oldschoolvikings

Moderators
  • Content Count

    13,147
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    128

Everything posted by oldschoolvikings

  1. He doesn't look anything like a duck.
  2. If my math is correct, it's like seven different. Right?
  3. But the fact that the 49ers consistently wear them with those stupid white socks means that they think of them as Color Rush uniforms. It's just the same with the Giants and Saints CRs. The white socks screw up what would otherwise be nice throwbacks.
  4. Agreed. The 49ers have one of the better primary uniforms in the league right now, and that Cowboy color rush wrongly uses navy instead of royal and had those dopey big stars on the sleeves.
  5. Actually, I think the gradient numbers will probably be the first thing to go. They might even be able to delete those ugly bastards before the five years are up, as there's some presidence for numbers changing outside the 5 year rule (ironically, the Rams did it themselves with their first navy/vegas gold jersey). And the Lakers' drop shadows are a bad comparison... drop shadow numbers were on baseball uniforms in the 30's.
  6. No, they didn't have to wear their color jersey. That was just how they did it for the 75th season. Usually, in the NFL the gold home jersey is worn against a road white and it looks fine. It would never work for a football team to try the Lakers' sub gold for white trick. Road uniform are white.
  7. Even though I guess it's grammatically wrong, I still prefer Elks to Elk. However, either way it's still my top choice. Eclipse and Elements are easily the worst.
  8. Thanks for doing this @Kramerica Industries. It's a welcome weekly distraction, which this year especially was very needed.
  9. The logos aren't good, but they're better than the uniforms.
  10. Why exactly are you @ing Gothamite on that?
  11. If Stafford can get you two 1sts plus, who knows anymore?
  12. Yeah, problem solved, until some team decides they want to do it differently and then just goes ahead and does it. Which has happened in the past with alternative rules. Once the options are out there, if enough teams decide they want to rework the rules, the league isn't going to fight about it. These things aren't quite as important to them as they are to most of us.
  13. Sure, they don't have to. But why would they fight the over it. If the NFL doesn't care about "cool looking throwbacks" just for their own sake (and they don't), what would be their reasoning for telling one team they can have two helmets, but tell another team they can't?
  14. Well, I guess I was wrong. I've been telling every Lions fan I know that they needed to dial back their expectations. I don't get it. Stafford is not a bad quarterback, by any means, but... what? He's got a ton of mileage on him. In the past couple seasons he's had a back injury, a neck injury, he's never won a playoff game, his record again winning teams makes you cringe, he's good for a half dozen head scratching bad decisions a season. Oh, well. I guess that's why I'm not an NFL executive.
  15. But it isn't just the amount of times you could wear it that causes the mass confusion, it's the combinations. 2 helmets, 3 jerseys, and 3 pants means 18 possible combinations, and that's not even adding in the socks. Teams like Jacksonville and Tennessee would literally never wear the same thing twice.
  16. See, there you go. After a half dozen posts saying "throwbacks only" someone posts this. How long do you think it would take some team to think something similar? Here's the problem. We think about what looks good to us, what we'd like to see on the field. So, of course, we can say the NFL can just pass a rule to make it throwbacks only, and problem solved. Because on this board, the only consideration, really, is aesthetics. But the NFL doesn't care about that. They don't. It's like all those weekly complaints on here about both teams wearing navy pants, or something. They don't even think about it because they couldn't possibly care less. If the NFL is considering bringing back multiple helmets, it's about money. There must be some sort of financial consideration in play, or they wouldn't even be discussing it. So the question is, what about a team, say, Houston, who've always had the same color shell? What if they want the chance to market a second helmet? If it's all about aesthetics, sure, just tell them no. But it's not, because the league doesn't care about that, except where it affects the bottom line. I could be wrong, but I just find it very hard to picture that multiple helmets would be allowed for throwbacks only, and that it would just stay that way. Teams who don't need a second helmet for a throwback would eventually want in too.
  17. No confirmation on that, yet. And if that decision had been made early enough that teams would already be making design decisions over it, I'd think we'd have heard by now. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that it doesn't happen.
  18. That's weird, because I really haven't heard any uproar over the logo since the uniform was released. Seems to me everyone's shock over the gradients, bone uniforms, and horn split pushed any worry about the logo completely out of mind. I know I haven't given the logo much thought since summer.