College Football Uniforms 2011 SEASON

[southpawstu19]

sorry guys was just typing away and was in a rush...not intentionally missing caps or punctuaiton, but i am glad everyone was able to understand regardless.

you must still be in a rush

rush, law school class...same thing right? ps on this pro combat note, i cant wait to see the army/navy game in action

[Pizzaman7294]

now that we have gold helmets again, now its time to win national championships again!

[vicfurth]

On the subject of alternates and throwbacks, I'm all for innovation within the realm of looking good. I also understand that looking good is relevant to the viewer. What I like differs from a Nuordr or spleenenator.

What I've never liked from the newer crowd is that anyone who disagrees with them is automatically old, intolerant, or just "wrong". It's the presentation of your arguments that refutes them, not the material itself. I am much more likely to listen to someone who says "I like this and here's why". What I see alot, though, is "I like this and whoever doesn't is an old fossil who can go screw their mother". That kind of intolerance for others opinions is exactly what you guys get upset about when we don't like carbon and black for Oregon or 1143 shades of gray for Wazzu.

Back to the matter at hand, I like a lot of the new designs' potential more than the execution. I'm a college traditionalist (if you will) that misses the days of green/yellow for Oregon or purple sans black for TCU. On the other hand, I do like the designs for the aforementioned schools, just not the execution or color choice.

As for the NFL, I really hope they don't do things like jaguar prints or excessive feather patterns or cheese texture for GB. It certainly wouldn't keep me from watching games, but I certainly wouldn't like it.

[TFoA]

What I've never liked from the newer crowd is that anyone who disagrees with them is automatically old, intolerant, or just "wrong". It's the presentation of your arguments that refutes them, not the material itself. I am much more likely to listen to someone who says "I like this and here's why". What I see alot, though, is "I like this and whoever doesn't is an old fossil who can go screw their mother". That kind of intolerance for others opinions is exactly what you guys get upset about when we don't like carbon and black for Oregon or 1143 shades of gray for Wazzu.

Same here. I have no idea when people got SO entrenched in the modern/traditionalist camp, but it sucks both ways. Everybody's got their own opinion, and that opinion can range all over the place. No need to go all

on anybody who disagrees with you.

Anyways, that's my 2 cents on that subject. My 2 cents on the Notre Dame helmets: If it matches the pants, WELL FREAKING DONE. That's gonna be a huge upgrade over the old helmets. I know that painting the domes before each game was one of the many traditions of the most storied college football program in the nation, but it was outdated, and it showed whenever those helmets got significantly beat up during a game. So yeah, real happy to see that Notre Dame's "fixed" that issue.

[DPV713]

Personally I divide college football into a few uniform related categories (all IMO):

The "Oregon" Category: Teams like Oregon, Maryland, Miami, Virginia Tech, Hawaii, and West Virginia. I feel these teams should have modern uniforms OR a few uniform combos.. I wouldn't mind these teams pulling a throwback out a couple of times a year, or using a certain uniform combo often. I believe these teams shouldn't have over-the-top, gradient, asymmetrical designs, etc. Just a modern, 21st century-type jersey style.

The "Texas" Category: Teams like Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio State, Notre Dame, USC, and Nebraska. I feel these teams are untouchable. Very minimal changes should be made to these teams (Ex. maybe a single pant stripe instead of double). No alternates should be allowed (maybe, MAYBE different color pants).

The "Florida State" Category: Teams like Florida State, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, Texas A&M, and Wisconsin. I feel these teams should protect their tradition, but give a little leeway. This means either some more uni combos (maybe white out for FSU and UF, navy pants and orange unis for Auburn, white helmet for Bama) while maintaining a traditional design or modern design (A&M and Wisconsin) while keeping a minimal number of cominations.

[thespleenenator]

Ok, so apparently, people are grouping me in with Nuordr in the uniform taste category. This is not true. I have VERY different tastes in uniforms. For one, I HATE piping (i.e, Missouri, Illinois, etc.). I also dislike when special uniforms are just recolors of the standard set. Now, if it's just an alternate, I'm ok with that. For instance, I would like the see Alabama with grey pants at some point, to match the facemask, not as a permanent change, but as a special alternate, that would be interesting. I hate things like Oregon's Pro Combats. Not only were the colors difficult to watch, but it just lacked creativity. I like creative things. Not modern things, not old school things. I like creative things. Things like Navy's pro combat. Things like Florida State's pro combat pants stripe. Things like Maryland's pride uniforms (it took me a while, but considering how bad they look now, I think the pride uni's were much better). So please, stop labeling me as some one who only likes modern uniforms. It's actually starting to annoy me a bit.

[nuordr]

On the subject of alternates and throwbacks, I'm all for innovation within the realm of looking good. I also understand that looking good is relevant to the viewer. What I like differs from a Nuordr or spleenenator.

What I've never liked from the newer crowd is that anyone who disagrees with them is automatically old, intolerant, or just "wrong". It's the presentation of your arguments that refutes them, not the material itself. I am much more likely to listen to someone who says "I like this and here's why". What I see alot, though, is "I like this and whoever doesn't is an old fossil who can go screw their mother". That kind of intolerance for others opinions is exactly what you guys get upset about when we don't like carbon and black for Oregon or 1143 shades of gray for Wazzu.

Back to the matter at hand, I like a lot of the new designs' potential more than the execution. I'm a college traditionalist (if you will) that misses the days of green/yellow for Oregon or purple sans black for TCU. On the other hand, I do like the designs for the aforementioned schools, just not the execution or color choice.

As for the NFL, I really hope they don't do things like jaguar prints or excessive feather patterns or cheese texture for GB. It certainly wouldn't keep me from watching games, but I certainly wouldn't like it.

Why are you grouping me and Spleen together. First of all, I believe for the most part that some teams should not change their look, however, if they agree to do a Pro Combat uniform, then they should change their look completely for one game (Texas and Alabama). I also believe that the new uniforms help in recruiting, marketing, and more importantly sales for schools who have to try harder than traditional teams. But I have never blatantly called someone old, old school, or living in the past directly. I have stated that when you have younger people, you tend to have more modern views and some people on here took that completely out of context.

So, if you want to call me out as being against anyone that does not agree with me than by all means do so. If it saves you calling out anyone else like Spleen then I will take all the heat, but please get your specific facts straight before doing so.

Finally, one last time let me explain what I like and do not like:

1. I love the Oregon Ducks uniforms, especially the black, yellow, and carbon colors.

2. For the most part I like traditional uniforms, but I also believe that over time things need to be updated.

3. I like piping on some teams, I hate the Illinois and Missouri Template, but loved the Andre Woodson look at Kentucky.

4. I hate teams that do not put a logo on the helmet, too me it make the whole uniform look bad. The only exceptions are Notre Dame, Penn State, Alabama, and Ohio State.

5. I hate any uniform with no striping on the pants. Take ASU's new look, I love the whole redesign, but the uniforms could be so much better with striping on the legs.

6. I love the new Navy Uniform - In fact I think it is the best PC uniform this year.

7. I hate storm trooper looks. Leave the all-white at home.

There are many more, but I believe me and Spleen are worlds apart on this subject.

[bigwalk]

Personally I divide college football into a few uniform related categories (all IMO):

The "Oregon" Category: Teams like Oregon, Maryland, Miami, Virginia Tech, Hawaii, and West Virginia. I feel these teams should have modern uniforms OR a few uniform combos.. I wouldn't mind these teams pulling a throwback out a couple of times a year, or using a certain uniform combo often. I believe these teams shouldn't have over-the-top, gradient, asymmetrical designs, etc. Just a modern, 21st century-type jersey style.

The "Texas" Category: Teams like Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio State, Notre Dame, USC, and Nebraska. I feel these teams are untouchable. Very minimal changes should be made to these teams (Ex. maybe a single pant stripe instead of double). No alternates should be allowed (maybe, MAYBE different color pants).

The "Florida State" Category: Teams like Florida State, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, Texas A&M, and Wisconsin. I feel these teams should protect their tradition, but give a little leeway. This means either some more uni combos (maybe white out for FSU and UF, navy pants and orange unis for Auburn, white helmet for Bama) while maintaining a traditional design or modern design (A&M and Wisconsin) while keeping a minimal number of cominations.

Three things. One, I'd move Bama to the Texas category. I think those should stay more or less untouched. Two, I think the Florida State category needs to be subdivided by number of school colors. For example, FSU and Wisconsin should be in separate subcats. I think the Wisconsin subcat should stick to a minimal number of combinations. On the other hand, the only combination of regular uniforms I don't like that FSU's worn is the garnet over white. I really like everything else. I'm pro mixing and matching, but only to a point (hence the subcategorization). Three, I actually think the rare Nebraska-in-all-white uniform really works.

[yauger72]

Personally I divide college football into a few uniform related categories (all IMO):

The "Oregon" Category: Teams like Oregon, Maryland, Miami, Virginia Tech, Hawaii, and West Virginia. I feel these teams should have modern uniforms OR a few uniform combos.. I wouldn't mind these teams pulling a throwback out a couple of times a year, or using a certain uniform combo often. I believe these teams shouldn't have over-the-top, gradient, asymmetrical designs, etc. Just a modern, 21st century-type jersey style.

The "Texas" Category: Teams like Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio State, Notre Dame, USC, and Nebraska. I feel these teams are untouchable. Very minimal changes should be made to these teams (Ex. maybe a single pant stripe instead of double). No alternates should be allowed (maybe, MAYBE different color pants).

The "Florida State" Category: Teams like Florida State, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, Texas A&M, and Wisconsin. I feel these teams should protect their tradition, but give a little leeway. This means either some more uni combos (maybe white out for FSU and UF, navy pants and orange unis for Auburn, white helmet for Bama) while maintaining a traditional design or modern design (A&M and Wisconsin) while keeping a minimal number of cominations.

Three things. One, I'd move Bama to the Texas category. I think those should stay more or less untouched. Two, I think the Florida State category needs to be subdivided by number of school colors. For example, FSU and Wisconsin should be in separate subcats. I think the Wisconsin subcat should stick to a minimal number of combinations. On the other hand, the only combination of regular uniforms I don't like that FSU's worn is the garnet over white. I really like everything else. I'm pro mixing and matching, but only to a point (hence the subcategorization). Three, I actually think the rare Nebraska-in-all-white uniform really works.

I would also add Michigan to the "Texas" category.

[DPV713]

Personally I divide college football into a few uniform related categories (all IMO):

The "Oregon" Category: Teams like Oregon, Maryland, Miami, Virginia Tech, Hawaii, and West Virginia. I feel these teams should have modern uniforms OR a few uniform combos.. I wouldn't mind these teams pulling a throwback out a couple of times a year, or using a certain uniform combo often. I believe these teams shouldn't have over-the-top, gradient, asymmetrical designs, etc. Just a modern, 21st century-type jersey style.

The "Texas" Category: Teams like Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio State, Notre Dame, USC, and Nebraska. I feel these teams are untouchable. Very minimal changes should be made to these teams (Ex. maybe a single pant stripe instead of double). No alternates should be allowed (maybe, MAYBE different color pants).

The "Florida State" Category: Teams like Florida State, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, Texas A&M, and Wisconsin. I feel these teams should protect their tradition, but give a little leeway. This means either some more uni combos (maybe white out for FSU and UF, navy pants and orange unis for Auburn, white helmet for Bama) while maintaining a traditional design or modern design (A&M and Wisconsin) while keeping a minimal number of cominations.

Three things. One, I'd move Bama to the Texas category. I think those should stay more or less untouched. Two, I think the Florida State category needs to be subdivided by number of school colors. For example, FSU and Wisconsin should be in separate subcats. I think the Wisconsin subcat should stick to a minimal number of combinations. On the other hand, the only combination of regular uniforms I don't like that FSU's worn is the garnet over white. I really like everything else. I'm pro mixing and matching, but only to a point (hence the subcategorization). Three, I actually think the rare Nebraska-in-all-white uniform really works.

I would also add Michigan to the "Texas" category.

Yeah, by no means are these the complete categories. Michigan would definately be in the "Texas" category.

[gdu]

sorry guys was just typing away and was in a rush...not intentionally missing caps or punctuaiton, but i am glad everyone was able to understand regardless.

you must still be in a rush

rush, law school class...same thing right? ps on this pro combat note, i cant wait to see the army/navy game in action

Which class? I don't miss law school.

[oddball]

I don't have a problem with alternates, just make it look good. Michigan State's looked horrible, and I'm still waiting for Maryland to look good this year. Yet, I have to say that Michigan's roads last week looked good, even the white pants.

[nuordr]

I really like the Arizona Wildcats look tonight. Here is a picture. But I hate the look of those stripes on the UCLA jersey. Here is that picture.

[oldschoolvikings]

just because something is not traditional or a throwback doesnt automatically designate it "garish" (or the other adjectives used to say "disgusting"). Assuming by your interpretation "amateur" (which we all know is taken from paul lukas or his uni watch blog: "amateur pacifist uniform"), you have little of opinion other than the masses. let me guess you are someone who wants teams to put stripes back in football socks, or that stirrups should be worn instead of the full baseball socks, or that football helmet stripes shouldn't taper in any direction and should be 1-3 stripes down the center of it. sports uniform styles, like all things, progress. if they do not they become stagnant. i agree that there has to be certain traditional aspects, but thats what nike does...they try to pay homage in an artistic fashion, not just throw out the same thing a team wore 30 years ago (throwbacks) and be done with it. nike is taking the "throwback/alternate" concept to a different level by combining the two concepts. they have been both very forward and sometimes traditional in their interpretations. Adidas is making themselves look stupid with the junk they are throwing out in comparison. progress has to start somewhere, and maybe its found in one of these uniforms/sublimated patterned helmets (look at all the matte helmets these days...thats so amateur right? sure).

i know about the strict alternate rules in the NFL, which is why i asked about the pro combat question. i had also heard somewhere the seahawks and nike were talking about making some sort of uniform to reflect the stormy sky of seattle for next year.

Good God, that was an annoying paragraph to read.

Since at one point in this massive rant you used the word "progress, let me just say, as has been pointed out here many times, change and progress are not nesessarily the same thing.

[TylerBray8]

I think UCLA should use the light blue as the numbers on their away. That blue they use now on the away is terrible.

[andrewharrington]

just because something is not traditional or a throwback doesnt automatically designate it "garish" (or the other adjectives used to say "disgusting"). Assuming by your interpretation "amateur" (which we all know is taken from paul lukas or his uni watch blog: "amateur pacifist uniform"), you have little of opinion other than the masses. let me guess you are someone who wants teams to put stripes back in football socks, or that stirrups should be worn instead of the full baseball socks, or that football helmet stripes shouldn't taper in any direction and should be 1-3 stripes down the center of it. sports uniform styles, like all things, progress. if they do not they become stagnant. i agree that there has to be certain traditional aspects, but thats what nike does...they try to pay homage in an artistic fashion, not just throw out the same thing a team wore 30 years ago (throwbacks) and be done with it. nike is taking the "throwback/alternate" concept to a different level by combining the two concepts. they have been both very forward and sometimes traditional in their interpretations. Adidas is making themselves look stupid with the junk they are throwing out in comparison. progress has to start somewhere, and maybe its found in one of these uniforms/sublimated patterned helmets (look at all the matte helmets these days...thats so amateur right? sure).

i know about the strict alternate rules in the NFL, which is why i asked about the pro combat question. i had also heard somewhere the seahawks and nike were talking about making some sort of uniform to reflect the stormy sky of seattle for next year.

Good God, that was an annoying paragraph to read.

Since at one point in this massive rant you used the word "progress, let me just say, as has been pointed out here many times, change and progress are not nesessarily the same thing.

True. Fashion is hot, but it fades. Style lives forever. Most of the new football uniforms we've seen in recent years are fashionable, as in people like them for a time and they create buzz, but they're not stylish, because they already look old in two seasons.

[andrewharrington]

Ok, so apparently, people are grouping me in with Nuordr in the uniform taste category. This is not true. I have VERY different tastes in uniforms. For one, I HATE piping (i.e, Missouri, Illinois, etc.). I also dislike when special uniforms are just recolors of the standard set. Now, if it's just an alternate, I'm ok with that. For instance, I would like the see Alabama with grey pants at some point, to match the facemask, not as a permanent change, but as a special alternate, that would be interesting. I hate things like Oregon's Pro Combats. Not only were the colors difficult to watch, but it just lacked creativity. I like creative things. Not modern things, not old school things. I like creative things. Things like Navy's pro combat. Things like Florida State's pro combat pants stripe. Things like Maryland's pride uniforms (it took me a while, but considering how bad they look now, I think the pride uni's were much better). So please, stop labeling me as some one who only likes modern uniforms. It's actually starting to annoy me a bit.

How is Navy's Pro Combat creative, but Oregon's is not? Navy's definitely has more potential to be great with a few tweaks, but I don't see how you can compare the amount of creativity that's present in a given uniform.

[andrewharrington]

On the subject of alternates and throwbacks, I'm all for innovation within the realm of looking good. I also understand that looking good is relevant to the viewer. What I like differs from a Nuordr or spleenenator.

What I've never liked from the newer crowd is that anyone who disagrees with them is automatically old, intolerant, or just "wrong". It's the presentation of your arguments that refutes them, not the material itself. I am much more likely to listen to someone who says "I like this and here's why". What I see alot, though, is "I like this and whoever doesn't is an old fossil who can go screw their mother". That kind of intolerance for others opinions is exactly what you guys get upset about when we don't like carbon and black for Oregon or 1143 shades of gray for Wazzu.

Back to the matter at hand, I like a lot of the new designs' potential more than the execution. I'm a college traditionalist (if you will) that misses the days of green/yellow for Oregon or purple sans black for TCU. On the other hand, I do like the designs for the aforementioned schools, just not the execution or color choice.

As for the NFL, I really hope they don't do things like jaguar prints or excessive feather patterns or cheese texture for GB. It certainly wouldn't keep me from watching games, but I certainly wouldn't like it.

I think you're right on with this. Sportswear companies will do all the bells and whistles in college, and the schools will put up with it because it helps recruiting and blah blah blah. Well, all that goes out the window in the NFL because there is no recruiting. When people think of a football uniform, there's a certain look that comes to mind. A football uniform should look like a football uniform to some degree. A little creativity goes a long way toward making it unique, but the bones of it should be absolutely recognizable a a professional-looking football uniform, which is not a design sentiment that a lot of young people share. Many people like to look forward and forget the past in the sports design industry, but I prefer to look to the past when designing sportswear, logos and uniforms because without the past, without the history, the present and future wouldn't be as they are. History is an important part of mankind, and it's not wise to abandon it in the name of creativity, in my opinion.

[nuordr]

On the subject of alternates and throwbacks, I'm all for innovation within the realm of looking good. I also understand that looking good is relevant to the viewer. What I like differs from a Nuordr or spleenenator.

What I've never liked from the newer crowd is that anyone who disagrees with them is automatically old, intolerant, or just "wrong". It's the presentation of your arguments that refutes them, not the material itself. I am much more likely to listen to someone who says "I like this and here's why". What I see alot, though, is "I like this and whoever doesn't is an old fossil who can go screw their mother". That kind of intolerance for others opinions is exactly what you guys get upset about when we don't like carbon and black for Oregon or 1143 shades of gray for Wazzu.

Back to the matter at hand, I like a lot of the new designs' potential more than the execution. I'm a college traditionalist (if you will) that misses the days of green/yellow for Oregon or purple sans black for TCU. On the other hand, I do like the designs for the aforementioned schools, just not the execution or color choice.

As for the NFL, I really hope they don't do things like jaguar prints or excessive feather patterns or cheese texture for GB. It certainly wouldn't keep me from watching games, but I certainly wouldn't like it.

I think you're right on with this. Sportswear companies will do all the bells and whistles in college, and the schools will put up with it because it helps recruiting and blah blah blah. Well, all that goes out the window in the NFL because there is no recruiting. When people think of a football uniform, there's a certain look that comes to mind. A football uniform should look like a football uniform to some degree. A little creativity goes a long way toward making it unique, but the bones of it should be absolutely recognizable a a professional-looking football uniform, which is not a design sentiment that a lot of young people share. Many people like to look forward and forget the past in the sports design industry, but I prefer to look to the past when designing sportswear, logos and uniforms because without the past, without the history, the present and future wouldn't be as they are. History is an important part of mankind, and it's not wise to abandon it in the name of creativity, in my opinion.

Excellent statement and I will have to agree with you this one. That is why I love how Nike puts the designs on the back of NCAA basketball uniforms because they generally honor the past.

[bigwalk]

Ok, so apparently, people are grouping me in with Nuordr in the uniform taste category. This is not true. I have VERY different tastes in uniforms. For one, I HATE piping (i.e, Missouri, Illinois, etc.). I also dislike when special uniforms are just recolors of the standard set. Now, if it's just an alternate, I'm ok with that. For instance, I would like the see Alabama with grey pants at some point, to match the facemask, not as a permanent change, but as a special alternate, that would be interesting. I hate things like Oregon's Pro Combats. Not only were the colors difficult to watch, but it just lacked creativity. I like creative things. Not modern things, not old school things. I like creative things. Things like Navy's pro combat. Things like Florida State's pro combat pants stripe. Things like Maryland's pride uniforms (it took me a while, but considering how bad they look now, I think the pride uni's were much better). So please, stop labeling me as some one who only likes modern uniforms. It's actually starting to annoy me a bit.

How is Navy's Pro Combat creative, but Oregon's is not? Navy's definitely has more potential to be great with a few tweaks, but I don't see how you can compare the amount of creativity that's present in a given uniform.

Probably because Oregon's was a recoloring of an existing uniform.