2020 NFL Season week by week uniform match-up combos: From HOF Game to Super Bowl LV

[leopard88 3,204]

22 minutes ago, 63Bulldogs63 said:

 

Totally get that. But that would still be a white sock with colored stirrups. For instance in your picture let's say the Colts were also a red team and instead of the white sock over the stirrups they wore a red sock. What color then would you consider the socks to be?  Obviously its all semantics but interesting peoples different perspective. 

 

In that case, I would consider it a red sock and a blue sock/stirrup with white stripes.  I see my photo as showing what would eventually be white socks over blue socks/stirrups (as already in place on the player on the right*).

 

I think the rest of us have mentally decided to go with the fiction of pretending the bottom half of the sock (i.e., the replacement for the white sock in the Unitas/stirrup era) isn't part of the sock that is relevant.  It doesn't make that right.  It's just that we have been conditioned to assume the white part is always just going to be there (at least until the Color Rush/single color sock era through a wrench into the whole thing).

 

* -- Who I believe is three time Pro Bowler Jerry Logan, for the record.

 

[NFLfan10 1,248]

If the Ravens wear purple pants again, that will easily be the best looking matchup of the weekend.

[simtek34 1,716]

Hey Saints, this is it. Burn the white socks, match the golds and logo, and this is all you need to wear until the rest of time. Perfect.

(Gold and white pants are both good, but never add black pants. As we've seen the past 3 seasons, they are too tempting for New Orleans.)

 

[63Bulldogs63 812]

6 hours ago, leopard88 said:

 

In that case, I would consider it a red sock and a blue sock/stirrup with white stripes.  I see my photo as showing what would eventually be white socks over blue socks/stirrups (as already in place on the player on the right*).

 

I think the rest of us have mentally decided to go with the fiction of pretending the bottom half of the sock (i.e., the replacement for the white sock in the Unitas/stirrup era) isn't part of the sock that is relevant.  It doesn't make that right.  It's just that we have been conditioned to assume the white part is always just going to be there (at least until the Color Rush/single color sock era through a wrench into the whole thing).

 

* -- Who I believe is three time Pro Bowler Jerry Logan, for the record.

 

 

I hear ya on all that. For me its always been this way. I think it stems from in high-school we wore 3 or 4 different socks. We wore all white, all red, white with the top bit red (just like nfl) and then we wore white adidas with red triple stripes. I always considered the foot/ankle portion to be the sock color and then another color being the striping color.

 

Great finds btw of these old photos. Such a refreshing sight to see.

[ltjets21 482]

4 hours ago, simtek34 said:

Hey Saints, this is it. Burn the white socks, match the golds and logo, and this is all you need to wear until the rest of time. Perfect.

(Gold and white pants are both good, but never add black pants. As we've seen the past 3 seasons, they are too tempting for New Orleans.)

 

Put the fleur de lis over the stripes and I agree, I'd roll with a champagne gold for the proper color.

[dont care 7,196]

On 1/12/2021 at 1:40 PM, 63Bulldogs63 said:

 

The reason I asked that is because my definition of what I thought was the general definition of socks and stripes seams to be different.

 

 

In the pic you posted it looks like an all black sock with wgwgw stripes as you mentioned. Although you can slightly see the white portion at the ankle since brees doesn't quite wear it properly. 

 

In this photo here you see the socks worn properly and its clearly a white sock with bwgwgwb stripes.

It’s still a black sock, the white portion is a white sanitary sock that depending on the player is either worn over the black sock or all one sock. You can really see the sock is worn over the top on sproles’ left leg here

[dont care 7,196]

12 hours ago, 63Bulldogs63 said:

 

Totally get that. But that would still be a white sock with colored stirrups. For instance in your picture let's say the Colts were also a red team and instead of the white sock over the stirrups they wore a red sock. What color then would you consider the socks to be?  Obviously its all semantics but interesting peoples different perspective. 

They wouldn’t because until recently the sanitary part of the sock had to be white

[leopard88 3,204]

11 hours ago, 63Bulldogs63 said:

 

I hear ya on all that. For me its always been this way. I think it stems from in high-school we wore 3 or 4 different socks. We wore all white, all red, white with the top bit red (just like nfl) and then we wore white adidas with red triple stripes. I always considered the foot/ankle portion to be the sock color and then another color being the striping color.

 

Great finds btw of these old photos. Such a refreshing sight to see.

 

My one year of organized football (1977), they gave us black striped stirrups with our uniform.  Being a bunch of naive 10-year-olds, we all wore them like baseball socks (i.e., white socks underneath with the stirrups on top).

[NFLfan10 1,248]

 

[NFLfan10 1,248]

Bucs haven't worn white over petwer in New Orleans since 2013. Not once with the previous set did they wear that look vs. the Saints.

[Bigblue62 0]

Saints in Black on Black.

With the Bucs in white over pewter, this would have been a great opportunity to bring back the black in gold for a beautiful matchup.

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/gametimesaint/status/1349831803171954692

[burgundy 2,215]

18 hours ago, ltjets21 said:

Put the fleur de lis over the stripes and I agree, I'd roll with a champagne gold for the proper color.

 

 

 

Why ruin perfectly good stripes by slapping a logo on top of them? And old gold works so well for New Orleans.

 

[63Bulldogs63 812]

2 hours ago, Bigblue62 said:

Saints in Black on Black.

With the Bucs in white over pewter, this would have been a great opportunity to bring back the black in gold for a beautiful matchup.

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/gametimesaint/status/1349831803171954692

Did they just get their license back? 

 

I'll see my self out.

[nuordr 1,075]

It's official, the Browns are wearing orange pants (YES! YES! YES!) vs the Chiefs: 

https://twitter.com/Browns/status/1350184273433800715?s=20

 

[bbush24 276]

This week features some good uniforms but bad matchups in my opinion.

 

Packers are obviously great but the Rams ruin the matchup.

 

And then I'm a big contrast guy so the other three matchups have too many colors right next to each other on the color wheel for my liking:

-Ravens purple vs. Bills blue

-Browns orange (especially since they're wearing orange pants) vs. Chiefs red

-Bucs pewter vs. Saints all black

[ltjets21 482]

On 1/14/2021 at 5:55 PM, burgundy said:

 

 

 

Why ruin perfectly good stripes by slapping a logo on top of them? And old gold works so well for New Orleans.

 

God forbid a team does something unique instead of having stripes like 70% of the league. The logo with the stripe looks more than ok it is literally the best of both worlds.

.

[BBTV 21,366]

The "best of both worlds" is never as good as the best of one world.  Logos have no business breaking up stripes on sleeves.  It's not as egregious on pants since the 95% of the stripe would lie below the logo, but still not good.

[burgundy 2,215]

21 minutes ago, ltjets21 said:

God forbid a team does something unique instead of having stripes like 70% of the league. The logo with the stripe looks more than ok it is literally the best of both worlds.

.

 

But it's not unique, as shown by Deion Sanders there. Just in the NFL, seven teams have done it before (two are even using it right now), and Seattle was the only team that could make it work. And that's not even getting into USFL, WLAF, CFL, college, and high school. It's been done to death, and is a vestige of the 80s and 90s. It's cluttered and uncreative uniform design.

 

[gothedistance 384]

Did anyone expect any of the teams to change the pants they last wore after the previous game they won in? I didn't.

[flyersfan 793]

8 hours ago, gothedistance said:

Did anyone expect any of the teams to change the pants they last wore after the previous game they won in? I didn't.

I thought that the bucs would wear all white as I felt like that was their look of choice on the road this season. Clearly I know nothing