rfraser85 Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 7 hours ago, ruttep said: They don't, they absolutely love it. That's the problem. Not all of them. Some Eagles players from last season still wore black socks instead of white, and we all saw the 49ers with red and white. The problem is they're either the minority or don't care enough to speak up. But the teams and NFL could tell them no and end this, but it may not be worth fighting for to them. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver_Star Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 On 2/28/2024 at 1:16 PM, MDGP said: (I want to say that's the same myth surrounding the Arizona Cardinals' name origins too) Speaking of yellow vs. white, I've always loved the Michigan Heritage Jersey mix-up. Despite the guy who runs the site explicitly saying he messed up and the jersey was actually white, I still see people use this image as proof they wore all yellow in the 60s. The Cardinals football team was aptly named after the uniform colors when they faded. I do not think they were thinking of the Cardinal bird until the late 1930's. But the color cardinal is a very old and classic medium crimson color that has been around for awhile and worn by the Cardinals in religious sects. So basically he did name the team after the color of the jerseys. And yes, I love Michigan's colors. I was reminded how the Chargers in 1985, the Pacers in 1990, and any other team switch to this type of color. I always loved the Rams royal blue and athletic gold and Michigan's navy blue and athletic gold colors when they wear it because both look beautiful and I am a sucker for the athletic gold colors clashing well with the blues, browns, and greens (mostly Oregon's classic colors). My only problem is the oversaturation of it done with the Rams color rush. I wish they had navy blue pants to go along with the athletic gold color rush. Then in 1997-ish when the Pacers switched their home whites to home athletic gold which was brillant. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 3 hours ago, Kiltman said: I’ll try to find them, it was from some of the local best writers after they updated the wordmark. edit: here’s one of the two I remember. Another said probably 2025. It could very well just be the wordmark change and that’s it. Hoping for more. Yeah I've heard nothing other than they wanted to "test" the '80s greens out for a few seasons before even thinking about making any changes. I'm still on the lookout for the first 2024 jersey that features that wordmark. I'd be shocked if they pushed it off another year, considering they could do it now. Quote "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...
MCM0313 Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 4 hours ago, Ted Cunningham said: I've often thought that simply adding silver (or a lighter grey, as Nike has been essentially unable to produce silver on fabrics to this point) would certainly improve their current look. I don't mind Philadelphia's current uniforms. Even though the "midnight green" is a byproduct of the late 90s to mid 00s NFL dark era, it's a unique color in the NFL and I don't hate it. As a general rule, I like away uniforms that go primary/white/secondary/socks when the primary color is dark and the secondary color is some shade of gold or silver. I think that works for balance. (Digression: I also think that's why gold pants work so well for Washington.) With that context, the one broad thing about the regular home and away looks I have never really liked was the balance of the away uniform: green/white/white/socks. Silver pants would add a lot of balance to that look, and would still look good, too, with the home uniforms (maintaining that dark-over-light look and avoiding two-tone dark-over-dark looks like Tampa's current iteration of the pewter uniforms). Their insistence on wearing white socks 75% of the time doesn’t help either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDGP Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 59 minutes ago, Silver_Star said: The Cardinals football team was aptly named after the uniform colors when they faded. I do not think they were thinking of the Cardinal bird until the late 1930's. But the color cardinal is a very old and classic medium crimson color that has been around for awhile and worn by the Cardinals in religious sects. So basically he did name the team after the color of the jerseys. I'm aware that the color cardinal exists. I'm just saying that I've heard the apocryphal story of [insert team] wears their colors because the jerseys faded so many times that it's pretty clear that it's never been true for any of them. Honestly, as with a lot of these names from the time it was probably some random newspaper reporter who came up with the name and it stuck. I'm also aware of the supposed quote by the owner, about them being Cardinal red, but there are also 10 million quotes commonly attributed to Abe Lincoln too that he never said. 1 Quote I've got a dribbble, check it out if you like my stuff; alternatively, if you hate my stuff, send it to your enemies to punish their insolence! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCM0313 Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 On 2/28/2024 at 2:16 PM, MDGP said: It makes me think the "he picked the color to match Notre Dame" is just another thing made up by someone years later. Reminds me of how when I was at Penn State, there was this persistent myth that they switched from Black and Pink to Blue and White because the colors faded in the sun (I want to say that's the same myth surrounding the Arizona Cardinals' name origins too) Speaking of yellow vs. white, I've always loved the Michigan Heritage Jersey mix-up. Despite the guy who runs the site explicitly saying he messed up and the jersey was actually white, I still see people use this image as proof they wore all yellow in the 60s. Maybe people think that because Meatchicken are a bunch of yellow-bellied cowards. Sorry, obligatory anti-UM trolling by an OSU alum. And yes, I’m quite aware what has happened the past three seasons. 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 The Eagles changing back to Kelly green is a tough one for me. I feel like that particular shade would get old after awhile in a way the midnight green hasn’t. It’s similar to the Chargers current change. Like most people, I was DYING for them to ditch the navy and just go powder and gold. But after seeing it for a few seasons? I kinda hate it. It looks washed out and kind of frilly. I know that’s not a popular opinion, but I miss them having a splash of navy to ground that set a bit better. Lighter colors in football are just hard to pull off in general imo. It looks fresh and clean, but it doesn’t fit the feel of the sport that well (imo), and grows old pretty quick I think. It’s one of the (many) reasons why I don’t want the Bucs to ever switch back to the throwback unis full time. They look bright and fun for a game or two, no doubt. But sit through a few ten loss seasons in that pastel 70s kitchen look and tell me it doesn’t get old fast. 2 Quote On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old School Fool Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 11 hours ago, BBTV said: Yeah I've heard nothing other than they wanted to "test" the '80s greens out for a few seasons before even thinking about making any changes. I'm still on the lookout for the first 2024 jersey that features that wordmark. I'd be shocked if they pushed it off another year, considering they could do it now. Test what? They put the uniform out and immediately got an overwhelmingly positive response. They said for years that they want to do kelly green real bad, and they also keep hesitating on it and it's irritating me. Do they want it or not? Make up your mind. The fans want it, the non-Eagles fans want it, but Jeffrey Lurie is too stupid to realize anything. Regardless of what color green they choose, they need new uniforms real bad like the Broncos do. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadSeed84 Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 5 hours ago, Old School Fool said: Test what? They put the uniform out and immediately got an overwhelmingly positive response. They said for years that they want to do kelly green real bad, and they also keep hesitating on it and it's irritating me. Do they want it or not? Make up your mind. The fans want it, the non-Eagles fans want it, but Jeffrey Lurie is too stupid to realize anything. Regardless of what color green they choose, they need new uniforms real bad like the Broncos do. They'll time it when they replace Jalen Hurts next season or so. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 8 hours ago, Old School Fool said: They said for years that they want to do kelly green real bad, and they also keep hesitating on it and it's irritating me. That's simply not true. They've said very clearly that they wanted the one-helmet rule to end so that they could have it as an alternate, and at one point, the president (not owner, but I'm pretty sure he's said the same) that they'd run it for a few years before considering any change. Maybe it's just to double dip on merch sales, maybe they just wanted to see it in action to gauge if they (the decision makers) liked it, or maybe some other reason. But at no point have they said that they definitely wanted to change their look. Quote "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...
BBTV Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 3 hours ago, BadSeed84 said: They'll time it when they replace Jalen Hurts next season or so. I know it's popular to assume that Hurts won't be on the team in 2025 (or whenever the dead-money hit for cutting him is reasonable), but I don't think that's the case. He contributed to the awfulness of the season, but this isn't a Wentz situation at all. I don't know if they have the talent to compete next year or even finish .500 (can't win games if you're giving up 50 a game) but I have confidence that they'll gel better now that they've been through this valley. Kelce coming back would be nice too. *unless the rumors of someone banging someone else's wife/SO are true, which they don't seem to be... but maybe? Quote "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_Admiral Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 9 hours ago, FiddySicks said: It’s similar to the Chargers current change. Like most people, I was DYING for them to ditch the navy and just go powder and gold. But after seeing it for a few seasons? I kinda hate it. It looks washed out and kind of frilly. I know that’s not a popular opinion, but I miss them having a splash of navy to ground that set a bit better. Lighter colors in football are just hard to pull off in general imo. It looks fresh and clean, but it doesn’t fit the feel of the sport that well (imo), and grows old pretty quick I think. It’s one of the (many) reasons why I don’t want the Bucs to ever switch back to the throwback unis full time. They look bright and fun for a game or two, no doubt. But sit through a few ten loss seasons in that pastel 70s kitchen look and tell me it doesn’t get old fast. Ask yourself this: would the new Chargers uniforms look better in an open-air stadium in San Diego rather than under fluorescent lights and ETFE? The NFL is a big league. There should be room for all sorts of approaches, from vivid colors to dark colors. I think the Chargers look great in powder blue, I loved seeing the Houston Oilers again this year, but I also love the Raiders uniforms and think the Ravens should wear head-to-toe black at home. As for the Eagles, they've gotten themselves into a dilemma where their main color doesn't reproduce well and they're messing around with black alternates and ice emoji, so they've functionally become a black, white, and tinted grey team. What they're doing isn't working and the set as initially designed barely worked to begin with. If they used, say, the Dallas Stars' green, I don't think it'd be any more out of place for football than it is for hockey. I think losing makes any non-conservative design unbearable. I've always been a critic of the new Buccaneers stuff, but it was in the nadir of the warm, grey alarm-clock years that I was like "okay, screw it, honestly just go back to creamsicle orange, if you're gonna be bad, be fun bad." 13 Quote ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SportsFan12 Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 10 hours ago, FiddySicks said: The Eagles changing back to Kelly green is a tough one for me. I feel like that particular shade would get old after awhile in a way the midnight green hasn’t. It’s similar to the Chargers current change. Like most people, I was DYING for them to ditch the navy and just go powder and gold. But after seeing it for a few seasons? I kinda hate it. It looks washed out and kind of frilly. I know that’s not a popular opinion, but I miss them having a splash of navy to ground that set a bit better. Lighter colors in football are just hard to pull off in general imo. It looks fresh and clean, but it doesn’t fit the feel of the sport that well (imo), and grows old pretty quick I think. It’s one of the (many) reasons why I don’t want the Bucs to ever switch back to the throwback unis full time. They look bright and fun for a game or two, no doubt. But sit through a few ten loss seasons in that pastel 70s kitchen look and tell me it doesn’t get old fast. I completely agree. The same can be said about the Broncos switching from navy to orange. The brighter color alternates aren’t meant to be full-time looks. Would be overkill. I wish the Chargers would wear the navy alts for more than one game to at least level things out a bit more. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver_Star Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 20 hours ago, MDGP said: I'm aware that the color cardinal exists. I'm just saying that I've heard the apocryphal story of [insert team] wears their colors because the jerseys faded so many times that it's pretty clear that it's never been true for any of them. Honestly, as with a lot of these names from the time it was probably some random newspaper reporter who came up with the name and it stuck. I'm also aware of the supposed quote by the owner, about them being Cardinal red, but there are also 10 million quotes commonly attributed to Abe Lincoln too that he never said. You know, mesh never was around during the 1898-1950's. Those uniforms were 98% cotton. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschoolvikings Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 21 hours ago, MCM0313 said: Sorry, obligatory anti-UM trolling by an OSU alum. And yes, I’m quite aware what has happened the past three seasons. What, that they cheated? 2 1 Quote http://dstewartpaint.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 9 hours ago, The_Admiral said: Ask yourself this: would the new Chargers uniforms look better in an open-air stadium in San Diego rather than under fluorescent lights and ETFE? The NFL is a big league. There should be room for all sorts of approaches, from vivid colors to dark colors. I think the Chargers look great in powder blue, I loved seeing the Houston Oilers again this year, but I also love the Raiders uniforms and think the Ravens should wear head-to-toe black at home. As for the Eagles, they've gotten themselves into a dilemma where their main color doesn't reproduce well and they're messing around with black alternates and ice emoji, so they've functionally become a black, white, and tinted grey team. What they're doing isn't working and the set as initially designed barely worked to begin with. If they used, say, the Dallas Stars' green, I don't think it'd be any more out of place for football than it is for hockey. I think losing makes any non-conservative design unbearable. I've always been a critic of the new Buccaneers stuff, but it was in the nadir of the warm, grey alarm-clock years that I was like "okay, screw it, honestly just go back to creamsicle orange, if you're gonna be bad, be fun bad." You’re completely right about the San Diego thing. Them wearing those bright colors and still looking washed out because they’re crammed under a transitional sun shade and some LED lights feels like an instant reminder of how much of a mistake that whole move was. That’s definitely an aspect. I had the hardest time putting my finger on what it was that I find about their unis to be so off putting, but that has to be at least a part of it. I don’t necessarily mind bright colors, I just feel that they’re more difficult to pull off and stand out like a sore thumb when you’re bad. And while I get you on the being “fun bad” thing, I respectfully don’t agree with your conclusion. There was nothing “fun” about those 90s Bucs teams. They even darkened the orange which made it even more depressing (which I think was a mistake, but they didn’t want to pay to replace it so they just Sacramento Kings’d it and went with it). I watched a lot of awful Bucs seasons with n my 20s, but I always thought hey at least the logo is cool and the unis are fun. When they’re bad, they just feel kinda campy, like the Pirates of the Caribbean ride set Disneyland. That’s awesome! Quote On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 A counterpoint might be that the Jacksonville Jaguars basically modified their color palette to black, metallic gold, and a vague suggestion of teal, and these "darker, more intimidating" colors at the low point of their franchise made a bad situation even worse. Loser stink comes for bright and dark palettes in equal measure; only a few timeless teams seem able to avoid it. 7 Quote ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeypower Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 On 3/3/2024 at 2:20 PM, The_Admiral said: Loser stink comes for bright and dark palettes in equal measure Don't I know it. 2 1 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DG_ThenNowForever Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 On 3/2/2024 at 9:31 PM, FiddySicks said: It’s similar to the Chargers current change. Like most people, I was DYING for them to ditch the navy and just go powder and gold. But after seeing it for a few seasons? I kinda hate it. It looks washed out and kind of frilly. I know that’s not a popular opinion, but I miss them having a splash of navy to ground that set a bit better. I was on an island when that Chargers rebrand came out, saying it wasn't all that great. Nice to see others come around. 5 Quote 1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said: and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruColor Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 1 hour ago, DG_ThenNowForever said: I was on an island when that Chargers rebrand came out, saying it wasn't all that great. Nice to see others come around. I still hate the TV numbers on the helmets. 4 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.