College Football 2012 Season

[nuordr]

If you put an Armani suit on a bum, he's still a bum. If you put Tim Tebow in an 18 Colts jersey, he's not a better quarterback. Conversely, if you put Walter Peyton in a Peyton Hillis Chiefs jersey, he'd still be the greatest ever. Clothes don't make the man.

I'm just saying that it LOOKS more professional to have a Speed Machine template than a Destroyer template, like it looks more professional to wear a suit, than a buttoned shirt.

Texas and Oklahoma wear older templates and they sure look more professional than Oregon.

How so?

Well, for one thing, they don't look as though they were designed with input from a sugered-up 16 year old?

Again, this has NOTHING to do with aesthetics. How good their designs are is irrelevant. I associate Oregon's look with big time money, and big time money, with professionals.

Interesting because I associate Alabama with big time money because they never change their look and they are frugal with their money and with all their BCS appearances I believe they are more big money than Oregon ever thought about being.

[oldschoolvikings]

Again, this has NOTHING to do with aesthetics. How good their designs are is irrelevant. I associate Oregon's look with big time money, and big time money, with professionals.

You've mentioned this point of view before, and I still have trouble wrapping my head around it. I think most people would define professionalism as having a certain level of class, or when a person of entity carries themselves in a dignified and/or respectful manner. Pretty much the direct opposite of "shows off how much money they have".

[thespleenenator]

Again, this has NOTHING to do with aesthetics. How good their designs are is irrelevant. I associate Oregon's look with big time money, and big time money, with professionals.

You've mentioned this point of view before, and I still have trouble wrapping my head around it. I think most people would define professionalism as having a certain level of class, or when a person of entity carries themselves in a dignified and/or respectful manner. Pretty much the direct opposite of "shows off how much money they have".

Not professionalism. I mean looking professional. Those are two different things. A small time school couldn't do what Oregon is doing. Any school could have a uniform like Bama. So I associate with being more professional, or more big time.

[The Fixer]

I've heard the term snow trooper uniforms before BUT A and M really does look like snow troopers tonight

[jgiff17]

http://s.discogss.com/image/A-150-72672-1111237993.jpg

[sacker12]

http://s.discogss.co...-1111237993.jpg

I'll one up you on that one.

http://www.youtube.c..._tRTnA4g?rel=0

[jgiff17]

http://s.discogss.co...-1111237993.jpg

I'll one up you on that one.

http://www.youtube.c..._tRTnA4g?rel=0

Well played and think you

[BrandMooreArt]

Again, this has NOTHING to do with aesthetics. How good their designs are is irrelevant. I associate Oregon's look with big time money, and big time money, with professionals.

You've mentioned this point of view before, and I still have trouble wrapping my head around it. I think most people would define professionalism as having a certain level of class, or when a person of entity carries themselves in a dignified and/or respectful manner. Pretty much the direct opposite of "shows off how much money they have".

im not sure where Spleen is going with it, i wont speak for him, but to me the cuts/fit of the newer uniforms (sans TechFit) look more professional because they fit better. generally. theres some tailoring issues with individual players, but i think its the difference between someone wearing a well made suit that fits properly to work, and someone wearing a button up shirt thats 2 sizes too large. nothing to do with individual graphic design, i like Alabama as much as i like Oregon (more so actually) but an old template looks a bit. . . well, old.

but like i said before its not something a schools needs to really focus on, not many people see templates and cuts of a jersey. it has no impact on people outside this forum. its best to just go with whatever template fits your design best

[vicfurth]

I gotta say that a&m looks much much better in a maroon helmet. The white isn't bad but yesterday's look would be much more crisp with a maroon helmet.

[Brave-Bird 08]

Every time I've seen Sam Houston State this year I've facepalmed. Ew. Gross. Nasty. Why?

[shaydre1019]

I bet the icy whites are gonna be a&ms default big game combo next yr. at least on the road.

[oldschoolvikings]

Again, this has NOTHING to do with aesthetics. How good their designs are is irrelevant. I associate Oregon's look with big time money, and big time money, with professionals.

You've mentioned this point of view before, and I still have trouble wrapping my head around it. I think most people would define professionalism as having a certain level of class, or when a person of entity carries themselves in a dignified and/or respectful manner. Pretty much the direct opposite of "shows off how much money they have".

im not sure where Spleen is going with it, i wont speak for him, but to me the cuts/fit of the newer uniforms (sans TechFit) look more professional because they fit better. generally. theres some tailoring issues with individual players, but i think its the difference between someone wearing a well made suit that fits properly to work, and someone wearing a button up shirt thats 2 sizes too large. nothing to do with individual graphic design, i like Alabama as much as i like Oregon (more so actually) but an old template looks a bit. . . well, old.

but like i said before its not something a schools needs to really focus on, not many people see templates and cuts of a jersey. it has no impact on people outside this forum. its best to just go with whatever template fits your design best

Well, they fit better for the way most current players prefer to wear their uniforms, right now. Put a player on the field in a uniform that fit like that 20 years ago (or maybe... probably... 20 years from now), they would be the one looking "Unprofessional." So it does come back to aesthetics... and fads, and personal preference.

It's just like basketball shorts. Everyone laughs at the old film of Dr. J in his tighty hotpants, but if you put a modern player on that court in giant balooning knee length shorts, the laughter would be endless. It's fashion.

[Joshawaggie]

Every time I've seen Sam Houston State this year I've facepalmed. Ew. Gross. Nasty. Why?

On the jersey itself, the weird blue stripe thing wouldn't be AS bad if the collar wasn't for some reason white. But.... the pants. The pants. There is no other word than: Diapers.

[Billy B]

Again, this has NOTHING to do with aesthetics. How good their designs are is irrelevant. I associate Oregon's look with big time money, and big time money, with professionals.

You've mentioned this point of view before, and I still have trouble wrapping my head around it. I think most people would define professionalism as having a certain level of class, or when a person of entity carries themselves in a dignified and/or respectful manner. Pretty much the direct opposite of "shows off how much money they have".

im not sure where Spleen is going with it, i wont speak for him, but to me the cuts/fit of the newer uniforms (sans TechFit) look more professional because they fit better. generally. theres some tailoring issues with individual players, but i think its the difference between someone wearing a well made suit that fits properly to work, and someone wearing a button up shirt thats 2 sizes too large. nothing to do with individual graphic design, i like Alabama as much as i like Oregon (more so actually) but an old template looks a bit. . . well, old.

but like i said before its not something a schools needs to really focus on, not many people see templates and cuts of a jersey. it has no impact on people outside this forum. its best to just go with whatever template fits your design best

Well, they fit better for the way most current players prefer to wear their uniforms, right now. Put a player on the field in a uniform that fit like that 20 years ago (or maybe... probably... 20 years from now), they would be the one looking "Unprofessional." So it does come back to aesthetics... and fads, and personal preference.

It's just like basketball shorts. Everyone laughs at the old film of Dr. J in his tighty hotpants, but if you put a modern player on that court in giant balooning knee length shorts, the laughter would be endless. It's fashion.

I think it's more to do with performance, at least for football. And I'm one of the few that prefers shorter shorts when playing basketball. I don't want you to be able to see my nuts through them, but they shouldn't be touching my knees either.

[Lights Out]

Put a player on the field in a uniform that fit like that 20 years ago (or maybe... probably... 20 years from now), they would be the one looking "Unprofessional."

20 years ago, players wore their uniforms like this:

Regardless of people's feelings about today's uniform templates, I hope we can all agree that they look more professional than those loose, ill-fitting jerseys of old.

[oldschoolvikings]

Put a player on the field in a uniform that fit like that 20 years ago (or maybe... probably... 20 years from now), they would be the one looking "Unprofessional."

20 years ago, players wore their uniforms like this:

Regardless of people's feelings about today's uniform templates, I hope we can all agree that they look more professional than those loose, ill-fitting jerseys of old.

Right... they look stupid. But I'd bet you anything, they though they looked awesome, and would tell you the wide fishnet mesh and belly shirts were a "performance" feature. It kept them cooler than full length, solid fabric jerseys, right? Sounds pretty familier to me.

[thespleenenator]

Put a player on the field in a uniform that fit like that 20 years ago (or maybe... probably... 20 years from now), they would be the one looking "Unprofessional."

20 years ago, players wore their uniforms like this:

Regardless of people's feelings about today's uniform templates, I hope we can all agree that they look more professional than those loose, ill-fitting jerseys of old.

Right... they look stupid. But I'd bet you anything, they though they looked awesome, and would tell you the wide fishnet mesh and belly shirts were a "performance" feature. It kept them cooler than full length, solid fabric jerseys, right? Sounds pretty familier to me.

Right. And we've improved that technology.

[pcgd]

See to me the era matters. Dick Butkus is going to look as weird wearing the tight fitting stuff from today as Johnny Football would look in a leather helmet. I can't imagine the 80's hurricanes on anything but mesh belly shirts. They look good for their time and era. 10 years from now the current crop of unis will be the same.

[Billy B]

I think that's more just because we're used to it. Kind of like how Butkus would look weird in a Packers uniforms or Manziel would look weird in burnt orange. Take a guy like Michael Jordan for example. When he came into the league he was wearing the short shorts but by the time he won his last championship he wore the more common short length you see today. I don't think he looks weird either. way.

[oldschoolvikings]

Put a player on the field in a uniform that fit like that 20 years ago (or maybe... probably... 20 years from now), they would be the one looking "Unprofessional."

20 years ago, players wore their uniforms like this:

Regardless of people's feelings about today's uniform templates, I hope we can all agree that they look more professional than those loose, ill-fitting jerseys of old.

Right... they look stupid. But I'd bet you anything, they though they looked awesome, and would tell you the wide fishnet mesh and belly shirts were a "performance" feature. It kept them cooler than full length, solid fabric jerseys, right? Sounds pretty familier to me.

Right. And we've improved that technology.

Really? How so? Do you think a 2012 Nike-outfitted player is any cooler in his uniform than a 1990 player is in that wide fishnet and exposed skin? Hard to beat skin on air for lightness and coolness. The difference is, the players no longer want to look like that. They want a super tight uniform that exposes more of their arms and less of their bellys. So the technology goes from "wide mesh and exposed skin" to "Sweat-wicking, skin-tight fabric"... not nessasarily because the technology is more effective (more advanced, certainly, but that's not nessesarily any more or less effective... a machine gun is more advanced than a rock upside the head, but both are equally effective), but because the current prefered fashion of the players dictates it.