Baseballfan

Unused or Old Uniforms Teams Should Wear

Recommended Posts

I think they looked superb, and apparently so did everyone else who commented on them other than yourself. You obviously just don't like colored pants.

I don't like them. White on white is an infinitely cleaner look. This feels bottom-heavy and gimmicky.

I do not like them either. While we're here, I don't like the blue facemask.

I know they're akin to blasphemy here, but I've always liked the grey facemask for Indy. Its a small, albeit faux-vintage detail that breathed some fresh life into the whole uniform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they looked superb, and apparently so did everyone else who commented on them other than yourself. You obviously just don't like colored pants.

I don't like them. White on white is an infinitely cleaner look. This feels bottom-heavy and gimmicky.

I think they looked superb, and apparently so did everyone else who commented on them other than yourself. You obviously just don't like colored pants.

I don't like them. White on white is an infinitely cleaner look. This feels bottom-heavy and gimmicky.

I do not like them either. While we're here, I don't like the blue facemask.

il_570xN.647966352_pqta.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since not immediately expressing disgust somehow got construed as 100% support for those hideous Colts pants, let me immediately express my disgust.

They were awful. We knew it at the time, I maintain it today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nets.jpg

The baggy cut of the modern NBA uniform really messes with the look of that Nets uniform.

julius-erving-new-york-nets.jpg?w=869

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blue/white is fine for the Rams, but if there is any chance for the blue/gold away uniform to exist again, I'd like that to happen.

I'm not crazy about yellow pants on the road for the (soon, I hope) Los Angeles Rams. I'd try blue pants with white/blue/yellow socks to mimic the sleeves.

Quickest and dirtiest of all quick and dirties:

FYQ14lX.jpg

I wonder if we'd be ready for yellow numbers with thick blue outlines on white. I'm trying to think of how to get the best balance of white, blue, and yellow on the road so that one color or the other doesn't dominate. The actual uniforms had too much yellow, this variation has too much blue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they looked superb, and apparently so did everyone else who commented on them other than yourself. You obviously just don't like colored pants.

I don't like them. White on white is an infinitely cleaner look. This feels bottom-heavy and gimmicky.

I do not like them either. While we're here, I don't like the blue facemask.

I know they're akin to blasphemy here, but I've always liked the grey facemask for Indy. Its a small, albeit faux-vintage detail that breathed some fresh life into the whole uniform.

No, that is definitely not blasphemy... Gray is the only choice that makes sense for that Colts uniform. With any classic football uniform, Gray is a perfectly legitimate choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like the 87 Twins uniforms with the "M" cap. Yes, they look Seinfeld and not retro in a modern way.

I'm sure there's a really good joke to be made here but I can't get the bat off my shoulder. I got nothing.

tumblr_mzie7131SU1rm5arco1_400.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gray is the only choice that makes sense for that Colts uniform.

How do white or blue not make sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nets.jpg

The baggy cut of the modern NBA uniform really messes with the look of that Nets uniform.

julius-erving-new-york-nets.jpg?w=869

. . . not to mention that the modern version has the stripe, wordmark and number in the wrong location.

On the original, the wordmark and number are off center and the stripe is somewhat on the front of the uniform. The modern version has the wordmark and number centered and the striping fully on the side (or at least pretty close to it).

EDIT: The number font is also different. Look at the 2s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nets.jpg

The baggy cut of the modern NBA uniform really messes with the look of that Nets uniform.

julius-erving-new-york-nets.jpg?w=869

. . . not to mention that the modern version has the stripe, wordmark and number in the wrong location.

On the original, the wordmark and number are off center and the stripe is somewhat on the front of the uniform. The modern version has the wordmark and number centered and the striping fully on the side (or at least pretty close to it).

EDIT: The number font is also different. Look at the 2s.

It's true that the modern cut messes somewhat with the design of the uniform. To compensate, the modern version should have three stars on the shorts.

But the differences in the positioning of the stripes and wordmark are trivial. Look, for example, at the St. Louis Cardinals' uniforms; the wordmark drifts up and down over the years.

Regarding the number font: the Nets used varsity (full-block) numbers as of 1976-77, their first year in the NBA. Here is a shot of Dr. J with Dave Cowens during the photo shoot for their Sports Illustrated cover after the merger.

nba-dave-cowens.jpg

(The sight of Julius in that uni style and with an NBA ball is very sad, because he never actually played for the Nets in the NBA. Due to collusion between the NBA and the Knicks aimed at defanging the defending ABA champions, the Nets were hit with a fee that the other ex-ABA teams didn't have to pay. The only way that the team could pay the fee and continue to exist was to sell Erving.)

The Nets didn't consistently stay with varsity numbers; but they did use them with that uni style for the next decade (interruped by the script-wordmark style of the mid-80s).

062713-sports-best-worst-draft-picks-Buc

112774_570x855.jpg

Otis-Birdsong-NBA-New-Jersey-Nets.jpg

otis-birdsong.jpg

Here we see both number fonts side-by-side in the same season: Mike Newlin with block numbers, and Maurice Lucas with varsity numbers.

nets-80-81.jpg

In fact, the team was sometimes pretty sloppy with the number fonts, even letting some diagonal 2s (which are part of neither of their official number fonts) slip in on occasion.

2116-21Fr.jpg

1985-86.jpg

Anyway, the use of the varsity numbers is not wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gray is the only choice that makes sense for that Colts uniform.

How do white or blue not make sense?

I agree -- gray would just look forced.

Here are my personal "rules" for the 4 circumstances in which it works for a football team to have a gray facemask.

1. They already have gray or sliver in their color scheme.

2. They've been wearing the same basic uniform since back when gray masks were the standard.

3. They rebrand to a new uniform specifically designed to have a vintage look/feel.

4. They are a football team that wears helmets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Grey masks as de rigueur for classic teams doesn't work when so many "timeless" teams have worn colored facemasks without compromising their timelessness: Bears, Steelers, Packers, 49ers, Redskins, Browns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the 49ers' only wearing of a red mask game during the dark red, black, drop shadowy over-logoed-mess period, I'd argue they don't belong in that list. But I'd be perfectly fine if they ever went with a bright red facemask.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.