spottedbadger

*pics of Wisconsin and Nebraska uniforms removed due to board regulations*

Bit of a selective memory there. That Nebraska template from 2002 was road only. Their home uniform, if I remember correctly, used their traditional striping pattern.

Also, you forgot this one...

Point being, neither school can claim to have an unbroken legacy of consistent uniform design.

I love how you accuse me of being selective, and then use a one game jersey as an example to "reveal" my bias. But aside from that fact, you must have missed where I said both have a history of wearing similar uniforms with some VARIATION, whether it be a red helmet, one, two, or no sleeve stripes, ucla stripes etc. I merely tried to illustrate the continuity over the decades through pictures and I got the 2002 Nebraska picture from a website detailing Nebraska's uniform history, and it wasn't annotated as being road only, but there is this picture.

I love the Badgers unis. Neat and Clean. Sure they look like Nebraska, but big whoop. 90% of the Badgers program success has been in those uniforms and they will probably never change them or if they do it will be a long time. I've lived in WI for my whole life and am a die hard Bucky fan, and I have never heard anyone say one bad thing about the Motion W or the uniforms. The W is great; its modern yet already a classic. I could see the black in it maybe being taken out or something someday but thats it, they will always have the motion W of some variation. But I do agree they need to match up the reds. The decals are dark and the unis are lighter. Either make it all darker or all lighter. Honestly, preferably make the decals lighter and match the unis. Like others have said here, both Nebraska and the Badgers own the look.

this isn't a partnership so shared ownership isn't an option here...could it be the fact that being a wisconsin homer is clouding your judgment?..from an unbiased perspective Nebraska will always own the look and the badgers should have adopted those dark red throwbacks when they had the chance.

oh so you hold no sort of bias against Wisconsin? Your previous posts reveal otherwise.

And your last sentence explains exactly why they shouldn't and won't change their uniform. They're successful in it. Why would they change their look in the middle of building notoriety as a football program?

Because it's the wrong color, for one... whether Alvarez was taking cues from the Cornhuskers or not, the color they wear is very clearly Nebraska red, not Wisconsin cardinal.

Also, for my 1/50th of a dollar, this is the best the Badgers have ever looked:

The color changed in the 70s, 40 odd years ago. And in that time it's become largely engrained in the University of Wisconsin as a whole. It would make very little sense to change that simply because Nebraska uses a similar shade of red in the same way Nebraska doesn't switch from white to cream.

Or Wisconsin could just stop being bitches and go back to their original color scheme to let Nebraska have it's look back. I doubt that was the reason they added the patch, as it has been there for several years. It doesn't so much to help distinguish them from Wiscy when they have the same color helmet, jerseys and pants, the same striping on the jerseys and pants, the same single color numbers, etc.

I don't know if it's common knowledge or not, but Wisconsin purposely looks like Nebraska. Barry Alvarez played at Nebraska and when he became coach at Wisconsin he purposely modeled the uniforms after our set. Sort of the deal that Hayden Fry did with Iowa modeling them after the Pittsburgh Steelers. Look like winners, feel like winners, play like winners. I think with how successful the UW program is now, they could change, especially now that we are in the same conference and will play twice every 4 years.

The winning tradition patch has been there since 1990, albeit in different form, but might have been inspired from the '100 Years' patch in 1989.

Again, I don't know how many times I've said this here, but that is a complete fallacy. Barry Alvarez modeled the UW program after Nebraska in terms of cultivating and heavily utilizing a walk-on program tradition, recruiting big, hard-nosed linemen instate as the primary infrastructure of the program/team and then recruiting skill players from other states, and establishing a culture and philosophy of run and grind football. He did not however apply this to the uniforms. If anything he distanced UW's general look away from Nebraska by bringing in the motion W, or as Alvarez puts it "I wasn't trying to mimic Nebraska,'' Alvarez said. "I just wanted a clean uniform.

I wanted a helmet logo that when somebody saw it they would know it was us. Then two stripes on the helmet, two on the sleeves of the shirt and two on the pants.'' There's a pretty steady history of the two programs having similar looks with some variation through the years.

This is what UW looked like in 1952:

This is what Nebraska looked like in 1952:

This is Wisconsin and Nebraska in 1974:

This is Wisconsin in the early 80s:

This is Nebraska in the early 80's:

This is Wisconsin in 1991:

This is Nebraska in 1991:

This is Wisconsin in 2002:

This is Nebraska in 2002:

And your last sentence explains exactly why they shouldn't and won't change their uniform. They're successful in it. Why would they change their look in the middle of building notoriety as a football program?

App State PC

Say it ain't so....

However I am curious to see a shot of the helmet, it looks like they went a different route than we are accustomed to.

It's this helmet posted in the early pages of this thread

And what a serious let down with those jerseys.

Has anyone noticed that the new Texas A&M set has a v-neck collar and not the weird boxy collar the Adidas tech fit jerseys have used this past season? Looks a whole lot better.

Wow. Surprised none of us saw that. Surprised I didnt notice that. I'm usually such a nerd about these details.

ahh yeah I originally missed that as well, the same way I am just now noticing Ryan Tannehill's wife sporting a new jersey in the background of the pic above.

Those sleeve stripes would look really good if they were like elastic or skin tight and look cool on some people like hulk. But when they fit normally they jus look bad.

Yeah good shout, it's very true

But in general I just think it looks worse if it is the principle design element of the shirt. It's almost as if it is caught between a normal sleeve trim stripe and an alternate color sleeve a la Arsenal, and it just looks like it's encroaching on the shirt. Conversely, I think it looks fantastic on the new Athletico shirt a couple of pages back when paired with the red and white vertical stripes.

Everton Home and Goalkeeper kit

eh I'm not sure I dig this. I'm all for clean and sleek looks, but I'm not sure about the wide stripe sleeve cuff. It looks better on some teams than others, and it looks absolutely terrible on Brazil for example. But the other thing that bugs me is that this is just a stock football shirt and a club like Everton certainly deserve a little more attention than that.

The pant stripes look to be a bit wonky and super cinched at the State logo, why is that? I'm also not a fan of the beveling but overall it's a surprisingly pleasant set.

they remind me of the shorts that some kickboxers wear. who on earth thought those were a good idea? Just awful.

Not really related, but Anderson silva was wearing some yellow Nike soccer tights. I think the anti friction ones. And he may have been wearing a jersey/training jersey of a team. Just kinda didn't wanna make a new thread.

Also the little guy fight after has one guy with what look to w Houston rocket inspired shorts. Totally unrelated, sorry.

yeah he's sponsored by the brazilian club Corinthians.

wow that is quite a departure from the usual Marseille modus operandi, and it turned out really well. I absolutely love what they did with the badge and wish they'd just adopt it full time.

New Southampton PL Home jersey. What happened there?

not sure is the answer!! It's got a bit of a mixed reaction. We've moved away from stripes a few times in the past, but this is a bit of a radical change!

I can only imagine Southampton are trying to set themselves apart from Sunderland and Stoke by not doing the wide red and white striping. This would be a great alternate but I still prefer last year's kit.

Yeah, except plain red shirts aren't really unique in the Premier League, either!

hahah yeah exactly, which is why they should have avoided that conundrum, brought back this beauty, and called it a day.

I don't know if this was already mentioned or not, but any idea on when the hats will be released?

I need to get the Vikings one :-D

Thanks.

July 12

I have the following issues with 5950:

The price: seriously you want to cough up $35 for a hat. They should never be over $20

The look: straight up ghetto yo. Look around and see who rocks these. The sticker on the bill is a new low in sports paraphernalia.

Luckily 47 brand is licensed to make fan caps and their designs sport similar conservative designs. Plus, and this is what sets them apart, no manufacture logo to be seen.

The sports specialties design from the late 80s early 90s should be rereleased. You know the one Dan reeves and bill macpherson wore in the Athlon pro football preview mags.

Have you checked the priced on 47 brand hats?

Uh so yeah, turns out the Liverpool third shirt is even worse than expected. It actually has a tribal pattern on the sleeves.

It's as much a tradition not to have a sponsor, considering sponsors weren't added until the mid-80's. Personally, I think both large team names and sponsors are vastly inferior to the national team look of just the crest and manufacturer logo. It looks classy and lets the team colors do the talking.

I can't even begin to describe how much I agree with you on this. You simply can't beat a simple shirt with a simple badge. Maybe it's some sort of false nostalgia or just sponsor fatigue from today's game, but for my money you can't beat looks like these:

At least we now know that all of the old Notre Dame helmets were donated and not simply discarded.

This is what they should have done since Draft Day. Use the 5950 fitted, and they can just be re-used until someone changes their logo. Hope it has the NFL shield on the back, and not the font of the team, or helmet.

Definitely getting a Packers one.

For whatever reason, the contrasting button without the contrasting visor really, really bugs me. I wish it were green all the way through.

Sorry, I'm from Texas. I played in plenty of games on turf where the temperature was over 130 and it wasn't that big a deal. I just figured if schools don't here weren't worried about it, schools in Mary-land wouldn't be either. Guess I was wrong.

You're the manliest man of them all. Concussions weren't that big of a deal either. I think every school is now worried about the lawsuit that comes from heat stroke, you know, ever since players dropped dead because of it.

Anybody die of heat stroke in Maryland? Football is for tough guys. Wimps can buy a ticket to watch.

I'm really not sure if this is satire, but just in case...I'm sure Korey Stringer was just a big ol' wimp when he died of heat stroke in Minnesota. But Minnesota is so cold, and so far north, and starts with M! No way someone could die of heatstroke there.

We've seen this trend with numbers, but the new Parma shirt will have the names of season ticket holders on the entire shirt.

lol maybe Genoa should think of doing something like this....

In all our discussions of Euro 2012 jerseys, one point has been missed. Puma'snumber font is awful!

It's truly terrible. It looks like a combination between beveled masking tape and pixelation.

Amazing as always for Atletico:

Oh, hell yes.

Leak of the new AVFC Macron kit, modeled slightly after the 1980/81 kit from when Villa were last Champions of England!

Seriously?! Now Villa and West Ham are both with Macron? And it's a bit of a bummer that they have done away with the shadowed checkers.

That was their third jersey, though. Their normal clash jersey this past season was black.

every white jersey they've worn since 2001 has been a "third" shirt.

Nope, 2003-4 clash kit was white

ahh caught me. missed that one.

I'm not a Wisconsin fan (in fact, I'm a rival), but I don't get what fans dislike about the motion W. Is it the inclusion of black? I'm personally not in love with the logo, but I think it is solid and instantly recognizable as Wisconsin. Did their helmets just have block W's on them previously?

Whiskeyjack?

I'm not a fan of the motion W, personally. I understand that its a pretty good mark from a branding standpoint... very recognizable, and I certainly don't expect them to change.

But for me, its just a little too... I don't know... slick? It seems, to me, kind of "forced" in regards to the rest of the uniform, which is solidly old school Big 10.

And the black is a deal breaker for me. I've heard people say that it doesn't work without it... that they've tried concepts for an all-red motion W and no one has pulled it off. But to me, that just says it isn't the right logo for a team who's colors are red and white. I'm kind of a pain in the ass stickler for that, I know, but to me, that's the deal. Its called "design parameters"... you have a color scheme... PERIOD. Make it work or try again.

what's the difference between a black outline in the motion W and the white space in the Georgia G?

That's silly. White is one of Georgia's colors.

I see Vikings' point, but I think the inclusion of a tiny bit of black in logos can be tolerable in some cases. For instance, the Chiefs and 49ers. Now, just because black is in those logos doesn't mean that they need to throw it into the jerseys and mess things up. I do see the point now about a sleek logo like that not fitting with their image. However, as was said, they aren't getting rid of it with the equity they have built into it. However, they should go back to their original shade of red (which I believe is the shade they still use on helmet decals).

their official school colors are red and black....

I'm not a Wisconsin fan (in fact, I'm a rival), but I don't get what fans dislike about the motion W. Is it the inclusion of black? I'm personally not in love with the logo, but I think it is solid and instantly recognizable as Wisconsin. Did their helmets just have block W's on them previously?

Whiskeyjack?

I'm not a fan of the motion W, personally. I understand that its a pretty good mark from a branding standpoint... very recognizable, and I certainly don't expect them to change.

But for me, its just a little too... I don't know... slick? It seems, to me, kind of "forced" in regards to the rest of the uniform, which is solidly old school Big 10.

And the black is a deal breaker for me. I've heard people say that it doesn't work without it... that they've tried concepts for an all-red motion W and no one has pulled it off. But to me, that just says it isn't the right logo for a team who's colors are red and white. I'm kind of a pain in the ass stickler for that, I know, but to me, that's the deal. Its called "design parameters"... you have a color scheme... PERIOD. Make it work or try again.

what's the difference between a black outline in the motion W and the white space in the Georgia G?