oddball Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 I'm watching on ESPN Classic, the title game between the Wranglers and the Philadelphia Stars and I noticed the Wranglers have the shiney material on the front and around the sides where the flames are, but on the back on the pants, it's the flat material. I've never to my knowledge seen that before. Has anyone else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
logoman Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Notre Dame had pants like that during the days of Blair Kiel. I always thought it looked odd. Why would the front of the uniform be more important than the back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewG70 Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 One thing is for certain -- those Wranglers jerseys were in absolute tatters by the time they played in the '84 title game, being that they exclusively wore those white jerseys all season long. Their owner was apparently too cheap to order colored (red) jerseys for them. Typical cheap management the state of Arizona is known for. The (unofficial) NHL Uniform DatabaseThe WHA Uniform Database Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sodboy13 Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 One thing is for certain -- those Wranglers jerseys were in absolute tatters by the time they played in the '84 title game, being that they exclusively wore those white jerseys all season long. Their owner was apparently too cheap to order colored (red) jerseys for them. Typical cheap management the state of Arizona is known for.Incorrect. The red jerseys were made, but never worn. I read a story years and years ago about a former Wranglers equipment manager (IIRC) who held on to one of the elusive reds. There were pictures and everything.And if anything, I would imagine those custom pants with the flame details were very expensive to produce. On 1/25/2013 at 1:53 PM, 'Atom said: For all the bird de lis haters I think the bird de lis isnt supposed to be a pelican and a fleur de lis I think its just a fleur de lis with a pelicans head. Thats what it looks like to me. Also the flair around the tip of the beak is just flair that fleur de lis have sometimes source I am from NOLA. PotD: 10/19/07, 08/25/08, 07/22/10, 08/13/10, 04/15/11, 05/19/11, 01/02/12, and 01/05/12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
logoman Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 There are a lot of variations of the story, so I have no idea where the truth lies but I do know they produced at least one red jersey. One of the more interesting versions of the story is that George Allen liked how the Cowboys (almost)always wore white. Considering he had been the Redskins coach, I find this more than a little ironic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruColor Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 I know I've mentioned this story in the past, but here's the truth:The Wranglers intended to change to Red jerseys for the 1984 season, but the league office had put in a rule that stated any team changing jersey colors (in this case, Blue to Red) had to wait one season before doing so. The USFL obviously thought that they were going to be around for more than 3 seasons, huh?The Wranglers deliberately wore White jerseys all season because of this rule.I'm standing by this story - it was told to me by a Wranglers' front office person during the '84 season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruColor Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 ...and to continue, the Wranglers had intended to start wearing the Red jerseys starting in the '85 season, but as we all know, they ended up merging with the Oklahoma Outlaws and became the Arizona Outlaws - with Black jerseys.I was disappointed - I wanted to see those Red unis with the Copper pants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sodboy13 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I know I've mentioned this story in the past, but here's the truth:The Wranglers intended to change to Red jerseys for the 1984 season, but the league office had put in a rule that stated any team changing jersey colors (in this case, Blue to Red) had to wait one season before doing so. The USFL obviously thought that they were going to be around for more than 3 seasons, huh?The Wranglers deliberately wore White jerseys all season because of this rule.I'm standing by this story - it was told to me by a Wranglers' front office person during the '84 season.And once again, I have learned something today. Much oblige. And in that case, they should have done a blue version of that jersey.Also, nice find on the pic, Logoman. Would have been an awesome look with those copper helmets and flaming pants. On 1/25/2013 at 1:53 PM, 'Atom said: For all the bird de lis haters I think the bird de lis isnt supposed to be a pelican and a fleur de lis I think its just a fleur de lis with a pelicans head. Thats what it looks like to me. Also the flair around the tip of the beak is just flair that fleur de lis have sometimes source I am from NOLA. PotD: 10/19/07, 08/25/08, 07/22/10, 08/13/10, 04/15/11, 05/19/11, 01/02/12, and 01/05/12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John in KY Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I'm watching on ESPN Classic, the title game between the Wranglers and the Philadelphia Stars and I noticed the Wranglers have the shiney material on the front and around the sides where the flames are, but on the back on the pants, it's the flat material. I've never to my knowledge seen that before. Has anyone else?Damn sometimes the posts really make me feel older than dirt.That was just the evolution of material for football pants over the early 1980s. The "shiny" material was developed to resist tears from some of the Astroturf surfaces that were used in the late 70s (Tartanturf I believe was the really harsh stuff back then). Since that material was both more expensive and stiff than the regular knit material they only put it on the front of the pants where the material was stretched to cover the pads and was more likely to get rubbed on the turf. Go to Getty Images and do searches for the 1981-1983 era and you will see a lot of pants made this way. By 1984 most teams changed to a pants design that used the shiny material for the entire pants - with exceptions for teams that made a decision to not use the shiny material for their pants (front and back) like the Redskins (particularly the burgandy set that didn't go to shiny fabric until a couple of years ago) and the Chargers (they didn't change to shiny material until they switched back to white pants in 1985). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John in KY Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Notre Dame had pants like that during the days of Blair Kiel. I always thought it looked odd. Why would the front of the uniform be more important than the back?Notre Dame was kind of an odd case. To go even further back in football pants history, back in the 50s and early 60s a lot of pants were made with a nylon material (like backpacks, tents, etc.) on the front (again - this covers the most-stressed area over the pads) and a less durable knit material on the back. Notre Dame continued using these nylon front pants for decades after the NFL and other schools had moved on to 100% knit fabric pants. They wore these pants pretty much into the Montana era.As I mentioned in the post above the "shiny" material was the next evolution in pants fabric, designed to hold up to the really rough artificial turf surfaces. Since the first generation of that material was stiff and expensive, the pants were made with it on the front (again, the stress points on the pants) and regular knit material on the back. By the mid-80s pants pretty much went to all shiny material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Falcon Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I wish the Wranglers would have just modified their blue jerseys and worn them with the copper pants. There were too many USFL teams wearing red jerseys at the time: Stallions, Stars, Bandits, Showboats, Generals and Blitz to my knowledge...and there were only 18 teams. It would have been hard to tell the Stallions, Stars, or Wranglers apart on the field from a distance due to this. Otherwise, I thought the USFL had some of the best unis ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sodboy13 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Otherwise, I thought the USFL had some of the best unis ever.Michigan Panthers. That is all. With the Breakers and the '84 Blitz getting runner-up nods. On 1/25/2013 at 1:53 PM, 'Atom said: For all the bird de lis haters I think the bird de lis isnt supposed to be a pelican and a fleur de lis I think its just a fleur de lis with a pelicans head. Thats what it looks like to me. Also the flair around the tip of the beak is just flair that fleur de lis have sometimes source I am from NOLA. PotD: 10/19/07, 08/25/08, 07/22/10, 08/13/10, 04/15/11, 05/19/11, 01/02/12, and 01/05/12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee. Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Otherwise, I thought the USFL had some of the best unis ever.Michigan Panthers. That is all. With the Breakers and the '84 Blitz getting runner-up nods.Breakers had the best helmets. Panthers the best unis/colors.San Antonio, however, was at the bottom of the league with everything. When you steal a logo from an editorial cartoon, there's something wrong with your organization. Welcome to DrunjFlix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leopard88 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 San Antonio, however, was at the bottom of the league with everything. When you steal a logo from an editorial cartoon, there's something wrong with your organization.I loved San Antonio's uniforms . . . except for the logo. If they replaced the anorexic cowboy . . . with just about anything . . . , they would have had some nice looking unis. Most Liked Content of the Day -- February 15, 2017, August 21, 2017, August 22, 2017 ///// Proud Winner of the CCSLC Post of the Day Award -- April 8, 2008 Originator of the Upside Down Sarcasm Smilie -- November 1, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee. Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 San Antonio, however, was at the bottom of the league with everything. When you steal a logo from an editorial cartoon, there's something wrong with your organization.I loved San Antonio's uniforms . . . except for the logo. If they replaced the anorexic cowboy . . . with just about anything . . . , they would have had some nice looking unis.I just went and looked at them. Although I generally love blue/green color schemes, this one just stunk. There's no real cohesion to this one, IMSNFHO. Welcome to DrunjFlix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ltravisjr Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 That was such an odd episode in sports business history. I don't how the legalities played into everything, but if I were the Wranglers I would have challenged to league to give me the right to the red jerseys on the grounds I was not the 1983 franchise in the first place. If anyone as old as me recalls, in 1984 the Chicago Blitz and Arizona Wranglers swapped cities. The Blitz moved to Arizona and became the Wranglers and vice versa. Essentially, the 1984 Wrangers were really the 1983 Blitz, and guess what? The 1983 Blitz wore RED!!Pardon the extreme focus I give this. I was a hardcore Blitz fan and they were one of the elite teams in the new league. It wasn't pleasant to see them leave only to be replaced with what had been an also-ran in Arizona LT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sport Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Here's a pretty good shot of the differences between front and back on these pantsAfter watching that documentary last night I really wish I was alive to witness this league. Also, Donald Trump is an even bigger ass than I originally thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sodboy13 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I just went and looked at them. Although I generally love blue/green color schemes, this one just stunk. There's no real cohesion to this one, IMSNFHO.Agreed. It's hard to mess up green and blue in my eyes, especially when silver comes along for the ride, and the Slingers did it. Two thick stripes on the helmet, two thick stripes on the pants, two thick stripes on the socks, and stripe-o-rama on the helmet. Plus, when you put those two shades of green and blue next to each other, in the form of two thick stripes, it all just becomes a mess. The Seahawks did this a whole lot better.I was a hardcore Blitz fan and they were one of the elite teams in the new league. There were hardcore Blitz fans? Wow. Good on ya. On 1/25/2013 at 1:53 PM, 'Atom said: For all the bird de lis haters I think the bird de lis isnt supposed to be a pelican and a fleur de lis I think its just a fleur de lis with a pelicans head. Thats what it looks like to me. Also the flair around the tip of the beak is just flair that fleur de lis have sometimes source I am from NOLA. PotD: 10/19/07, 08/25/08, 07/22/10, 08/13/10, 04/15/11, 05/19/11, 01/02/12, and 01/05/12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John in KY Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Here's a pretty good shot of the differences between front and back on these pantsAfter watching that documentary last night I really wish I was alive to witness this league. Also, Donald Trump is an even bigger ass than I originally thought. Yep - that was the style back circa 1981-1983. I don't remember the "modern" shiny-metallic fabric on pants before say 1981 or so. It was just how they were made during that era; it wasn't until more like 1984 or 1985 that the all shiny-metallic fabric pants came out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mings Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Notre Dame had pants like that during the days of Blair Kiel. I always thought it looked odd. Why would the front of the uniform be more important than the back?That's one name I haven't heard in a while. He is from my hometown and went to my high school (although he went before I was born) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.