Recommended Posts

The problem with the Bucs' current pewter isn't necessarily that it's flat compared to the previous shiny material, but that it's just dark. It looks brown, not pewter. Lighten it up and it would look better.

 

As far as their previous uniform as a whole, yes, there's a lot of sentiment for it based on Super Bowl XXXVII, but it had definitely started to look dated by 2013. The team went way overboard (no pun intended) on "fixing" it, but a change was starting to be necessary. I think there could have been a few tweaks to the 1997-2013 uniforms to make them more timeless, such as toning down on the multiple outlines of numbers/pant stripes or brightening the red (the best change Nike made), and they could have become a new classic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/20/2018 at 9:14 PM, MCM0313 said:

I freaking HATE the matte pewter. That's a color that completely changes with a matte finish. It also bothers me is that, even with the problems making newer fabrics glossy, it's still possible to add SOME gloss. The Saints don't have completely flat pants, for instance. Nor do the Raiders, do they? So evidently someone intentionally ordered Tampa's pants to be as matte as possible. Even a tiny bit of gloss would make those pants (and the other pewter elements of their uniform) look so much better.

Agree to disagree, but pewter should have a matte/patina style finish, especially for a pirate themed identity.  Polished shiny just looks like dark silver...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Matito said:

The problem with the Bucs' current pewter isn't necessarily that it's flat compared to the previous shiny material, but that it's just dark. It looks brown, not pewter. Lighten it up and it would look better.

 

As far as their previous uniform as a whole, yes, there's a lot of sentiment for it based on Super Bowl XXXVII, but it had definitely started to look dated by 2013. The team went way overboard (no pun intended) on "fixing" it, but a change was starting to be necessary. I think there could have been a few tweaks to the 1997-2013 uniforms to make them more timeless, such as toning down on the multiple outlines of numbers/pant stripes or brightening the red (the best change Nike made), and they could have become a new classic.

I strongly disagree, nothing about this look was dated in 2013 or would look dated 5 years later. I will say I actually like the new logo more and think it would look great on this set if it is normal size.

 

Darrelle-Revis.jpeg

darrelle-revis-cut-tampa-bay-buccaneers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dont care said:

Pats had them last year

 

Gotcha. The post made it seem like it was a new thing but that sounded wrong to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Placebo said:

Agree to disagree. The Vikes have gone double white most often and I think it is their best look, personally.

 

I don't think white jersey and white pants works with this new set because the stripes don't match. On the white pants, the yellow stripe is surround by purple but on the white jersey the yellow strip is outside the purple. The look just doesn't feel right. Regardless of whether or not the Vikings should be wearing all white on the road, this current set isn't designed to be all white it seems like. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, AstroBull21 said:

Agree to disagree, but pewter should have a matte/patina style finish, especially for a pirate themed identity.  Polished shiny just looks like dark silver...

Matte metal and shiny fabric look a hell of a lot more similar than matte metal and matte fabric (the latter of which just looks like and reminds one of fabric; go figure).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PaleVermilion81 said:

 

I don't think white jersey and white pants works with this new set because the stripes don't match. On the white pants, the yellow stripe is surround by purple but on the white jersey the yellow strip is outside the purple. The look just doesn't feel right. Regardless of whether or not the Vikings should be wearing all white on the road, this current set isn't designed to be all white it seems like. 

 

True, but their last set wasn't meant to be all-white and they did it anyway.

 

20101012_082510_favre500.jpg?w=525

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Gupti said:

The funny thing, I think, with the Packers and matte pants is that when they first introduced those Acme Packers throwbacks around 2010, I recall seeing news tidbits about how the Packers players (not the least being Aaron Rodgers) were raving about how comfortable the pants that went with them were, and how they looked forward to wearing them for the pants. Those throwback pants happened to be made of a matte beige-colored fabric. Was it the fact that they were matte? Was it that they were just able to make beige-colored fabric in a softer textile? I don’t know, but I find it funny how they were notably so much more comfy than what they’d worn for so long that they went out of their way praise them for it. Surely a lot of hubbub for a set of drawers.

I recall that too, and i think it was a combination of a different fabric as well as there being no pants stripes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im a huge fan of the Vikes’ current road white regardless of the striping, though I really wish they’d included some “road whites” in the pant rotation to better match the jerseys like Denver had.

 

I’ll need some board vets to back me up on this lore, but I believe that I recall that when the unis were introduced in 2013, Colorwerx’s logosheet showed that there actually was an extra pair of white pants available that they never mentioned, didn’t show at the unveiling, and haven’t shown a thread of since. They were white with a single fat purple stripe, and the Viking head on the hip inside of the stripe. I wonder if it was just a mistake to include them at all, like they were part of a design option that wasn’t selected. Weird stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, MCM0313 said:

Right, but is being matte finish what makes them better gear? Doubtful - correlation doesn't equal causation. I also find it doubtful, given the state of technology today, that teams will forever be forced to choose only one particular material finish if they want to perform. Admittedly, I'm biased because I prefer glossy to matte for almost anything.

 

Also, I don't think the Buccaneers' current pants/yoke look like tarnished or weathered metal. I think they look non-metallic altogether, which is pretty silly given that their color is supposed to be pewter, which IS A METAL.

 

This is pewter:

tablewares.png

 

This is the Bucs' "pewter" uniform color:

tjAb2Mo.png

 

We can talk about lighting and photography and such, but that's a fundamentally different color. And in my opinion, it's much worse, particularly in contrast to the metallic helmet.

s9sXuc3.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Gupti said:

Im a huge fan of the Vikes’ current road white regardless of the striping, though I really wish they’d included some “road whites” in the pant rotation to better match the jerseys like Denver had.

 

I’ll need some board vets to back me up on this lore, but I believe that I recall that when the unis were introduced in 2013, Colorwerx’s logosheet showed that there actually was an extra pair of white pants available that they never mentioned, didn’t show at the unveiling, and haven’t shown a thread of since. They were white with a single fat purple stripe, and the Viking head on the hip inside of the stripe. I wonder if it was just a mistake to include them at all, like they were part of a design option that wasn’t selected. Weird stuff.

I believe those pants show up in Madden too. IIRC, they're labelled as alternate road pants. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Matito said:

The problem with the Bucs' current pewter isn't necessarily that it's flat compared to the previous shiny material, but that it's just dark. It looks brown, not pewter. Lighten it up and it would look better.

 

As far as their previous uniform as a whole, yes, there's a lot of sentiment for it based on Super Bowl XXXVII, but it had definitely started to look dated by 2013. The team went way overboard (no pun intended) on "fixing" it, but a change was starting to be necessary. I think there could have been a few tweaks to the 1997-2013 uniforms to make them more timeless, such as toning down on the multiple outlines of numbers/pant stripes or brightening the red (the best change Nike made), and they could have become a new classic.

 

I'm not so sure about that, although everyone is entitled to their opinion. At that point, the Bucs only had those unis for 16 years...which is nothing compared to the Steelers, Raiders, Cowboys, Packers, or Bears, just to name a few. I think the new, larger helmet logo was a good idea, but the rest of the 2014 uniform should be scrapped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, whitedawg22 said:

 

This is pewter:

tablewares.png

 

This is the Bucs' "pewter" uniform color:

tjAb2Mo.png

 

We can talk about lighting and photography and such, but that's a fundamentally different color. And in my opinion, it's much worse, particularly in contrast to the metallic helmet.

s9sXuc3.png

Thank you. Can't believe a UM fan is backing me up on this, but Tampa's brown-black hybrid is not pewter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just at the Bucs team store at the stadium this past weekend, and they were selling authentic on-field use jerseys.  I asked the staff and they said they were the same models that the players wear as team issue. I was shocked to notice how much the pewter on the shoulders was a deep dark gray.  There is no hint of brown anywhere.

 

If you think there's brown, its likely due to lighting altering its appearance...because its far from anything brown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ScubaSteve said:

 The Eagles will be wearing a Super Bowl champions patch for one game against the Falcons. I know MLB does stuff like this, is this the first time for NFL?

 

https://www.crossingbroad.com/2018/08/the-eagles-are-wearing-super-bowl-champs-jerseys-against-the-falcons.html

 

CI5186-365-a-1100x1100.png

Awesome! I was hoping they would have a patch for the opening game. I missed out on ordering one with the regular Super Bowl patch. Just ordered a Malcolm Jenkins one. Hopefully they actually wear green for Week 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, oldschoolvikings said:

 

True, but their last set wasn't meant to be all-white and they did it anyway.

 

20101012_082510_favre500.jpg?w=525

Just because they could doesn’t mean they should, they also wore mono purple in that uniform set too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, whitedawg22 said:

 

This is pewter:

tablewares.png

 

This is the Bucs' "pewter" uniform color:

tjAb2Mo.png

 

We can talk about lighting and photography and such, but that's a fundamentally different color. And in my opinion, it's much worse, particularly in contrast to the metallic helmet.

s9sXuc3.png

The Bucs pewter is supposed to mimic the finish of cannons and cannon balls, not the actual metal pewter. I do agree that it does not look as good matte as it did on the shimmer fabric but comparing a color to a metal it’s not suppose to be mimicking is bad form. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, dont care said:

Just because they could doesn’t mean they should, they also wore mono purple in that uniform set too.

The worst flaw of that Vikings set was the pants.  Even when they wore them as designed (white/purple and purple/white), the "transition" from white to purple (or vice-versa) in the side panel just came a few inches lower.  It should have just kept the pants stripe all one color, particularly since they ended up going white/white about seven times a year. And on the white/white (or p/p), it just looked like a random box had been taken out of the side of the pants.  The pants, in a vacuum, looked ridiculous with that short stripe not going to the top.  I always thought that "transition" was a case of "overthinking it." The Bengals also have a transition on top of their pants.  Those are not quite a egregious as the Vikings because the "box" is two colors and one of those two matches the jersey side panel.  But still unnecessary.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.