2002 Washington Redskins Full-Time Throwbacks

[DeFrank]

On 12/30/2016 at 3:33 PM, PTR87 said:

own the darrell green jersey from 02

 

 

 

I was at this game when I was 7 years old.

[DeFrank]

On 1/2/2017 at 3:58 PM, oldschoolvikings said:

I feel so out of touch on these, because I just don't love them. I know the basic idea behind these should be right in my wheelhouse, and most of the CCSLCers I'm usually in lockstep with are big fans of it, but there's just a few details that bug me enough that I find impossible to get past.

 

The repeating of the spear on the sleeve is IMO needless clutter. As great as the spear looks on a helmet, it just doesn't work as well on the sleeve.  And the hip logo as a real eyesore. I can't think of an example where a hip logo actually improves a uniform. And if for some reason you feel a hip logo is necessary, why repeat the anniversary logo? Six spearheads on one uniform is absolutely overkill.  But the most nagging brainworm of this set is the fact that they designed a brand new stripe pattern for the sleeve (Obviously as a "house" for the spear) but kept the authentic throwback stripe on the socks.  Mismatched stripes between sleeves and socks are always a deal breaker for me.  (Come to think of it, Washington is still making this mistake.)

 

 

I agree with all of those changes. I think what so many people love about the uniform is 1. the shades of burgundy and gold and 2. the spear helmet.

 

Washington has sort of meandered their way over to some of what that 2002 uniform had to offer, specifically by using gold pants and that sock stripe, but as many of us are aware, there is no conscientious plan to all this. The team tried a fauxback in 2002-2003. Gibbs came in and went back to the ultimate classic of white/burgundy at home and away with some all-white mixed in. We tried the above-linked Lombardi-era throwback in 2007. New GM Bruce Allen took those 2007 throwback pants and socks and paired them with the rarely-used burgundy jerseys of the 1979-present set (also linked above). A gorgeous new throwback since 2012, using the colors we love from the 2002 fauxback, hasn't gained as much love (probably due to the tan pants and helmet changes).

 

Going forward, if Washington/Nike are smart, I could see all of the above lead to a real "modern throwback" overhaul if the team ever decides to (hopefully) change the name (I think that unless they decide to change the name, they won't overhaul the uniforms and draw more media attention to the issue). This set could use some features of the 2002 fauxback and 2012-present throwback while retaining many features of the 1979-present set. 

 

Helmet: Dark burgundy, dark gold facemask. Nike-updated spear helmet. No stripe.

 

Home Jersey: Dark burgundy jersey. Dark gold numbers outlined in white (or not...). '79-present sleeve stripe (dark gold/white). Move TV numbers to shoulders.

Home Pants/Socks: Dark gold pants. 79-present pants stripe (dark burgundy/white). Dark burgundy socks (with same striping pattern why not!)

 

Away Jersey: White. Dark burgundy numbers outlined in dark gold. '79-present sleeve stripe (dark burgundy/dark gold). Move TV numbers again.

Away Pants/socks: Dark burgundy. 79-present pants stripe (dark gold/white). White socks (striped socks again).

 

The team doesn't have a sentimental attachment to any iteration of the burgundy jersey, so having one that looks pretty different than anything we've seen on a consistent basis before (specifically dark gold pants and numbers!) wouldn't be "too much" of a change. Alternatively, the classic, sentimental, don't-touch-this white over burgundy look remains largely intact. If anything, the new colors keep the feel/appreciation for that combo while making it look far more snazzy in a very Nike way.

 

I'll whip up a concept soon. It'll be my first one since 2013.

[leopard88]

6 hours ago, DeFrank said:

 

I agree with all of those changes. I think what so many people love about the uniform is 1. the shades of burgundy and gold and 2. the spear helmet.

 

Speaking for me, that is a large part of it.  The colors are so much nicer than the one Lombardi foisted on them.

 

I'd even welcome these (or something similar) as the road uniform with a throwback/fauxback set.

 

[Bill0813]

3 hours ago, leopard88 said:

 

Speaking for me, that is a large part of it.  The colors are so much nicer than the one Lombardi foisted on them.

 

I'd even welcome these (or something similar) as the road uniform with a throwback/fauxback set.

 

Sand Knit was the predominate manufacturer of the Redskins jerseys from 1957 to 1968.  Vince Lombardi's brother in law was a sales rep for Rawlings, so out with the losing tradition and in with new jerseys from Rawlings, but just days before the season a serious issue was discovered. 

For a decade the Redskins had always worn dark burgundy jerseys with a burgundy or dark plumb colored helmet.  After opening the boxes there was going to be a serious fashion faux pas, the jerseys were the wrong color.   All helmets were quickly taken in the back equipment room stripped of their 9 part spear decals and spray painted the new lighter color of cardinal.

 http://www.helmethut.com/Redskins/Pierce.html

[leopard88]

I knew there was some kind of story along those lines.  I just didn't have time to track it down this morning.

 

Now, how do we explain the pants?  Also manufacturer issues or did Lombardi just really want them to look like the Packers?

[FinsUp1214]

2 hours ago, Bill81361 said:

 

 http://www.helmethut.com/Redskins/Pierce.html

 

Its awesome stories like this that just make me love the quirky nature of uniform history all the more. 

[DeFrank]

6 hours ago, leopard88 said:

 

Speaking for me, that is a large part of it.  The colors are so much nicer than the one Lombardi foisted on them.

 

 

 

In a vacuum, I would tend to agree. The problem, of course, is that shades of burgundy and gold we know now are so completely associated with success for the team. All five Super Bowl appearances, including five victories, in what outsiders often refer to as the "McDonalds" colors. I've never seen them this way because of how much of a fan I've been all my life. I think any return to darker shades would have to retain a white over burgundy road uniform so as not to completely depart from what I consider to be a top-five all-time NFL uniform.

[BBTV]

I've never heard Washington's uniforms described as "McDonald's colors".  Neither on this board nor in real life.

[Discrim]

I could easily imagine someone calling the Chiefs' unis "McDonald's colors."  The Skins, not so much.

Quote

Now, how do we explain the pants?  Also manufacturer issues or did Lombardi just really want them to look like the Packers?

Answered your own question there

[HailGoldPants]

20 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

I've never heard Washington's uniforms described as "McDonald's colors".  Neither on this board nor in real life.

Must be an internal fan thing.  I must have heard the McDonald's comparison at least 50 times.

[FinsUp1214]

I'd never heard the McDonald's comparison, either. For the Chiefs I have, like dozens of times. It's one of those "knocks" Broncos fans here throw at them occasionally. But I've never in my life heard it regarding Washington.

 

 

 

[The_Admiral]

2 hours ago, HailGoldPants said:

Must be an internal fan thing.  I must have heard the McDonald's comparison at least 50 times.

As an internal fan, I'm not an internal fan.

[Sykotyk]

Didn't see it mentioned, but wanted to let in on this regarding the Arena Football League.

 

Most know that at one point, the NFL purchased a 49% interesting the AFL, including an option to buy the remaining 51% (this was also during the time the NFL had loaned the CFL money). Included in that option, was the ability for NFL team owners to purchase AFL expansion teams at a reduced rate. The NFL also changed their rules to allow owners to own an AFL team as then-current NFL rules prohibited it.

 

Many NFL owners took up the offer, the notable ones Colorado Crush, Dallas Desperados, Nashville Kats (second iteration), and New Orleans VooDoo. Another condition was having the rights to the NFL market IF there wasn't a team and a plan to start a team. One of the teams, was Washington who had reserved, and planned, to start an AFL team at some point in the future. The name/logo/colors had already been approved, though not publicized since Snyder never went through with actually starting the team. But, it was to be the Washington Warriors and use the spear helmet logo exactly as the Redskins did.

 

In the end, the NFL plan fell through when the league imploded, and just now Washington is getting another AFL team after years since the Washington Commandos went under.

[DeFrank]

Posted the concept of what I was talking about in text above: 

 

[leopard88]

On 1/7/2017 at 1:32 AM, Discrimihater said:

I could easily imagine someone calling the Chiefs' unis "McDonald's colors."  The Skins, not so much.

Answered your own question there

 

That has always been my guess/assumption (about the Redskins).  I just didn't know if there was also more to the story.

[Discrim]

There is a bit more, actually, though I figure Gothamite can flesh it out better than I can.  Basically, when Lombardi overhauled the Skins' unis, he went with a different manufacturer...where his brother happened to be employed.  IIRC said supplier didn't have Washington's longstanding dark burgundy color available, and the closest shade they had was cardinal red, so that's what Lombardi went with. 

[Gothamite]

15 hours ago, Discrimihater said:

There is a bit more, actually, though I figure Gothamite can flesh it out better than I can.  Basically, when Lombardi overhauled the Skins' unis, he went with a different manufacturer...where his brother happened to be employed.  IIRC said supplier didn't have Washington's longstanding dark burgundy color available, and the closest shade they had was cardinal red, so that's what Lombardi went with. 

 

I think you've done a pretty good job there.  The only thing I'd add is that he was color-blind, so by all accounts he didn't care too much about those particulars.  In later years, he couldn't remember what color jersey he wore at Fordham.

 

Being color-blind, these two uniforms must have looked identical except for the helmet details.  I guess Vince figured that dressing like winners was a first step in bringing winning ways to Washington.

 

 

Edit: the road version was every bit as "inspired":

 

[oldschoolvikings]

Those road sleeves are glorious.

[Around the Horn]

12 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

I think you've done a pretty good job there.  The only thing I'd add is that he was color-blind, so by all accounts he didn't care too much about those particulars.  In later years, he couldn't remember what color jersey he wore at Fordham.

 

Being color-blind, these two uniforms must have looked identical except for the helmet details.  I guess Vince figured that dressing like winners was a first step in bringing winning ways to Washington.

 

You know, I always had heard about the whole looking like the Packers thing, but until now seeing them next to each other, I never realized how blatant it was...

[HailGoldPants]

Each and almost every detail of the two uni sets are identical with the exception of helmet stripes.  I wonder why Lombardi didn't go with 3 stripes on the Skins helmet?  Maybe they had a prototype, but thought it didn't look quite right?