Lights Out

I'm surprised at how much I like some of these courts (others, like the Bucks', are hideous) but I don't get why they all have to be the same generic template.

It's like a cross between the Nets' and Thunder's crappy logos, but for soccer instead of basketball. The cliche wannabe-Euro name also isn't helping.

I don't mind the patches being on the front like in other sports, but I hate that it's only being done to make room for jersey ads that shouldn't exist in the first place.

53 minutes ago, jerrylawless3 said:

What if they called them Tennessee Oilers throwbacks?

That would make it even worse.

54 minutes ago, CaliforniaGlowin said:

If the sales suck, they'll stop doing it. I don't think too many of these are going to sell.

I doubt Nike or the NBA would cut down the uniform rotation, but I could see them changing the prompt from city/local-inspired looks to something else.

I actually like that Wizards City except for the Blazers-esque sash.

20 hours ago, ruttep said:

I just want to know what genius decided to make navy leggings the only pants/sock look for both the home and road jerseys after Brady left. Actually one of the dumbest uniform decisions ever.

I blame whoever decided to stop wearing silver pants on the road anymore after 1999. The mess they've made with their current uniforms was just the next step.

I actually wonder if it's one of those superstitious things. The last time they wore silver pants on the road, they had a huge meltdown in Philly with four INTs and three fumbles.

On 10/21/2023 at 12:06 AM, timjameskohler said:

No matter what shade of red the Bucs use, this is clear: they seem to be utterly committed and devoted to not using it. 

It does seem like they only wear red like 5 times a year, sometimes even less. The one recent exception being 2019 where, between the standard home and Color Rush, they wore red 8 times.

9 hours ago, simtek34 said:

 

The Bills were the first in 2002. Falcons were the next year in 2003. And just for completionists  sake, Bengals were 2004, Cardinals 2005, Vikings 2006, Chargers 2007, (nothing in 2008,) Jags 2009, (nothing in 2010,) and Bills again in 2011. I didn't count the Texans, since that seems to not have been a Reebok design, and the 2009 49ers, as that was just going back to an old look. The 2011 Bills was stated to be a Reebok creation, so that counts.

If you think about it, the Patriots were the first team to get the "Reebok treatment" even though Adidas was their supplier back then. That set had all the same design elements that Reebok took and ran with for the next decade. The only difference between those uniforms and the Bills or Cardinals is that they won more.

17 hours ago, tBBP said:

I think adidas' primeknit fabrics may hold a key to that.

Adidas themselves haven't bothered trying to make it work in football, or maybe they haven't figured out how to do it yet. UW, GT, BC, USF still have all the usual problems with gold.

17 minutes ago, -Akronite- said:

their current proper look

There's no such thing as a proper look for the Bills that doesn't have red helmets and socks.

Maryland's uniforms just look cheap now. And they're using the same stupid halftone effect on the numbers that the Commanders use on their infamous road jerseys.

12 hours ago, timjameskohler said:

The Saints being in primetime is our semi-annual reminder that they sneakily have one of the worst uniforms in the league.

 

Stripeless black pants with the black jerseys. Stripeless white pants with the white jerseys. Matching leggings with everything.
 

They RUINED one of the only serviceable color rush sets with a pointless patterned black helmet, destroying their best look.
 

Nike’s ‘gold’ is more of a thrice-washed khaki. 

 

They only remember they have amazing throwbacks every four to five years.

 

Every single uniform combination looks unfinished, as if the gold crayon broke. Absolutely no character or identity whatsoever. At least the  Titans and Commies use, you know, actual colors. The Saints need a rebrand, yesterday. 
 

You’re not off the hook either, Jags.  

 

 

The only thing saving the Saints from being the Cowboys in gold is that Nike adjusted the colors on the jerseys to match the helmets and pants, as dull as it is.

I will say that the whole "khaki pants" thing didn't start with Nike. It's been a consistent problem since they first reintroduced the gold pants in 1986.

17 hours ago, Pyromania1983 said:

Sixers local insider Kyle Neubeck also announced today that there people within the organization actively looking to bring back the AI-era black uniforms.

 

Obviously not happening this year, but something to watch for in the next year or two, I'd assume!

 

https://streamable.com/9t85e0

I swear they've been saying this every year for half a decade and it's amounted to nothing.

12 hours ago, bbush24 said:

 

Absolutely the correct answer. Worst uniform in NFL history.

 

Unpopular opinion: that Browns set kind of falls into the same category as the 2014 Bucs to me: a few tweaks away, not totally unsalvageable. Get rid of the stupid pants wordmarks and complete the stripes, change the numbers to white on the brown jersey and brown on the white jersey, and they would have been okay. They probably still would have been scrapped because of their association with the Hue era, but they wouldn't be hated as much in hindsight.

I still think they handled the sleeve stripes better than the alternative of trying to cram double-decker stripes from the 1940s into progressively shrinking sleeve caps. The new shades of brown and orange looked noticeably better on the field, which is why they stayed the same even after the Browns otherwise went back to the old uniforms. The brown facemasks were also a huge improvement over the previous grey ones, and those have stuck around too.

17 minutes ago, Cujo said:

 

Okay. The Chargers have a top-12 kicker..

 

LA is on this graphic because Staley leaves points on the field with his horrible in-game decision making. How many of those Ls become wins if Staley takes the FG instead of going for it on 4th and 5 on the ten? Another one of those close losses was the SNF game where he called that OT timeout vs the Raiders which literally cost the Chargers a playoff spot. Staley is really truly terrible. 

 

The Chargers have been losing games like this for decades. I assure you, it has little to do with anything Staley's doing or not doing. He'll eventually be replaced by the next Madden Create-a-Coach who's just happy to be employed. No actual coach with options is going anywhere near that franchise as long as the Spanii own it. And the Spanii don't want anyone who'd call them out on the joke franchise they've been running anyway.

Yeah, that's bad. The rest of the uniform is nothing to write home about either.

8 minutes ago, WBeltz said:

The Rams "bone" unifrom isn't bad by any means. The color and the white patch are what do it in. Otherwise I would say it is a fine, serviceable uniform, that would do better or would fit in more for a college team. 

Besides how the color makes them look gross and unwashed, whatever they were trying to do with the sleeves looks horrific, and the yellow trim on the jerseys and pants vibrates against the bone color and disappears from a distance. The stripes on the bone pants having only yellow and white was a questionable decision too. They also sometimes ruin the superior blue jerseys by wearing them with bone pants.

I'm waiting for the day they go with white-over-bone or vice versa... now that will truly be an atrocity.

1 hour ago, Sport said:

For my money those are the worst uniforms in NFL history. There isn't a single good decision anywhere in that steaming pile. 

I still like everything about that look besides the alarm clock numbers and maybe the mismatched sleeve logos. Even with those poor choices, I still don't think they were worse than this...

...or this...

...or some of the crap that Reebok came up with over the years.

I don't love that Pistons Statement, but the only thing that's particularly egregious about it is that it's BFBS. The font is just a standard athletic block, not something completely out of left field, and it has their iconic two-toned stripe, just applied a different way.

To me, the main problem with the Statement Edition is that most of the league just treats it as an excuse to go BFBS.

I've long thought that the Bucs could please everyone by simply swapping the prominence of orange and red in their current color scheme. In other words, orange and pewter with red trim instead of red and pewter with orange trim.

Also, looking back at KU's old uniforms in particular, I still don't see how the Giants couldn't make it work until 2000.

2 hours ago, oldschoolvikings said:

 

Those Bronco helmets weren't royal blue and would've been just as big of a mismatch with the Giants' jerseys as the navy blue was.  Maybe more.

 

I don't know... how much of a mismatch Denver's helmets were often had to do with lighting, while those Giants helmets always looked like crap regardless of conditions. It's difficult to get an exact match with different materials, but I think it looks worse when a team doesn't even try (see also: Cowboys).

18 minutes ago, DCarp1231 said:

I’m still curious to know what a monocreamsicle uniform would look like for Tampa Bay

57 minutes ago, PrimalCookie said:

I've always been curious - why was it so hard to make royal blue helmets back then? As far as I can tell the first time someone wore them was the 2000 Giants. I'm sure it took as long as it did because of tradition and they probably could've been made earlier, but still. That's ridiculous that it took that long for a royal team to match their helmet to the rest of their uniform.

I've never bought the explanation that royal blue helmets were uniquely hard to make before the year 2000. Kentucky, BYU, Duke, Kansas, etc. had them at various times as far back as the '60s. When college football programs were able to do it in an era before bloated apparel deals from Adidas and Nike, there's no excuse for why NFL teams like the Giants and Rams couldn't do it besides laziness or just not caring about branding.

And then there's the biggest counterpoint of all: the Broncos, who had royal blue helmets for almost 30 years at the same time that they supposedly couldn't be done for other teams.