Detroit Lions Alt

[TheOldRoman]

Considering that they have black as a part of their color scheme (including trim and facemask), it wouldn't be "black for black's sake". It would be just using a secondary color, as a primary. Just like Houston does with red jerseys. Or San Diego does with powder blue jerseys.

But any reason to rail on a black uniform, right?

No, Dennis. Black was crammed into their color scheme a decade ago as BFBS. But even in their current version, it's a tertiary color. It doesn't belong, as Honolulu blue and silver work great together without black (as we saw in the Barry Sanders era). Black is only there to make things worse and sell a few more polo shirts for guys to wear to the office on casual Fridays.

The helmets and pants have always been silver. So, if one associates black with the Lions, it should be the third color you think of. Kind of like the Dolphins with navy or their new teal-ish blue. Their colors are aqua and orange, with or without that crap added. It's silly to make a jersey that color, let alone an entire uniform from the neck down. It would be like making a brown Redskins jersey because there's brown in the logo.

[kixbinder5]

Being a Lions fan (I know), I heard that they could not make any uniform alterations for 5 years because they wore the patches honoring William Clay Ford this year, and that is considered a jersey alteration since they wore them last year to honor him. Does the 5 year rule not apply to alternate jerseys?

I think alternate jerseys are on a different scale, as they haven't released on recently

[Gothamite]

Considering that they have black as a part of their color scheme (including trim and facemask), it wouldn't be "black for black's sake".

Sure it would. Black was added to their color scheme so they could sell black merchandise, including a black jersey. They have continued to sell black merchandise even though they (temporarily?) retired the black jersey,

It's the very definition of "black for black's sake".

Being a Lions fan (I know), I heard that they could not make any uniform alterations for 5 years because they wore the patches honoring William Clay Ford this year, and that is considered a jersey alteration since they wore them last year to honor him. Does the 5 year rule not apply to alternate jerseys?

Alternate jerseys are absolutely part of the 5-year rule. But this is the first time I have heard anyone suggest that memorial patches are.

It doesn't make much sense. Where did you hear that?

[NW980]

This is the article I read. The author's sources have been dead on with other Detroit sports-related issues, so I have no reason not to believe it.

http://detroitsportsrag.net/why-are-the-lions-wearing-the-william-clay-ford-sr-patch-this-year/

If you don't feel like reading the article, the idea is because WCF died in 2014 (and the team wore a patch in 2014), the patch on the 2015 uniform was considered a change, and therefore was subject to the 5-year rule. So apparently (according to the article), the Lions could either be fined every game they wore the patch, or this would be their uniform alteration.

[NW980]

I asked the author of the article. His information came from a person within the organization, but the NFL has denied it. For me, this raises an intersting question. Would adding a patch constitute a jersey change, if the patch is not timely (like an anniversary patch the year after the anniversary, or the WCF memorial patch this season)? I know the Bears added a tribute to George Halas, but they made it a perminant part of the jersey.

[Proc]

My favorite look for the Lions, besides the throwbacks (which the fans here in Detroit love), was the Billy Sims' era.

[TheOldRoman]

Being a Lions fan (I know), I heard that they could not make any uniform alterations for 5 years because they wore the patches honoring William Clay Ford this year, and that is considered a jersey alteration since they wore them last year to honor him. Does the 5 year rule not apply to alternate jerseys?

Alternate jerseys are absolutely part of the 5-year rule. But this is the first time I have heard anyone suggest that memorial patches are.

It doesn't make much sense. Where did you hear that?

There definitely is (or was) a five year rule for alternate jerseys, but I don't think it's related to the five-year rule about rebrands. it's been stated that when a team adds an alternate jersey, that's the only alt they can wear for five season, outside of an anniversary throwback which could replace it for one year. But the general five-year rule is that once a team rebrands, it can't make significant changes to the primary uniforms/helmets for five seasons. So I don't think those rules are related. The Lions adding a patch to the jersey wouldn't preclude them from adding an alternate. But that discussion is probably moot anyway, as the NFL already eased off the five-year rebrand rule when it allowed the Jaguars to change after four seasons of the previous set. But even if they are re-enforcing that five year rule, they're not going to stop teams from adding an alternate, even if they already have a color rash alt, in this new Nike era.

Also, I didn't watch the early game on Thanksgiving and had forgotten the Lions kept the Ford patch. That's dumb. First off, it's freaking huge, taking up space on an increasingly small uniform. But aside from that. it's ugly. No team owner deserves a giant freaking patch to be permanently on the front of the jerseys. The primary culprit is the Chiefs, ruining their all-time great home uniform with a stupid, huge patch of a white circle. If teams want to leave permanent memorials to an owner on jerseys, and the Lions shouldn't, they should take after the Bears and add something subtle into the sleeve stripes. No sleeve stripes? Tough. If the Raiders can resist the urge to add a gigantic patch for Al Davis, who was arguably more symbolic of and important to his franchise than any other owner in the history of sports, the Lions and Chiefs could calm their :censored: about it.

[VikWings]

As a Vikings fan I like that black is an official color (facemask, logo) just because of the black merchandise, because black is a far more neutral color to wear around than purple, but I never want to see a black uniform on the field, even though a black re-color of their current jersey might look nice in a vacuum.

[TheOldRoman]

As a Vikings fan I like that black is an official color (facemask, logo) just because of the black merchandise, because black is a far more neutral color to wear around than purple, but I never want to see a black uniform on the field, even though a black re-color of their current jersey might look nice in a vacuum.

I never got this line of thinking. It's not a tuxedo. You're wearing sports wear. It's not going to look classy or sophisticated no matter what color it is. No lady is going to see a guy in a black Lions sweatshirt and say, "damn, that's a well dressed guy." I just don't understand wearing a color to support a team which isn't that team's color. I mean, if you don't want to wear a team-color shirt, don't wear any team shirt at all.

[Gothamite]

Amen.

Green and gold aren't the best colors on me, but I don't want the Packers to switch just so my cap can be better-coordinated.

[jp1409]

I was in Florida last month and every single piece of charcoal/black Dolphins apparel made me cringe. Paying so much to buy your favorite team merchandise but not wanting it to be in their actual colors is a real nonsense. Buy a damn grey hoodie for a quarter of the price if you don't want a Dolphins one...

[WavePunter]

I agree.. Black is an "edgy" enough color that it might look great with a certain team's colors or logo, and that's all well and good, but in-general, the ridiculous anthracite/black stuff is overwhelmingly over-supplied.. I'm a dolphins fan, and that dark grey doesn't work with their color scheme at all.. If I wasn't grey dolphins merchandise, it might be an old-school athletic heather grey t-shirt or hoodie, with a bunch of aqua and coral on it, but that's about as far as I'll go with the grey nonsense.. If you want a neutral color, white works

[Chewbacca]

I have a bad feeling this might end up being a grey Color Rush uniform for the Lions. What a catastrophe that would be.

[VikWings]

As a Vikings fan I like that black is an official color (facemask, logo) just because of the black merchandise, because black is a far more neutral color to wear around than purple, but I never want to see a black uniform on the field, even though a black re-color of their current jersey might look nice in a vacuum.

I never got this line of thinking. It's not a tuxedo. You're wearing sports wear. It's not going to look classy or sophisticated no matter what color it is. No lady is going to see a guy in a black Lions sweatshirt and say, "damn, that's a well dressed guy." I just don't understand wearing a color to support a team which isn't that team's color. I mean, if you don't want to wear a team-color shirt, don't wear any team shirt at all.

I'm not trying to look classy or sophisticated. Just saying black is more neutral, easier to match, and less vibrant/loud than purple. I have purple vikings stuff too. But I like having black as an option.

I prefer gray (not anthracite) to black though for merchandise. I just love the way colors pop off gray. Gray works with pretty much any team too (not saying shoehorning it into the color scheme). Black doesn't.

[Gothamite]

Right. Because when you're wearing a $200 polyester shirt designed to show everyone in sight how much you love the Vikings, "less vibrant" is what's really important.

Count me as another who just doesn't get it. If you want to represent your team, represent your team. If you want clothing that coordinates better, there's a handful of Gaps in every town.

[TheOldRoman]

Amen.

Green and gold aren't the best colors on me, but I don't want the Packers to switch just so my cap can be better-coordinated.

My father-in-law has a black leather Packers jacket he wears around. I always shake my head. This is probably a $300 jacket, almost entirely in black, outside of a few green stripes on the sleeves and logos on the chest and back. I'm not going to spend that kind of money to *not* look like anything my team wears.

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

I could care less if they came out in hot pink and teal uniforms until they focus on the on-field performance.

[BrandMooreArt]

Count me as another who just doesn't get it. If you want to represent your team, represent your team. If you want clothing that coordinates better, there's a handful of Gaps in every town.

i agree to a point, but thats just not the way people buy things. they want to represent their team and be stylish, and there is a greater sense of value that comes from buying a shirt that they can wear on game day or wear to work on friday. they want yoga pants with their team's logo on them but they dont want the pants to be yellow. they want a hat that's black and gray so they can wear it more often, but they want the Longhorns logo on it. if you're an apparel provider, there's nothing wrong with providing both options. you have to

for the Lions, i would guess they will add blue pants to pair with their blue jersey or add a silver jersey for the Color Rush game. if they really wanted to get wild though, there is a red jersey in their history

[BrianLion]

I have a bad feeling this might end up being a grey Color Rush uniform for the Lions. What a catastrophe that would be.

which would be weird seeing as how gray isnt even in our color scheme?

[hawk36]

My favorite look for the Lions, besides the throwbacks (which the fans here in Detroit love), was the Billy Sims' era.

Agreed.