Sunday Morning Uni Watch

72316299

By Phil Hecken

Week 12 of the NCAA football season certainly had its share of excitement — #1 Kansas State marched into Waco and played a BFBS-topped Baylor team that promptly spanked them (52-24), and almost simultaneously, #2 Oregon (dressed in carbon/black/gray, more on that below) lost an overtime heartbreaker to white clad Stanford. And, of course, in a game with slightly less national implications, black-ops’ed Maryland candied up and got blown out 41-14 against the ‘Noles of FSU.

But Week 12 wasn’t all about the black-clad teams (and TJ will have more on those below), yesterday was all about the beautiful USC/UCLA game, which for almost the fourth consecutive year, was color vs. color. THE Jeff approves.

Not every game could (or should) be color vs. color, but for the rare, special game such as this, I firmly approve as well. IMHO, color-vs-color should be played only under three conditions: 1) Neutral site (or as close to neutral as one can get); 2) Only when the colors are sufficiently different so as not to clash. Teams that wear gray (silver) or gold (yellow) almost automatically qualify versus darker-clad teams, and orange or powder blue would usually be ok; and 3) Rivalry games. When these three conditions are met, as they are when USC and UCLA hook up, bring it on. I wouldn’t want to see Tennessee and Alabama pulling that, even in a Bowl game.

I did a three part series on NFL color-versus-color back in 2010. My feelings on the NFL, because of it’s more stringent uniform requirements, differ slightly on NCAA color-vs-color, but they’re basically similar. We see a few of these matchups in the NCAA every year, but none of them look as good as USC/UCLA. There are probably a dozen or more teams that could pull this off — and as long as those games are special (or at least as special as NCAA games can be what with all the candying up…), lets see more.

And now, here’s Terry Duroncelet with your week 12 edition of…

. . .

Sunday Morning Uni Watch
By Terry Duroncelet

Let’s candy up for week 12, gentlemen (and ladies).

• On Wednesday, Ball State wore black jerseys against Ohio. I don’t know if this qualifies as BFBS for them, so I’ll say this: these wouldn’t be so bad if they didn’t have those lame screenprinted numbers (terrible picture, I know, but it was the best one that I could find that showed the shine of the numbers). I mean, they received new uniforms this year, and yet they still haven’t made the switch to tackle-twill. Why? Is there some sort of tradition of using screenprint at Ball State?

• Toledo wore grey uniforms with gold helmets that had the Rockets logo on one side, and T.V. numbers on the other. To me, the combination of navy, gold, and grey can actually be pretty good. However, Toledo’s design isn’t the best in college football, plus these particular grey uniforms suffer from the same problem as Ball State: screenprinted numbers! Weak. I can’t help but think that I’ve seen this look before. Maybe… nah, couldn’t be.

• On Thursday, North Carolina wore their HydroChrome helmets for the second time this season against Virginia. As I said before, I love this helmet, and the Tar Heels’ uniform choice of white jerseys and navy pants was much better than the mono-navy that they wore before. My only complaint is that UVA wore their navy pants as well. Ah man, they should’ve worn their white pants! There would’ve been a lot more contrast then.

• Moving on to Saturday, Maryland wore the uniform that has a military-themed name that just so happens to have been worn in the same week that a popular game with a similar name released the sequel to said game earlier in the week. Now, I lost my shit (to say the least) last week when I went on a rant about their Pride uniforms v2.0 (you’ll have to scroll down a bit), but I’ll be honest: I don’t hate these. Yes, they still suffer the no-stagger problem, but it’s hardly noticeable here, so I don’t mind as much. Some of you can guess that I hate when teams do this mess, but here, I actually like it (they even look nice in the background of that photo). The red ‘MARYLAND’ wordmark with the gold-outlined black numbers don’t look sterile and monochrome-ish, and they’re surprisingly readable (to me, at least).

• Virginia Tech wore some new decals on their white helmets against Boston College, which featured their Gobbler mascot on the left, and some rather thin T.V. numbers on the right. Here’s a closer look at both sides. I like, but the helmet is still too white for my taste. I say slap a maroon cage on there at least.

• A bit of D1AA news from Dr. Daniel Swartos, who writes: “I sent this on Twitter but didn’t know if I did it right. The South Dakota State University Jackrabbits are playing the University of South Dakota Coyotes today for the first time in 9 years. They’ve both transitioned to D1AA over that time. The rivalry is 113 years old and is your classic Med/Law University (USD) vs Land Grant University (SDSU), or as they put it “If you want to work on the farm, go to SDSU, if you want to own the farm, go to USD”. It is a very bitter rivalry and they are expecting 20,000 people. I know that’s small but in this state it would be the largest crowd ever. Anyways, SDSU is wearing some throwback unis from the 80′s.They are much much better than what they usually wear. I wish they would have gone with the yellow pants today, but the jersey is gorgeous and I love the simple “Jacks” on the front. I just figured I would pass it along. Its not Alabama/Aubrn, but for us up here, its a big game.” I found one photo, and it’s tiny, but I can tell that they only sprung enough for throwback jerseys, and not throwback helmets or pants. Silly Jackrabbits, don’t you know that there’s more to a uniform than just a jersey?

• Yes! For the first time since 2010, the crosstown rivalry was a color vs. color matchup, as it was intended.

• Boise State wore their BFBS helmets and pants with their blue jerseys. Gross. Although, I do like the tape that Greg Grimes was sporting.

Whyoming. Wat r u doin? Whyoming. STAHP. Seriously, I can’t believe that they wore the yak panel uniforms a second time this season. I can name a bunch of things that are better than what the Cowboys wore on Saturday, like drinking coconut mango water, G3 Pinkie Pie face, this “music“… I could go on, but then we’d be here all day, so let’s move on. (BTW, if anyone’s wondering, yes, I intentionally spelled those first seven words wrong)

• Kansas went BFBS with white helmets against Iowa State. Now, I’ve seen plenty of teams wear the ebony fabric, usually to poor success, but GEEZ, Kansas looks particularly out of place. Because of the blue accents, I honestly thought that this was Kentucky for a second.

• It’s extremely hard to see, but Southern Miss wore these helmets against UTEP. Because ‘Murica.

• San Jose State wore gold jerseys with blue pants against BYU. To my knowledge, this is the first time that I’ve seen them in this combination (although that the photos linked here are from a previous game against UC Davis). Also, note how their regular blue and white tops have some sort of Nike polygon underneath the armpits, yet the gold tops have full side panels, even though they look to be the same Nike Pro Combat template as the other two uniforms. Weird.

That does it for this pretty chill (eye-roll) week 12 of the NCAA football season. A good number of top teams fell (K-State, Oregon). I cannot WAIT to see the new rankings later on today. Take care.

. . .

Thanks, TJ. Yes, boys and girls, because UO & KSU both lost, that means the number one team in the nation is now…yup. As if my weekend wasn’t bad enough already.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Steelers ThrowbackThe Return of the Bumblebee…

The guys from the GUD are back with an update on the Steelers’ throwbacks.

. . .

Tonight in the Sunday Night Football game the Pittsburgh Steelers will be wearing their “bumblebee” throwbacks for the second (and thankfully) final time. Three weeks ago they debuted them against the Washington Redskins and people generally either loved or hated them, but mostly hated. Here at Uni Watch, we ran a fantastically detailed rundown by The Gridiron Uniform Databases’s Tim Brulia and company that demonstrated that the so-called “1934″ throwbacks probably weren’t even worn at all during the 1934 season.

But the public and media (and the Steelers) continue to call them “1934″ throwbacks. It’s especially frustrating when people like Brian Billick, the play-by-play announcer on the Redskins-Steelers game, refer to the Steelers wearing these uniforms from the 1934 season and mention that “they should get rid of them because the team went 2-10 that year” or other opinions to that effect. As we’ve shown, they probably weren’t even wearing the “prison stripes” when they went 2-10!

The response by the normally enthusiastic and detailed-oriented Uni Watch Nation seemed to be uninterested as well. Today, as we bid adieu to these uniforms for this season (and hopefully forever) we’d like to offer this poll, to follow up on the research from three weeks ago:


What was your opinion of the “1934″ Steelers’ throwback uniforms research?
  
pollcode.com free polls 

Let us know what you think!

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

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.

. . . . .

Ding-Dong! It’s the deep recesses of your mind calling; are you listening?…

s-concussion REV

Click to enlarge

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Duck Tracker 2012

2012 Duck Tracker

The eleventh game of the Ducks 2012 season featured them at home in a very loud Autzen Stadium, taking on PAC-12 rival Stanford. If you expected to see another UO blowout…well, you were in for a surprise — the Cardinal took out the Ducks in OT, 17-14. In somewhat of a return to ‘normalcy’ (if such a word can be applied to the Duck uni combos), the U of Zero eschewed any sort of green in sporting a very attractive carbon-black-carbon costume. Since I tend to give Oregon a free pass when it comes to actually wearing school colors, I liked this combo. (And I like it anytime they wear *gray* helmets and *gray* pants together.)

Ducks_2012_G_11

Our 2012 Duck Tracker is Tim E. O’Brien, and here he is to tell you about it:

. . .

Yesterday will go down as the second time ever that the Ducks have worn Carbon/Black/Gray (The first being last season against ASU). This is far and away one of Oregon’s best looks this season and a classic in the making for seasons to come. My favorite part of this set is the connectivity between each uniform element. The helmet, jersey and pants all have gray, black and yellow elements and no other colors. That kind of consistency helps the Ducks look more unified, visually – something I think they’ve had a problem with at points this season.

In other tracking news, Northwestern wore their black pants on the road for a second time this season (and are now 2-0 when doing so *HINT HINT*) and my Hoosiers wore their red helmets on the road for the first time since the Ohio State game last fall. Unfortunately Penn State ran them off the field. Time to add red pants

And finally, as always, feel free to check out all of the college uniform tracker sites.

. . .

Thanks Tim.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

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.

Catherine’s just rip, roarin’ rarin’ and ready to go with this week’s 5 & 1, in a weekend that featured a whole mess of interesting matchups. I think we may all have a pretty good idea what the #1 (good) game will be, coughUSCUCLAcough, but what else will make the vaunted Top 5? And which teams will capture the dreaded “And 1″? Lets find out…

. . .

Happy Sunday, UniWatchers! I know this countdown is the highlight of everyone’s weekend so let’s get started!

5. Washington vs. Colorado: I’ve been a big fan of Washington’s uniforms all year. I also love the Buffs in the gold pants/lids.

4. Iowa vs. Michigan: I thought this game was a great combination game. Michigan looked great in their classic home uniforms and everyone knows I’m a sucker for colored pants on the road.

3. Washington State vs. Arizona State: I love Arizona State in maroon jerseys. I was actually surprised by how much I liked Washington State in the red lids/pants.

2. Ole Miss vs. LSU: Loved everything about this game. LSU narrowly escaped an upset against a feisty Ole Miss squad. One of the best games of the day!

1. USC vs. UCLA: I love color on color games. I also love watching USC lose.

And the bad one…

+1 Florida State vs. Maryland: Yikes, Maryland. The Terps are becoming a regular at this spot!

I look forward to hearing what you all think! Hope everyone had a great weekend!

. . .

Thanks Catherine! Oh, boy…first time in a looooooooong time we’ve disagreed (and vehemently) on the “bad” game. You’re correct that Maryland is a good weekly candidate for the “and 1,” but this weekend wasn’t one of them. That ‘black ops’ costume was great and the contrast with FSU was perfect IMHO, of course. Readers, how’d she do?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

And on that note, we’ll end this fine Sunday edition of Uni Watch. Everyone have a great rest of the weekend and a fine Thanksgiving! White meat is for suckers, but I’ll take a double order myself. Enjoy the Stillers in their bumblebees (in a game most of us will actually get to watch) and lets hope for a couple color-vs-color Thanksgiving games, eh? Catch ya next weekend.

. . .

“About the Terrapin uniforms — I don’t really care about their look one way of another, but to me this black ops and white ops b.s. is just second rate copying of things Nike have been doing for years.”
–Christopher Thorne

 

131 comments to Sunday Morning Uni Watch

  • RMB | November 18, 2012 at 7:04 am |

    I could have tolerated these particular Maryland unis if only they’d have gone with something other than black numerals.

    • Rob H. | November 18, 2012 at 7:13 am |

      But they’re ‘Black Ops’ man! You gotta blend in when you’re hiding in the jungle waiting for the Viet Cong, or crounching in the desert looking for Al Qaeda. You can’t have big bright contrasting numbers (visible from the upper deck) that the enemy might spot. That bright yellow outline might even be endangering them a little. As Kellen Winslow II once said, “this is combat, we are warriors!” (or something like that)

      Is it just me or with all the originality, are FSU and Maryland’s uniforms using the exact same font?

      • DJ | November 18, 2012 at 10:35 am |

        Florida State’s number font is more rounded; not the same as Maryland’s

        • Douglas King | November 18, 2012 at 4:29 pm |

          The font that FSU had on their pro combats a few years ago (which is also the one used for everything but the numbers), looks similar but they are not the same font.

  • Memal | November 18, 2012 at 7:28 am |

    I agree with Catherine, Maryland looked awful, I’m really sick of that gimmick.

    • Arr Scott | November 18, 2012 at 8:14 am |

      Agreed. As great as FSU looked, Maryland was worse by far, giving the game a strongly negative uni-rating. Other than the black numbers – should have been yellow with red outline – I didn’t mind the Maryland unis in theory, but in practice they were among the worst things Maryland has ever worn.

      • scott | November 18, 2012 at 9:31 am |

        And yet Maryland’s getting the exact sort of attenion they’re looking for. You can’t put a price on all the free publicity they get from wearing all these uniforms.

        • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 11:14 am |

          Which is why I’m kinda against giving Maryland & Oregon all this special uni attention. Yeah it gives us something to talk about but it’s attention for the worst reasons.

          Recruiting really should be based on the team’s proud traditions & winning, not because of flashy & trendy clown suits.

          While I’m happy Oregon lost, I’m less happy it’s Notre Dame (because it’s Notre Dame) whom will benefit from it.

        • The Jeff | November 18, 2012 at 11:17 am |

          Recruiting really should be based on the team’s proud traditions & winning, not because of flashy & trendy clown suits.

          So… if you’ve been a mediocre team for decades… how exactly do you attract better recruits?

        • Phil Hecken | November 18, 2012 at 11:21 am |

          “f you’ve been a mediocre team for decades… how exactly do you attract better recruits?”

          ~~~

          short answer: win

          longer answer, which probably borders on blasphemy on a sports (uniform) board: who gives a shit…kids are there to learn, not play sports…unfortunately, that’s not the way the world works, and certainly not the way the money works…

          i always thought it was somewhat disgusting that a university coach gets paid $4 million a year, but the guy who’s been teaching for 40 years, slaving away in the science department for 30 years, who’s thisclose to finding a cure for cancer, is being told his $250,000 salary is too high

        • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 12:56 pm |

          I’m on the who-gives-a-shit-about-sports side. I’m more in favor of the Science dept. but unfortunately sports draws a lot of revenue. It’s terrible jocks get a free ride just because they play sports & it’s even worse when they waste the education.

          Football coaches are usually conceited assholes and they make way too much money. But there will always be more worthless departments than others in college so that’s how it goes.

        • James A | November 18, 2012 at 1:13 pm |

          I’m against the Maryland “candy” ops uniform. While I agree in the scenario proposed that the science teacher should be paid more than the football coach, the problem is that tens of thousands of people don’t show up to see a guy teach a class or write down test results (while wearing black if they are proper fans/sheep).

        • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 1:30 pm |

          the problem is that tens of thousands of people don’t show up to see a guy teach a class or write down test results

          On the other hand, thousands if not millions or billions would end up benefiting more from the Science guy. Initially, I bet many thousands more read his published research & they do have special lectures & conferences which people do show up to.

          In the grand scheme of things, sports is completely & totally worthless (that’s funny, why do I hear my sports-hating dad’s voice in that?) and college sports is even more worthless than for-profit professional sports.

        • James A | November 18, 2012 at 1:54 pm |

          I don’t disagree at all, but you know that’s the mentality on campus (particularly the athletic departments). You know coaches make that argument to the dean, media, etc. to justify the disparity in salaries.

        • Arr Scott | November 18, 2012 at 2:50 pm |

          Phil, I don’t think it borders on disgusting, and in my journalistic experience the overpaying of athletic staff is more or less inversely proportional to the moral character of said staff. ADs and coaches tend to be scum and villains in direct proportion to how much higher their salaries are compared to their school’s teaching staff. This is not a coincidence: Perverse incentives produce perverse behavior.

          But most disgusting to me is not that a coach might be payed 100 times a professor’s salary, but that a coach might be paid $4 million while his players are paid $0. It’s absurd to claim that the sport is amateur if the coaching staff is full-time and paid. Either return to part-time coaches who also teach, at a normal professor’s salary plus a small coaching bonus, or stop screwing the players by pretending that they are amateurs while everyone else in the program is a full-time paid professional.

        • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 2:59 pm |

          Players are being “paid” – they are given a partial or full scholarship. If anything, student athletes are given too much.

    • Komet17 | November 18, 2012 at 3:25 pm |

      Concealed78 wrote: Initially, I bet many thousands more read his published research & they do have special lectures & conferences which people do show up to.

      —————————————————-

      I’m a college professor, and I’ll tell you: you’re lucky if one hundred people read a research article you’ve written, and at conference presentations, an audience of 50 is considered to be a pretty big one.

  • Sonny | November 18, 2012 at 7:58 am |

    Catherine, did you know Ohio State and Wisconsin played, right? Didn’t even make it into the top 5, I’m stunned.

    • JTH | November 18, 2012 at 8:14 am |

      Yeah, so did Tennessee/Vandy and BYU/San Jose State. Both were SOLID contenders for the +1, but whatever.

    • CWac19 | November 18, 2012 at 11:19 am |

      Nice uniforms on their own. Together, as a pair, not enough contrast to make my own personal Top 5. IMO, it’s a real challenge for teams with a very similar color palette to make the “best of” list.

    • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 1:39 pm |

      There’s the argument that there’s only so many slots to go around & somebody’s feelings will inevitably get hurt.

      I take it you’re a fan of one of the teams?

  • JTH | November 18, 2012 at 8:15 am |

    So what does TL/DR mean, anyway?

    • Steve | November 18, 2012 at 9:23 am |

      I assume it’s another silly, made up acronym that most people probably have no idea what it stands for. If there is one thing that bugs me about this site (especially on the weekends), it’s the acronyms…there seems to be one for everything, which is probably confusing as hell for people that haven’t read the site from the get go. SMUW. BFBS. BFGS. NOB. FNOB. ILA (I made that one up…”I love acronyms!).

      • Rob H. | November 18, 2012 at 9:37 am |

        This one is not specific to Uni Watch, and for all I know it may have never been used here before. It means “too long didn’t read” and it’s used dismissively towards people who ramble on too long in website posts, much with the same tone of people who use “meh” It summed up perfectly the tone of the third option in the poll, but it’s use is in no way related to, or even part of the Uni Watch specific lexicon.

        • Steve | November 18, 2012 at 9:50 am |

          I understand that, but the main point of my comment was that there are way too many needless acronyms used here. Is it that hard to write things out? Most of the time “Name on Back” or “First Initial on Back” are only used once in a post…so why not type it out? I know what most of them mean since I’ve read the site since day one, but I assume many don’t, especially those who haven’t been readers for as long. So “TL/DL” is just another needless one that could have been avoided by typing it out. And since someone took the time to comment on it, I obviously wasn’t the only one confused by it.

          Oh well…just my thoughts. I’ve already spent too much time on it. Carry on.

        • Will S | November 18, 2012 at 1:06 pm |

          Amazingly enough I don’t mind the acronyms that much on this site; probably because I’m here most days and also because there is a glossary.

          The acronyms and buzzwords in the business world and the acronyms and short forms in the chat/text world that have infiltrated elsewhere are way more annoying to me (I don’t have a cell phone but my wife does. When she gets text messages full of these things she sometime phones or texts back “Sorry, I don’t speak idiot.”)

          I had no idea what TL/DR was; I think “meh – who cares” would have worked just as well for the 3rd option.

    • Tom V. | November 18, 2012 at 12:31 pm |
    • Clayton Lust | November 18, 2012 at 2:02 pm |

      too long/didn’t read

  • Rob H. | November 18, 2012 at 8:49 am |

    Too long, didn’t read

    • Rob H. | November 18, 2012 at 8:50 am |

      That was meant to be a reply to JTH | November 18, 2012 at 8:15 am

  • Josh | November 18, 2012 at 9:03 am |

    Maryland doesn’t care what you think of their uni’s, just that you ARE thinking of their uni’s.

    I agree, my alma mater is getting tired with this UA look, but for such a bad team these past two years, any press is good press.

  • Patrick_in_MI | November 18, 2012 at 9:18 am |

    Can we please the My Little Pony bullshit for your Justin Bieber fanpage please? Makes me feel like I’m reading a blog dedicated to 12-year old girls.

    • The Jeff | November 18, 2012 at 10:04 am |
      • Ben D. | November 18, 2012 at 10:38 am |

        The Jeff wins an internet!

    • Simply Moono | November 18, 2012 at 2:54 pm |

      I’ll probably get in trouble for feeding a troll comment (not generalizing and calling you a troll, period), but…

      I stated at the beginning of the season that I would be making occasional pony references when I feel that they are appropriate. I promised myself and made it a point to avoid talking about the show on this site every week, because you didn’t come here to see Pinkie Pie sprout fingers (you can find the episode online if you want to see that): you came here for the uniforms and the sports. And that’s the main focus of each post. I just so happened to have seen Pinkie’s G3 face to be appropriate for describing things that are better than the yakfest of a uniform that Wyoming wore yesterday.

      I love ponies, but even so, writing about them can get old if you don’t know when to draw the line. In fact, I said to myself yesterday that no matter how appropriate it may seem, I won’t make a pony reference for at least a week (probably two, but at least one), because while I do want to incorporate my love of the show in a very small amount on Sundays (just like Paul occasionally talks about meat on here), at the same time, I don’t want to use the show as a writing crutch, because like any shtick, it’s okay to have it in your pocket, but the overusage of said shtick gets old after a while. That goes for everything, including ponies.

      I understand if you don’t care much for the show, but there are better ways to voice a comment showing that, like “Hey, I understand that you like this show, but I hope that you aren’t leaning on ponies to carry you through every Sunday post”, instead of “Save this bullshit for your Justin Bieber blog” (BTW, I don’t really care much for Bieber, so I highly doubt that I would have a blog about him). I can’t say that I’m sorry, because I haven’t done anything wrong. I’ll never force the show down anyone’s throats, whether it be on here or anywhere else, because 1) not everyone is going to like the same things as you, which is how it should be. 2) that’s not what this site is about. 3) that’s an example of a bad Brony.

      In closing, while I will never let my love for the show take over how I write each college football uni rundown, I will not apologize for the pony plugs, and I will continue to throw in pony plugs for this season (which has been my intention for only this season since week 1).

      • Rob H. | November 18, 2012 at 5:05 pm |

        You don’t need to apologize.. as Paul has said many times this is his site, and by extension anyone he gives the floor to (Phil and the weekend crew) and as much as people come here to hear about mainly about sports and uniforms, they don’t come here to hear about My Little Pony or all other sorts of things that can get brought up from time to time.

        If they don’t like it they can lump it — there’s lots of things worse than My Little Pony.

      • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 6:54 pm |

        Patrick_in_MI is the same asshole who wished cancer on me awhile back on here (I made a note of it)

        No apology to him necessary.

        • Phil Hecken | November 18, 2012 at 7:12 pm |

          why would someone wish cancer on you?

          let me guess…you don’t like the pink shit on unis

        • Simply Moono | November 18, 2012 at 7:17 pm |

          Oh, I’m not apologizing, just explaining my reasoning.

        • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 7:18 pm |

          Here it is:
          http://www.uni-watch...

          Patrick_in_MI | May 13, 2012 at 10:29 pm |
          Wow, I hope you die of a really special form of cancer.

        • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 7:21 pm |

          let me guess…you don’t like the pink shit on unis

          Something about pink bats & me being annoyed by special interest groups, preferential treatment, etc etc

          You know, typical worthy reactions of the typical worthy stuff of wishing cancer upon someone.

  • Jedi54 | November 18, 2012 at 9:37 am |

    Maryland, Boise State and Baylor looked awesome. That’s how you do black. The hats and britches should always match. It was lovely to see that gear Baylor threw down.

  • hgmercury | November 18, 2012 at 10:23 am |

    Phil Hecken and Caterine Ryan always have negative things to say about Maryland’s football uniforms. I have to disagree with both of them, with the exception of the stripping pattern on their pants goes too far back to the rear of their pants than it go should go. Even if the striping pattern on their pants is the problem that does not necessarily makes it a bad uniform. This year’s Maryland football uniforms are not bad compared to last year’s uniforms. This year’s pride uniforms the black version is better than the last year’s white version.

    • The Jeff | November 18, 2012 at 10:27 am |

      Well, a D is better than an F, but that doesn’t make it good.

      Maryland are so blatantly trying to be Oregon, it’s just sad really.

      • hgmercury | November 18, 2012 at 10:52 am |

        I think Maryland learned their lesson with regards trying to be Oregon. Last year they made several different uniform color combinations which many people correctly believed to be copying Oregon. After last year’s 2-12 record Maryland decided not to use several different color combinations, including yellow. This year Maryland kept it basic with red, black, and white, with the exception of the helmets where they have a black and a white version. They have also used uniforms to honor the military like yesterday’s uniforms. I could be wrong but from what I know, the pride uniforms that Maryland uses is unique because no other teams have done something similar. It is understandable that some people do not like the pride uniforms while other people do not dislike it.

        • CWac19 | November 18, 2012 at 11:26 am |

          Maybe I missed it, but were yesterday’s “Black Ops” uniforms even ostensibly about honoring the military? Or just gratuitously using military terminology?

        • The Jeff | November 18, 2012 at 11:48 am |

          I’m pretty sure it was the latter.

    • Phil Hecken | November 18, 2012 at 10:51 am |

      “Phil Hecken and Caterine Ryan always have negative things to say about Maryland’s football uniforms.”

      ~~~

      um, did you read ANYTHING i had to say about the ‘black ops’ uniforms, either today or yesterday, when i led with it? obviously not, henry grossman

      while it’s true i dislike the flag desecration uni (aka “pride”) i thought both the black and white ops’ unis were quite nice

      terry had a whole bit besmirching the pride unis last weekend, not me

      im not a big fan of ass stripes or tramp stamps, but maryland isn’t the only team who uses them, and yesterday’s pant stripes were so muted as to be almost invisible

      • hgmercury | November 18, 2012 at 11:28 am |

        Phil Hecken

        My apologies. I should have given you credit for liking the black ops uniforms.

  • DJ | November 18, 2012 at 10:29 am |

    I wouldn’t want to see Tennessee and Alabama pulling that, even in a Bowl game.

    But wasn’t that game a long-standing color v. color game? It made sense when Tennessee’s jerseys were an especially light/yellow orange.

    • Eduardo | November 18, 2012 at 10:52 am |

      Was that Joe Namath in the Alabama-Tennessee color on color picture?

      • Phil Hecken | November 18, 2012 at 10:55 am |

        yessir

  • Mike Engle on Android | November 18, 2012 at 10:54 am |

    Color on color football only works, for me, if you could still clearly tell which team is which on a black and white tv. After that technical requirement, I only like to see it with some inherent symbolism. When USC and UCLA meet up at their mutual home field at the Rose Bowl, it is perfect. The 5&1 leader of all time. Dark red vs light blue. Can’t be beat.

    • Rob H. | November 18, 2012 at 11:02 am |

      But isn’t the whole point in advocating more usage of color-vs-color nowadays in this HDTV age — we don’t have to worry about how it looks on B&W TVs since 99.99% of people aren’t watching in black & white anymore.

      • The Jeff | November 18, 2012 at 11:04 am |

        Exactly. The only reason white jerseys even became the norm is because of black & white TV. Color on color was perfectly fine in the pre-TV era.

        • Rex | November 18, 2012 at 11:38 am |

          International soccer is one of those sports that hasn’t come around to always wearing white as the visiting team. They have primary jerseys and only wear the alternate/white if the other team’s is too close.

      • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 2:05 pm |

        Except some of us don’t have HDTVs & don’t want to watch on a 60″ screen. But the TV’s video output isn’t the issue, it’s the product on the field & how it looks & mingles. People can rave all they want about how great green looks vs orange or True Blue vs Cardinal, but color vs white is still the best contrast there is. Otherwise things just get blurred.

        • Phil Hecken | November 18, 2012 at 2:14 pm |

          “but color vs white is still the best contrast there is”

          ~~~

          if all you’re concerned with is contrast, then yes

          right now the only game i am getting is the all white jets versus the all blue rams, and sure, the contrast is fantastic, especially inside of the antiseptic rj dome with its artificial turf…especially in HDTV

          problem is, the game looks like complete shit, even though i can see both teams clearly

          and the best contrast, obviously would be all black verus all white, every game every week

          you’re going to need a better argument than this mark

        • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 2:33 pm |

          I hate color vs color. It looks like shit.

          The end.

          *Sigh* For jersey/uniform tops: color vs white is best for contrast. Of course black vs white would be the absolute best, but that’s not the issue. And I am not going to advocate blue vs red because somebody somewhere thought it looked good on their PS3.

          If monochrome color vs monochrome white is what it would take to get off this color vs color shit, well maybe that would have to be considered (christ I hope not).

          I just don’t see what’s so awful about color vs white or what’s so great about color vs color. If you’re going to advocate color vs color, then you’re going to have to lay out some very specific guidelines on what’s allowed & acceptable and what isn’t.

        • Phil Hecken | November 18, 2012 at 2:46 pm |

          “If you’re going to advocate color vs color, then you’re going to have to lay out some very specific guidelines on what’s allowed & acceptable and what isn’t.”

          ~~~

          go back up and read the pieces on “color vs color” in the NFL (linked in today’s lede) — i think in the third one i lay out my guidelines; i also laid out SPECIFIC guidelines for the NCAA (there were three of them) right in the THIRD GRAF of today’s post

          *sigh*

        • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 3:22 pm |

          I saw the 3rd paragraph (but I did not re-read the 3-part series until just now) and this is what I’m proposing with: yay (y) or nay (n) denoted before each circumstance:

          red v Tennessee orange
          red v Longhorn burnt orange
          red v burnt orange
          red v Athletic Gold
          red v green
          red v forest
          red v light blue
          red v Carolina blue
          red v True Blue
          red v royal
          red v navy
          red v purple
          red v crimson
          red v black
          red v Vegas Gold
          red v gray/silver
          red v white

          Then red replaced with a different color thereafter, and so on. Basically a full-fledged chart akin to the multiplication Times Table for any given scenario. The current definition of color vs color is too vague.

          This just came to me: are there no teal teams in NCAAF?

        • Phil Hecken | November 18, 2012 at 3:33 pm |

          yeah, i’ll be getting right on that

        • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 3:40 pm |

          yeah, i’ll be getting right on that

          So no, then.

        • Phil Hecken | November 18, 2012 at 3:49 pm |

          you want me to objectively not arbitrarily come up with a spreadsheet of every possible acceptable combination in the NCAA and NFL…and my list would be definitive? puh-lease…what you, ok, not you, but what the average person might deem acceptable, i might not…and what THE jeff deems acceptable would most likely not be acceptable to just about the entire world

          my rules, arbitrary as they are, are enough — neutral site (or special circumstance, like a thanksgiving game), enough contrast so almost everyone (jack nicklaus excluded) can tell the difference, and special game — like a season-ending rivalry game

          i happen to LIKE white-clad teams, so i’m certainly not advocating for much color-vs-color, but i think if it’s rare, it’s special, and games like USC/UCLA fit that bill

        • Mike Engle | November 18, 2012 at 3:58 pm |

          My definition of “almost everybody” would include Jack Nicklaus, but exclude Stevie Wonder.
          //YMMV

        • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 4:20 pm |

          Here’s a bare-bones rough draft:

          http://img132.images...

          Of course I don’t want 14,440 different examples & possible combinations & scenarios. The point of that chart would be to establish the nays from the process of elimination. All vs white (y). white v gray/silver (n).

        • Rob H. | November 18, 2012 at 5:44 pm |

          right now the only game i am getting is the all white jets versus the all blue rams, and sure, the contrast is fantastic, especially inside of the antiseptic rj dome with it’s artificial turf…especially in HDTV…problem is, the game looks like complete shit, even though i can see both teams clearly

          That’s just because monochrome sucks… tell me the one on the right doesn’t look better:

          http://i.imgur.com/V...

          But that’s a different argument than color-vs-color. And you couldn’t do color-vs-color with Rams and Jets, unless the Rams brought a gold jersey with them.

        • Phil Hecken | November 18, 2012 at 7:10 pm |

          mark,

          that’s not quite the way i would have set the chart up, but i get your idea

          basically it’s not going to be hard and fast…but you can put all the golds, yellows, silvers and light grays, plus the powder (carolina) blue and call that “light” and the rest you can call “dark” and as a general rule of thumb, no light should play another light, and no dark should play another dark

          for example, most times orange would be ok against a dark, but it would depend … that first example works, but this doesn’t (IMHO)

          i wouldn’t normally want red versus navy, but that works, because of the white yokes and helmets

          here’s a red versus blue (honolulu) that imho doesn’t work

          honestly, it would depend on the matchup, and the circumstances — i’d almost NEVER want to see it in the nfl except for say, thanksgiving or the super bowl

          college, bowl games and end of season rivalry games (neutral site if possible) would be ok so long as the contrast was there

          you could, for example, probably get away with UF vs UGA (blue vs red) at the world’s largest outdoor cocktail party

      • Mike Engle | November 18, 2012 at 3:21 pm |

        It’s not just the TV itself. Some people are colorblind or color impaired. Doesn’t matter how good your TV is, because Jack Nicklaus still can’t tell red from green. Stormtroopers vs. Darth Vaders might not be beautiful, but it’s high-contrast enough for anybody and their dogs to follow along.
        //Form follows function. Establish function, then form it as handsomely as you’d like.

    • Komet17 | November 18, 2012 at 3:29 pm |

      Mike Engle: The Rose Bowl is NOT a “mutual home field” for USC and UCLA. USC’s home is the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum.

  • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 10:55 am |

    yesterday was all about the beautiful USC/UCLA game, which for almost the fourth consecutive year, was color vs. color.

    I don’t know, that’s a bit too much color & a white jersey would have certainly helped with contrast. Still looks like two home teams playing each other.

    If this is the best example for a color-vs-color, I’m still not convinced.

    • Phil Hecken | November 18, 2012 at 11:11 am |

      you’re nuts mark — and i LOVE white uniforms — but you tell me which of these five doesn’t belong:

      2008

      2009

      2010

      2011

      2012

      ucla did look good in 2011, but they didn’t look like ucla — you want to candy up the uniforms, don’t do it in your rivalry game

      • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 11:29 am |

        I just gave my gut reaction, that’s all. It’s just too much color. A white helmet would have helped; but still. The 2008 angle of the pic shows a lot of gold-ish pants which blurs contrast & it’s a dark jersey against a less-darker jersey on a green field. That’s a lot of color.

        I know this context here does not apply anymore:
        http://img176.imagev...

        But it’s like reading gray text on a black background. Honestly, the 2011 one looks the most appealing to me to watch, and that’s not factoring any historical context or favoritism because I don’t have a favorite NCAAF team or uniform.

        If the match-up was a blue Toronto Maple Leafs vs red Chicago Blackhawks or a red Detroit Red Wings vs a black Boston Bruins, I still couldn’t get behind it.

        • Phil Hecken | November 18, 2012 at 11:39 am |

          well, you can actually tell who is who even in B&W, but it’s a valid point — which is precisely why some color vs color matchups don’t work at all;

          in football, unlike soccer or hockey, it’s much more about the top half of the body — QB’s especially need to quickly tell which player is a receiver and which is a DB — and which is why i give THE jeff credit for one suggestion he’s made over the years — make opposing teams wear different color helmets from their opponents…

          ricko and robert marshall disagree on the color vs color thing (robert loves it, ricko hates it), but i think both will agree that helmet color and the speed with which a QB must ID a player can only be helped by different color lids

          THAT should be one requirement the NCAA (where multiple helmets are the norm) and NFL (where teams are only permitted one helmet) both leagues adopt ASAP

        • The Jeff | November 18, 2012 at 11:40 am |

          Man… I *really* don’t understand you. How is “too much color” even a thing? I hope you don’t look out your window in the fall when you’ve got a blue sky and green grass with yellow & orange trees.

        • Rob H. | November 18, 2012 at 12:17 pm |

          THAT should be one requirement the NCAA (where multiple helmets are the norm) and NFL (where teams are only permitted one helmet) both leagues adopt ASAP

          You mean that NFL should permit multiple helmets so that both teams aren’t wearing same color helmet? That makes sense. Isn’t that the reason that the Bills gave for switching to a red helmet in 1984 — because except the Jets the whole division wore white helmets? (And since then the Jets and Bills have both switched back to white, although New England now wears silver.)

          I agree that USC-UCLA looks good red vs blue, but just to play devil’s advocate, I think it also good for teams that play each other regularly home-and-away to have different looks — UCLA at USC games to look one way and USC at UCLA games to look another, although this preference is more so for the NFL where division rivals play home and away every season.

          For instance, Dallas vs Philadelphia is almost always white vs green, I’d rather see Philly go white at home to force Dallas to wear blue and so that both meeting don’t look identical.

        • Phil Hecken | November 18, 2012 at 1:33 pm |

          “I think it also good for teams that play each other regularly home-and-away to have different looks”

          ~~~

          rob, i agree with this, especially when it’s true home and home series like the NFL divisions — but if it’s a bowl game (or the super bowl) or a ‘neutral site’ (granted usc/ucla isn’t *neutral* per se — coliseum, rose bowl, etc), it’s pretty close — both are so. cal teams calling LA home — and since they meet up once a year, and both have gorgeous unis (or did until adidas fancied up ucla), i think the c-vs-c is perfect

        • LarryB | November 18, 2012 at 7:21 pm |

          The too much color comment did make me chuckle. Concealed and The Jeffs was a good one.

          Somebody does not like USC vs UCLA because it had too much color?

      • CWac19 | November 18, 2012 at 11:35 am |

        Wow. UCLA’ s 2008 uniforms were gorgeous. Can anyone at Adidas truly believe the current look to be superior?

        • timmy b | November 18, 2012 at 12:10 pm |

          We had color vs color in the now comatose (late??) National Hockey League. Before 1951-52 (the season the NHL mandated white vs. color, a full SIX YEARS before the NFL did, but I digress) the NHL frequently had color vs. color games, like Leafs-Hawks, Leafs-Red Wings, Rangers-Habs, Leafs-Maroons, etc. believe it or not, instances of white vs white, such as Bruins-Leafs, Leafs-Americans, Bruins-Americans, etc.

          As for the NFL from at least 1941-1949, and 1954-1956, we had instances of Bears-Packers games where both wore navy jerseys! Lions (honolulu) and Rams (royal) in the early 40′s where both wore blue.

          True, this is before most of us were born. But, it DID happen.

        • LarryB | November 18, 2012 at 12:19 pm |

          I agree that 2008 uni was sweet.
          I do like the USC UCLA color on color games. USC unis are probably my second favorite. After Ohio State.
          UCLA is up there too. Still getting used to the different blue.

        • Rob H. | November 18, 2012 at 12:21 pm |

          I think even if you consider it being pre-TV, navy vs navy is still a bit too unnecessarily confusing, both for the fans in the stands and the quarterbacks. That had to lead to an interception or two!

        • The Jeff | November 18, 2012 at 12:34 pm |

          Yeah… even I don’t want to see navy vs navy – but I’m thinking the Packers yellow shoulders and yellow helmets were probably enough for the players, at least. I’d think it’d be more confusing for the players when you’ve got something like Raiders at Panthers or Colts at Bills, where even though it’s color vs white, you’ve got one team wearing a uniform remarkably similar to what the other team often wears.

  • hutcherson99 | November 18, 2012 at 11:11 am |

    I wish someone had mentioned the UGA/Georgia southern game when it comes to brilliant jerseys: http://media.cmgdigi...

    because honestly, UGA has some great, classic uniforms, and Georgia southern wears basically alabama uniforms, which uni watch seems to love, but with a better navy blue color. i was just surprised to not see any mention of it.

    • concealed78 | November 18, 2012 at 11:36 am |

      That is nice. What I like is how uncluttered the helmet designs & helmet stripes are, and numbers on the sides of the helmet are nifty, too. The jerseys look nice and clean. What a refreshing exercise in restraint.

    • CWac19 | November 18, 2012 at 11:43 am |

      Playing a tough, non-conference game before heading to the playoffs. All that’s right with FCS (and, conversely, in the same game, all that’s wrong with FBS).

  • Mitts | November 18, 2012 at 11:21 am |

    A very bad week for Minor League Baseball rebranding. #1 RailRiders. The humping porcupine on the railroad tracks? If that’s creative then I want to be an accountant.
    http://m.thetimes-tr...

  • hgmercury | November 18, 2012 at 11:22 am |

    I stand corrected. Catherine Ryan always has negative things to say about Maryland uniforms.

    My apologies to Phil Hecken. He does not always have negative things to say about Maryland uniforms. To his credit he did like the black ops uniforms worn by Maryland in yesterday’s game against Florida State. He does not like the pride uniforms, while many people do not. Having read Catherine Ryan’s 5 & 1 spot she has always mentioned something negative about Maryland’s uniforms when discussing them.

    • Rex | November 18, 2012 at 11:36 am |

      The 5 & 1 will always reflect one person’s opinion. Just hope something you like shows up here, too.

      • Rob H. | November 18, 2012 at 12:23 pm |

        Are we talking about all of Maryland uniforms or just since the beginning of last season when they started to suck?

        • Rex | November 19, 2012 at 10:30 am |

          I don’t necessarily agree with half of the 5 & 1 every weekend (among the whole league), but have to say Maryland has moved past their nouveau riche uniform period and toned it down a bit. The lack of decal clarity on Saturday made them look like NASCAR helmets.

  • Rex | November 18, 2012 at 11:24 am |

    Don’t blame UVa for wearing navy pants- that’s their primary color. Carolina needs to represent their primary color with some light blue pants or, of course, helmet.

    • Simply Moono | November 18, 2012 at 2:18 pm |

      I didn’t blame them: I just gave my opinion on what pant I would’ve preferred for the Cavaliers.

  • DenverGregg | November 18, 2012 at 11:40 am |

    Getting the 5-spot on the five-and-one is probably the greatest accomplishment for 2012 Buff football.

    Great to see UCLA/SoCal back to color v. color, but still looks odd to see it as a day game. That was the quintessential night game. And it’s no coincidence that UCLA finally pulls one out after abandoning their “white flag” kits from last year.

    Three great “and one” contenders:
    Wyo/UNLV;
    Iowa State/Kansas;
    Duke/Ga Tech.

  • James De | November 18, 2012 at 11:54 am |

    http://t.co/a0nNF5rp The Reading Figthin’ Phil’s is another abortion of a sports brand identity. This is indefensable. My goodness… when did Minor League Baseball get bought out by fucking Milton Bradley? There needs to be a MILB brand clearing house to stop such shennagin’s…

    • Arr Scott | November 18, 2012 at 2:56 pm |

      Well, I disagree about your prescription – centralizing decision making in the hands of some trumped up junior Selig cannot conceivably improve anything – but I’m with you on the diagnosis. The latest I heard from Art Silber, owner of my local Potomac Nationals, who are preparing to build a new ballpark across the street from me, is that he’s leaning toward rebranding the team the P-Nats. With the P right there on the chest in front of the word Natd. Seeing the Fightin Phils gives me nightmares of what we can expect here in Northern Virginia in two years.

      • scott | November 18, 2012 at 3:50 pm |

        Actually, MILB is encouraging this sort of stuff by mandating that Brandiose and perhaps one other design studio handle all the work. If local firms did the designs they’d understand the communities better. Why the hell two idiots from San Diego think they know the Reading area is beyond me.

  • C.T. | November 18, 2012 at 12:32 pm |

    Kansas going all-black with the stock white helmet is the true definition of BFBS. Everything about their colors clashes with a black concept, and rather than coming up with something that tie the two in together, Adidas just shipped over a generic black uni and said told em to work it out for themselves. Just look at the Boise BFBS unis…I don’t love them, but I’d say that they made a real effort to bring the whole thing together.

    The whole thing just smacks of laziness and is truly third rate. Nice for Kansas to get another reminder of where they are on the totem pole.

    • Douglas King | November 18, 2012 at 4:36 pm |

      Easily the most half-assed example of BFBS we have ever seen, they didn’t even use their same font for the numbers, just one of the stock fonts of Adidas.

    • jedi54 | November 18, 2012 at 7:17 pm |

      No Boise State did it right. If you gonna wear black britches, you need black hats. They could have worn the orange shirts or any color shirt and I would have been happy.

  • Jake | November 18, 2012 at 12:33 pm |

    Iowa and Gardner-Webb went color v. color last night in the Cancun Challenge.

    http://bloximages.ne...

  • C.T. | November 18, 2012 at 12:35 pm |

    Loved the USC-UCLA game. Notes about the UCLA unis though:
    1) the numbers were a tad small. Looking at the 2008 game, they had a block numbering that was a bit bigger and they looked alot better. USC’s humongous numbers didnt help it much.
    2) there seemed to be some weird bunching issues on the upper backs & shoulders. Every time they zoomed in on UCLA players walking away from the camera it was pretty obvious that they had major fitting issues. Also, the rear numbers bunched alot, they almost looked like thermoplastic numbers. Anyone have a screen shot?

  • Tom V. | November 18, 2012 at 12:45 pm |

    I could have watched the USC/UCLA game simply because it was such a good looking game, color on color works perfectly with these two uniforms, both teams with similar pants works incredibly well too. When judging uniforms simply on the look (and not history) color to me is the thing to go on, most uniforms fail when it comes to striping and contrasting piping. To me simple is better with big blocks of color and readable numbers.

    As for the Maryland uniforms and them being the UA Oregon, I have to say Oregon doesn’t have a great color palette to work with, gray, white, black, that yellow and that green don’t lend themselves to a great look. And some combinations are terrible. Maryland on the other hand has a great basis, red, yellow, black and white. I like the sublimated flag patterns on the helmets and shoulders, I liked the flag uniforms they started with last year (or rather thought it was a decent idea) because the colors worked, if they were trying to work with blue and black or something it wouldn’t have worked. I wasn’t incredibly impressed with the white ops but it was a clean look and the faint flag patterns worked. Black ops, not so much. But again Maryland has a much better choice of colors than Oregon.

  • TD | November 18, 2012 at 1:21 pm |

    Ref Bill Leavy’s number and ‘R’ are peeling off – the ‘R’ and the ’7′ are already gone. (Bucks-Panthers)

  • Alex | November 18, 2012 at 2:25 pm |

    If not already posted

    http://www.theonion....

  • Tony C. | November 18, 2012 at 2:37 pm |

    Browns QB Brandon Weeden started today’s game with a clear visor on http://scores.espn.g... . then took it off, and the put it back on later in the game(sorry don’t have pictures of that.

  • Clint Kalinec | November 18, 2012 at 3:04 pm |

    Army/Navy rivalry games unis have been unveiled. HATE the Army one. At first glance I hated the Navy helmet. But for some reason the more I look at it the more I like it.

    http://twitter.com/U...

    http://twitter.com/U...

    http://twitter.com/U...

    http://twitter.com/U...

    • Arr Scott | November 18, 2012 at 4:41 pm |

      I really don’t want to like these, but I absolutely love the whole Navy uniform. The Army uni is still meh for me, but it’s more about the monochrome than any particular element. I do like the non-camo pattern on the numbers, sleeves, and helmet. (Funny, the one school that’s unarguably justified in using camo, and it doesn’t. Army just made an ass out of a whole bunch of civilian college football teams.) I just wish the whole thing weren’t so monochrome, and numbers basically the same color as the jersey are always wrong. Not even as a matter of aesthetic opinion: That’s bad design. Still, I care more about USNA, and they’ll look good enough that I won’t mind the underwhelming Army unis.

      • Mike Engle | November 18, 2012 at 6:17 pm |

        This is what happens when teams “candy up” and you get a raspberry truffle from Godiva in the trick-or-treat bag. Navy: really really nice jerseys; helmet too gaudy for me. Army: the details are clever, but it’s over-designed to the point of “meh.”

  • Nick | November 18, 2012 at 3:16 pm |

    Anyone else watching the Packers-Lions and notice that Michel Leshoure and Titus Young have “SR.” tacked onto their NOB? I don’t think I’ve seen that before.

    • Komet17 | November 18, 2012 at 3:17 pm |

      Nick,
      Yes, I just saw that, too–no screenshot–but I don’t recall seing that on Leshoure–or any one else, ever, for that matter.

      • Douglas King | November 18, 2012 at 4:39 pm |

        You wouldn’t have because this is the first year the NFL is letting people put those on.

        There may be another young on the team so I can understand him having it on their but I don’t think there is another Leshoure on the team (possibly even in the league).

  • Mirliton | November 18, 2012 at 3:18 pm |

    This happened… http://cmsimg.theadv...

  • Mike Engle | November 18, 2012 at 3:53 pm |

    I saw a AHL game in person last night. Manchester Monarchs v. Bridgeport Sound Tigers. My phone camera isn’t good enough to take quality hockey pictures, but I noticed two odd things about Manchester:
    They have a player, #5, Vince LoVerde, whose NOB is entirely all-caps, but “mixed case,” i.e.: the L and V are the two biggest letters in his name. I would have expected an all-cap LOVERDE (with or without a space) or maybe even LoVERDE (with or without a space).
    Slava Voynov (#76) had the Reebok vector logo on his jersey, while everybody else had the Reebok wordmark.

  • Arr Scott | November 18, 2012 at 4:35 pm |

    Note to the GUD team: I certainly did appreciate your investigation into the origins of Pittsburgh’s bumblebee jersey. It’s just that you did such a thorough job that it didn’t seem to leave much to comment on. Don’t take the relative silence in the comments the other weekend as apathy; I think it’s more likely a sign of how good your work was.

    That said, you’re completely wrong about the striped Steelers unis. They’re awesome, I tell you, absolutely awesome. About the only thing that could get me to actually watch Sunday Night Football, in fact. Looking forward to it.

    • timmy b | November 18, 2012 at 5:09 pm |

      Hey Arr,

      First, thanks for the kind words on the throwback research. A labor of luv, as they say.

      Anyway, I LOVE the convict jerseys! In the GUD blog, I do a weekly review of the uni matchups. For Week 8, http://nfluniforms.b..., you’ll see what I had to say about how well they looked on the field. The bumblebees are so far outside the box of NFL uniforms that they really stand out, in a very good way.

      Of course, I only speak for myself and not my GUD teammates, who – I believe – do not share my enthusiasm for the striped Steeler wonders.

    • Rob H. | November 18, 2012 at 5:12 pm |

      Thanks, Arr Scott.. on behalf on Tim & Bill (and I don’t mean to presume to speak for them) I appreciate your comment very much. The fact is we did to some extent take the lack of response to it as apathy and hence today’s poll. But your comment is representative of the results of the poll so far — over 500 votes and 74% in the affirmative — and it is much appreciated.

      And also, the comments about disliking the uniforms were solely mine (and more to reflect how I perceived they have been received generally than specifically my own opinion of them) and Tim or Bill didn’t have anything to do with any of the text above accompanying the poll.

      But for all of us at the GUD, thanks to you and everybody!

    • Phil Hecken | November 18, 2012 at 6:55 pm |

      i’ll echo a part of robert scott’s adulation for the piece and even go so far as to say i’m actually looking forward to SNF as well, since i didn’t get to see the first game against warshington

      i don’t hate the unis, but i don’t think they did nearly as good a job as they could have…i’m not talking about adding full sleeves (which would have made that the most awesome throwback ever), but they could have had the spandex shirts in repeating black/gold patterning to match the jersey; they should NOT have had black panels down the sides of the shirt, better mimicking the supposed original uniform…tan pants i can live with, but the modern helmet RUINS an otherwise very good throwback

      at the very least get hydrographics to do a washington-throwback lid for you or use the gold helmets you used the past few seasons for the other throwback…that would have looked much better aesthetically

      was it an outlandish design then? sure — is it garish now? you betcha…but garish and outlandish don’t always equate to bad…and this (jersey in particular) uni had sooooo much potential, only to fall a day late and a few pennies short

      • Rob H. | November 18, 2012 at 7:17 pm |

        Yes about the helmets, they and Green Bay’s throwback would have looked better with the Redskins faux-leather helmet, but at the very very least, just take the logo off one side and stripes off and just go with a plain solid black helmet like they did in 1994 or like you said, the yellow throwback helmet from last couple years.

        There was a fan they showed at last Monday Night’s game against Kansas City wearing the bumblebee throwback and he had a leathery looking helmet, I think using the current helmet really disturbs the whole throwback look. Even if the Washington and Green Bay helmets still are going to look “moderny” due to safety requirements and such, at least they are trying.

        Now if they just could have somehow let the Redskins and Steelers play both wearing their throwbacks (color-vs-color problems notwithstading) we’d be in a wonderful actual throwback era like baseball does. I know I already brought that up, and anyway it’s not like Christopher Reeve in that movie where he actually fools himself into thinking he is in the past until he tragically looks at the penny from modern times and wakes up. The $8 beers will keep you from forgetting you’re in 2012.

  • LarryB | November 18, 2012 at 7:19 pm |

    Speaking of Maryland it appears them and Rutgers want to join the Big Ten.

    I hate these mega conferences. 12 is even too much. 14 is dumb. And am I supposed to be excited about Maryland and Rutgers?

    • Phil Hecken | November 18, 2012 at 7:27 pm |

      yes 14 in a conference

      how stupid

      get used to it

      and get used to super-conferences going forward…the B1G will be 14 sooner than you think and it wouldn’t surprise me to see the *big 12* (now 10) disband and join other conferences too

      remember the SWC? yeah, neither does anyone else (TFPIC)…point is, nothing is forever, and just as the BCS is going to result in a playoff system, the conferences of our youth are going to be entirely different soon too

      • Tim E. O'B | November 18, 2012 at 7:37 pm |

        Maryland and Rutgers are bad adds, the B1G missed out on a better athletic and geographical fit in Mizzou because of a perceived lower academic standard. Now their in the SEC and wont want to move.

        In a perfect world, moving on from 12 to 14, the B1G would add Iowa State and Mizzou and going to 16 they would add Kansas and Kansas State or Cincinnati and Pitt.

        Finally, fuck Notre Dame.

        • DJ | November 18, 2012 at 8:00 pm |

          the B1G missed out on a better athletic and geographical fit in Mizzou because of a perceived lower academic standard. Now their (sic) in the SEC and wont want to move.

          Speaking of low academic standards…

          And this isn’t about academic standards. It’s about money. And the reach of the BTN. What would Mizzou give them — St. Louis and Kansas City? In theory, Maryland gets them Washington DC, while Rutgers gives them New Jersey and a toehold into New York City. That both schools are also members of the Association of American Universities is a happy coincidence.

        • Phil Hecken | November 18, 2012 at 8:06 pm |

          “Speaking of low academic standards”

          ~~~

          don’t mind time, he majored in journalism at a B1G school ;)

        • Neeko | November 18, 2012 at 10:41 pm |

          Missouri doesn’t offer the TV market those east coast schools do – all about $$$

        • Tim E. O'B | November 18, 2012 at 11:10 pm |

          Yeah, because Lincoln, NE is such a huge market…
          *eye roll*

          Who would want St. Louis and Kansas City as a football TV market, could you even imagine that?
          *exaggerated eye roll*

          I can’t wait to get the Baltimore football TV market, I mean, who wouldn’t watch a middling state football program instead of a stupid consistently-playoff-contending NFL team?
          *Points at exaggerated eye roll*

          It’s not that simple, you shouldn’t be so cynical.

      • LarryB | November 18, 2012 at 8:19 pm |

        I do not like them because there will be teams that rarely play each other. Unless college football seasons go to 16 games.

        Even now I think Ohio State will not play Nebraska for a few years. Then add 2 more so so programs and it will be even worse.

        Just because it is here does not mean I have to like it. As a fan what do I gain from it?

        And I know years ago the Southern Conference had a bunch of teams. Before some split for the ACC.

  • LarryB | November 18, 2012 at 7:22 pm |
  • Mike | November 18, 2012 at 9:07 pm |

    Cris Collinsworth, in the midst of a discussion on the Steelers throwbacks mentioned on Sunday Night Football just now “Let’s go futuristic and try to sell some jerseys that way”. Umm, how about NO.

  • Rob | November 18, 2012 at 10:13 pm |

    Regarding the Steelers’ “throwback” unis tonight, a friend of mine from high school had the best comment on them:

    “The Steelers throwback stuff looks like prison uniforms and jazz hands had a love child.”

    Couldn’t have said it any better myself.

  • StLMarty | November 19, 2012 at 12:40 am |

    Isn’t fan baiting illegal on this site?