NFL Changes 2014+

[Gothamite]

Hell, then if circular logic's the only kind you've got, I guess we'll have to accept it.

[Sec19Row53]

The one-helmet rule is in place in order to avoid charges of negligence in the courtroom. CYA.

Except it can't.

In court, the NFL will have to provide internal studies and data to support their response. It is the one place where empty rhetoric would be instantly exposed as such. The NFL knows this. They have lots of lawyers. Expensive ones. Good ones.

Of all the possible reasons floated for the NFL to take this course of action, "legal coverage" is the most patently absurd of all. Unless they can actually demonstrate that it works, and is therefore not an empty gesture.

I'm sure they have studies and doctors that "suggest" that it would be beneficial to not switch out helmets. I'm sure multiple studies would have multiple results and if even one is in the leagues one helmet policy favor, it would benefit them to have in their back pocket.

But yeah as noted above, Thursday night games basically tell us that the league only cares about safety when it's convenient.

Where is this 'accepted as fact' study/data that Thursday football is inherently less safe than Sunday or Monday?

[JayMac]

The one-helmet rule is in place in order to avoid charges of negligence in the courtroom. CYA.

Except it can't.

In court, the NFL will have to provide internal studies and data to support their response. It is the one place where empty rhetoric would be instantly exposed as such. The NFL knows this. They have lots of lawyers. Expensive ones. Good ones.

Of all the possible reasons floated for the NFL to take this course of action, "legal coverage" is the most patently absurd of all. Unless they can actually demonstrate that it works, and is therefore not an empty gesture.

I'm sure they have studies and doctors that "suggest" that it would be beneficial to not switch out helmets. I'm sure multiple studies would have multiple results and if even one is in the leagues one helmet policy favor, it would benefit them to have in their back pocket.

But yeah as noted above, Thursday night games basically tell us that the league only cares about safety when it's convenient.

Where is this 'accepted as fact' study/data that Thursday football is inherently less safe than Sunday or Monday?

There may not be a study but less days to recover from a violent game cannot be better for any body part.

[BrandMooreArt]

The one-helmet rule is in place in order to avoid charges of negligence in the courtroom. CYA.

Except it can't.

In court, the NFL will have to provide internal studies and data to support their response. It is the one place where empty rhetoric would be instantly exposed as such. The NFL knows this. They have lots of lawyers. Expensive ones. Good ones.

Of all the possible reasons floated for the NFL to take this course of action, "legal coverage" is the most patently absurd of all. Unless they can actually demonstrate that it works, and is therefore not an empty gesture.

I'm sure they have studies and doctors that "suggest" that it would be beneficial to not switch out helmets. I'm sure multiple studies would have multiple results and if even one is in the leagues one helmet policy favor, it would benefit them to have in their back pocket.

But yeah as noted above, Thursday night games basically tell us that the league only cares about safety when it's convenient.

Where is this 'accepted as fact' study/data that Thursday football is inherently less safe than Sunday or Monday?

There may not be a study but less days to recover from a violent game cannot be better for any body part.

yea i dont like the thursday games because its less recovery time for the players as well as less preparation time for the game, all of which dilutes the product. i suppose if everyone had to do it once and its followed by 10 days off, its not terrible. but the NFL is pushing for games on every sunday, monday, thursday, an 18 game schedule, and more games outside the country, if not a franchise. if all were to happen with a shorter preseason i hope they would expand the roster sizes too, but theres not a lot the NFL does to help the players without adding something detrimental to the list

[Sec19Row53]

The one-helmet rule is in place in order to avoid charges of negligence in the courtroom. CYA.

Except it can't.

In court, the NFL will have to provide internal studies and data to support their response. It is the one place where empty rhetoric would be instantly exposed as such. The NFL knows this. They have lots of lawyers. Expensive ones. Good ones.

Of all the possible reasons floated for the NFL to take this course of action, "legal coverage" is the most patently absurd of all. Unless they can actually demonstrate that it works, and is therefore not an empty gesture.

I'm sure they have studies and doctors that "suggest" that it would be beneficial to not switch out helmets. I'm sure multiple studies would have multiple results and if even one is in the leagues one helmet policy favor, it would benefit them to have in their back pocket.

But yeah as noted above, Thursday night games basically tell us that the league only cares about safety when it's convenient.

Where is this 'accepted as fact' study/data that Thursday football is inherently less safe than Sunday or Monday?

There may not be a study but less days to recover from a violent game cannot be better for any body part.

yea i dont like the thursday games because its less recovery time for the players as well as less preparation time for the game, all of which dilutes the product. i suppose if everyone had to do it once and its followed by 10 days off, its not terrible. but the NFL is pushing for games on every sunday, monday, thursday, an 18 game schedule, and more games outside the country, if not a franchise. if all were to happen with a shorter preseason i hope they would expand the roster sizes too, but theres not a lot the NFL does to help the players without adding something detrimental to the list

So every team does have to play on Thursday. The practice squad is being expanded from 5 to 10 next year, IIRC. 18 games could only happen if the players agree to it.

What was the problem again?

I don't really have a stake in this, but I always argue with 'accepted facts'.

[Xist2inspire]

Completely off topic: I know the Spanii won't do it, but...they need to quit bulls****ing and gon' make those the Chargers' primary home uniforms..and change the colors of the road uni to match.

If they ever do, they might make a new white jersey with powder blue numbers and stripes, but they keep the pants and socks from that alternate set. They should change the facemask color to either powder blue or white.

Have to say that does look really nice:

Even if the Chargers don't go full time with the powder blue, I think a white face mask works perfect with their helmet.

Watching the Chargers/Broncos game, it's amazing just how much better the Chargers' set would be if they made powder blue the primary. Because right now, having two light colors (powder blue & yellow) as trim in addition to white just isn't working at all. Keep the navy as an alternate if you must, but it shouldn't be used as the primary any more.

[Red Wine Pirate]

Have the Broncos ever worn their orange jerseys with their blue pants? Since their helmet is blue, I think this would be a good look.

[VandyDelphia Mike]

Have the Broncos ever worn their orange jerseys with their blue pants? Since their helmet is blue, I think this would be a good look.

Not possible without a sevrely disjointed transition from jersey side stripe to pants side stripe.

[Red Wine Pirate]

Have the Broncos ever worn their orange jerseys with their blue pants? Since their helmet is blue, I think this would be a good look.

Not possible without a sevrely disjointed transition from jersey side stripe to pants side stripe.

I think the transition would create a polar opposite effect that still meshes well with the helmet color.

[Gothamite]

The whole point of the side stripe is to move seamlessly from jersey to pants. That's why they had to adopt the road pants (blue stripe) when they switched to orange jerseys (blue stripe) at home.

[Red Wine Pirate]

That's obvious. I was just curious if they've ever worn the orange jersey/blue pants combo in the past. Regardless of the side panel opposites, I think the overall look of that combo would look good with the pants matching the helmet.

[WSU151]

That's obvious. I was just curious if they've ever worn the orange jersey/blue pants combo in the past. Regardless of the side panel opposites, I think the overall look of that combo would look good with the pants matching the helmet.

No and no. I don't think you realize what an ugly combination that would be. All navy would be a far better choice. You really can't disregard the opposite side panels. Look at the 2006-2012 Vikings when they wore purple jerseys with white pants...the mismatched panels were a disaster.

[BBTV]

You'd get a stupid mismatch effect like when the Vikings decided to wear their white pants with their white jerseys in the RBK days, when the white pants were designed to only be worn with the purple jersey. That's probably the main issue with side panels on jerseys - unless you're consistent across all combos (like the Patriots), or use solid pants (like the Rams used to), you are either limiting your combinations or guaranteeing yourself some stupid mismatched looks.

Orange jerseys with navy pants isn't the worst idea ever, but these orange jerseys with these navy pants pretty much is the worst idea ever.

[TheOldRoman]

I think orange jerseys with navy pants is terrible no matter what set it's in. It's not the look of a professional team. It's the look of a high school team which could only afford one set of pants, so they went with navy because they're easier to keep clean.

I'm surprised the Broncos didn't end up making an orange set of pants to pair with the white jerseys, as was suggested/rumored a few years back. I think they would have looked really nice with the road jersey, and done a lot to liven up a bland look that features barely any of what is now their primary color. However, I'm glad they didn't get orange pants, because that would have just lead to orange monochrome nonsense.

[nuordr]

I think orange jerseys with navy pants is terrible no matter what set it's in. It's not the look of a professional team. It's the look of a high school team which could only afford one set of pants, so they went with navy because they're easier to keep clean.

I'm surprised the Broncos didn't end up making an orange set of pants to pair with the white jerseys, as was suggested/rumored a few years back. I think they would have looked really nice with the road jersey, and done a lot to liven up a bland look that features barely any of what is now their primary color. However, I'm glad they didn't get orange pants, because that would have just lead to orange monochrome nonsense.

I disagree and I'll use the new Illinois set as a reference: the uniform on the left is beautiful. It is not as nice as the Orange-Navy-Orange, but it is definitely a 9/10.

[TheOldRoman]

I was specifically thinking of that set when I made my post. That's not a good look for a football team.

[phutmasterflex]

I think orange jerseys with navy pants is terrible no matter what set it's in. It's not the look of a professional team. It's the look of a high school team which could only afford one set of pants, so they went with navy because they're easier to keep clean.

I'm surprised the Broncos didn't end up making an orange set of pants to pair with the white jerseys, as was suggested/rumored a few years back. I think they would have looked really nice with the road jersey, and done a lot to liven up a bland look that features barely any of what is now their primary color. However, I'm glad they didn't get orange pants, because that would have just lead to orange monochrome nonsense.

I disagree and I'll use the new Illinois set as a reference: the uniform on the left is beautiful. It is not as nice as the Orange-Navy-Orange, but it is definitely a 9/10.

No it isn't. It's maybe a 3/10. I am never a fan when the jersey is a lighter or brighter color than the pants.

[mad43dog]

I think orange jerseys with navy pants is terrible no matter what set it's in. It's not the look of a professional team. It's the look of a high school team which could only afford one set of pants, so they went with navy because they're easier to keep clean.

I'm surprised the Broncos didn't end up making an orange set of pants to pair with the white jerseys, as was suggested/rumored a few years back. I think they would have looked really nice with the road jersey, and done a lot to liven up a bland look that features barely any of what is now their primary color. However, I'm glad they didn't get orange pants, because that would have just lead to orange monochrome nonsense.

You're saying that if a team wants to wear orange over navy they look like "a high school team that can only afford one set of pants"? That's extraordinarily stupid

[TheOldRoman]

I think orange jerseys with navy pants is terrible no matter what set it's in. It's not the look of a professional team. It's the look of a high school team which could only afford one set of pants, so they went with navy because they're easier to keep clean.

I'm surprised the Broncos didn't end up making an orange set of pants to pair with the white jerseys, as was suggested/rumored a few years back. I think they would have looked really nice with the road jersey, and done a lot to liven up a bland look that features barely any of what is now their primary color. However, I'm glad they didn't get orange pants, because that would have just lead to orange monochrome nonsense.

You're saying that if a team wants to wear orange over navy they look like "a high school team that can only afford one set of pants"? That's extraordinarily stupid

Yes. I'm saying it looks bad as a football uniform. Each sport has its historic aesthetics, whether you care to admit it or not. Baseball teams don't wear light lids (or white!) with dark jerseys, but football teams do. Basketball teams wear matching tops and bottoms, but it is awful when football teams do it. There's 60+ years or modern football aesthetic that tell us what a football uniform can be. So no, that might look totally cool for rollerball or even as a hockey uniform, but it doesn't work for football.

[mad43dog]

I think orange jerseys with navy pants is terrible no matter what set it's in. It's not the look of a professional team. It's the look of a high school team which could only afford one set of pants, so they went with navy because they're easier to keep clean.

I'm surprised the Broncos didn't end up making an orange set of pants to pair with the white jerseys, as was suggested/rumored a few years back. I think they would have looked really nice with the road jersey, and done a lot to liven up a bland look that features barely any of what is now their primary color. However, I'm glad they didn't get orange pants, because that would have just lead to orange monochrome nonsense.

You're saying that if a team wants to wear orange over navy they look like "a high school team that can only afford one set of pants"? That's extraordinarily stupid

Yes. I'm saying it looks bad as a football uniform. Each sport has its historic aesthetics, whether you care to admit it or not. Baseball teams don't wear light lids (or white!) with dark jerseys, but football teams do. Basketball teams wear matching tops and bottoms, but it is awful when football teams do it. There's 60+ years or modern football aesthetic that tell us what a football uniform can be. So no, that might look totally cool for rollerball or even as a hockey uniform, but it doesn't work for football.

I agree with you, other than the chicago bears of the late 1930s. I just didn't like the analogy.