BBTV

I would assume so. They're still selling them. But no confirmation.

Maybe because the pre-90s set was known for giant-mesh fabric and oversized numbers? And these have the NFL shield, which started around '91.

I'm sure that free agency in 93 and the salary cap in 94 had a lot to do with it, as eventually some level of parity leveled the field and created more balance. As for how the field became so tilted? I don't know. Some of it is luck, in that you had the Montana/Walsh 49ers, the Cowboys dynasty, and Gibbs' and Parcell's systems during that time frame. But also the AFC had Elway, Marino, an incredible Bills team, run-and-shoot Warren Moon, and couldn't get it done. The thing is that other than the Bills vs Giants game, the AFC teams weren't even competitive. How many of the games in that run were embarrassing blowouts? The majority IIRC. To be fair, the Bills really should have won 1990, which would have made the streak not nearly as bad. But as great as they were - and they were great - the Cowboys completely worked them, and they couldn't stop Doug Williams and the counter.

1. You know more about the business than I do, so I appreciate the help here. If they know the pantone from that era, couldn't Nike simply add it to their pallet since their green is a different shade? Or is it one of those things where the "official" color may not have been the "actual" color, hence all the trial and error? 2. Regarding the photos: the Eagles used screened numbers every year of that set up until the very last one. The second image is from 1995, the only twill season (I could tell instantly even without the label on it.) That season, the green on the green numbers definitely looked different - either due to the material change to twill, or just that they didn't care. The numbers are also narrower, which makes them look different too. But prior to '95, I believe the color was relatively consistent (with the understanding that nothing from that era was 100% consistent.) Their manufacturer for most - if not all - of those years was Russell. I know that all of the NOB lettering was done in house for most of that era. I assume they came numbered.

Why would it be Riddell? Wouldn't the team be painting them regardless of brand? Or having the manufacturers, whether Riddell, Vicis, Schutt, (or whoever makes them these days) paint them before supplying them? Regarding the green - if I'm understanding, they knew the pantone wouldn't match the original due to the materials, so they tried a million shades until they were happy? If so, I appreciate the effort, but this may be a case where it was overthought. Or not. Guess we'll see.

The 80s helmet wings on a midnight-green shell would look great. I've never been a fan of the cartoon-wings they adopted in '96. I'd be cool with a midnight-green version of the 80s/early-90s uniform... maybe with the current Eagle logo on the sleeve.

They want people to buy them for Christmas, so they're going to model them before or at the beginning of the shopping season. Still coulda picked better opponents, but I get why they didn't wait till late in the season.

So the most advanced sports apparel company in the world had to call in scientists to replicate a pantone color. I want to know how the fabric gets dyed for all other colors, because it sure seems like green is Nike's kryptonite (fully intended). EDIT: And the helmet - which Nike has nothing to do with - doesn't even look close. I'm being overly harsh here, and overall I'm fine with what they did, but I don't buy that they put that much effort into replicating the green when 1) they didn't, and 2) even if they did, the fabrics are so different that it wouldn't matter.

I guess they wanted a SNF game and a Thanksgiving / Black Friday-ish game so they can maximize holiday sales. They definitely were the ones lobbying for two. I don’t recall hearing them saying anything about three. As far as I know, the black was a one-year deal just until the throwback was permitted.

They’re wearing them against the Dolphins and Bills??? WTF - not the Giants, Cowboys, 49ers, or any NFL rival? That’s a choice.

The Jaworski green was a little before my time (I was alive, but didn't really get into football other than football cards until '87-'88) but I obviously saw countless highlights and had countless cards, and they looked different in nearly every single one. They looked nearly 'midnight green' in some photos, bright 'kelly' green in others, and every shade in between. Between the shade of green and the material, it looked considerably different under every lighting and photograph. Also, merch from that era is meaningless. They just used whatever green they had on hand for the few hats and t-shirts that were available. They didn't care about pantone values (if that even existed). Green was green. It's shocking to me that while I consider the Cunningham set to be "my" set that I grew up with, I really only watched it for 9 years, while I've seen midnight green for 27 years, and the current version for 20. It think that says two things: 1. They're remarkably restrained in that they haven't made a single noticeable change in 20 years, and have had the same uniform in spirit for 27. 2. The effect that childhood has on things. I still look at 'midnight green' as their "new" uniforms, even though the ratio of midnight to kelly in my lifetime is 3:1. While I'm a fan of the current look, the Cunningham set will always be "my" set. I'm not advocating for them to "go back" to it (especially since it doesn't really look the same), but it's still "my" set.

That was for the 50th anniversary of the 1960 championship team.

It's very hard to distinguish between the "Jaworski" green and the "Cunningham" green. These throwbacks actually look closer to the 30s-60s green. (graphic taken from uni-watch)

I will never understand why a team's mascot would destroy a piece of equipment that's vital to the team's ability to compete. If the Panther is breaking all the sticks, what will the team do? Same with the Sharks.

I shouldn't need to know what "fuse", "elite 51", "speed machine", "mach speed", "vapor untouchable", etc. are. The fact that we're even using those terms here indicates that Nike has won. How the hell can anything fit closer to the pads than the last template? It was as tight as tight gets. Once it gets to a certain point, the law of diminishing returns kicks in. I can't believe that there's any noticeable difference in terms of "tighter to the pads" between this and the previous one.

I actually find it very distracting - on all of them, not just the Eagles. That v-seam in the front stands out like a sore thumb. It's almost like when you see a concept here and the template's seams are shown in black lines. Also with the collar - it's just too much. I don't get what the purpose of the giant-invasive V-seam is. I thought they were touting how their previous "seamless" template was as good as it gets. I'd think that having more seams would be a downgrade.

I disagree. Sweat's NOB is way too thick. The originals were borderline difficult to read due to how thin and condensed they were, so I'm not going to kill them for this, but it would have been cool if they replicated that detail. I will give them credit for getting the notches on the 6s and 9s right. That's super easy to overlook.

Really curious if they got the NOB font right. They couldn't be blamed for going with a plain block, but it would be great attention to detail if they matched the condensed-block of that era.

Those uniforms are known for having shiny pants, even if there was a year or two when they didn't (which I didn't even realize). While this throwback may be a somewhat-accurate representation of a specific year or two, it's not accurate for the era it's supposed to represent. Really needed shiny pants. and maybe shoulda gone a bit darker with the green to account for the difference in the materials. The Nike green seems a little brighter to me, probably just due to the originals being 100% mesh that got dark easy.

The AFC lost 13 straight SBs in the 80s/90s. In the last 13 SBs, it's nearly even with the AFC at 7 and NFC at 6 (including 3/3 in last 6 games, some of which have come down to the wire.) There's absolutely no comparison between the current NFC and the AFC of the 80s and 90s.

I don't know if those other sports would benefit, but I don't think they'd be hurt by it. They may only be able to compete against each other rather than non-Super teams, but I'm not sure that matters.

The announcers and spotters wouldn't.

That's part of them "making their own rules". NFL D-League just isn't going to happen, so having the players be paid employees of the schools is the next best option, which simply isn't going to happen under NCAA governance. I don't trust the "super league" administrators to be fair about how they pay players, but at least they'd be allowed to. As for the fairness aspect, players would have more leverage than ever, and be able to unionize and bargain for whatever they deem is a fair piece of the pie. I'm basically saying to make it a fully-professional (or at least semi-professional) league where everyone involved is an employee or contractor. There'd be more than enough money to go around. The notion that any coach is allowed to make millions off the backs of free labor is not only nauseating - it should be illegal.

I know this isn't a novel idea, but maybe the major conferences (I guess that's the "Big"s, SEC, ACC?) should merge into a single entity and sell a TV package as a whole - kinda like how the NFL has networks bidding for the AFC, NFC, and special nights. They could keep their rivalries and stay as "conferences" if they want, but there's the potential to make more $ as a combined entity than as separate ones. They'd say F-off to the NCAA* and just have their own rules, their own playoff, and declare their own championship. *I guess the risk here is that the NCAA could impose penalties for small schools that still want to do jobs to the major teams that are no longer in the NCAA. They'd have to work that out, since the Super Conference would still probably want some of those tune-up games. Or maybe not, since they have their own separate playoff and make their own rules, the teams don't need to worry about a computer or imperfect ranking, so they could play full conference schedules and maybe the playoff teams have 7-5 or 8-4 records... but it's fine, whereas that's not fine in the current NCAA system. EDIT: They could also merge their respective networks together and basically charge whatever the hell they want - both as streaming services and to cable subscribers, since it'd be a monopoly.

Interesting that they don't have a special QB jersey. I know it's "non contact", but figured they'd still have a red or some other special jersey.