The 1940 NFL in Color

[BBTV]

The question is, was there a functional reason for the "wings" in the front of the helmet? I can kinda see how the stripes were pieces of leather used to strengthen the seams, but the wings? Looks like it was slapped on there for decorative reason. Not that it diminishes its coolness.

I'm guessing it's padding for the front of the head, similar to how there seems to be extra padding over the ears.

Maybe, but even so, it wouldn't have to be shaped like that. It appears to be a style thing in addition to a functional thing.

[Hontas]

I'm in the camp that records and accomplishments made in the "early days" of pro sports can't really be taken seriously because the talent pool was so limited due to either explicit or implicit segregation. Of course, that debate has nothing to do with this thread, but I didn't see harm in asking the question of when that happened.

Wow. Where do you idiots "camp?"

[oldschoolvikings]

I'm in the camp that records and accomplishments made in the "early days" of pro sports can't really be taken seriously because the talent pool was so limited due to either explicit or implicit segregation. Of course, that debate has nothing to do with this thread, but I didn't see harm in asking the question of when that happened.

Wow. Where do you idiots "camp?"

Uh oh.

[tBBP]

I'm in the camp that records and accomplishments made in the "early days" of pro sports can't really be taken seriously because the talent pool was so limited due to either explicit or implicit segregation. Of course, that debate has nothing to do with this thread, but I didn't see harm in asking the question of when that happened.

Wow. Where do you idiots "camp?"

Uh oh.

Think Imma get my popcorn out for this one...

[powersurge]

I'm still really curious as to why the long sleeves on football jerseys just simply went away?

I understand that in today's era of ultra modern uniform design (i.e. post year 2000) that the technology of under armor and nike breathable under jersey gear makes it totally unnecessary to have sleeves. But I'm just curious as to why the sleeves simply vanished way back when? You would think that it would make more sense to have long sleeves in a game predominantly played in cold weather and brutal enough cover up as much of your exposed skin as possible.

any thoughts on this?

[Spearhead]

I'm still really curious as to why the long sleeves on football jerseys just simply went away?

I understand that in today's era of ultra modern uniform design (i.e. post year 2000) that the technology of under armor and nike breathable under jersey gear makes it totally unnecessary to have sleeves. But I'm just curious as to why the sleeves simply vanished way back when? You would think that it would make more sense to have long sleeves in a game predominantly played in cold weather and brutal enough cover up as much of your exposed skin as possible.

any thoughts on this?

Some Baltimore Colt players wore long sleeves into the early 1970s and I have seen some long sleeves on Hamilton Ti-Cats into the 1970s as well. In the 1940s and 50s Notre Dame and Perdue started the season in short sleeves and switched to long by mid season.

Why did the long sleeves disappear? I would assume that it was just a fashion progression.

[illwauk]

Can't help but notice that the Packers and Giants, two of the more "plain" and "traditionally" dressed teams were amongst the most "modern" looking teams in 1940.

[timmy b]

Teams not pictured in this incredible find are the Bears, Cardinals, Lions and the newly rechristened Steelers. Of all the 10 teams in the NFL in 1940, only the Dodgers (added in 1940) and Bears had sleeve stripes. The Packers and Rams had shoulder inserts. All others had plain unadorned primary jerseys. The Redskins did have logos on the sleeves of their white jerseys.

[Graham_Clayton]

Interesting to note that Hein's pants only go down to his knees - was this done only for this photo? I can't imagine someone playing a game with totally exposed shins.

[Gothamite]

Is there any functional difference between that and this?

High socks weren't mandated until the mid-1940s. Wasn't uncommon for players to go without stirrups, like Don Hutson in 1943:

[sc49erfan15]

The thing that gets me the most (apart from the uniforms, which are simple but gorgeous) is the size of the players.

6'1" 190, 6'1" 205, and 5'7" 147 pound quarterbacks. A 6'2" 200 receiver, a running back at 5'10" 190, and a 6'2" 225 pound center?!? I realize weight training and such has come a long way since the 1940s, but...wow.

[Gothamite]

Yeah. Stunning, isn't it? Even more recently, "the Fridge" wouldn't be able to earn his nickname today.

[TheoW]

The thing that gets me the most (apart from the uniforms, which are simple but gorgeous) is the size of the players.

6'1" 190, 6'1" 205, and 5'7" 147 pound quarterbacks. A 6'2" 200 receiver, a running back at 5'10" 190, and a 6'2" 225 pound center?!? I realize weight training and such has come a long way since the 1940s, but...wow.

In that same vein, there's always something to me about these old pictures that the player's look much older than someone in their early 20s do today, facewise.

[Billy B]

The thing that gets me the most (apart from the uniforms, which are simple but gorgeous) is the size of the players.

6'1" 190, 6'1" 205, and 5'7" 147 pound quarterbacks. A 6'2" 200 receiver, a running back at 5'10" 190, and a 6'2" 225 pound center?!? I realize weight training and such has come a long way since the 1940s, but...wow.

In that same vein, there's always something to me about these old pictures that the player's look much older than someone in their early 20s do today, facewise.

I've always noticed the same thing. There's a picture of a player in Memorial Stadium from about 100 years ago and he looks like he's about 40. And there was one of a football player in my high school from the 60s that looked the same.

[ksupilot]

Can't help but notice that the Packers and Giants, two of the more "plain" and "traditionally" dressed teams were amongst the most "modern" looking teams in 1940.

Very strange...the Packers and Giants were the Seahawks and Jaguars of their day.

Not to mention, Giants fans can now tell Jets fans that they were doing the flying jet celebration before the Jets even existed.

On another note, who was the first team to put a proper logo on the side of their helmet?

[hugevolsfan]

Can't help but notice that the Packers and Giants, two of the more "plain" and "traditionally" dressed teams were amongst the most "modern" looking teams in 1940.

Very strange...the Packers and Giants were the Seahawks and Jaguars of their day.

Not to mention, Giants fans can now tell Jets fans that they were doing the flying jet celebration before the Jets even existed.

On another note, who was the first team to put a proper logo on the side of their helmet?

I'm pretty sure it is the Rams but that is from memory did not look it up

[Gothamite]

I think he meant besides the Rams. Not a design element, but a "proper logo".

I want to say it was the Bears.

[hugevolsfan]

I think he meant besides the Rams. Not a design element, but a "proper logo".

I want to say it was the Bears.

Yes sorry I missed the proper part I believe the bears is correct

[illwauk]

Very strange...the Packers and Giants were the Seahawks and Jaguars of their day.

Not to mention, Giants fans can now tell Jets fans that they were doing the flying jet celebration before the Jets even existed.

On another note, who was the first team to put a proper logo on the side of their helmet?

According to gridironuniforms.com, it was the Colts in 1957. They also had horse shoes on the back of their helmet for three years prior.