reversed), AND the side judge whistled and marked the ball where forward progress had been stopped (as someone else mentioned about seeing him running in from the side to mark the ball). The on-air guys said it was whistled (even though they were saying it as “It shouldn’t have been whistled”). And the replays show with complete clarity that the ball carrier’s forward progress had been stopped, and that there was a slight backward motion before he then surged forward again.

          The play was dead — and whistled dead with a corresponding official mark of the ball — before the ball came anywhere near the plane of the goal line (not the “plain” of the goal line).

          Thinking that a judgement call was blown, or that the review was in regards to whether or not the ball crossed the goal line prior to being down by contact, are both easy mistakes to make. But looking at the same replay as everyone else, listening to and reading the same football commentators and former officials (save one), and choosing not to see the “bob” of the ball and the ball carrier’s body as they are pushed backward, then disagreeing vehemently and vocally, and writing with the tenor and tone of what you’ve posted here, Tim, is questionable at best, and suggests a bit of insanity or perhaps some sort of stress or trauma based overreaction at worst. Very odd.

    • Phil Hecken | October 14, 2012 at 12:47 pm |

      “What does this have to do with the “Obsessive Study of Athletics Asthetics”?”

      ~~~

      that one, single, solitary comment? nothing…if there was anything remarkable about yesterday’s game it was the fact that notre dame didn’t actually come onto the field wearing the clown costumes for which the program is becoming known

      it’s a sad day when it’s actually uni-notable that ND didn’t dress up like idiots

      oh, and i think the sarcasm tags are broken…sorry

      • Sebastian | October 14, 2012 at 2:40 pm |

        The clown costumes for which the program is becoming known?

        Wow.

        Notre Dame wore those abominations ONCE (and it will only be once, as defined by the Shamrock Series). But now you’re acting like they routinely wear those? Please.

        I’m sure you believe they play all three service academies annually, too.

        • Phil Hecken | October 14, 2012 at 3:02 pm |

          maybe they’re not oregon, but in the past two years, i’ve counted six different uniforms they’ve worn

          one, two, three (gloves & shoes), four, five-a, five-b (different helmets) and six-a & six-b (also different helmets)

          (and yankee stadium 2010)

          are they all “clown costumes”? of course not, but that’s a lot of different unis for a program that seemed to be the yankees of college football unis for a number of years

          why all the different unis? do they need to attract recruits with shiny things to attract 17 year olds now? looks like the program is doing pretty well this year…

        • Phil Hecken | October 14, 2012 at 3:09 pm |

          shit…no idea what happened with those first two links…

          but here and here

  • daveclt | October 14, 2012 at 11:54 am |

    Great job Catherine. Although I think your #2-5 are all better than #1. But overall, a good list.

    Your +1 was spot on. That was the worst uni-matchup I saw all weekend.

  • Coleman | October 14, 2012 at 12:33 pm |

    Watching Sunday NFL Countdown and in the background was the Texans stadium seating. Are their fucking seats pink?! This stuff is out of hand. For real.

  • Catherine | October 14, 2012 at 12:50 pm |

    Sorry if some of the links were messed up on my post. When I grab photos from news sites they sometimes update the URL/put in a different photo by the time this post runs. Not sure what happened with the Pittsburgh photo. I was using the Pitt Athletics site to navigate to the sources. Sorry about that!

    • The Jeff | October 14, 2012 at 12:53 pm |

      Perhaps you should save the image and re-upload it someplace else and link to that, instead.

      /just saying

      • Catherine | October 14, 2012 at 2:47 pm |

        That may be my new strategy! Hadn’t been a huge problem before this week but it might be time for a change!

  • Phil Hecken | October 14, 2012 at 1:05 pm |

    jets olive tops look more olive than usual

    • Graf Zeppelin | October 14, 2012 at 3:02 pm |

      Maybe it’s the sunlight. In Monday night’s game it looked like they’d been color-corrected, but they definitely look like Army greens today.

    • JenInChicago | October 15, 2012 at 11:31 am |

      I agree. It looked horrible. Thank goodness for the one true green stripe on the shoulder. (It looks bad. Really bad.)

  • The Jeff | October 14, 2012 at 1:06 pm |

    Well, on a good note, the Ravens are wearing purple jerseys and black pants today.

    • JEDI54 | October 15, 2012 at 2:52 pm |

      They should have wore all black, but I can live with the purple on black as well. Just keep the strips off the britches.

  • LarryB | October 14, 2012 at 1:06 pm |

    When I did a quick look at todays Benchies I thought the shirts had the word boobs on. With the pink and all.

    • Ricko | October 14, 2012 at 1:42 pm |

      Idea was voted down in a team meeting, 7-6.

      I don’t know if it was split along party lines or not.

      • LarryB | October 14, 2012 at 2:25 pm |

        haha

  • Fan | October 14, 2012 at 1:33 pm |

    Bills blue pants today! I thought they weren’t wearing them this year?

    • The Jeff | October 14, 2012 at 1:40 pm |

      Awesome. They should have worn them last year, afterall, blue pants were part of the uniform that the current set is supposed to be based on. Plus it keeps them from looking too much like the Colts.

    • Phil Hecken | October 14, 2012 at 2:25 pm |
      • Wheels | October 14, 2012 at 2:42 pm |

        Those are great?

        • Phil Hecken | October 14, 2012 at 7:01 pm |
    • Bromotrifluoromethane | October 14, 2012 at 7:52 pm |

      Count me as a fan. Much nicer than the all white look. Now just please keep them on the road only and the white pants at home only.

      • Phil Hecken | October 14, 2012 at 8:00 pm |

        maybe i’ll like them if i see them without all the pink and if they get white undersocks…

        like…this is a little better look cuz the high whites are actually high…

        but what’s the over/under on them pairing these with the blue tops this season? i’m giving it 50/50

        • Wheels | October 14, 2012 at 8:09 pm |

          Yup, I’m afraid of the looming mono-threat too.

        • Rob H | October 14, 2012 at 9:00 pm |

          you mean this?

          http://uniformdataba...

        • Wheels | October 15, 2012 at 12:01 am |

          yikes

  • Attila Szendrodi | October 14, 2012 at 1:47 pm |

    The Jets are wearing 3 shades of green today and ALL of them are ugly. When did they switch to olive/army green?

    • The Jeff | October 14, 2012 at 1:54 pm |

      1998? The Jets green has been “wrong” for years… it just seems to be a bit worse now.

      • Attila Szendrodi | October 14, 2012 at 2:15 pm |

        Maybe it’s the sunlight but today is the worst.

      • Graf Zeppelin | October 14, 2012 at 3:05 pm |

        No; it’s never looked like this. Whether forest green is better than kelly green is neither here nor there; they’ve never worn Army green before. What the Jets are wearing now is a combination of forest green (helmet decals, shoulder stripes, nameplate fabric), Army green (torso), and maybe one other shade (sweatboxes).

  • Pierre | October 14, 2012 at 2:05 pm |

    I was at the LSU/South Carolina game last night. Anyone who has read any of my posts here would know how much I hate all this camo crap and other assorted costumes. I was really expecting to hate South Carolina’s uniforms. But I have to admit, on the field they looked bad-ass…

    • Rob H | October 15, 2012 at 5:57 am |

      If by bad-ass, you mean “ass-bad” then yeah.

  • LarryB | October 14, 2012 at 2:28 pm |

    I find myself pulling for the team wearing more normal uniforms in college these days.

    When a team wears BFBS I hope they lose. Same with gray. Does anybody buy those black replicas especially after the team loses?

  • Rob S | October 14, 2012 at 2:33 pm |

    I could only take a few minutes of Lions-Eagles on TV before I retreated to listen to the game on the radio. The bright neon magenta accessories are just too damn much, though I did enjoy spotting a few guys here and there that didn’t have any (aside from the mandatory helmet ribbon sticker).

  • Micah | October 14, 2012 at 3:46 pm |

    That last link in the louisville/pitt countdown is not from that particular game as you can see Pitt has adidas on and they are now a Nike school. Good picks, I actually like Rutgers but definitely too much red

  • Mike | October 14, 2012 at 4:39 pm |

    Niners/Giants game.. Interestingly there is no pink at all.

  • timmy b | October 14, 2012 at 4:51 pm |

    OMG, Bills in blue pants today!!

  • dwight | October 14, 2012 at 5:49 pm |

    forgive me if i am raising an old point, but has is been discussed that the Ravens’ purple on their helmet doesn’t match the jerseys and I jut missed it? How is it not a bigger deal that they use TWO shades of an awful color?

  • T.J. | October 14, 2012 at 5:55 pm |

    Not sure what era the Rice throwbacks are from, but the school celebrated it’s 100th anniversary this weekend. Pretty sure that had something to do with it.

  • Wheels | October 14, 2012 at 5:58 pm |

    The Bills look awesome with blue pants but I’d like to see white socks with them.

  • Johnny O | October 14, 2012 at 6:39 pm |

    The scene in Houston before the game tonight. Absolutely disgusting:

    http://i147.photobuc...

  • Phil Hecken | October 14, 2012 at 7:05 pm |

    so…joe buck is calling the giants’ games today

    that’s gotta be some kind of feat, no?

    • Wheels | October 14, 2012 at 8:42 pm |

      Kinda like Phil Collins’ intercontinental performances at Live Aid.

  • Bromotrifluoromethane | October 14, 2012 at 7:56 pm |

    As I said Monday and forgot to come back to reply to Paul’s question…. This pink thing is wwwwwaaaaayyyyyyyyy out of control now. And yes, I do feel the same way about the cammo/flag, gray, and any other kind of super trooper/clown looking deals that are out there as well. Oregon and the Military Academies get very slight passes but otherwise can we stop this stuff now?

    • Bromotrifluoromethane | October 14, 2012 at 7:58 pm |

      Slightly off of that topic I also forgot to mention on Mon or Tues that Jaguars post in the ticker scares me. The new look will be “Oregon on steroids”. I don’t know what that means, I don’t want to know what that means. But if it’s worse than what they have now it will take quite an effort to top it.

  • Mike Engle | October 14, 2012 at 9:00 pm |

    http://sports.yahoo....

    What drug was the Adirondack Phantoms designer, who thought white hockey numbers with a thin orange outline and virtually nothing else to create legibility (let alone “help”), using?
    –NOT Jim Vilk, believe it or not

    • Mike Engle | October 14, 2012 at 9:03 pm |

      Drat, that link didn’t work…it’s the Puck Daddy (Yahoo Sports blog) entry featuring Brayden Schenn and Sean Couturier teaming up for a nice shorthanded goal.

    • Phil Hecken | October 14, 2012 at 9:49 pm |
  • Gus | October 14, 2012 at 9:33 pm |

    Zubaz would be a hit. The college players now are too young to realize how ridiculous the zubaz craze was and would easily be impressed by having that style of game pants. I can just imagine a player tweeting a pic and saying, “check out our pants for saturday! these are SWEEEEET!!!”

  • Gus | October 14, 2012 at 9:33 pm |

    Zubaz would be a hit. The college players now are too young to realize how ridiculous the zubaz craze was and would easily be impressed by having that style of game pants. I can just imagine a player tweeting a pic and saying, “check out our pants for saturday! these are SWEEEEET!!!”

  • Kidney Jess | October 14, 2012 at 11:42 pm |

    End of Packer game on NBC, they had a pop-up graphic for the Wendy’s post-game interview using the recently obsolete logo!

  • Joseph Gerard | October 14, 2012 at 11:53 pm |

    Hey I noticed Donald Driver and Charles Woodson have truncated collar stripes, maybe have a few other players with it. Funny, since they don’t have the Flywire collar. Anyone else notice?

  • HottMaxx | October 15, 2012 at 2:51 am |

    Anyone notice Tom Brady’s new helmet?

  • Keith | October 15, 2012 at 9:36 am |

    Anyone else think Dettrick L. Maddox’s “South Beach” design set smacks strongly of MLB’s infamous Future Night jerseys? Same big logos and splashy colors. Practically brothers in design.

  • Ucancmysox | October 16, 2012 at 12:59 am |

    Heck yeah! K-State getting number 1! EMAW! Definitely thought the Bama-Mizzou game deserved a spot though.

  • Ricko | October 16, 2012 at 4:27 pm |

    For those interested, there is a new copy of the excellent book on the..

    NATIONAL BOWLING LEAGUE-ONE YEAR WONDER
    at Amazon for $40.

    Typically, even used copies go for $100 or so, and I’ve seen it new at almost $250.

    I found a new copy there and, if the that 1961-62 experiment intrigues you, it is WELL worth the money (It also will kill most of a day, at least, once you start browsing around in it. Very thorough, just an excellent job by author John Fulgaro.

    A tidbit from the book. Yogi Berra and Mickey Mantle were draft choices.