Jump to content


Photo

Super Bowl Jersey Match Up!


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#61 Matito

Matito
  • Member

  • Members
  • 235 posts
  • Joined: Aug 16/09
    • Location:St Petersburg, FL


Posted January 29, 2010 - 00:22

Just reported in WDSU 6 news in New Orleans that Colts will wear their blue jerseys and white pants and the Saints will wear their white jerseys with their gold pants.

I like this. Both teams will sport their full team colors, without one color being too overbearing. I felt that with the Saints possibly wearing the black pants with white jerseys, that it would look too black-heavy.
Posted ImagePosted Image

#62 Quillz

Quillz
  • Enlightened

  • Members
  • 1,597 posts
  • Joined: Mar 15/09
    • Location:Los Angeles, CA

    • Favourite Logos:Angels
      Blue Jays
      Dodgers
      Rams

Posted January 29, 2010 - 00:40

No, teams can opt out and wear white. The '05 Steelers wore white in the Super Bowl because they'd won the last three postseason games on the road, forcing Seattle into the monochromes.

EDIT: whoa, we've now had two rotations of Patriots-Steelers-Colts. ew.

The "home team" of the Super Bowl can only make the decision to wear white, right?

Just reported in WDSU 6 news in New Orleans that Colts will wear their blue jerseys and white pants and the Saints will wear their white jerseys with their gold pants.

The Saints should have worn those black pants with the gold stripes.

#63 Cujo

Cujo
  • Throwback.

  • Members
  • 18,002 posts
  • Joined: Apr 14/05
    • Location:@CujoKnows


Posted January 29, 2010 - 08:33


Just reported in WDSU 6 news in New Orleans that Colts will wear their blue jerseys and white pants and the Saints will wear their white jerseys with their gold pants.

The Saints should have worn those black pants with the gold stripes.

It really gets no classier than gold pants. Good call, New Orleans.

abq_sig_red.png

cujo_twitter.png


#64 JQK

JQK
  • Over There...

  • Members
  • 10,725 posts
  • Joined: Nov 24/02
    • Location:Wilkes-Barre/Scranton

    • Favourite Logos:‍‎ 
      Chicago Black Hawks
      New Jersey Devils
      Hartford Whalers
      Hershey Bears (2012)

Posted January 29, 2010 - 08:43

Thank God!!!

#65 Jezus_Ghoti

Jezus_Ghoti
  • Got you roasted like evah

  • Members
  • 1,889 posts
  • Joined: Nov 15/03


Posted January 29, 2010 - 09:17

Very, very good news.

#66 dennisbergan

dennisbergan
  • Member

  • Members
  • 807 posts
  • Joined: Oct 12/05


Posted January 29, 2010 - 10:25

The Saints should have worn those black pants with the gold stripes.



They don't exist anymore (and haven't for a LONG time).

#67 Captain Poncho

Captain Poncho
  • Member

  • Members
  • 314 posts
  • Joined: Apr 19/05
    • Location:The Office of Doom


Posted January 29, 2010 - 11:38


No, teams can opt out and wear white. The '05 Steelers wore white in the Super Bowl because they'd won the last three postseason games on the road, forcing Seattle into the monochromes.

The "home team" of the Super Bowl can only make the decision to wear white, right?


As in any game in the NFL, the "home" team gets to pick which jersey they'll wear. Even if it's white. Pittsburgh wore white in 2005 because they chose to as the home team.

#68 the admiral

the admiral
  • Empty calories, empty posts

  • Members
  • 19,620 posts
  • Joined: May 30/07


Posted January 29, 2010 - 12:36

It really gets no classier than gold pants.

From the "Only Makes Sense at the CCSLC" files...
The females in the establishment start admiring Dirty for his assets, which just causes Dirty to return to the situation at hand: his money. He asks for the females' assistance in rectifying the situation, and subsequently asks them to expose their nether regions. Dirty finishes off the song with some nonsensical lyrics, that clearly imply his rising anger for the missing money.

#69 Quillz

Quillz
  • Enlightened

  • Members
  • 1,597 posts
  • Joined: Mar 15/09
    • Location:Los Angeles, CA

    • Favourite Logos:Angels
      Blue Jays
      Dodgers
      Rams

Posted January 29, 2010 - 15:16



No, teams can opt out and wear white. The '05 Steelers wore white in the Super Bowl because they'd won the last three postseason games on the road, forcing Seattle into the monochromes.

The "home team" of the Super Bowl can only make the decision to wear white, right?


As in any game in the NFL, the "home" team gets to pick which jersey they'll wear. Even if it's white. Pittsburgh wore white in 2005 because they chose to as the home team.

Yeah, that answers my question. It's just that most Super Bowls I've seen feature the home team wearing their home jerseys, so I forgot they still had a choice.

#70 Quillz

Quillz
  • Enlightened

  • Members
  • 1,597 posts
  • Joined: Mar 15/09
    • Location:Los Angeles, CA

    • Favourite Logos:Angels
      Blue Jays
      Dodgers
      Rams

Posted January 29, 2010 - 15:18

The Saints should have worn those black pants with the gold stripes.



They don't exist anymore (and haven't for a LONG time).

Ah, that's a shame, as they seemed much better than gold pants.

I don't know much about the Saints... Do these gold pants have a black stripe (which I think would look better than all-gold)... or are the pants just an all-gold design?

#71 Matito

Matito
  • Member

  • Members
  • 235 posts
  • Joined: Aug 16/09
    • Location:St Petersburg, FL


Posted January 29, 2010 - 23:41


The Saints should have worn those black pants with the gold stripes.



They don't exist anymore (and haven't for a LONG time).

Ah, that's a shame, as they seemed much better than gold pants.

I don't know much about the Saints... Do these gold pants have a black stripe (which I think would look better than all-gold)... or are the pants just an all-gold design?

This is what they will be wearing:
Posted Image
Posted ImagePosted Image

#72 Quillz

Quillz
  • Enlightened

  • Members
  • 1,597 posts
  • Joined: Mar 15/09
    • Location:Los Angeles, CA

    • Favourite Logos:Angels
      Blue Jays
      Dodgers
      Rams

Posted January 30, 2010 - 00:29



The Saints should have worn those black pants with the gold stripes.



They don't exist anymore (and haven't for a LONG time).

Ah, that's a shame, as they seemed much better than gold pants.

I don't know much about the Saints... Do these gold pants have a black stripe (which I think would look better than all-gold)... or are the pants just an all-gold design?

This is what they will be wearing:
Posted Image

Oh, that actually looks nice. The gold pants are much better with that black stripe on the side.

#73 PurpleRush

PurpleRush
  • Member

  • Members
  • 671 posts
  • Joined: Dec 13/09
    • Location:Worcester MA

    • Favourite Logos:Blue Jays original,
      Arkansas Razorbacks,
      Minnesota T-wolves original,
      and Pat Patriot

Posted January 30, 2010 - 02:30

Very happy to see the Saints wearing the gold pants.

As for team color designation,
prior to Super Bowl 13 played in January 1979,
the designated home team had to wear colored shirts.
Thus Dallas in the blue shirts in SB V.

Since then, 4 designated home teams
have chosen to wear white in the SB.

Dallas SB XIII - 35-31 loss
Washington SB XVII - 27-17 win
Dallas SB XXVII - 52-17 win
Pittsburgh SB XL - 21-10 win
Posted Image

#74 njmeadowlanders

njmeadowlanders
  • @GoldAsIce

  • Members
  • 5,363 posts
  • Joined: Oct 18/05
    • Location:San Diego, CA / Parsippany, NJ

    • Favourite Logos:New York Mets

Posted January 30, 2010 - 08:13

See, by going with the Gold pants, don't the Saints basically admit that the black pants suck?

If you want to look the best you can for the biggest event the franchise has ever been involved in and you go with those gold pants, it basically says "hey, the black pants suck and look awful on us".

65caba33-7cfc-417f-ac8e-5eb8cdd12dc9_zps


#75 BBM

BBM
  • Piping Free

  • Members
  • 1,133 posts
  • Joined: Mar 21/06
    • Location:Long Island, NY


Posted January 30, 2010 - 09:14

See, by going with the Gold pants, don't the Saints basically admit that the black pants suck?

If you want to look the best you can for the biggest event the franchise has ever been involved in and you go with those gold pants, it basically says "hey, the black pants suck and look awful on us".


Or, they may want to have a more traditional look for their first-ever Super Bowl appearance.

Also, with the Saints in gold pants, I think this officially bumps SB XLI as the best-looking Super Bowl of the decade. (Assuming this game still counts toward last decade)

#76 PurpleRush

PurpleRush
  • Member

  • Members
  • 671 posts
  • Joined: Dec 13/09
    • Location:Worcester MA

    • Favourite Logos:Blue Jays original,
      Arkansas Razorbacks,
      Minnesota T-wolves original,
      and Pat Patriot

Posted January 31, 2010 - 00:24

It should, as this is known as the 2009 season.
Posted Image

#77 CS85

CS85
  • Get your commie hands away from my warning points

  • Members
  • 12,648 posts
  • Joined: Sep 14/05
    • Location:Champaign, IL


Posted January 31, 2010 - 07:55

Thank goodness! I can now watch the Superbowl without having to squirm knowing there's a leotard look being viewed by countless millions worldwide.

BBoGyVR.jpg

                                                      twitter


#78 BlueSky

BlueSky
  • Someday...

  • Members
  • 6,934 posts
  • Joined: Apr 13/05
    • Location:Georgia


Posted February 1, 2010 - 07:20


See, by going with the Gold pants, don't the Saints basically admit that the black pants suck?

If you want to look the best you can for the biggest event the franchise has ever been involved in and you go with those gold pants, it basically says "hey, the black pants suck and look awful on us".


Or, they may want to have a more traditional look for their first-ever Super Bowl appearance.

Also, with the Saints in gold pants, I think this officially bumps SB XLI as the best-looking Super Bowl of the decade. (Assuming this game still counts toward last decade)


I think the black pants took a shot this year when the Saints lost to Dallas and then TB wearing them. We may never see 'em again! ^_^

Aesthetically, even aside from the leotard/unitard/whateveryoucallittard issues, the white/black and black/black combos have way too little gold to be attractive IMO.
Posted Image Posted Image

#79 TheOldRoman

TheOldRoman
  • Oh, you didn't know?

  • Members
  • 4,578 posts
  • Joined: Nov 4/05


Posted February 1, 2010 - 13:39


See, by going with the Gold pants, don't the Saints basically admit that the black pants suck?

If you want to look the best you can for the biggest event the franchise has ever been involved in and you go with those gold pants, it basically says "hey, the black pants suck and look awful on us".


Or, they may want to have a more traditional look for their first-ever Super Bowl appearance.

Also, with the Saints in gold pants, I think this officially bumps SB XLI as the best-looking Super Bowl of the decade. (Assuming this game still counts toward last decade)

No way. Both unis will be nice, but the Saints would have to have matching golds and black-white-black pant stripes to be in the conversation for best of the decade.
Posted Image

#80 newcaymanS

newcaymanS
  • Previewing
  • 1 posts
  • Joined: Jul 17/08


Posted February 4, 2010 - 10:55

In Superbowl history the white jerseys lead in wins with a 26-17 record, INCLUDING 5 straight wins.

They have noted that the Colts have played all 3 of their PRIOR superbowl appearances in Miami, and that they are 2-1 in those games. The 1 and only loss came as a heavy favorite while wearing their Blue jerseys in Superbowl 3. They are not as big favorites this time around, but still they are favored and are wearing blue jerseys... is this an omen for a Saints win??? Or after 5 white jersey wins in a row are we bound to see a color jersey win this year???