Old School Fool Posted October 5, 2020 Share Posted October 5, 2020 Are these players wearing the shirts underneath the pads correct? That would be something to consider. I imagine the pads dig into skin or whatever sometimes and wearing an undershirt fixes that. We've seen undershirts in the past without a problem, anybody remember the infamous 90's turtleneck? I think it's down to the manufacturer, in this case, Nike does not know how to do these properly or something. Baggy stuff isn't "in" with fashion these days, dudes kinda want to wear the tighest possible clothing now. It's all Nike's fault and the teams equipment managers for not being smart about this. They had it right years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewharrington Posted October 5, 2020 Share Posted October 5, 2020 1 hour ago, Old School Fool said: Baggy stuff isn’t “in” with fashion these days... That’s pretty inaccurate. I still don't have a website, but I have a dribbble now! http://dribbble.com/andyharry [The postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the position, strategy or opinions of adidas and/or its brands.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont care Posted October 5, 2020 Share Posted October 5, 2020 3 hours ago, Old School Fool said: Are these players wearing the shirts underneath the pads correct? That would be something to consider. I imagine the pads dig into skin or whatever sometimes and wearing an undershirt fixes that. We've seen undershirts in the past without a problem, anybody remember the infamous 90's turtleneck? I think it's down to the manufacturer, in this case, Nike does not know how to do these properly or something. Baggy stuff isn't "in" with fashion these days, dudes kinda want to wear the tighest possible clothing now. It's all Nike's fault and the teams equipment managers for not being smart about this. They had it right years ago. It’s more to separate your sweaty nasty pads away from your body, there really are no pinch points on pads. Some lineman and defenders pads straps are really the only exception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted October 5, 2020 Share Posted October 5, 2020 Deion's pads would be half that size nowadays. Looking back at it, I don't know how most of the players had any mobility considering the oversized pads they wore - especially the runningbacks and linebackers. Look at how amateur the fat guy in red on the left looks. There's no comfort benefit to wearing your liner shirt down past your ass. The doofus right behind him is doing it too. The one with the dress on in front doesn't even have his socks pulled up, so maybe he wishes he was in college or high school and wants to play dress up (or... dress down)? Is it a rejection of authority and a challenge to those in charge to try and take the PR hit associated with telling them how to wear the uniform? "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ManillaToad Posted October 5, 2020 Share Posted October 5, 2020 3 hours ago, BBTV said: Is it a rejection of authority and a challenge to those in charge to try and take the PR hit associated with telling them how to wear the uniform? Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
throwuascenario Posted October 5, 2020 Share Posted October 5, 2020 On 10/2/2020 at 12:16 PM, Sec19Row53 said: '[]\p[Have you ever watched a game from the stands or the press box and couldn't rely on someone to tell you who a player was? I have. TV numbers serve a purpose. I get that not everyone uses them. The fact that you don't doesn't invalidate their existence. By your own words you can almost always see the front or back numbers. I think it is more often than that, but the TV numbers serve their purpose when you can't see the front or ] \back numbers. I've been to plenty of NFL games in the stands and have never even been close to being able to read the TV numbers because they're so small. Anyways, I would think that most people that have the players' numbers memorized are the same people that don't usually need the numbers to identify players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest23 Posted October 5, 2020 Share Posted October 5, 2020 3 hours ago, BBTV said: Deion's pads would be half that size nowadays. Looking back at it, I don't know how most of the players had any mobility considering the oversized pads they wore - especially the runningbacks and linebackers. Look at how amateur the fat guy in red on the left looks. There's no comfort benefit to wearing your liner shirt down past your ass. The doofus right behind him is doing it too. The one with the dress on in front doesn't even have his socks pulled up, so maybe he wishes he was in college or high school and wants to play dress up (or... dress down)? Is it a rejection of authority and a challenge to those in charge to try and take the PR hit associated with telling them how to wear the uniform? Untucked undershirt and low/no socks is basically the preferred practice look for most players which looks schlubby on field but is likely the most comfortable option for wearing a uniform. Maybe the solution is for the league to institute a unform protocol for practices (i.e. practice how you play) akin to the ravens wearing game quality threads as practice gear. Lastly we are talking about practice here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted October 5, 2020 Share Posted October 5, 2020 What ever happened to Merton Hanks and the uniform police? At least the league looked relatively professional back then. Granted, teams like the ATL have blown professionalism out of the water with their clown suits, but at least they could force the players to wear the uniform correctly. Doesn't make sense to me why a team would invest a lot of money in a design only to allow the players to wear it in any way other than as intended. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewharrington Posted October 5, 2020 Share Posted October 5, 2020 6 hours ago, BBTV said: Deion's pads would be half that size nowadays. Looking back at it, I don't know how most of the players had any mobility considering the oversized pads they wore - especially the runningbacks and linebackers. Look at how amateur the fat guy in red on the left looks. There's no comfort benefit to wearing your liner shirt down past your ass. The doofus right behind him is doing it too. The one with the dress on in front doesn't even have his socks pulled up, so maybe he wishes he was in college or high school and wants to play dress up (or... dress down)? Is it a rejection of authority and a challenge to those in charge to try and take the PR hit associated with telling them how to wear the uniform? Personally, I would find it a lot more comfortable to tuck the undershirt so I don’t have to worry about pulling it down all the time. 2 hours ago, throwuascenario said: I've been to plenty of NFL games in the stands and have never even been close to being able to read the TV numbers because they're so small... Maybe that’s why they’re called TV numbers. I still don't have a website, but I have a dribbble now! http://dribbble.com/andyharry [The postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the position, strategy or opinions of adidas and/or its brands.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben5 Posted October 5, 2020 Share Posted October 5, 2020 15 hours ago, Old School Fool said: Are these players wearing the shirts underneath the pads correct? That would be something to consider. I imagine the pads dig into skin or whatever sometimes and wearing an undershirt fixes that. We've seen undershirts in the past without a problem, anybody remember the infamous 90's turtleneck? I think it's down to the manufacturer, in this case, Nike does not know how to do these properly or something. Baggy stuff isn't "in" with fashion these days, dudes kinda want to wear the tighest possible clothing now. It's all Nike's fault and the teams equipment managers for not being smart about this. They had it right years ago. [Deon pic] I'm confused as to your point. It's an equipment manager fault that the player wants to wear a baggy shirt under their jersey? Or Nike's fault? How so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaydre1019 Posted October 5, 2020 Share Posted October 5, 2020 4 hours ago, BBTV said: What ever happened to Merton Hanks and the uniform police? At least the league looked relatively professional back then. Granted, teams like the ATL have blown professionalism out of the water with their clown suits, but at least they could force the players to wear the uniform correctly. Doesn't make sense to me why a team would invest a lot of money in a design only to allow the players to wear it in any way other than as intended. I feel like that may have gone away, or at least gotten much looser with the introduction of color rush. Of all the things nike has done, getting rid of the white sock bottom mandate is by far the worst thing for me. On a side note there should be some kind of mandatory stripe on any solid white socks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_grateful_ted Posted October 6, 2020 Share Posted October 6, 2020 8 hours ago, BBTV said: What ever happened to Merton Hanks and the uniform police? At least the league looked relatively professional back then. Granted, teams like the ATL have blown professionalism out of the water with their clown suits, but at least they could force the players to wear the uniform correctly. Doesn't make sense to me why a team would invest a lot of money in a design only to allow the players to wear it in any way other than as intended. You’re too much man hahaha, it’s a sliver of shirt in the whole scheme of the uniform. Players do it for some reason, in my experience it is more comfortable, you just don’t feel it tug when you move your arms up or out or whatever. Whatever, you know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ltjets21 Posted October 6, 2020 Share Posted October 6, 2020 I feel like there aren't any strides being made in this argument. As someone who just stopped playing football a two years ago I can say for certain that you always want your jersey to be tight. Smaller and tighter is always preferred especially with lineman that is why full sleeves will never come back. We had tight under armor jerseys and our coaches still taped up our jerseys in the back and shoulders. Occasionally guys would wear baggy long sleeve shirts but nobody ever really grabs you by the arms. As far as the undershirt being untucked it is a complete style thing. To be honest unless your a back or a receiver it doesn't hamper your play what so ever. I understand why some might not like it but every style comes in waves to be honest. I never thought we would ever see guys wearing no show socks again but here we are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tracy MidGrady Posted October 6, 2020 Share Posted October 6, 2020 Calling a guy a doofus for wearing a long undershirt is a bit much no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted October 6, 2020 Share Posted October 6, 2020 No. Not when he looks like a doofus, and not when he puts the lie to the whole “got to be tailored tight for performance!” No shame in calling a doofus a doofus. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschoolvikings Posted October 7, 2020 Share Posted October 7, 2020 Yeah, doofus is one of the kinder things you could call them. "Hey, give me a super tight, nearly sleeveless jersey, so no one has anything to grab on to. Oh, and while you're at it, hang a bunch of loose handfuls of fabric around my waist. What? No, I'm not a moron." This is pretty much exactly what a bunch of us have been saying for years. Maybe the tight jersey thing started as a performance idea, but it had long since become 90 percent fashion. http://dstewartpaint.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted October 7, 2020 Share Posted October 7, 2020 To be fair, "doofus" is the worst word you can use on this forum before the swear filter gets you. I tried 173 words before I landed on "doofus". Goober was next on the list if doofus resulted in a "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_grateful_ted Posted October 7, 2020 Share Posted October 7, 2020 I’d say this is the appropriate reaction to an untucked shirt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted October 7, 2020 Share Posted October 7, 2020 On 10/5/2020 at 7:04 AM, BBTV said: Is it a rejection of authority and a challenge to those in charge to try and take the PR hit associated with telling them how to wear the uniform? You know what, yeah probably. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justpassingby Posted October 7, 2020 Share Posted October 7, 2020 Sorry if it’s kind of early, is there any word on teams that could be changing next year? WFT is obviously a prime candidate and I know Kyler Murray has been vocal about disliking the Cardinals uniforms. Anything else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.