DeFrank Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I just finished attending a "Chalk Talk" with Redskins GM Bruce Allen and about a hundred other season ticket holders at Redskins park. The only reason I went was to ask "Will burgundy pants become a part of our uniform combination again?" Without missing a beat, Allen, who was the one who decided to bring back gold pants in 2010, states that because of a new NFL rule, they were not able to wear burgundy pants. He said that because the Skins won in their throwbacks this year, they would stay, and the two pant options would remain gold and tan.Now, obviously something isn't right. The Redskins wore white pants in the preseason, and the Seahawks and Titans wore three pants each during the regular season. My guess is that the league gave the Seahawks a Nike exemption and the Titans an anniversary exemption.What do we think about this? Goes along with unpublicized rules like the throwback helmet one. concepts: washington football (2017) ... nfl (2013) ... yikes potd 10/20/12 origin story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderbread Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I just finished attending a "Chalk Talk" with Redskins GM Bruce Allen and about a hundred other season ticket holders at Redskins park. The only reason I went was to ask "Will burgundy pants become a part of our uniform combination again?" Without missing a beat, Allen, who was the one who decided to bring back gold pants in 2010, states that because of a new NFL rule, they were not able to wear burgundy pants. He said that because the Skins won in their throwbacks this year, they would stay, and the two pant options would remain gold and tan.Now, obviously something isn't right. The Redskins wore white pants in the preseason, and the Seahawks and Titans wore three pants each during the regular season. My guess is that the league gave the Seahawks a Nike exemption and the Titans an anniversary exemption.What do we think about this? Goes along with unpublicized rules like the throwback helmet one.That sounds like a load of bs from Bruce Allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soarindude Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 What is the point of this rule if it even does exist? Seems like a pointless rule in my opinion. Most teams could easily wear 3-4 pants without ruining their indentity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oz615 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 My guess is that the league gave the Seahawks a Nike exemption and the Titans an anniversary exemption. Well even if that's the case,then how the Panthers was able to wear 3 pants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThorSkaagi Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Limiting jerseys and helmets I can understand, but I fail to see why this rule would even exist for pants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptay Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 God bless the NFL. So many rules and restrictions on the uniforms alone, not to mention the postgame interviews. And the on-field play of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschoolvikings Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I don't think this is an occasion to bash the NFL for their rules, since it seems obvious to me this rule just plain doesn't exist. Off the top of my head, the Seahawks (blue, white and gray), the Rams (blue, white and throwback), the Cardinals (red, white w/ red stripe and white w/ black stripe), the Panthers (gray, white, and black), the Texans (blue, white, red), and the Chargers (blue, white w/ navy, and white w/ powder blue) all wore three pairs of pants. I might be forgetting someone. http://dstewartpaint.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djam2410 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I just finished attending a "Chalk Talk" with Redskins GM Bruce Allen and about a hundred other season ticket holders at Redskins park. The only reason I went was to ask "Will burgundy pants become a part of our uniform combination again?"Without missing a beat, Allen, who was the one who decided to bring back gold pants in 2010, states that because of a new NFL rule, they were not able to wear burgundy pants. He said that because the Skins won in their throwbacks this year, they would stay, and the two pant options would remain gold and tan.Now, obviously something isn't right. The Redskins wore white pants in the preseason, and the Seahawks and Titans wore three pants each during the regular season.My guess is that the league gave the Seahawks a Nike exemption and the Titans an anniversary exemption.What do we think about this? Goes along with unpublicized rules like the throwback helmet one.i think it would be.. restricted to two colored pants and a white option ?They wanted to keep the throwbacks so the tan was counted as one of the color options and they couldn't get an exemption to have burgundy pants also Cal Bears | Miami Dolphins | Cleveland Cavaliers |@dcjames5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThorSkaagi Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I don't think this is an occasion to bash the NFL for their rules, since it seems obvious to me this rule just plain doesn't exist. Off the top of my head, the Seahawks (blue, white and gray), the Rams (blue, white and throwback), the Cardinals (red, white w/ red stripe and white w/ black stripe), the Panthers (gray, white, and black), the Texans (blue, white, red), and the Chargers (blue, white w/ navy, and white w/ powder blue) all wore three pairs of pants. I might be forgetting someone.Titans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panthers_2012 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Complete BS. The NFL doesn't have a restriction on pants, only jerseys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailGoldPants Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I always thought that the NFL restricted teams to 3 pants. Hence the reason we don't see the Rams gold pants or the Skins red pants.Sounds like Bruce may be mixed up himself. If the rule is indeed 3 pants, a memo needs to be sent to Bruce and he needs to ditch the white pants in favor of red, and still keep the throwback pants. Check out my site at stevebcreations.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailGoldPants Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 @DeFrank....I was reading an account of the Chalk Talk on a Redskins message board and the guy reporting said he thought Bruce Allen mentioned something about asking the NFL permission to wear solid red pants. Do you recall this or did this guy just misunderstand Bruce Allen? Thanks. Check out my site at stevebcreations.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buster Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I just finished attending a "Chalk Talk" with Redskins GM Bruce Allen and about a hundred other season ticket holders at Redskins park. The only reason I went was to ask "Will burgundy pants become a part of our uniform combination again?"Without missing a beat, Allen, who was the one who decided to bring back gold pants in 2010, states that because of a new NFL rule, they were not able to wear burgundy pants. He said that because the Skins won in their throwbacks this year, they would stay, and the two pant options would remain gold and tan.Now, obviously something isn't right. The Redskins wore white pants in the preseason, and the Seahawks and Titans wore three pants each during the regular season.My guess is that the league gave the Seahawks a Nike exemption and the Titans an anniversary exemption.What do we think about this? Goes along with unpublicized rules like the throwback helmet one.That sounds like a load of bs from Bruce AllenSounds like the doings of John Mara.The cap penalty wasn't enough for this man...take away the best throwback helmet EVER and enforce pants restrictions on the Redskins too!What's next, Coach Gruden will be forced to wear a "MY NAME IS" tag so no one thinks Jon has come back to coaching? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaydre1019 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Wouldn't tan/white/gold be three pants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hormone Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Man, I'm sick of the NFL. You can't look good in your burgundy pants, but any player can wear 4 pair of socks to create a striped effect, or long single color socks, etc. SMH. Because of the helmet rule, let the teams jazz it up a little. Maybe they are giving the skins a hard time because of the nickname??Off the top of my head teams with 3 pant options are...Titans, Chargers, Panthers, Seahawks, Texans, Broncos3 Pant options because of throwbacks...(although some not worn in '13)Bucs, Jets, Redskins, Falcons and I'm sure I'm leaving some out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderbread Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Man, I'm sick of the NFL. You can't look good in your burgundy pants, but any player can wear 4 pair of socks to create a striped effect, or long single color socks, etc. SMH. Because of the helmet rule, let the teams jazz it up a little. Maybe they are giving the skins a hard time because of the nickname??Off the top of my head teams with 3 pant options are...Titans, Chargers, Panthers, Seahawks, Texans, Broncos3 Pant options because of throwbacks...(although some not worn in '13)Bucs, Jets, Redskins, Falcons and I'm sure I'm leaving some out...Pats cowboys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4_tattoos Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 JUST BRING THE BURGUNDY PANTS BACK DAMMIT!!!!!! Hotter Than July > Thriller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSU151 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 My guess is that the league gave the Seahawks a Nike exemption and the Titans an anniversary exemption. Well even if that's the case,then how the Panthers was able to wear 3 pants?Didn't the Giants have 3 pants last year - home, road, and white? Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 My guess is that the league gave the Seahawks a Nike exemption and the Titans an anniversary exemption. Well even if that's the case,then how the Panthers was able to wear 3 pants?Didn't the Giants have 3 pants last year - home, road, and white?No. They dropped the former home pants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanB06 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Man, I'm sick of the NFL. You can't look good in your burgundy pants, but any player can wear 4 pair of socks to create a striped effect, or long single color socks, etc. SMH. Because of the helmet rule, let the teams jazz it up a little. Maybe they are giving the skins a hard time because of the nickname??Off the top of my head teams with 3 pant options are...Titans, Chargers, Panthers, Seahawks, Texans, Broncos3 Pant options because of throwbacks...(although some not worn in '13)Bucs, Jets, Redskins, Falcons and I'm sure I'm leaving some out...Pats cowboysPats throwbacks are gone. Casualty of the one-helmet rule. Sodboy13 said: As you watch more basketball, you will learn to appreciate the difference between "defense" and "couldn't find the rim with a pair of bloodhounds and a Garmin." meet the new page, not the same as the old page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.