College Football Uniforms - 2017 Season

[WavePunter]

I agree that there isn't much that could improve the Clemson/Auburn game aesthetically.. It was basically just an orange and white game.. Both teams wore their best looks given the situation, it's just not a great looking matchup.. Clemson/ South Carolina  or Auburn/Alabama are better visual matchups due to the added garnet/crimson (especially SC home vs Clemson or Bama away vs Auburn).. It's ok to have good looking matchups that aren't (and can't be) great.. Both teams looked great and the matchup looked good, but nowhere near "best of the weekend" status

[BlackBolt3]

2 hours ago, VikingsNotMinnesota said:

That said, their pants need a purple outline stripe. It just looks really weird when their helmet has purple outlines, and their jerseys have purple outlines, but their pants have none. Also I think this game going Orange, Purple, Orange would've been better, just so they contrast with Auburn's aways better.

Yeah, I've been thinking that a thin purple stripe to go outside of the orange is the way to go. Not enough to stick out, but enough to notice it's there.

 

Also, some of y'all have been asking for it, but that O/P/O combo is not going to happen any time soon. The uniform combination seem to be pretty ingrained at this point: all orange, all white, all purple, orange over white, and white over orange. The mixing and matching seems to remind people around here of the Bowden coaching days, which compared to now, are the dark ages.

[4_tattoos]

Doesn't Clemson only wear purple once a season now?

[oddball]

The whole "modern" vs "classic" design. First of all to the poster who said, "Can we stop with the "I nominate [random traditional matchup] as uni matchup of the week, so clean!"?" Um, no. If you don't like it, walk away. As far as the argument goes, I'm can only think of Hawaii, the current San Diego State, and Oregon with the wings as good uniform designs of the modern style. Boise State? Has potential, but falls short in so many areas. Helmet sides not matching, over-sized logo on helmet, stripes on arms, not on pants, gradient numbers all kill what could be a solid look.

[henburg]

23 hours ago, VikingsNotMinnesota said:

You can't just give every classic match-up an automatic thumbs up, you have to do it case by case. There's an awful trend on this board where any classic matchup is automatically praised, and every modern match-up is automatically bad. That's not using your brain at all, that's deciding whether or not you like something before you have even attempted to analyze it, and that's really toxic to a community that wants to discuss uniforms. It's very frustrating trying to have debate/conversation as to why I or someone else thinks a uniform is good/bad, and I get met with non responses and statements like "no it's a traditional uniform, it's good, shut up". It would be really nice if I could say "I don't like this matchup and here's why", and get "i disagree and here's why", rather than "no, I'm a grey haired 29 year old who likes what i likes, don't break the circlejerk, raaaaaa".

 

23 hours ago, oldschoolvikings said:

 

No one has ever said that here.  Ever.

 

This is obviously an oversimplification, but it's still definitely a sentiment that dominates this and many other threads. I'm not saying people have to change their sensibilities, but it would be nice if opinions that went against the norm for CCSLC weren't immediately belittled by more tenured posters. I mean, we're surely better than this right? 

 

On 9/10/2017 at 5:08 PM, vicfurth said:

 

Uuuuuuuum you do know that's two schools with orange as a main color right? 

 

I mean, we could spend time talking about how awful Arizona looked. Or Iowa State. But they're modern and trendy so automatically better than the old stuff. 

 

I feel enlightened. 

 

On 9/10/2017 at 8:42 PM, WSU151 said:

 

Nope.

 

Some of us gray haireds like the classic looks, mainly because college football was invented way before 2005.

 

Both of these posts make VikingsNotMinnesota's point for him. 

[vicfurth]

1 hour ago, henburg said:

 

 

This is obviously an oversimplification, but it's still definitely a sentiment that dominates this and many other threads. I'm not saying people have to change their sensibilities, but it would be nice if opinions that went against the norm for CCSLC weren't immediately belittled by more tenured posters. I mean, we're surely better than this right? 

 

 

 

Both of these posts make VikingsNotMinnesota's point for him. 

 

I can see your point. Personally, I just want stuff to look good; the year the idea was created notwithstanding. The two specific ones I called out were these, though:

 

 

 

One is straight-up modern, the other one has more old-school elements (i.e. shoulder loops and gray facemask). For me, though, the color balance is off. Arizona has multiple shades of red. An aforementioned "amazing" Boise state look has an okay jersey/pants with a unbalanced helmet that I really don't like. But then you have other uniforms that are modern and look really good.

 

 

 

Again, it's about balance, not modern vs old

[vicfurth]

Another example is how proper coloring makes all the difference:

 

 

 

Same uniform but coloring make a lot of difference. 

[MJWalker45]

11 hours ago, vicfurth said:

Another example is how proper coloring makes all the difference:

 

 

 

Same uniform but coloring make a lot of difference. 

The helmets make a difference too. I'm so sick of asymmetric helmets. One of worst belongs to Virginia because either the logos or the numbers would be good on their own but are horrible in tandem. 

[nuordr]

44 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

The helmets make a difference too. I'm so sick of asymmetric helmets. One of worst belongs to Virginia because either the logos or the numbers would be good on their own but are horrible in tandem. 

I would normally agree with you, but as I was watching the Broncos last night, I was thinking their color rush helmet would look great as a full-time helmet with the "D" on one side and "Bronco" on the other. That way you satisfy all fans from the old & new school. 

 

 

[MJWalker45]

1 minute ago, nuordr said:

I would normally agree with you, but as I was watching the Broncos last night, I was thinking their color rush helmet would look great as a full-time helmet with the "D" on one side and "Bronco" on the other. That way you satisfy all fans from the old & new school. 

 

 

That'd be even worse. Pick one logo and go with it. 

[Webfooter]

From what I've gathered, Air Force will be using the APLS helmets multiple times throughout the season, with them using a single logo/bumper design for each of the games they wear them in.

[Hamptonlantavegas]

Nice combo for both teams

[Hamptonlantavegas]

Some would say this is the Gold Standard for NC State (See what i did there ?)

[djam2410]

The Cal set is growing on me more and more every time i see it . The only real problem i see is maybe making the yellow on the sleeves more pronounced on the home jersey

 

[Ciaranowls]

Can  you guys just stop fighting please

[IceCap]

17 hours ago, henburg said:

This is obviously an oversimplification, but it's still definitely a sentiment that dominates this and many other threads. I'm not saying people have to change their sensibilities, but it would be nice if opinions that went against the norm for CCSLC weren't immediately belittled by more tenured posters. I mean, we're surely better than this right? 

The problem is I haven't seen much actual belittling. It seems to me like people who like what is admittedly "against the norm" take anything short of fawning over their "unique" opinions as "belittling."

 

I don't think anyone here is adverse to discussion and an exchange of ideas. The notion that it's just the traditionalist side of things that shoot down any attempt at discussion/oversimplify the argument to a strawman is false. VikingsNotMinnesota's own recent posts prove that the "modern" fans are just as capable of over-simplifying and belittling the opinions of those they don't agree with as any "traditional" fan.

 

In short? If you want productive discussion? Show you're (a general "you") are willing to engage in it.

[VikingsNotMinnesota]

3 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

The problem is I haven't seen much actual belittling. It seems to me like people who like what is admittedly "against the norm" take anything short of fawning over their "unique" opinions as "belittling."

 

I don't think anyone here is adverse to discussion and an exchange of ideas. The notion that it's just the traditionalist side of things that shoot down any attempt at discussion/oversimplify the argument to a strawman is false. VikingsNotMinnesota's own recent posts prove that the "modern" fans are just as capable of over-simplifying and belittling the opinions of those they don't agree with as any "traditional" fan.

 

In short? If you want productive discussion? Show you're (a general "you") are willing to engage in it.

I literally admitted that I'm a traditionalist, but alright I'll take your word on it. My experience has not led to believe that discussion and critique of traditional uniforms is possible, but I'll give it more of a whirl, we'll see.

[radchad]

1 hour ago, djam2410 said:

The Cal set is growing on me more and more every time i see it . The only real problem i see is maybe making the yellow on the sleeves more pronounced on the home jersey

 

 

The only thing I didn't like was that a bunch of players wore gold socks, which looked kind of ridiculous with the gold pants

[Cardsblues02]

37 minutes ago, radchad said:

 

The only thing I didn't like was that a bunch of players wore gold socks, which looked kind of ridiculous with the gold pants

Those Weber State uniforms are awesome. One of the better uniforms Adidas does mainly because you cant see the stupid shockweb pattern. The helmet is great too.

[henburg]

1 hour ago, Ice_Cap said:

The problem is I haven't seen much actual belittling. It seems to me like people who like what is admittedly "against the norm" take anything short of fawning over their "unique" opinions as "belittling."

 

I don't think anyone here is adverse to discussion and an exchange of ideas. The notion that it's just the traditionalist side of things that shoot down any attempt at discussion/oversimplify the argument to a strawman is false. VikingsNotMinnesota's own recent posts prove that the "modern" fans are just as capable of over-simplifying and belittling the opinions of those they don't agree with as any "traditional" fan.

 

In short? If you want productive discussion? Show you're (a general "you") are willing to engage in it.

 

I just called it belittling in that VikingsNotMinnesota's original post that started this whole discourse in the first place pointed out that aside from both teams sporting traditionally-styled uniforms, there was really nothing very visually exciting or even pleasing about that match up due to the near monochromatic color scheme. I think it's a more than valid point, but his post was met with people reducing what he said to strawmen almost immediately.

 

Obviously nobody is perfect in this situation. I wasn't trying to split posters into two factions, I'd hope that people consider their tastes to be more complex than "all traditional" or "all modern". Taking it case by case is the only right way to do it IMO, and I am in total agreement with your last point.