NFL 2010-2011

[BBTV]

Dude, never agree with dennisbergan.

Yeah, actually the opposite is true... they need to not only keep the helmet stripes, they need to match them on the pants.

The helmet stripes, with that entire uniform, stick out like a sore thumb.

With the home black uniform (whether its with gold or black pants), there is no point in having a white stripe on the helmet. There is very little (if any) white in the entire uniform. It USED to make sense, when the Saints pants stripes matched the helmet (or were very similar to the helmet). Back then, they had white in their uniform.

Today, its out-of-place.

Right. You could make a case that the helmet stipe could be white-black-white, then it would sort of match the FDL logo (actually, you'd need two thin black strips on the outside of the white), but even then, it wouldn't match the rest of the uniform.

If it was just solid black, then it would match the gold pants, but it's probably better if it's just eliminated all together. Do this, and for crying out loud, match the golds, and it's an OK (even if a litle dated) uniform. Slap a custom font on it, and it's way better IMO.

Dude, never agree with dennisbergan.

Yeah, actually the opposite is true... they need to not only keep the helmet stripes, they need to match them on the pants.

The helmet stripes, with that entire uniform, stick out like a sore thumb.

With the home black uniform (whether its with gold or black pants), there is no point in having a white stripe on the helmet. There is very little (if any) white in the entire uniform. It USED to make sense, when the Saints pants stripes matched the helmet (or were very similar to the helmet). Back then, they had white in their uniform.

Today, its out-of-place.

The Redskins' helmet stripes don't match their uniforms either. Why doesn't anybody butch about them?

If the Redskins jump off a bridge, would the Saints follow? One has nothing to do with the other. Don't get upset and defensive because someone is criticizing your favorite teams' uniforms (sorry, that's not meant to sound as harsh as it probably did ).

For the record, the Redskins uniforms look lost in the early '80s, and desparately need to be updated / overhauled. I do like the helmet, probably because I always liked their striping pattern, but that's about the only redeeming quality of their current set IMO. I'd start over.

[dennisbergan]

For the record, the Redskins uniforms look lost in the early '80s, and desparately need to be updated / overhauled. I do like the helmet, probably because I always liked their striping pattern, but that's about the only redeeming quality of their current set IMO. I'd start over.

I agree. The Redskins threads are awful and have been for years now.

But because Lil Dan Snyder used to wear Skins jammies to bed and those red and yellow colors mean so much to him, it will likely never change.

The Redskins would look 100 times better with a "modernized" version of their throwemback uniforms. That dark maroon and mustard yellow color scheme would be unique to anyone else in the NFL (and most of college football too) and those colors would work in these times (the current bright red and yellow just scream 1977).

To be more "PC", the helmet logo would likely have to be changed (I always liked the "R" insignia that Gibbs used to wear on his hat. That could work in some way and one of the old logos the team used to wear when they wore gold helmets could be used on a current helmet too).

-Deep Maroon helmet with new logo.

-Deep maroon jersey, with white number outlined in mustard gold.

-White jersey, with maroon number outlined in mustard gold.

-Mustard gold pants, with thin white and maroon stripe.

-Deep maroon pants, with thin white and gold stripe.

(And here is one, that may shock some people....)

-A striped sock similar to the throwback socks, with the maroon pants (its part of the Skins' uniform history) and solid maroon socks with the gold pants.

That look would make the Redskins a winner; at least off the field.

[Chawls]

Dude, never agree with dennisbergan.

Yeah, actually the opposite is true... they need to not only keep the helmet stripes, they need to match them on the pants.

The helmet stripes, with that entire uniform, stick out like a sore thumb.

With the home black uniform (whether its with gold or black pants), there is no point in having a white stripe on the helmet. There is very little (if any) white in the entire uniform. It USED to make sense, when the Saints pants stripes matched the helmet (or were very similar to the helmet). Back then, they had white in their uniform.

Today, its out-of-place.

The Redskins' helmet stripes don't match their uniforms either. Why doesn't anybody butch about them?

If the Redskins jump off a bridge, would the Saints follow? One has nothing to do with the other. Don't get upset and defensive because someone is criticizing your favorite teams' uniforms (sorry, that's not meant to sound as harsh as it probably did ).

For the record, the Redskins uniforms look lost in the early '80s, and desparately need to be updated / overhauled. I do like the helmet, probably because I always liked their striping pattern, but that's about the only redeeming quality of their current set IMO. I'd start over.

No offense taken . I wasn't trying to defend my favorite team; rather I was trying to speak objectively as I actually AGREE with the argument of most that their stripes should coordinate somewhat. I was just noting that some people seem to single out the Saints as the only team who has this problem. I was merely meaning to point out that they aren't.

But as far the 'Skins uniform problems, I think we all know what they need to do:

But replace the grey facemask with a gold one

[powersurge]

Dude, never agree with dennisbergan.

Yeah, actually the opposite is true... they need to not only keep the helmet stripes, they need to match them on the pants.

The helmet stripes, with that entire uniform, stick out like a sore thumb.

With the home black uniform (whether its with gold or black pants), there is no point in having a white stripe on the helmet. There is very little (if any) white in the entire uniform. It USED to make sense, when the Saints pants stripes matched the helmet (or were very similar to the helmet). Back then, they had white in their uniform.

Today, its out-of-place.

The Redskins' helmet stripes don't match their uniforms either. Why doesn't anybody butch about them?

If the Redskins jump off a bridge, would the Saints follow? One has nothing to do with the other. Don't get upset and defensive because someone is criticizing your favorite teams' uniforms (sorry, that's not meant to sound as harsh as it probably did ).

For the record, the Redskins uniforms look lost in the early '80s, and desparately need to be updated / overhauled. I do like the helmet, probably because I always liked their striping pattern, but that's about the only redeeming quality of their current set IMO. I'd start over.

No offense taken . I wasn't trying to defend my favorite team; rather I was trying to speak objectively as I actually AGREE with the argument of most that their stripes should coordinate somewhat. I was just noting that some people seem to single out the Saints as the only team who has this problem. I was merely meaning to point out that they aren't.

But as far the 'Skins uniform problems, I think we all know what they need to do:

But replace the grey facemask with a gold one

those are a thing of beauty. I doubt we'll ever see them though. But you can always dream.

In regards to helmet stripes having to match pant stripes. Is that an OCD thing where everything needs to match perfectly??? I actually love the fact that helmet and pants stripes don't always match because it prevents the entire league from being boring and predictable with their jerseys. Being different is fine so long as its good. I think the Redskin pants and Saints pants help break up the predictablity of the league's unis.

[AndrewG70]

Dude, never agree with dennisbergan.

Yeah, actually the opposite is true... they need to not only keep the helmet stripes, they need to match them on the pants.

The helmet stripes, with that entire uniform, stick out like a sore thumb.

With the home black uniform (whether its with gold or black pants), there is no point in having a white stripe on the helmet. There is very little (if any) white in the entire uniform. It USED to make sense, when the Saints pants stripes matched the helmet (or were very similar to the helmet). Back then, they had white in their uniform.

Today, its out-of-place.

The Redskins' helmet stripes don't match their uniforms either. Why doesn't anybody butch about them?

If the Redskins jump off a bridge, would the Saints follow? One has nothing to do with the other. Don't get upset and defensive because someone is criticizing your favorite teams' uniforms (sorry, that's not meant to sound as harsh as it probably did ).

For the record, the Redskins uniforms look lost in the early '80s, and desparately need to be updated / overhauled. I do like the helmet, probably because I always liked their striping pattern, but that's about the only redeeming quality of their current set IMO. I'd start over.

No offense taken . I wasn't trying to defend my favorite team; rather I was trying to speak objectively as I actually AGREE with the argument of most that their stripes should coordinate somewhat. I was just noting that some people seem to single out the Saints as the only team who has this problem. I was merely meaning to point out that they aren't.

But as far the 'Skins uniform problems, I think we all know what they need to do:

But replace the grey facemask with a gold one

And either remove the sock stripes or make them match the sleeve stripes. Perfect.

[andrewharrington]

Right. You could make a case that the helmet stipe could be white-black-white, then it would sort of match the FDL logo (actually, you'd need two thin black strips on the outside of the white), but even then, it wouldn't match the rest of the uniform.

Actually, the fleur is black, with a white outline, then a gold and then a black outline. Too complicated for a helmet stripe. Stripe matching blows anyway. Matching stripes is no rocket science, and it's a waste of a design degree.

[andrewharrington]

As for the dog imagery, again the Dawg Pound is not the team. Would a pig logo make sense for the Redskins? Would Darth Vader's helmet make sense as a Raiders logo (as awesome as it would be)? No. Fan communities will take on identities of their own, there's nothing wrong with that. The team shouldn't change its own identity to match that of the fan community, however. That's an example of the tail wagging the dog (no pun intended). So sure, the Dawg Pound thing is great for that subsect of the Browns' fanbase, but it doesn't work as an overall team identity.

Again, the name Browns will always be ambiguous. So why try nailing down the team name to a concrete image? Play off the traditional football image and use the =B= logo.

For the record, the dog theme originally began within the team (the defensive secondary), then it spread to the fans. The reason the Pig and Darth Vader will not work as logos for those teams is because those teams already have established, tangible nicknames. The Browns' ambiguous nickname allows for more liberty to be taken in the image that represents them because there are no preestablished notions of what a 'Brown' is. That said, I's still rather see a monogram or shield or something ambiguous as their official logo, but The dog would be a fine choice as well.

As it stands, the 3/4 helmet is the only logo that can be used for men's apparel, while the B logo is only for women's apparel and the dog is only for kids apparel.

[The_Admiral]

The Redskins' helmet stripes don't match their uniforms either. Why doesn't anybody butch about them?

They prefer to femme?

[BlueSky]

Right. You could make a case that the helmet stripe could be white-black-white, then it would sort of match the FDL logo (actually, you'd need two thin black strips on the outside of the white), but even then, it wouldn't match the rest of the uniform.

Actually, the fleur is black, with a white outline, then a gold and then a black outline. Too complicated for a helmet stripe. Stripe matching blows anyway. Matching stripes is no rocket science, and it's a waste of a design degree.

Like this?

That's the way the Saints wore their helmet and pants stripes for part of the '68 season. At some point they decided to change back to b/w/b. Note the right tackle in this pic, who still has the old-soon-to-be-new-again pants.

[powersurge]

i understand the draw backs of stereotyping... but the history of Cleveland is the hard-nosed stereotype, defined to a T. Now, every city has a special relationship with its fans, but Cleveland Browns football is a lot more a part of the community than other places like a New York, California teams, even a lot of the Texas teams.

Prove it.

I would hazard a guess that there are just as many yuppie white collar douches in downtown Cleveland as there are in any other major city and just as many meat and potatoes flannel shirt factory workers in any other city as there are in Cleveland.

Its all just people glorifying where they live. After a while people hear it so many times they start to believe it. You can't tell me that Cleveland is any more harder working or hard-nosed then The Bronx or East LA or even South Boston. And all of those places are diehard sports fans just as much if not more than Cleveland.

Again, not be harsh but the whole "my town is blue collar" thing has got to go.

[powersurge]

d/p

[TruColor]

Actually, the fleur is black, with a white outline, then a gold and then a black outline. Too complicated for a helmet stripe. Stripe matching blows anyway. Matching stripes is no rocket science, and it's a waste of a design degree.

And then, there's the Buffalo Bills' helmet:

[BBTV]

Yeah, that's a total mess. I totally forgot about that extra gold outline in the FDL - it's kind of unnecessary. I wasn't suggesting that they should adjust their stripe to match it, just that it's a way that they could justify having a multi-colored stripe at all, because as it stands now, it looks really out of place with the rest of their uniform. I don't think that every stripe needs to be exactly the same, and that everything has to match from the top on down, but nothing should really stand out as being out of place, and that's what the black-white-black stripe does, IMO.

[powersurge]

Yeah, that's a total mess. I totally forgot about that extra gold outline in the FDL - it's kind of unnecessary. I wasn't suggesting that they should adjust their stripe to match it, just that it's a way that they could justify having a multi-colored stripe at all, because as it stands now, it looks really out of place with the rest of their uniform. I don't think that every stripe needs to be exactly the same, and that everything has to match from the top on down, but nothing should really stand out as being out of place, and that's what the black-white-black stripe does, IMO.

I've always believed that the Saints' pants were more of a match with the Jersey then the helmet. Thats why I guess it doesn't matter to me as much that a helmet stripe doesn't match the pants as long as if the pants look pretty good with the jersey. I understand what you are getting at though. You are looking for some continuity, am I right? I contend that continuity is fine but not always necessary. I also think that the helmet doesn't have to always be the deciding factor either.

Look at the Giants home and road unis. None of the stripes match on anything...from helmet to shirt to pants. But they still look pretty darn good IMO. And thats strange for me because I usually think that most teams can look fine so long as two of the three main components of their uniform (helmet, pants, and jersey) have some continuity or look good together.

[The_Admiral]

Cubs fans are immune to misplaced proletarian pride. Too bad I hate everything else about us.

[Chawls]

The Redskins' helmet stripes don't match their uniforms either. Why doesn't anybody butch about them?

They prefer to femme?

*rimshot*

I didn't think I'd be able to say b?i?t?c?h. So I said butch instead hoping to pass it off as a typo.

[BBTV]

Look at the Giants home and road unis. None of the stripes match on anything...from helmet to shirt to pants. But they still look pretty darn good IMO. And thats strange for me because I usually think that most teams can look fine so long as two of the three main components of their uniform (helmet, pants, and jersey) have some continuity or look good together.

The Giants home uniforms sort of match. The helmet is blue-red-blue (the blue is just the actual shell), and the pants are blue-red-blue. The roads are a total mess. Actually, I don't think that either uniform really looks good, matching elements or not.

[IceCap]

I'm curious as to what you think the Redskins should change to. I wouldn't mind something along the lines of the 70th Anniversary modernized throwbacks, but when people say the Redskins should "start over" I get unpleasant images of burgundy and gold versions of the Vikings' set where Reebok tries their hardest to make the points end in a feather like design.

[jws008]

I'm carious as to what you think the Redskins should change to. I wouldn't mind something along the lines of the 70th Anniversary modernized throwbacks, but when people say the Redskins should "start over" I get unpleasant images of burgundy and gold versions of the Vikings' set where Reebok tries their hardest to make the points end in a feather like design.

Please, don't give Reebok or the NFL any ideas!

Didn't Paul Lukas over at Uniwatch mention a few years back that he had seen a prototype Redskins alternate that added black to the color scheme, or is my memory failing me again?

[powersurge]

Look at the Giants home and road unis. None of the stripes match on anything...from helmet to shirt to pants. But they still look pretty darn good IMO. And thats strange for me because I usually think that most teams can look fine so long as two of the three main components of their uniform (helmet, pants, and jersey) have some continuity or look good together.

The Giants home uniforms sort of match. The helmet is blue-red-blue (the blue is just the actual shell), and the pants are blue-red-blue. The roads are a total mess. Actually, I don't think that either uniform really looks good, matching elements or not.

My point is that they are not a complete match and yes the roads are totally mismatched. Though I have to admit that there is something I really like about them even if I'm not sure what it is. It is funny though how when you see the white jersey out of context, IOW worn by a fan without a helmet and pants it looks weird. Doesn't seem like a Giants jersey.