Football: bring back metallic pants

[_RH_]

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I miss the shiny metallic pants many football teams used to wear.  I know this is a few years late, but why haven't teams fixed this error?!  A google search led to this article, which has MANY links and interesting bits about Notre Dame's pants specifically (and also lists other schools that went away from that style).  https://www.onefootdown.com/2015/4/6/8213323/notre-dame-a-history-of-the-fighting-irish-football-pants

This picture in particular was weird (half metallic half matte pants):

 

To me there is no contest, and I don't understand why teams went away from the metallic, ESPECIALLY when the helmets now clash with the pants

 

 

 

[dont care]

The manufacturers can’t make the lightweight faberics with the shimmer material. It’s been discussed a multitude of times here.

[oldschoolvikings]

31 minutes ago, dont care said:

The manufacturers can’t make the lightweight faberics with the shimmer material. It’s been discussed a multitude of times here.

 

Oh, yeah.

 

"Can't".

[Old School Fool]

It absolutely needs to come back. I would love to see it for the 49ers especially because the khaki look sucks. It was fine in the 80's but it's not working anymore.

 

[dont care]

1 hour ago, oldschoolvikings said:

 

Oh, yeah.

 

"Can't".

Yes, they can’t do it, while still making them lightweight. If the teams really wanted to keep the shimmer and play with the heavier materials they would ask Nike to like the cowboys and raiders.

[MDGP]

1 minute ago, dont care said:

Yes, they can’t do it, while still making them lightweight. If the teams really wanted to keep the shimmer and play with the heavier materials they would ask Nike to like the cowboys and raiders.

 

That lightweight argument is as much nonsense as the Sharks' not wearing hem stripes for extra speed is nonsense. The .02 ounce difference between these pants have no actual impact on performance. It's all marketing that gullible people buy into. 

[dont care]

39 minutes ago, Lafarge said:

 

That lightweight argument is as much nonsense as the Sharks' not wearing hem stripes for extra speed is nonsense. The .02 ounce difference between these pants have no actual impact on performance. It's all marketing that gullible people buy into. 

Ok we’ll they are also stretchier, more form fitting, more comfortable and allow greater range of motion easier than the old pants. Dazzle twill is just obsolete to today’s materials, teams don’t want to wear them for the the performance aspect of them, other than the few teams that care more about the aesthetics and keep the dazzle twill.

[MDGP]

40 minutes ago, dont care said:

Ok we’ll they are also stretchier, more form fitting, more comfortable and allow greater range of motion easier than the old pants. Dazzle twill is just obsolete to today’s materials, teams don’t want to wear them for the the performance aspect of them, other than the few teams that care more about the aesthetics and keep the dazzle twill.

 

I'm young enough to have worn both nike football pants and dazzle twill pants while playing. Honestly, dazzle twill can be extremely comfortable, form fitting, and absolutely has the full range of motion, when it is made with quality. IMO, dazzle twill gets a bad rap because so many people wore cheap, low quality versions when they played.

 

 

[oldschoolvikings]

10 hours ago, dont care said:

Ok we’ll they are also stretchier, more form fitting, more comfortable and allow greater range of motion easier than the old pants. Dazzle twill is just obsolete to today’s materials, teams don’t want to wear them for the the performance aspect of them, other than the few teams that care more about the aesthetics and keep the dazzle twill.

 

Thanks for checking in, Mr. Knight.

[FightingGoldenDevil]

Everytime my school gets new uniforms our old pants become the new practice pants. A lot of my teammates are still wearing the now old practice pants that are dazzle twill because they think they're more comfortable than our "new" practice pants

[Chromatic]

Count me in as someone in favour of matte pants.

[Mingjai]

16 hours ago, Lafarge said:

 

That lightweight argument is as much nonsense as the Sharks' not wearing hem stripes for extra speed is nonsense. The .02 ounce difference between these pants have no actual impact on performance. It's all marketing that gullible people buy into. 

 

Or 2006 Winter Olympic ice hockey when the team not wearing the 43% lighter, 15% more aerodynamic Nike Swift uniforms somehow won the gold medal. 

[Mitch B]

19 hours ago, Old School Fool said:

It absolutely needs to come back. I would love to see it for the 49ers especially because the khaki look sucks. It was fine in the 80's but it's not working anymore.

 

 

The 49'ers would look better wearing white pants than the khakis they currently wear.

[andrewharrington]

On 9/29/2018 at 10:49 PM, Lafarge said:

 

That lightweight argument is as much nonsense as the Sharks' not wearing hem stripes for extra speed is nonsense. The .02 ounce difference between these pants have no actual impact on performance. It's all marketing that gullible people buy into. 

 

Weight is a small factor. Moisture absortbtion and moisture transfer properties, airflow and dry time, stretch, compression, and comfort (both in material and in construction), durability, cleaning properties, etc. are all considerations. 

 

On 9/30/2018 at 3:43 PM, Mingjai said:

 

Or 2006 Winter Olympic ice hockey when the team not wearing the 43% lighter, 15% more aerodynamic Nike Swift uniforms somehow won the gold medal. 

 

Maybe they had talented players, good technique, smart coaching? Material technology isn’t really a “performance enhancer.” Rather, it’s meant to make players more comfortable, remove avoidable performance obstacles, and (theoretically) give the athlete the best chance at success, independent of skill or athletic ability.

 

Just because good players and/or good athletes *can* succeed with older equipment and garments doesn’t prove that material technology has no value, nor does it mean that designers and athletes should stop innovating and trying to make better equipment.

[DeFrank]

I also feel this desire to see shiny metallic pants back in the NFL. At the same time, I think it's for the same reasons I want every player to wear white shoes and bigger pads. And more players to wear turtlenecks. And brighter colors. And fans to tuck in their jerseys in the stands. And wear Starter jackets unironically.

 

I think I just want it to be 2002 again.

 

[AstroCree]

NFL uniforms hit their peak in 2000-2001. Practically every team looked great during that period. 

[guest23]

much like nike bringing about their minimalist design trend being an obvious attempt for them to stay ahead of the fashion/design curve, I thought they would have trotted out metallic sheen by now as a new design element for whatever their next generation cutting edge fabric is. Anecdotally the high end women's athletic brands seem to have been on the shiny/metallic trend (90's baby!) for over a year so the tech is definitely out there. Maybe adi will be the 1st to jump back as they have embraced the faux mesh pattern with their throwbacks.

[-Akronite-]

It really has to be on a case by case basis for me.

 

If the color itself is metallic, there are instances, such as Notre Dame going from gold to mustard pants, where I can see your side. However, the Buckeyes look much better in the current gray than a shiny silver IMO. I wish they'd do away with the glittery helmets as well, although I'm not against having a gloss (but that's another discussion entirely).

 

If the color is not metallic, no. There are almost no cases where, IMO, shiny fabric looks better than matte. Looking back a lot of jerseys look cheap because of the shiny finish compared to the matte, which better resembles the old school look of football when the fabric was (I assume) all cotton and wool.

 

I'd be interested in being presented a case where a switch from shiny to matte was a downgrade for a non-metallic color.

[Htown1141]

22 hours ago, DeFrank said:

I think I just want it to be 2002 again.

Guys, I think DeFrank is Jon Gruden.

[andrewharrington]

19 hours ago, -Akronite- said:

It really has to be on a case by case basis for me.

 

If the color itself is metallic, there are instances, such as Notre Dame going from gold to mustard pants, where I can see your side. However, the Buckeyes look much better in the current gray than a shiny silver IMO. I wish they'd do away with the glittery helmets as well, although I'm not against having a gloss (but that's another discussion entirely).

 

If the color is not metallic, no. There are almost no cases where, IMO, shiny fabric looks better than matte. Looking back a lot of jerseys look cheap because of the shiny finish compared to the matte, which better resembles the old school look of football when the fabric was (I assume) all cotton and wool.

 

I'd be interested in being presented a case where a switch from shiny to matte was a downgrade for a non-metallic color.

 

Notre Dame is the most interesting case for sure. I think I like the matte pants on them. One, their helmet finish is so unique and perfect for them, but there is no shiny fabric (maybe lamé?) that could even approach the same look. I’d rather the pants be intentionally different than failing miserably to replicate the helmet. Plus, I think the matte pants look traditional and fit the ND brand, and they also match the gold on the jersey pretty well. The Notre Dame helmet is a truly iconic, special piece of equipment, and I like that it stands alone, unique from the gold that you find on the rest of the uniform.