Boise State can't wear all-blue at home

[scottysprings]

Whatever the case, it gives ammo to the sore losers who inaccurately claim that Boise "only wins because they blend in with the turf". That kind of negative attention and bias is going to reflect poorly on the conference.

Has anyone here actually made that claim?

[Guest]

Whatever the case, it gives ammo to the sore losers who inaccurately claim that Boise "only wins because they blend in with the turf". That kind of negative attention and bias is going to reflect poorly on the conference.

Idiots, all of them. By that logic, Boise is incapable of winning on the road, which we know to be untrue.

[Mingjai]

If Boise can't wear blue, then the Mountain West shouldn't allow Colorado State to wear green either.

I've always thought the same thing, but after a little bit of research, I found that the physiology of human eye makes humans much more sensitive to the green-yellow portion of the light spectrum and less sensitive to blue portion. That being the case, I'm not surprised that more people complain about Boise State in all blue than Colorado State in all green.

[wyopokes2]

I'm all for this ridiculous rule haha. I've never much enjoyed their blue on blue. I think blue/orange/blue would be a great, unique look for Boise

[Red Wolf]

Oh no! The football players on the field won't be able to see them because they have an overhead view like they're playing NCAA Football 12!

[cornettored]

I'm surprised. I would think the MWC would give every advantage TOWARDS Boise St. (case in point: "Hey TCU. That game against BSU in Fort Worth? Yeah, that's gonna be in Boise. Good luck in abandoning us and going to the Big East!')

[pcgd]

Although its not impossible to see them on the smurf turf, it is more difficult at a glance to see the players against the blue background. The blue of the turf is nearly identical to the blue on the jerseys. This "advantage" of course turns to a "disadvantage" when a QB has to attempt to pick out his receiver against a sea of blue...so really there can't be a advantage because it would also go against them on offense.

And the Green thing, most (if not all) green teams have a different tonal green than their grass. In the case of Boise blue turf, its pretty much the exact same color.

Reminds me a bit of in High school we played a team that had bright orange jerseys and ran a very tight wishbone offense. Not that big of a deal, but their game film they provided was so poor that the bright orange jerseys glowed so bad on the tape that you couldn't see numbers or much more than orange blobs on screen. With all the fake handoffs they did it was nearly impossible to tell who had the ball (which I'm sure was their goal) I always thought of that when watching Boise State and how I'm sure it was difficult to see them on game film. I'm talking pre-HD days. Now I'm sure teams just DVR ESPN instead of exchange gamefilm...

[rams80]

Captain! A Boise Bird of Prey just decloaked off the port bow!

Where? I can't see them! It's that durned blue field!

[Guest]

its pretty much the exact same color.

No. It's not.

The jerseys are much darker.

[Cujo]

Instead of blaming the uniforms, what they should do is outlaw the "Smurf turf". It's a total eyesore for starters, and on top of that, I believe that the blue turf takes nearly all the focus away from the game being played. I'm sure I'm not the only one in here who has tuned out during a game because of the field itself.

[Lights Out]

Whatever the case, it gives ammo to the sore losers who inaccurately claim that Boise "only wins because they blend in with the turf". That kind of negative attention and bias is going to reflect poorly on the conference.

Has anyone here actually made that claim?

Not here, but I'm just saying in general. Yes, there are idiots who think that's true.

[pcgd]

its pretty much the exact same color.

No. It's not.

The jerseys are much darker.

1) As you know, photos are not a good indicator of actual color. He could be sweating or the lights could be reflecting off the uniforms differently

2) Why on earthy WOULDN'T they match, or at least attempt to match them? Would they ask the turf company to lighten the turf instead of matching their colors/logos exactly? That makes zero sense. I'm not saying if you lay a jersey on the field it will disappear I'm just saying they are damn close and I'm sure both Nike and the turf company were attempting to match off the same PMS number.

3) Even if you're right, and the jerseys are darker or the field lighter on purpose, its still so much closer than Green Bay's green vs. the grass. Or Texas State's green vs. grass. Or any other team's green vs. grass or turf.

[MJWalker45]

Texas State is maroon and gold

[nuordr]

To make Boise wear white at home is against every form of freedom to choose there is in my opinion. The conference says the school has an advantage over visiting teams because they were all blue at home? Really? Well, I guess teams like Oregon have an unfair advantage when they wear their all-green uniforms? Either way, this is ridiculous and I hope they just blow out their competitors by 35 a game just to prove a point.

[pcgd]

Texas State is maroon and gold

Crap...North Texas. The Mean Green...just trying to think of a Kelly Green school.

[IceCap]

Whatever the case, it gives ammo to the sore losers who inaccurately claim that Boise "only wins because they blend in with the turf". That kind of negative attention and bias is going to reflect poorly on the conference.

Maybe I misunderstood the article posted by the op, but wasn't wearing white at home...

...part of the agreement which allowed the Broncos to join the Mountain West, as they made the move from the WAC.

?

If so, as bogus as the rule might be, the Broncos were aware of the condition going into the Mountain West and chose to go anyway. So really, there's not much room to complain.

[Red Wolf]

...part of the agreement which allowed the Broncos to join the Mountain West, as they made the move from the WAC.

?

If so, as bogus as the rule might be, the Broncos were aware of the condition going into the Mountain West and chose to go anyway. So really, there's not much room to complain.

I'm sure they're pumped to be out of the WAC, especially with how it's going to look in the next few years. It's just a silly rule. Unless you're playing NCAA or watching TV, I don't think they're blending into the field.

[thespleenenator]

...part of the agreement which allowed the Broncos to join the Mountain West, as they made the move from the WAC.

?

If so, as bogus as the rule might be, the Broncos were aware of the condition going into the Mountain West and chose to go anyway. So really, there's not much room to complain.

Well, considering their other option was staying in a WAC conference that just added powers such as Seattle University and UTA to their conference, and who might not even have football two years from now, I don't really think it was that much of a choice.

[IceCap]

...part of the agreement which allowed the Broncos to join the Mountain West, as they made the move from the WAC.

?

If so, as bogus as the rule might be, the Broncos were aware of the condition going into the Mountain West and chose to go anyway. So really, there's not much room to complain.

Well, considering their other option was staying in a WAC conference that just added powers such as Seattle University and UTA to their conference, and who might not even have football two years from now, I don't really think it was that much of a choice.

Well obviously Boise decided that moving up the ranks of NCAA football was more important then wearing blue at home (which it is). So really, they're moving up in the world. If they can't wear blue at home, so be it. I know this is a uniform related message board and we all care about stuff like this, but this seems like a no-brainer for the Broncos.

[Gothamite]

I'd agree.

Boise State negotiated a deal to join a new conference, and this was part of that. Buyer's remorse now? Suck it up.