Jump to content

Boise State can't wear all-blue at home


RyanB06

Recommended Posts

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.

there is no freedom of choice in the ncaa and mountain west bylaws...you either play by the rules or you're out.

as others have said the blue on blue is an absolute nightmare to watch on hdtv that runis the experience of watching an up and coming national power...in addition it must be a serious pain in the ass to review game film with the all blue and gray numbers...what a mess.

as far as going non mono blue on the blue turf I think the conference actually threw them a bone considering it's cheaper in the short term to change uniform colors than to replace artificial turf...hopefully next go round bsu will realize that if they want to be considered an elite program they'll have to ditch smurf turf and go with grass or a synthetic like everyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 245
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Doesn't matter to me much if they decided to accept the terms when they signed, we can still talk about if the rule is dumb. Which it is. Home field advantage means you have your fans, your stadium, your locker rooms, your band, your pick of uniforms, all of that. How can you take away one of those "advantages", citing that it gives them an advantage? Doesn't seem to make sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

In all honesty, I think we care more about this than Boise does. ^_^

b0b5d4f702adf623d75285ca50ee7632.jpg
Why you make fun of me? I make concept for Auburn champions and you make fun of me. I cry tears.
Chopping off the dicks of Filipino boys and embracing causes that promote bigotry =/= strong moral character.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

In all honesty, I think we care more about this than Boise does. ^_^

Well BSU fans seem to care, if Lights Out is any indication.

I may not be a fan of the coloured field trend, but I've always been ok with it in BSU's case, because they started it. It's their "thing."

Maybe, though, it's time to ditch the blue turf if the Broncos want to be considered a top NCAA program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

In all honesty, I think we care more about this than Boise does. ^_^

Well BSU fans seem to care, if Lights Out is any indication.

I may not be a fan of the coloured field trend, but I've always been ok with it in BSU's case, because they started it. It's their "thing."

Maybe, though, it's time to ditch the blue turf if the Broncos want to be considered a top NCAA program.

Ok, I really don't mean to bring this up, but if you can excuse Boise for its colored turf because they "started it", then how come you still get pissed at Oregon's uniforms? Oregon has been mix and matching since the beginning of the Century.

b0b5d4f702adf623d75285ca50ee7632.jpg
Why you make fun of me? I make concept for Auburn champions and you make fun of me. I cry tears.
Chopping off the dicks of Filipino boys and embracing causes that promote bigotry =/= strong moral character.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

In all honesty, I think we care more about this than Boise does. ^_^

Well BSU fans seem to care, if Lights Out is any indication.

I may not be a fan of the coloured field trend, but I've always been ok with it in BSU's case, because they started it. It's their "thing."

Maybe, though, it's time to ditch the blue turf if the Broncos want to be considered a top NCAA program.

Ok, I really don't mean to bring this up, but if you can excuse Boise for its colored turf because they "started it", then how come you still get pissed at Oregon's uniforms? Oregon has been mix and matching since the beginning of the Century.

Well you did mean to bring it up, didn't you? I just want to clarify that. If this turns into another Oregon back-and-forth you know who to blame.

There are a couple answers to your question. The first is that while Boise's coloured turf goes against tradition they at least go against tradition in a way that emphasizes team/school colours.

The second answer is that I don't have a problem with Oregon mixing and matching. I only have a problem with it when the combos they wear are devoid of school/team colours. The Ducks' current winged jersey set looks rather nice when they stick to combos that utilize green and athletic gold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

In all honesty, I think we care more about this than Boise does. ^_^

Well BSU fans seem to care, if Lights Out is any indication.

I may not be a fan of the coloured field trend, but I've always been ok with it in BSU's case, because they started it. It's their "thing."

Maybe, though, it's time to ditch the blue turf if the Broncos want to be considered a top NCAA program.

Ok, I really don't mean to bring this up, but if you can excuse Boise for its colored turf because they "started it", then how come you still get pissed at Oregon's uniforms? Oregon has been mix and matching since the beginning of the Century.

Well you did mean to bring it up, didn't you? I just want to clarify that. If this turns into another Oregon back-and-forth you know who to blame.

There are a couple answers to your question. The first is that while Boise's coloured turf goes against tradition they at least go against tradition in a way that emphasizes team/school colours.

The second answer is that I don't have a problem with Oregon mixing and matching. I only have a problem with it when the combos they wear are devoid of school/team colours. The Ducks' current winged jersey set looks rather nice when they stick to combos that utilize green and athletic gold.

OK, thanks for clarifying. All i needed.

b0b5d4f702adf623d75285ca50ee7632.jpg
Why you make fun of me? I make concept for Auburn champions and you make fun of me. I cry tears.
Chopping off the dicks of Filipino boys and embracing causes that promote bigotry =/= strong moral character.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No problemo.

As for Boise, well again I have a hard time feeling sorry for them if they knew about this condition going into the Mountain West, which it appears they did. It's not like MW waited for them to join and then sprung this on them.

I guess if Boise wants to continue climbing the ranks of NCAA football they can either be ok with white at home or ditch the blue turf. I guess it goes back to the standard traditional argument of "look like you belong."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

In all honesty, I think we care more about this than Boise does. ^_^

Well BSU fans seem to care, if Lights Out is any indication.

I may not be a fan of the coloured field trend, but I've always been ok with it in BSU's case, because they started it. It's their "thing."

Maybe, though, it's time to ditch the blue turf if the Broncos want to be considered a top NCAA program.

They wouldn't be anywhere near a top NCAA program without the blue turf. It's become somewhat of a brand for BSU - the blue turf put them on the map nationally. Great coaching and recruiting is the biggest deal, but the turf helped.

xLmjWVv.png

POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While that may be true, perhaps it's served its purpose. It got people to notice BSU, which helped with recruiting. Now that they've made a name for themselves as a program on the rise they don't need the turf. Yeah, it's part of their brand, but maybe it's just one of those things a program outgrows as it moves up the ranks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we'll see more of this then:

1120_sports_bsusr105.standalone.prod_affiliate.36.JPG

but we'll probably see blue with white pants or something along those lines

Too bad it'll be in those terrible new uniforms.

That being said, this is a dumb rule.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been saying it for a couple of years now, if BSU wants to be taken seriously year in and year out it's time to go to a regular field. As others have stated, it served the purpose, time to move on and be like the big boys.

Regarding a competitive advantage, I don't buy it. While it is difficult viewing on TV, and I personally hate it, the players on the filed are looking at each other and not the field. I don't see how it could make much difference to them.

crsig.jpgnsig.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been saying it for a couple of years now, if BSU wants to be taken seriously year in and year out it's time to go to a regular field. As others have stated, it served the purpose, time to move on and be like the big boys.

Regarding a competitive advantage, I don't buy it. While it is difficult viewing on TV, and I personally hate it, the players on the filed are looking at each other and not the field. I don't see how it could make much difference to them.

You mean like they already are?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been saying it for a couple of years now, if BSU wants to be taken seriously year in and year out it's time to go to a regular field. As others have stated, it served the purpose, time to move on and be like the big boys.

I hope someone tells Tennessee the same about their gimmicky endzones... that program could really be something major one day!

Seriously, while I can understand why people may not like the smurf turf, to suggest it's time for them to "move on" from something that's so integral to their identity would be like telling Alabama to get rid of all references to Bear Bryant because it's time to "move on" from that era. Besides, what's the problem with a program that came of age in the 21st century actually looking like a program that came of age in the 21st century? To adopt conventions of "traditional" programs they weren't even around to help establish would be even more of a gimmick than what people are claiming the blue turf to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Totally agree. I don't watch. I'm sure part of it because I don't want to watch a middle-to-slightly-upper level NCAA team beat up on some nobody and pretend its a big deal, but also, I can't stand to look at the screen. The blue overkill makes me physically ill. "Eyesore" doesn't begin to cover it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been saying it for a couple of years now, if BSU wants to be taken seriously year in and year out it's time to go to a regular field. As others have stated, it served the purpose, time to move on and be like the big boys.

I hope someone tells Tennessee the same about their gimmicky endzones... that program could really be something major one day!

Seriously, while I can understand why people may not like the smurf turf, to suggest it's time for them to "move on" from something that's so integral to their identity would be like telling Alabama to get rid of all references to Bear Bryant because it's time to "move on" from that era. Besides, what's the problem with a program that came of age in the 21st century actually looking like a program that came of age in the 21st century? To adopt conventions of "traditional" programs they weren't even around to help establish would be even more of a gimmick than what people are claiming the blue turf to be.

that is one of the lamest comparisons that I've ever read...this has nothing to do with tradition whatsoever....other coaches have complained that a team with 100% flat blue uniforms that plays on a flat blue playing surface may have a competitive advantage due to a slight camouflage effect making scouting game film and reading secondaries from the qb position an absolute bitch...not to mention the tv viewing experience is a visual washout (which is why I'm surprised espn or other networks haven't complained)...the best analogy would be akin to the home/clash jersey argument but instead of 2 teams looking too similar one team looks like the field.

as for the mono green argument grass and fake turf tends to provide enough contrast against fabric green via texture, light, and multiple shades of green...along this argument I think that a visiting should have a right to protest a mono green team and if the ref agrees the team should be forced to change...what's fair is fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.