Buc

Tampa Bay Buccaneers Unveil New Uniforms

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

That's not the point of the rule.

 

The rule exists so that players can use grandfathered helmets that aren't available anymore.

 

It also tangentially forces teams to realize that the helmet is a key part of the identity, one that shouldn't be bogged down with alternates (let's face it, color rush would have brought in alternate helmets if the NFL wanted it - some of those looks would have been dreadful with alternate helmets).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

It also tangentially forces teams to realize that the helmet is a key part of the identity, one that shouldn't be bogged down with alternates (let's face it, color rush would have brought in alternate helmets if the NFL wanted it - some of those looks would have been dreadful with alternate helmets).

 

You're right - the rule against alternate helmets predates the "one helmet" rule, but the latter just reinforces the former.

 

The NFL used to realize that the helmets were so important to a team's identity that they needed to be consistent.  But you're right, they'd probably  have thrown that wisdom out of the window had their hand not been forced by the safety regulations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, colortv said:

 

How far we've come from when the creamsicles were considered arguably the worst uniforms in sports history.

And still should be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

That's not the point of the rule.

 

The rule exists so that players can use grandfathered helmets that aren't available anymore.

 

I’m not sure I follow the logic. 

 

That worked as an excuse maybe back when the rule was first established, but how is that still relevant now? It’s not like anyone is still rocking one of the old VSR4s. 

Share this post


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

 

I’m not sure I follow the logic. 

 

That worked as an excuse maybe back when the rule was first established, but how is that still relevant now? It’s not like anyone is still rocking one of the old VSR4s. 

 

Are there any players wearing helmet models that are still legal but have been taken out of production? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think there are anymore, actually (I could be wrong about that, though). 

 

And even still, why couldn’t you just take a second approved shell and paint one of them? 

Share this post


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

 

How far we've come from when the creamsicles were considered arguably the worst uniforms in sports history.

I never understood that. The colours are a bit garish but beyond that its a pretty standard looking uniform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, colortv said:

 

How far we've come from when the creamsicles were considered arguably the worst uniforms in sports history.

I've wondered about this. As a kid in the '80s, I always liked the creamsicles. And I remember being disappointed by the red/pewter look in the late '90s -- not because it was bad on its own, but because it was replacing such a unique color set.

 

All I can figure is that those uniforms carried some of the residue from the team's futility during much of that era. Ugly by association, you could say.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

I've wondered about this. As a kid in the '80s, I always liked the creamsicles. And I remember being disappointed by the red/pewter look in the late '90s -- not because it was bad on its own, but because it was replacing such a unique color set.

 

All I can figure is that those uniforms carried some of the residue from the team's futility during much of that era. Ugly by association, you could say.

Good points.  Had the White Sox won six straight World Series’ with shorts and collared shirts, all of MLB would be wearing that look today.  Same with the Flyers, the Stanley Cup, Cooperalls, and the NHL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've mentioned this in another thread a year or two ago, but as I remember it (granted, I was 9) the change to red & pewter in 1997 was celebrated in the Tampa Bay area.  For years, up until hearing other Bucs fans' opinions of this upcoming uniform change, I had always most people genuinely preferred red & pewter to creamsicle & red.  However, when I asked about it over the weekend, one fan said that things just get tired over time.  That was the case for the creamsicles in 1997, and that (in their opinion) may be the case with pewter now.  Thinking back now, when it was coupled with a successful late-season run in 1996 and successful 1997 season, the change was probably viewed as somewhat like a re-birth of the franchise.  And then when you pile on the team's success in the subsequent years culminating in the Super Bowl victory, people embraced it as the true Bucs identity.

 

However, with only two playoff appearance in the following 17-or-so seasons, fewer people have continued to be married to the red & pewter identity.  For a growing number of Bucs fans, when they see equal amounts of team futility in both color schemes, it just becomes a matter of personal preference.  Some Bucs fans view pewter as drab, see pictures of players wearing the throwbacks (which I'll say look, to me, miles better than pics of the actual creamsicles worn back in the day), and think it could be the best look in the league.

 

Me personally, I would've liked to have seen all three colors being used in the subsequent set.  I think just using red and orange makes us look too much like the Chiefs, but those mockups for the upcoming set (especially when looking at just the jersey) makes us look too much like the Falcons' dirty bird set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

Are there any players wearing helmet models that are still legal but have been taken out of production? 

I mean with every season more an more guys are being forced to switch. Tom Brady, Antonio Brown, and Joe Staley come to mind this past season. When Tom Brady is forced to switched you know its big.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but that only shows that some guys prefer really old helmets.  They won’t certify any model that’s over ten years old, so every year certain models age out of that window.

 

The “one helmet” rule is to reduce the number of players who are forced to change helmet models.  But when some players want to wear a model that’s over a decade old, you understand that no policy could eliminate that entirely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mafiaman said:

Good points.  Had the White Sox won six straight World Series’ with shorts and collared shirts, all of MLB would be wearing that look today.  Same with the Flyers, the Stanley Cup, Cooperalls, and the NHL.

 

I wouldn't go that far. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

It also tangentially forces teams to realize that the helmet is a key part of the identity, one that shouldn't be bogged down with alternates (let's face it, color rush would have brought in alternate helmets if the NFL wanted it - some of those looks would have been dreadful with alternate helmets).

Some would be better though, like the Saints maybe switching to a gold that fits better, the Bengals in white helmets, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, mafiaman said:

Had the White Sox won six straight World Series’ with shorts and collared shirts, all of MLB would be wearing that look today.

 

Win "six straight World Series" in their shorts? The White Sox only managed to don the shorts for three games in team history, all during the 1976 season. They trotted them out in the first game of a Sunday double header on August 8th, for a Saturday game on August 21st, and - finally - in the opener of a Sunday twin bill on August 22nd. After that, they were consigned to the dustbin of sports uniform history.   

Edited by Brian in Boston

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Brian in Boston said:

 

Win "six straight World Series" in their shorts? The White Sox only managed to don the shorts for three games in team history, all during the 1976 season. They trotted them out in the first game of a Sunday double header on August 8th, for a Saturday game on August 21st, and - finally - in the opener of a Sunday twin bill on August 22nd. After that, they were consigned to the dustbin of sports uniform history.   

And you predicted the comeback of John Stockton shorts in the NBA too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Starting to veer offcourse...lets keep things on topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else think that the Bucs might move up the uniform release date if they sign Tom Brady?

 

🤔

Share this post


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

I've mentioned this in another thread a year or two ago, but as I remember it (granted, I was 9) the change to red & pewter in 1997 was celebrated in the Tampa Bay area.  For years, up until hearing other Bucs fans' opinions of this upcoming uniform change, I had always most people genuinely preferred red & pewter to creamsicle & red.  However, when I asked about it over the weekend, one fan said that things just get tired over time.  That was the case for the creamsicles in 1997, and that (in their opinion) may be the case with pewter now.  Thinking back now, when it was coupled with a successful late-season run in 1996 and successful 1997 season, the change was probably viewed as somewhat like a re-birth of the franchise.  And then when you pile on the team's success in the subsequent years culminating in the Super Bowl victory, people embraced it as the true Bucs identity.

 

However, with only two playoff appearance in the following 17-or-so seasons, fewer people have continued to be married to the red & pewter identity.  For a growing number of Bucs fans, when they see equal amounts of team futility in both color schemes, it just becomes a matter of personal preference.  Some Bucs fans view pewter as drab, see pictures of players wearing the throwbacks (which I'll say look, to me, miles better than pics of the actual creamsicles worn back in the day), and think it could be the best look in the league.

 

Me personally, I would've liked to have seen all three colors being used in the subsequent set.  I think just using red and orange makes us look too much like the Chiefs, but those mockups for the upcoming set (especially when looking at just the jersey) makes us look too much like the Falcons' dirty bird set.

 

Very nice comment!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Brian in Boston said:

 

Win "six straight World Series" in their shorts? The White Sox only managed to don the shorts for three games in team history, all during the 1976 season. They trotted them out in the first game of a Sunday double header on August 8th, for a Saturday game on August 21st, and - finally - in the opener of a Sunday twin bill on August 22nd. After that, they were consigned to the dustbin of sports uniform history.   

 

He's sort of right. Think of it as the 76-81 uniforms more generally. 

 

The 1983 Sox uniforms are TRASH but they're beloved because it was the only playoff appearance between 1959 and 1993. 

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.