Why do people love the orange Bucs?

[Ridleylash]

4 hours ago, Lights Out said:

 

They aren't necessarily a problem in a vacuum, but I just don't think it works well for a sports team.

Neither does looking really dull and boring, though, especially not with the quality of footage we get on sports broadcasts nowadays. You want your look to pop, to catch the eye, to be easily-seen on the field. What's eye-catching about a color that on matte looks like either grey, brown or greyish-brown depending on a bunch of circumstances? Especially considering like 95% of a football uniform is generally, well, matte colors.

 

And, again, having too many colors all fighting for attention and space on a jersey doesn't look very good, either.

 

Quote

It also doesn't help matters that the logo is associated with historic loserdom on the field.

I mean, is the current logo not associated with stuff like Jameis Winston's infinite turnover bakery and general field ineptitude as well? It's not like the Bucs are some monolithic Superbowl contender right now; they've gone 5-11 for the last two years and are currently at 5-7 this year. Their last above .500 record was a 9-7 in 2016, and the team hasn't even made the playoffs since 2007. They haven't been in the playoffs for over a decade.

 

As for the Super Bowl win...you know what other teams won their league championships in 2002? The Detroit Red Wings, Los Angeles Lakers and the then-Anaheim Angels. All three of those franchises are also currently far from playoff contention. And as pointed out earlier, the Bucs went to the NFC Championship game in the Bucco Bruce uniforms, so it's not only able to be associated with historic loserdom.

 

Besides, if we're counting losing seasons against a logo...then I guess we also have to knock points off the Hartford Whalers logo, since it was also associated with some absolutely miserable teams (like the 19-54-7 team in 1982-83 or the 26-52-6 team in 1992-93). This despite the fact that it's very commonly considered one of the greatest sports logos of all time, mind you.

[Reyes47]

2 hours ago, DastardlyRidleylash said:

As for the Super Bowl win...you know what other teams won their league championships in 2002? The Detroit Red Wings, Los Angeles Lakers and the then-Anaheim Angels. All three of those franchises are also currently far from playoff contention. And as pointed out earlier, the Bucs went to the NFC Championship game in the Bucco Bruce uniforms, so it's not only able to be associated with historic loserdom.

The bucs sucked in orange. That is the legacy of Bucco Bruce to most fans. Losing the NFC championship is nowhere near winning the super bowl (again should’ve been twice). If the bucs went 26-0 with Bucco Bruce then most including me would see it more positively. 

You also conflate the previous logo for the current one

Quote

 

Besides, if we're counting losing seasons against a logo...then I guess we also have to knock points off the Hartford Whalers logo, since it was also associated with some absolutely miserable teams (like the 19-54-7 team in 1982-83 or the 26-52-6 team in 1992-93). This despite the fact that it's very commonly considered one of the greatest sports logos of all time, mind you.

And that’s why the whalers moved. A decent logo can overtake mediocrity. Bucco Bruce doesn’t especially when bucco bruce is the face of the longest nfl losing streak

[IceCap]

22 minutes ago, Reyes47 said:

Dude let it go.

*mod hat goes on*
 

Nope. You opened a thread asking for people to give input on the Bucs' old orange uniforms. 
You were bound to get opinions you disagreed with. You are well within your right to argue with these people, provided you do so within our rules of conduct. 

You will not tell someone who is still engaged in an argument you started to "let it go."

@DastardlyRidleylash has a right to his opinion. You can argue against it, but don't try to exclude him or his position from the discussion. 

 

Keep in mind you received a warning for homophobic remarks earlier. Consider this a friendly warning to conduct yourself more respectfully going forward so that isn't added to. 

[Bobster]

The creamsicle uniforms were one of my favorites back in the 70's and 80's.  The road white looked much better with orange numbers outlined in red rather than vice-versa.

 

I'm not worried about intimidating, I'm not worried about it being attached to the 0-26 start - I just liked how it looked.

 

[FiddySicks]

This is a topic that’s rather personal to me (as you can tell from my username), and here’s my stance on it. 

 

 

The current uniform and logo package is absolute garbage and is HANDS DOWN the worst look in the entire league, if not in the history of the league. It’s amateurish, gaudy, disjointed, and absolutely stupid. Combine that with the total  :censored:show that team has been since that change, and you have a recipe for a look that’s just about completely killed any interest I have in this god forsaken team. That’s saying a LOT, considering my once loyal devotion. 

 

 

Here’s the most egregious part, though. The current mess replaced what was, IMO, the greatest uniform and logo set in any sport ever. It was sleek, intimidating, memorable, and had the absolute perfect combination of modern touches on a classic base. I’ve been a Bucs fan since I was probably about four years old, but the moment my fandom was completely set in stone is when they took the field against the 49ers (my “local” team) at the Old Sombrero in 97. It’s what sparked my entire interest in this whole weird little hobby we all partake in here. They had the perfect set for what they were going for, and completely flushed it down the toilet for this horrendous “update” for no other reason than they figured a uniform change could mask how poorly they run the actual on field product. This team has made me mad a lot in the past, but that is something I will NEVER forgive them for. As silly as it may sound, I feel like I lost my favorite team when they made this change and saw it replaced with a cheap knockoff version that’s actually insulting it’s so bad. I simply cannot mister the same feelings for this clown show looking football team now that they made that switch.  

 

But here’s the thing about the original set. People really love it now, and I’ll admit it’s got a LOT of that vintage charm. That’s one of the things that drew me to the team in the first place. But I’m sorry, there are aspects of it that are just objectively bad. The logo is TERRIBLE, and by the time they made the change to the pewter set, the colors were about as tacky as they could possibly be (they darkened the original pastel orange sometime in the 80s and it was NOT a good look). And while they had some flashes early on (after being absolutely AWFUL in the first two seasons), that whole uniform set was so mired in the funk of losing that just about everyone was chomping at the bit for them to change everything they possibly could. People have a selective memory on it now, but just about everyone HATED that set by the end! I personally couldn’t stand it any longer and they were my favorite team. I grew to sort of miss the creamsicle look after awhile, but that was more due to the scarcity of it all. Back after they made that change, it was basically impossible to find any of the old creamsicle merchandise. I looked for a few items for YEARS to no avail. Then they did the throwback game, and I was over the moon because they were actually selling Bucco Bruce gear again and it wasn’t crazy rare or expensive like it once was. But, the luster of that wore off after awhile, and once you could actually find Bucco Bruce gear regularly, I started to really notice just how flawed that look really was. If anything, them having throwback games made me like the new set even more. They could wear their best look the majority of the time, and still bust out the throwbacks once or twice a season. A perfect way to quench that thirst. 

 

But them returning to the Bucco Bruce look full time would be such absolute overkill. They suck donkey nuts and have for years. If they brought back the creamsicles, they would still suck donkey nuts, but now they would look garishly bright every week doing it. I guarantee you people would end up just as sick of the creamsicles now as they were when they made the original change. 

[LordBigMad]

There is BY FAR too much stock put into the "X Team won alot in this uniform and lost alot in that uniform" debate. 

 

It's absurd IMO. ALL teams have winning and losing stretches even teams with iconic uniforms. By this logic, all teams should wear plain white uniforms with the city name scrawled on them in black magic marker because chances are, they've had losing stretches in all of their uniforms.

 

The discussion should be about what LOOKS GOOD. And the Bucco Bruce Creamsicle uniform is GORGEOUS regardless of what happened on the field in them. MUCH MUCH better than the dull, drab, plain pewter power sets.

 

Growing up a Bears fan in Chicago, I remember the NFC Central matchups with the Buccaneers in those creamsicle Bucco Bruce uniforms twice a year. I was a young kid back then and I din't know any better and as a result, I'd rip on those Buccaneers uniforms all the time.

 

But, now that I'm older, more mature, and more refined (like fine wine lol) I've learned to appreciate the more traditional looks in sports. You can count me in the "The Bucs really had something there" camp when looking back on the Bucco Bruce uni. It was bright, beautiful, unique, and colorful while having a traditional layout at the same time. Absolutely gorgeous set. Easily in my top 10 in NFL history.

 

IMO the reason Bucco Bruce and the creamsicle set wasn't appreciated in it's time has nothing to do with winning or losing. It has to do with the fact that it was AHEAD of it's time. It had traditional striping, number fonts, and socks with a daring, bright, exciting color scheme that screamed "FLORIDA".

[Ted Cunningham]

10 hours ago, Bobster said:

The creamsicle uniforms were one of my favorites back in the 70's and 80's.  The road white looked much better with orange numbers outlined in red rather than vice-versa.

 

I'm not worried about intimidating, I'm not worried about it being attached to the 0-26 start - I just liked how it looked.

 

This gets at my sentiments about the Buccaneers' orange uniforms and, more broadly, my feelings about uniforms generally: I just really liked them. I didn't even necessarily follow the Buccaneers until after they had changed to red and pewter, but I would still pull for them in neutral games just because their uniforms were better.

 

I think one thing that gets a little lost in this discussion is that, especially when their away numbers were orange with red strokes, the Buccaneers were essentially an orange and white team with red trim. (They were close to the Tennessee Volunteers with a trim color, frankly.) Yes, if one were to list the Buccaneers' colors from that time, one would most likely say orange and red. However, that's not how the team employed those colors. How they used those colors essentially neutralizes the argument that "red and orange are ugly together" because red is very obviously subordinate to orange and white within the identity.

 

Changing subjects slightly to the Buccaneers' looks, more broadly: When I think about what looks I'd want each team to have to suit my tastes, I cannot decide with Tampa Bay. I was an ardent Buccaneers fan once they changed their uniforms. (I think the change brought my attention to the team, and then I liked that they were a "bad" team that was starting to play well. And I liked Mike Alstott and John Lynch. And Shaun King. Then once they won the Super Bowl, I lost interest and haven't really liked an NFL team or even followed the NFL closely since. Haha.) So, while my generally traditionalist viewpoint would dictate that I should go with the original creamsicle as the quintessential look for Tampa Bay, the red and pewter is such a solid, modern-(for the time anyway)-meets-traditional look. 

 

Tampa Bay was the rare (maybe even unique?) team that got it right the first time, and then got it right again upon its redesign.

[infrared41]

13 hours ago, Reyes47 said:

The bucs sucked in orange. That is the legacy of Bucco Bruce to most fans. Losing the NFC championship is nowhere near winning the super bowl (again should’ve been twice). If the bucs went 26-0 with Bucco Bruce then most including me would see it more positively. 

 

No offense, but the "the team was bad while wearing this look so it's a bad look" is the single worst argument against a uniform. The Detroit Red Wings were God-awful for a very long time before they started winning Cups in the 90's. They've worn essentially the same uniform for as long as I can remember. My question to you is this; should I associate the Red Wings uniforms with the terrible hockey the team played from the late 60's thru the 80's or the years in which the team won four Stanley Cups? Or now that the Red Wings missed the playoffs, is it time to change the look? While you're working on that...

 

If a uniform looks good, it looks good. Period. Uniforms don't play games, players do. Uniforms don't create legacies either. If you want something to blame for how bad the Bucs were in the original uniforms, blame the front office, the coaching staff, and the players. The uniform had nothing to do with it. The "fans associate this uniform with whatever" is just nonsense. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I am saying it's a really dumb reason to abandon a perfectly good uniform. 

[SFGiants58]

If a uniform doesn’t have a “winning tradition” behind it, try harder to win and make it a “winning tradition.”

 

Unless you’re logo falls into the “controversy” sector (e.g., Cleveland MOD EDIT, Washington Snyders, etc.), you shouldn’t use losing as an excuse for getting rid of or adopting a design. In those “controversy” cases, it’s actually a point in a rebrand’s favor (IMHO). 
 

But back to the Bucs, this is just an awful organization that would benefit the league by folding. At least have a good “unique” look while being a disaster on par with the nuBrowns and the Bengals?

[Reyes47]

32 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

 

No offense, but the "the team was bad while wearing this look so it's a bad look" is the single worst argument against a uniform. The Detroit Red Wings were God-awful for a very long time before they started winning Cups in the 90's. They've worn essentially the same uniform for as long as I can remember. My question to you is this; should I associate the Red Wings uniforms with the terrible hockey the team played from the late 60's thru the 80's or the years in which the team won four Stanley Cups? Or now that the Red Wings missed the playoffs, is it time to change the look? While you're working on that...

 

If a uniform looks good, it looks good. Period. Uniforms don't play games, players do. Uniforms don't create legacies either. If you want something to blame for how bad the Bucs were in the original uniforms, blame the front office, the coaching staff, and the players. The uniform had nothing to do with it. The "fans associate this uniform with whatever" is just nonsense. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I am saying it's a really dumb reason to abandon a perfectly good uniform. 

I didn’t say because they sucked in orange that makes it bad. What i was saying is bucco bruce is not an iconic logo because the bucs were awful under it. I dislike them because they’re loud and gaudy and incredibly dated. They are incredibly 70s 

[Atomic]

...and we've heard this from you ad nauseam. We all get it: You don't like the Creamsicle uniforms and that's ok. Some people do and that's ok too. 

 

@Reyes47 - To quote @McCarthy:

18 hours ago, McCarthy said:

Don't start a thread with a loaded question and then argue when the answers aren't to your liking.

 

With that said, we're done here as this has ran it's course.