2021 NFL Season week by week uniform match-up combos: From HOF Game to Super Bowl LVI

[Indigo]

5 hours ago, BBTV said:

 

Totally.  If they have to go all purple (which they don't), this combo is way better.  The gold on the CR set looks awful.

 

I personally like the CR more than the regular all-purple, but I guess that’s an unpopular opinion.

1 hour ago, oldschoolvikings said:

 

Neither part of this sentence makes sense.

If they wore all-purple two weeks ago, why are they doing it again, but with the standard jersey and pants?

[lgbaseball8]

52 minutes ago, BBTV said:

When you think about how the jersey and pants have shrunk so much over the years, and how the socks are now solid color and really tall, the jersey and pants together are basically what the jersey used to be, and the socks are what the pants used to be, so monochrome with contrasting socks is kinda/sorta what used to be normal.  

I really disagree with this

[Bathysphere]

Kinda funny how this version of the Jags road set was maligned when it came out in 2018, yet now to me its clearly superior to its non-contrastingly socked counterparts. Also, makes for their 12th different combo of the year, and NONE of them have been the classic teal-white-black. Their final game is at home, so if they try to pull some crap like teal-white-white instead and keep their true look on the shelf all through the first season since the return of teal, I will become violent.

 

4 hours ago, DCarp1231 said:

This uniform keeps me up at night. It’s such a superior “go nuts once a year” look to the color rush teal. And I swear they were going to wear it on SNF against the Steelers in 2018 before the game got flexed out because the team sucked and they presumably audibled to the still handsome teal over black, and by the time they ever got another home game on primetime, they had completely fallen into the trap of no contrast. There’s no way they’ll ever consider this today over the color rush under the current circumstances, and that just sucks.

 

The player also keeps me up at night, but for different reasons.

[Sec19Row53]

20 hours ago, LA Fakers+ LA Snippers said:

When they have a more popular all-purple uniform that they wore recently, why would the wear a worse version of it?

This summarizes my opposition to alts. If you have a better uniform, why wear a worse version?

[oldschoolvikings]

1 hour ago, Sec19Row53 said:

This summarizes my opposition to alts. If you have a better uniform, why wear a worse version?

 

Exactly. And if, like the Dolphins, your alt is better than your primary, than why don't you switch them?

[MJD7]

1 hour ago, Sec19Row53 said:

This summarizes my opposition to alts. If you have a better uniform, why wear a worse version?

This makes sense, but I think alts are nice at the very least for contrast purposes. 

 

For example, if the Vikings play the Ravens in Baltimore, I’d ideally want the Ravens to wear their black jersey in order to minimize the amount of purple from their end in the matchup. Even though most would agree that the Ravens purple jersey is clearly superior to the black, in this particular matchup I think the black is the better option.

 

There are countless other examples I could think of like this where, if two teams share a color, I think it’s best for one (or ideally both) of them to embrace the other color(s) in their palette. Having an alternate is an easy way to do that. 

[SportsFan12]

Eagles are in fact wearing black pants. Let’s hope this is a win streak-based decision…

 

Saints are wearing black over gold at home for the first time since 2018 Week 1. I think it’s safe to say the gold pants have somehow worked their way back into the rotation with both jerseys.

[DCarp1231]

4 hours ago, oldschoolvikings said:

 

Exactly. And if, like the Dolphins, your alt is better than your primary, than why don't you switch them?

It’s simple, throwbacks are called as such for a reason. Yes, the throwbacks are a much better overall uniform, but leave them in the past where they belong. Or take the Buccaneers route and just merge new logos with older uniforms.

[Sec19Row53]

4 hours ago, MJD7 said:

This makes sense, but I think alts are nice at the very least for contrast purposes. 

 

For example, if the Vikings play the Ravens in Baltimore, I’d ideally want the Ravens to wear their black jersey in order to minimize the amount of purple from their end in the matchup. Even though most would agree that the Ravens purple jersey is clearly superior to the black, in this particular matchup I think the black is the better option.

 

There are countless other examples I could think of like this where, if two teams share a color, I think it’s best for one (or ideally both) of them to embrace the other color(s) in their palette. Having an alternate is an easy way to do that. 

Why should I change my best look because of what the other team is wearing? As the Ravens, in this example, why do I give a rip about how "the matchup" looks? I care about how I look, and therefore will wear my best uniform,  ESPECIALLY because I pick the dark or light jersey as the home team.

[Indigo]

45 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Why should I change my best look because of what the other team is wearing? As the Ravens, in this example, why do I give a rip about how "the matchup" looks? I care about how I look, and therefore will wear my best uniform,  ESPECIALLY because I pick the dark or light jersey as the home team.

Because you want to be able to distinguish your team from the opposing team. If both teams are wearing a significant amount of purple, it gets confusing for players. 

[Sec19Row53]

55 minutes ago, LA Fakers+ LA Snippers said:

Because you want to be able to distinguish your team from the opposing team. If both teams are wearing a significant amount of purple, it gets confusing for players. 

I disagree that it is that big of a concern. It also works both ways, so why help the other team? 

[MJD7]

1 hour ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Why should I change my best look because of what the other team is wearing? As the Ravens, in this example, why do I give a rip about how "the matchup" looks? I care about how I look, and therefore will wear my best uniform,  ESPECIALLY because I pick the dark or light jersey as the home team.

You may disagree but I feel like, at its core, the point of a sports uniform is to distinguish your team from the other team. What one team wears is inherently tied to what the other team wears; that’s why one team has to wear a light color in every matchup. Why not distinguish yourself further by avoiding a color you share with the other team?

 

Even though the Ravens’ purple jersey might be their best in most scenarios, the fact that the Vikings also wear purple makes it not the best choice for the Ravens in that particular matchup in my eyes.

[oldschoolvikings]

This conversation comes up here, over and over. I get that for people who watch sports with an interest in uniforms, wanting the teams to make uniform choices with respect what the other team is wearing seems logical, but at this point, it should be beyond obvious that teams don't care in the slightest. In fact, I'd go ahead and guess they don't even bother to find out what uniform the other team is wearing.

 

Why would they?

[MJD7]

31 minutes ago, oldschoolvikings said:

This conversation comes up here, over and over. I get that for people who watch sports with an interest in uniforms, wanting the teams to make uniform choices with respect what the other team is wearing seems logical, but at this point, it should be beyond obvious that teams don't care in the slightest. In fact, I'd go ahead and guess they don't even bother to find out what uniform the other team is wearing.

 

Why would they?

Oh I’m not arguing against that. Just because I think teams should do something, doesn’t mean they actually do.

 

Isn’t that kind of what these boards do, though? We complain about minutiae such as undershirts, monochrome, and sock lengths, knowing full well that the athletes and teams don’t care about things like that.

 

I do recall seeing a video of Browns’ head coach Kevin Stefanski saying that he likes contrast in matchups, funnily enough though. I wouldn’t know where to find it at this point.

[dont care]

21 hours ago, DCarp1231 said:

It’s simple, throwbacks are called as such for a reason. Yes, the throwbacks are a much better overall uniform, but leave them in the past where they belong. Or take the Buccaneers route and just merge new logos with older uniforms.

Nah, just make the throwbacks the primary and end the madness.

[oldschoolvikings]

21 hours ago, DCarp1231 said:

 Yes, the throwbacks are a much better overall uniform, but leave them in the past where they belong.

 

The first half of this sentence and the second half of it don't make sense together.

[BBTV]

I'm pretty sure that at least some of a team's thinking (possibly / probably influenced by the league since revenues are shared) is that if they just "go back" to a previous look, then they reduce their sales by no longer having two sets of jerseys to sell, so it's worth it to have a crappy "new" look so they can sell that while double-dipping in throwback sales.  If a team like Miami were to go back to their throwbacks, it's likely that they'd invent some kind of horrific alternate set just to have something else to sell - so you'd get beautiful throwbacks 14 games a year, but then a grotesque "black out" or "coral color rush" uniform because money.

[Indigo]

29 minutes ago, BBTV said:

I'm pretty sure that at least some of a team's thinking (possibly / probably influenced by the league since revenues are shared) is that if they just "go back" to a previous look, then they reduce their sales by no longer having two sets of jerseys to sell, so it's worth it to have a crappy "new" look so they can sell that while double-dipping in throwback sales.  If a team like Miami were to go back to their throwbacks, it's likely that they'd invent some kind of horrific alternate set just to have something else to sell - so you'd get beautiful throwbacks 14 games a year, but then a grotesque "black out" or "coral color rush" uniform because money.

That’s why the Browns and Bucs, who went the throwback route, got all-brown and all-pewter Color Rushes, respectively.

[dont care]

2 hours ago, BBTV said:

I'm pretty sure that at least some of a team's thinking (possibly / probably influenced by the league since revenues are shared) is that if they just "go back" to a previous look, then they reduce their sales by no longer having two sets of jerseys to sell, so it's worth it to have a crappy "new" look so they can sell that while double-dipping in throwback sales.  If a team like Miami were to go back to their throwbacks, it's likely that they'd invent some kind of horrific alternate set just to have something else to sell - so you'd get beautiful throwbacks 14 games a year, but then a grotesque "black out" or "coral color rush" uniform because money.

I wouldn’t like to see a coral alternate of the throwbacks

[gothedistance]

22 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

I disagree that it is that big of a concern. It also works both ways, so why help the other team? 

 

When there's too much of the same color from the two teams on the field, it negates the 'best look' thing. When the Steelers and Packers play each other, the yellow is too abundant, and pulls their excellency down.

 

2 hours ago, dont care said:

Nah, just make the throwbacks the primary and end the madness.

 

Or redesign the uniform all over again when the 5 year requirement is past. 

 

I liked the Dolphins uniforms from 1997-2012. I wish Miami did the same thing the Bucs did with their redesign.