Packers to wear 1929 Throwbacks

[FiddySicks]

I'd be a bit afraid it'd be opening Pandora's Box, but it would be nice if they changed the helmets to a matte finish like some of the college lids we've seen recently.

[Mongoose]

I'd be a bit afraid it'd be opening Pandora's Box, but it would be nice if they changed the helmets to a matte finish like some of the college lids we've seen recently.

Agreed, it would help make the helmets closer to looking like the old leather helmets.

[JohnnySeoul]

I'd be a bit afraid it'd be opening Pandora's Box, but it would be nice if they changed the helmets to a matte finish like some of the college lids we've seen recently.

Many outside of this forum agree with you. Matte finish is perfect for the Buc's pewter helmets.

[tBBP]

^ No, it isn't. (Not in my opinion, anyway.)

[JohnnySeoul]

^ No, it isn't. (Not in my opinion, anyway.)

Hince "outside of this forum".

[IceCap]

Matte helmets look terrible, and they're costly. They show every nick and scrape. So they constantly have to be replaced. Which can't be to the players' advantage. It takes a while to break new gear in.

[powersurge]

I'd be a bit afraid it'd be opening Pandora's Box, but it would be nice if they changed the helmets to a matte finish like some of the college lids we've seen recently.

Many outside of this forum agree with you. Matte finish is perfect for the Buc's pewter helmets.

Didn't you already say that in another thread?

I still don't get why you insist on a "matte finish" for the Bucs. I understand that pewter is not quite as reflective and metallic as most metals, but it is still a metal and therefore it is most appropriate to utilize it the way the Bucs are doing so now...NOT with a matte finish. Its pewter, NOT grey.

[powersurge]

Matte helmets look terrible, and they're costly. They show every nick and scrape. So they constantly have to be replaced. Which can't be to the players' advantage. It takes a while to break new gear in.

THIS x 1000

[andrewharrington]

Matte helmets look terrible, and they're costly. They show every nick and scrape. So they constantly have to be replaced. Which can't be to the players' advantage. It takes a while to break new gear in.

THIS x 1000

Plus, leather helmets did generally have a shine to them. Not a reflective, polished gloss like today's helmets, but a definite shine. A satin-finish buff would be perfect. Full-on matte plastic would be too dull, in my opinion.

[JohnnySeoul]

I'd be a bit afraid it'd be opening Pandora's Box, but it would be nice if they changed the helmets to a matte finish like some of the college lids we've seen recently.

Many outside of this forum agree with you. Matte finish is perfect for the Buc's pewter helmets.

Didn't you already say that in another thread?

I still don't get why you insist on a "matte finish" for the Bucs. I understand that pewter is not quite as reflective and metallic as most metals, but it is still a metal and therefore it is most appropriate to utilize it the way the Bucs are doing so now...NOT with a matte finish. Its pewter, NOT grey.

Did I start this in this thread, NO. (Bucfan56)

[JohnnySeoul]

Matte helmets look terrible, and they're costly. They show every nick and scrape. So they constantly have to be replaced. Which can't be to the players' advantage. It takes a while to break new gear in.

You've said this numerous times, but if this actually true, then why did Under Armour decide to go this route with Maryland? Obviously they've done their homework with Nike's matte helmets from previous seasons and did not see your "flaw". I highly doubt ASU and/or Maryland will have this issue.

[IceCap]

Matte helmets look terrible, and they're costly. They show every nick and scrape. So they constantly have to be replaced. Which can't be to the players' advantage. It takes a while to break new gear in.

You've said this numerous times,

Actually I haven't, this is the first time I've mentioned it. If other people are saying it, I'll take it to mean I'm onto something.

but if this actually true, then why did Under Armour decide to go this route with Maryland? Obviously they've done their homework with Nike's matte helmets from previous seasons and did not see your "flaw". I highly doubt ASU and/or Maryland will have this issue.

Heh. Fads are a hell of a thing. Matte finishes for helmets are "in" right now. So manufacturers are going to make them. Fads don't make sense most of the time, people just go along with them because they're the "in" thing, regardless of how silly, impractical, and/or costly they may be. That's why UA pushed matte helmets for Maryland and why Nike pushes matte helmets for....almost every one of their schools. It's the current fad. Once the novelty no longer outweighs the impracticality matte helmets will quietly disappear.

[a3uge]

If an actual encyclopedia had to list current uniforms, would they list a throwback that had been worn a year prior but not confirmed for another season? Probably not. I think that would be up to the editor's digression, which isn't any different than Wikipedia's model. Honestly if I saw the throwback template on the page, I would think they confirmed it.

[FiddySicks]

What's impractical about matte helmets compared to shiny helmets? And I don't buy that they would have to be replaced more often, a lot of teams end up repainting their lids every week anyway. IMO certain teams (the Steelers come to mind immediately) would look fantastic in matte helmets.

[Gothamite]

I don't know. "they scratch easily" is often said, but I haven't seen anything to back it up. If anyone has, I'd love to learn more.

If an actual encyclopedia had to list current uniforms, would they list a throwback that had been worn a year prior but not confirmed for another season? Probably not. I think that would be up to the editor's digression, which isn't any different than Wikipedia's model. Honestly if I saw the throwback template on the page, I would think they confirmed it.

The throwbacks were announced at the time as the team's official third jersey. That's how they sell them at the pro shop, that's how the team announces their use. Not a specific anniversary one-off, as so many of these are, but the Packers' first-ever third jersey.

Third jerseys remain on the team's books for five years, worn or not. Removing them without prior announcement from the team was a clear case of Original Research. Especially since, at the time, the team was "50/50" on whether they would be worn this season.

But Wikipedia isn't actually concerned with reality, not when a "consensus" disagrees. Which is why we have nonsense like "2010?11 NFL playoffs" for the season just past. Nevermind that the NFL called them the "2010 playoffs," Wiki's editors decided that the official NFL designation was too confusing, so they changed it. Consensus trumps reality.

I like the idea of Wikipedia. I'm a former heavy editor. But like so many former editors, I'm burned out and have lost interest. Too often, it's about what editors want reality to be, not reality. And a heavy enough presence, and loud enough voice, on the Talk pages can ensure that the "policing" is actually personality-driven nonsense that can override the site's stated and laudible goals.

Just ask Tiki Barber, who fell victim to misinformation/vandalism before the Super Bowl. By spreading the inaccurate data he found on Wikipedia (or one of the copycat sites that steal wiki content to pad their pages), he authenticated it in the eyes of many, and it took a legitimate reporter to finally dig deep and correct the story, while the falsehood continued to stay prominently displayed on Wikipedia to be copied and spread around. If the subject had been less promonent, the falsehood would still be there to be copied, spread and reinforced. That's why the model fails.

[hawk36]

Matte helmets look terrible, and they're costly. They show every nick and scrape. So they constantly have to be replaced. Which can't be to the players' advantage. It takes a while to break new gear in.

THIS x 1000

Plus, leather helmets did generally have a shine to them. Not a reflective, polished gloss like today's helmets, but a definite shine. A satin-finish buff would be perfect. Full-on matte plastic would be too dull, in my opinion.

They have the technology. Wouldn't be that tough (look at the amazing graphics on hockey masks). Make the stitching, worn leather, etc. all part of a full helmet design. Would have to be done right so as not to look cheesy but it could be done. Should be done.

[BBTV]

I don't know. "they scratch easily" is often said, but I haven't seen anything to back it up. If anyone has, I'd love to learn more.

If an actual encyclopedia had to list current uniforms, would they list a throwback that had been worn a year prior but not confirmed for another season? Probably not. I think that would be up to the editor's digression, which isn't any different than Wikipedia's model. Honestly if I saw the throwback template on the page, I would think they confirmed it.

The throwbacks were announced at the time as the team's official third jersey. That's how they sell them at the pro shop, that's how the team announces their use. Not a specific anniversary one-off, as so many of these are, but the Packers' first-ever third jersey.

Third jerseys remain on the team's books for five years, worn or not. Removing them without prior announcement from the team was a clear case of Original Research. Especially since, at the time, the team was "50/50" on whether they would be worn this season.

But Wikipedia isn't actually concerned with reality, not when a "consensus" disagrees. Which is why we have nonsense like "2010?11 NFL playoffs" for the season just past. Nevermind that the NFL called them the "2010 playoffs," Wiki's editors decided that the official NFL designation was too confusing, so they changed it. Consensus trumps reality.

I like the idea of Wikipedia. I'm a former heavy editor. But like so many former editors, I'm burned out and have lost interest. Too often, it's about what editors want reality to be, not reality. And a heavy enough presence, and loud enough voice, on the Talk pages can ensure that the "policing" is actually personality-driven nonsense that can override the site's stated and laudible goals.

Just ask Tiki Barber, who fell victim to misinformation/vandalism before the Super Bowl. By spreading the inaccurate data he found on Wikipedia (or one of the copycat sites that steal wiki content to pad their pages), he authenticated it in the eyes of many, and it took a legitimate reporter to finally dig deep and correct the story, while the falsehood continued to stay prominently displayed on Wikipedia to be copied and spread around. If the subject had been less promonent, the falsehood would still be there to be copied, spread and reinforced. That's why the model fails.

How do you feel about things like the Jags teal pants, which technically were made and could've been worn at any time, yet appeared nowhere in any team-related releases?

[powersurge]

I'd be a bit afraid it'd be opening Pandora's Box, but it would be nice if they changed the helmets to a matte finish like some of the college lids we've seen recently.

Many outside of this forum agree with you. Matte finish is perfect for the Buc's pewter helmets.

Didn't you already say that in another thread?

I still don't get why you insist on a "matte finish" for the Bucs. I understand that pewter is not quite as reflective and metallic as most metals, but it is still a metal and therefore it is most appropriate to utilize it the way the Bucs are doing so now...NOT with a matte finish. Its pewter, NOT grey.

Did I start this in this thread, NO. (Bucfan56)

you still haven't answered my question...why do you insist on a matte finish??? I'm not trying to be a prick, I'm just really curious as to why you think the Bucs would look better with matte pewter helmets (which would essentially be dark grey) I don't believe it would work...but again, thats just me. I personally think they have the best looking helmet in all of pro football...and that says a lot because I'm a Bears fan and I HATE Tampa.

[powersurge]

Matte helmets look terrible, and they're costly. They show every nick and scrape. So they constantly have to be replaced. Which can't be to the players' advantage. It takes a while to break new gear in.

THIS x 1000

Plus, leather helmets did generally have a shine to them. Not a reflective, polished gloss like today's helmets, but a definite shine. A satin-finish buff would be perfect. Full-on matte plastic would be too dull, in my opinion.

They have the technology. Wouldn't be that tough (look at the amazing graphics on hockey masks). Make the stitching, worn leather, etc. all part of a full helmet design. Would have to be done right so as not to look cheesy but it could be done. Should be done.

to take a page from my old college art teacher...just because you CAN do it, it doesn't mean that you SHOULD.

[TheOldRoman]

I have said several times that matte helmets can't be worn more than once without looking like crap. I seem to remember VT's black helmets last year looking scuffed to hell by the 4th quarter. I have seen plastics (toys and computers off the top of my head) with a similar finish to the matte helmets and those plastics mark up very easily and show every nick. The Chicago Bears have been wearing these helmets for a month and already they are all marked up. The Bears and Steelers helmets always look all marked up, but I haven't noticed it on teams with glossy helmets. Gloss hide marks better than non-shiny ones. I can't imagine matte helmets wouldn't be worse than those helmets.

Also, this is really the first year of matte being a huge trend. We will see how this goes, but as far as I know all previous matte helmets have been worn only once. I don't know if any of the planned matte helmets this year will be worn more than once, but if they are, I guess we will see if the helmets look like crap after the first wearing.