Buc

Buccaneers to Get New Uniforms

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, oldschoolvikings said:

 I know some on this board think the Jaguars went too far towards the plain, but after that two tone helmet garbage, it really was what they needed to do. 

 

So, has anybody tried to color swap the Jags' or Jets' uniforms to Bucs colors? I know we've suggested it for the Gridbirds' uniforms (at least for the Jags), but such simplicity might work here. Two-color numbers, simple sleeve details, and fairly plain pants would be a good minimalist reaction to the previous design. 

 

32 minutes ago, Haz_Matt said:

I'd be ok with something like this for the helmet

spacer.png

 

It's painful.

Edited by IceCap
let's not link to that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Bucs need to scrap everything about the current look and aim to look closer to their 2000's set or the Bucco Bruce-era set. The problem with Nike is they seemingly cannot ever get the pewter right; so either minimize the use of it or just accept it's not working out with Nike and get rid of the color altogether. Doubling-down is what got the Bucs into this mess to begin with.

 

spacer.png

Something like this helmet, with either Bucco Bruce or the flag logo, would be ideal for me. Maybe have a pewter face mask if we want to keep it around, but it's pretty obvious Nike is completely inept when it comes to making pewter work on actual jerseys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, FormerLurker said:

Sure is.

mhm

 

14 minutes ago, FormerLurker said:

You’re welcome for shedding light on it 😉

I'm kind of scared to find out where you dug it out from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Ridleylash said:

The Bucs need to scrap everything about the current look and aim to look closer to their 2000's set or the Bucco Bruce-era set. The problem with Nike is they seemingly cannot ever get the pewter right; so either minimize the use of it or just accept it's not working out with Nike and get rid of the color altogether. Doubling-down is what got the Bucs into this mess to begin with.

 

spacer.png

Something like this helmet, with either Bucco Bruce or the flag logo, would be ideal for me. Maybe have a pewter face mask if we want to keep it around, but it's pretty obvious Nike is completely inept when it comes to making pewter work on actual jerseys.

 

All of this right here! This post is on point! I want to subscribe to your newsletter! QFT. x10000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking White Helmets to go with Pewter Red tops and Red Orange Pants... or is that too hard for Nike to get :censored:ing right.

Share this post


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

I know some on this board think the Jaguars went too far towards the plain, but after that two tone helmet garbage, it really was what they needed to do.


Count me amongst those who "think the Jaguars went too far towards the plain". What the Jacksonville Jaguars "needed to do" in order to get their sartorial house back in order was THIS...

 

zkjoA9Bm.jpg Qzar6bnh.jpg gPSH8AUm.jpg 0yXRvs2m.jpg MMnTpX4m.jpg oIYU90Cm.jpg

No black jerseys, black pants, or black numbers. No mustard jerseys or pants. No unitards. No gradient helmets. No so-stripped-down-as-to-be-generic styling. Just THIS.

The Jaguars sported their perfect look - one of the best ever in the history of the NFL - from 1998 through 2001. They should get back to it ASAP.    

Share this post


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


 

They don’t actually hold real shares. That’s the whole point.

 


I mean, I was being glib, but...
 

Sure they do. Just because cashing in on dividends is restricted to preferred stock or shareholders aren’t allowed to sell their stock at a certain time doesn’t mean they’re not real shareholders, it just means that they have common stock and agreed to a restrictive shareholders agreement. Neither of what you said claiming they aren’t real shareholders is all that uncommon, and there are perfectly reasonable reasons for both (mostly ensuring that they don’t lose control to an unwanted new owner i.e. sharks/corporate raiders. An NFL team especially wouldn’t want to risk that).

 

Executives and board members of a corporation have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders. Acting however they want, especially when they straight up ask the shareholders the direction they want to go in is illegal (barring invocation of the business judgment rule).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Brian in Boston said:


Count me amongst those who "think the Jaguars went too far towards the plain". What the Jacksonville Jaguars "needed to do" in order to get their sartorial house in order was THIS...

 

zkjoA9Bm.jpg0yXRvs2l.jpg

Qzar6bnh.jpg MMnTpX4t.jpg

gPSH8AUm.jpg oIYU90Cm.jpg

No black jerseys, black pants, or black numbers. No mustard jerseys or pants. No unitards. No gradient helmets. No so-stripped-down-as-to-be-generic styling. Just THIS.

The Jaguars sported their perfect look from 1998 through 2001. They should get back to it ASAP.    

I don't wanna jags jack this thread, but the originals are far superior to these.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, heavybassX said:

I'm thinking White Helmets to go with Pewter Red tops and Red Orange Pants... or is that too hard for Nike to get :censored:ing right.

I don’t even know what this means. 

Share this post


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

mhm

 

I'm kind of scared to find out where you dug it out from.


 

It was one of my grandpa’s famous idioms. “That’s about as useful :censored: on a bull/a drum set for Anne Frank/a kaleidoscope for Hellen Keller/a football bat/a sewn fanny on a prostitute” etc...

Share this post


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

A sewn fanny on a prostitute?

 

 

Your Gramps might of had some issues.


Fanny means something different when speaking the Queen’s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, FormerLurker said:

Fanny means something different when speaking the Queen’s.

 

So, "Fanny (Be Tender With My Love)" isn't about assplay?!? ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, FormerLurker said:

It’s kind of cute Packers fans actually bought this schtick and think their “vote” matters about as much as a drum set for Anne Frank.

 

We have the same voting power a shareholder in pretty much any other publicly held company has. Do we have a say in football operations? No, but it's not like Apple shareholders have a say in the design of the iPhone 11 either.  Would you like me to upload a copy of one of the yearly reports that shows what we'll be voting on? Or would you rather go on believing something that isn't true?

 

Also, an Ann Frank "joke?" If you gotta go that low it might be time to hire a new writing staff. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. Back to Bucs uni talk and how they're inevitably going to screw it up.

 

film vs GIF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aww....and I was JUST getting ready to share my previous experience at Lambeau!!

 

(I mean, since the Bucs thread done got Packerjacked and all, it seemed like the perfect opportunity... 😁)

Share this post


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

Ok. Back to Bucs talk and how they're inevitably screw it up.

They double down on pewter, as it becomes the main color with red, white and orange as accents, and keep the alarm clock font fully intact. Instead of either Bucco Bruce or the Super Bowl-era flag, they create a new logo that focuses on pewter over every other color that both sides of the debate hate for various reasons. The team defends it as being "the next step of the Buccaneers brand" when the fanbase begins absolutely gutting the new look online.

 

In 5 years, they rebrand again to backpedal on the pewter overload, but, as is the Buccaneers' way, they still manage to :censored: the rebrand of the rebrand up; they keep the logo set that everybody hates and the NOB fonts everybody hates, but just remove the pewter; a marginal improvement that they then stick with for the next million years.

 

It's both horrible and yet amusing that this doesn't even sound that farfetched to me.

Share this post


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

They don’t actually hold real shares. That’s the whole point.

 

So who owns the "real" shares? If Packers stock is nothing more than a useless souvenir, why is it that the team has only opened it up for purchase twice in the last 70 years? Seems to me that something as fake as you (incorrectly) think it is would be as easy to buy as a jersey or hat. 

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.