2014 NFL Season week by week uniform match-up combos

[BrianLion]

The Seahawks are 0-2 when wearing monochrome blue in the Super Bowl. Just something to chew on

Please make sure the Seahawks make note of this.

hey sherman who's sorry now

Darrel Bevell needs to write a 5 page, MLA formatted paper to the city of Seattle for such a bad call.

OC is taking way too much heat for this. Wilson's pass was terrible.

1. It probably should've never been thrown

2. It should've at least been thrown to the back shoulder of the WR to prevent the route getting cut off.

[hbgoo1975]

As far as the Patriots ar concerned, the mascot was the only member of the team who wore the blue jersey and grey pants for the game last night!

[dsaline97]

OC is taking way too much heat for this. Wilson's pass was terrible.

1. It probably should've never been thrown

2. It should've at least been thrown to the back shoulder of the WR to prevent the route getting cut off.

1. Wilson isn't making a read, its a slant pass. He's catching and firing as soon as he gets the snap.

2. The pick is designed to get the outside receiver (Lockette) wide open. Wilson threw it where he needed, the DB just made a great play on the ball.

So yes, it was a bad call. And so were the uniforms.

[RayFinkle]

Few images from this year's Super Bowl. Not the best SB uni match-up, but there have been worse (i.e. last year). If Seattle went with gray pants, I actually think this game would have looked pretty good. That's just my opinion though.

Gray pants and a gray helmet would do wonders for the Seahawks. The navy-navy-navy overload ruins an otherwise decent uniform set.

Agreed. Well, they have gray pants. And white. They just barely ever wear them. And by doing so, they miss a great opportunity to have a pretty decent home uni.

What's that cheesy joke, 'Some year called and it's want's its blah blah blah back'? Well, Seattle, 2006 called and it wants it's monochromatic uni back!! You are not a high school team that still wears monochromatic uni's. UGLY. It was ugly when you lost to Pitt in that SB, and it's still ugly now.

[goforbroke]

Few images from this year's Super Bowl. Not the best SB uni match-up, but there have been worse (i.e. last year). If Seattle went with gray pants, I actually think this game would have looked pretty good. That's just my opinion though.

So this image is basically why I've been supporting the Navy end zones the past few years... This is going to be a photo that the Patiots will blow up and use everywhere as often as they can for the next 30 years... Imagine if it has a neon green end zone instead of the muted navy that works for both teams. Same as last year - there wasn't really a signature Seahawks touchdown since it was such a blowout -- maybe the opening safety or the pick 6 - but anyway imagine if it had a bright orange end zone .. would have ruined the iconic photo for Seattle. Now if its New England playing against say Green Bay then there's nothing you can do theirs going to be 1 navy and 1 green or gold end zone. But when the option is there to have colors that are more neutral I think its smart to go with it even if its a more bland field. Also - i know some people saying the color clashing is waht makes the Super Bowl field great, but i think a more uniform field is always better- ESPECIALLY if they went back to a colorful logo isntead of just Silver, then you're talking about 4 diferent color schemes on 1 field including the R/W/B NFL logo

[Buster]

Few images from this year's Super Bowl. Not the best SB uni match-up, but there have been worse (i.e. last year). If Seattle went with gray pants, I actually think this game would have looked pretty good. That's just my opinion though.

This angle makes Russell Wilson's throw look even more stupid, The Patriots defenders are so easy to see against the navy end zone...whereas his own receivers are not.

[Buster]

The Seahawks are 0-2 when wearing monochrome blue in the Super Bowl. Just something to chew on

Please make sure the Seahawks make note of this.

hey sherman who's sorry now

Darrel Bevell needs to write a 5 page, MLA formatted paper to the city of Seattle for such a bad call.

OC is taking way too much heat for this. Wilson's pass was terrible.

1. It probably should've never been thrown

2. It should've at least been thrown to the back shoulder of the WR to prevent the route getting cut off.

Agreed it was a horroble pass, but Wilson was 57% with a whopping 12 competions on the game.

Instead of giving it to the unstoppable RB 3 times in a row (he would have scored on 2nd down), they dialed up a play for a 60%-range career passer having a mediocre-to-bad game passing to throw the game away.

Wilson's effectiveness comes from his legs, not his arm. He has never been an accurate passer in the NFL. Look up his game logs and how many games he's had between 39-59% passing...too many for all of the praise he gets. He's had 15 games passing in the 30s and 50s percentage-wise in his 48 career regular-season starts...dipping all the way down to a 39% stinker. 4 of his 8 postseason games were under 60% passing too. He usually doesn't hit 200 yards passing...this is Lynch's team and he should have run that ball in for a Super Bowl win. If Lynch had been allowed to walk after this season Wilson's career would take a huge step back.

If not a Lynch run, it should have been a fake handoff and QB keeper...they've been scoring with that play all year with Wilson not even getting touched on it.

OC was stupid to call it...and Wilson was not the guy to make that play.

[TheOldRoman]

Few images from this year's Super Bowl. Not the best SB uni match-up, but there have been worse (i.e. last year). If Seattle went with gray pants, I actually think this game would have looked pretty good. That's just my opinion though.

So this image is basically why I've been supporting the Navy end zones the past few years... This is going to be a photo that the Patiots will blow up and use everywhere as often as they can for the next 30 years... Imagine if it has a neon green end zone instead of the muted navy that works for both teams. Same as last year - there wasn't really a signature Seahawks touchdown since it was such a blowout -- maybe the opening safety or the pick 6 - but anyway imagine if it had a bright orange end zone .. would have ruined the iconic photo for Seattle. Now if its New England playing against say Green Bay then there's nothing you can do theirs going to be 1 navy and 1 green or gold end zone. But when the option is there to have colors that are more neutral I think its smart to go with it even if its a more bland field. Also - i know some people saying the color clashing is waht makes the Super Bowl field great, but i think a more uniform field is always better- ESPECIALLY if they went back to a colorful logo isntead of just Silver, then you're talking about 4 diferent color schemes on 1 field including the R/W/B NFL logo

Again, I literally couldn't disagree with you any more. Two different teams, likely with different color schemes, facing off in a neutral-site game of great importance. There is every reason to tailor the field as much as possible, featuring each team's colors properly. This photo would be much better with a neon green endzone. Last years' game would have looked much better with an orange endzone, particularly since the Broncos were WEARING orange jerseys, and the color is synonymous with their franchise. Neither would have been "ruined" with better endzones. And sorry, but I think the notion is ridiculous that the Patriots wouldn't want to print this photo out if the endzone wasn't in their own color scheme. If Brady sets the all-time TD record (not that he will) in Indy, are they not going to print a photo of that because the endzones are royal blue? If anything, different colored endzones would highlight that it was the Super Bowl. That picture? Other than the field being grass and the jersey patches, that's exactly as the game would look in Seattle.

And that's not to say that the Seahawks should have definitely had a green endzone, although it would have looked great and been just as appropriate for them as the Titans' light blue endzone (which looked incredible). It would have looked great had they done the Seahawks' endzone in navy, but done the letters gray with a green outline (like the jersey numbers). Aside from the awful logo placement on the Patriots' endzone, it would have looked a lot better if the wordmark had red in it.

[martymcfry]

Few images from this year's Super Bowl. Not the best SB uni match-up, but there have been worse (i.e. last year). If Seattle went with gray pants, I actually think this game would have looked pretty good. That's just my opinion though.

So this image is basically why I've been supporting the Navy end zones the past few years... This is going to be a photo that the Patiots will blow up and use everywhere as often as they can for the next 30 years... Imagine if it has a neon green end zone instead of the muted navy that works for both teams. Same as last year - there wasn't really a signature Seahawks touchdown since it was such a blowout -- maybe the opening safety or the pick 6 - but anyway imagine if it had a bright orange end zone .. would have ruined the iconic photo for Seattle. Now if its New England playing against say Green Bay then there's nothing you can do theirs going to be 1 navy and 1 green or gold end zone. But when the option is there to have colors that are more neutral I think its smart to go with it even if its a more bland field. Also - i know some people saying the color clashing is waht makes the Super Bowl field great, but i think a more uniform field is always better- ESPECIALLY if they went back to a colorful logo isntead of just Silver, then you're talking about 4 diferent color schemes on 1 field including the R/W/B NFL logo

Again, I literally couldn't disagree with you any more. Two different teams, likely with different color schemes, facing off in a neutral-site game of great importance. There is every reason to tailor the field as much as possible, featuring each team's colors properly. This photo would be much better with a neon green endzone. Last years' game would have looked much better with an orange endzone, particularly since the Broncos were WEARING orange jerseys, and the color is synonymous with their franchise. Neither would have been "ruined" with better endzones. And sorry, but I think the notion is ridiculous that the Patriots wouldn't want to print this photo out if the endzone wasn't in their own color scheme. If Brady sets the all-time TD record (not that he will) in Indy, are they not going to print a photo of that because the endzones are royal blue? If anything, different colored endzones would highlight that it was the Super Bowl. That picture? Other than the field being grass and the jersey patches, that's exactly as the game would look in Seattle.

And that's not to say that the Seahawks should have definitely had a green endzone, although it would have looked great and been just as appropriate for them as the Titans' light blue endzone (which looked incredible). It would have looked great had they done the Seahawks' endzone in navy, but done the letters gray with a green outline (like the jersey numbers). Aside from the awful logo placement on the Patriots' endzone, it would have looked a lot better if the wordmark had red in it.

Ditto.

[phutmasterflex]

Few images from this year's Super Bowl. Not the best SB uni match-up, but there have been worse (i.e. last year). If Seattle went with gray pants, I actually think this game would have looked pretty good. That's just my opinion though.

So this image is basically why I've been supporting the Navy end zones the past few years... This is going to be a photo that the Patiots will blow up and use everywhere as often as they can for the next 30 years... Imagine if it has a neon green end zone instead of the muted navy that works for both teams. Same as last year - there wasn't really a signature Seahawks touchdown since it was such a blowout -- maybe the opening safety or the pick 6 - but anyway imagine if it had a bright orange end zone .. would have ruined the iconic photo for Seattle. Now if its New England playing against say Green Bay then there's nothing you can do theirs going to be 1 navy and 1 green or gold end zone. But when the option is there to have colors that are more neutral I think its smart to go with it even if its a more bland field. Also - i know some people saying the color clashing is waht makes the Super Bowl field great, but i think a more uniform field is always better- ESPECIALLY if they went back to a colorful logo isntead of just Silver, then you're talking about 4 diferent color schemes on 1 field including the R/W/B NFL logo

So what if the Seahawks end zone was green or gray? That doesn't take away the importance of the play in that moment in that game as you are suggesting. It doesn't matter which Seahawks color they used for the end zone. The story remains the same.

[goforbroke]

Few images from this year's Super Bowl. Not the best SB uni match-up, but there have been worse (i.e. last year). If Seattle went with gray pants, I actually think this game would have looked pretty good. That's just my opinion though.

So this image is basically why I've been supporting the Navy end zones the past few years... This is going to be a photo that the Patiots will blow up and use everywhere as often as they can for the next 30 years... Imagine if it has a neon green end zone instead of the muted navy that works for both teams. Same as last year - there wasn't really a signature Seahawks touchdown since it was such a blowout -- maybe the opening safety or the pick 6 - but anyway imagine if it had a bright orange end zone .. would have ruined the iconic photo for Seattle. Now if its New England playing against say Green Bay then there's nothing you can do theirs going to be 1 navy and 1 green or gold end zone. But when the option is there to have colors that are more neutral I think its smart to go with it even if its a more bland field. Also - i know some people saying the color clashing is waht makes the Super Bowl field great, but i think a more uniform field is always better- ESPECIALLY if they went back to a colorful logo isntead of just Silver, then you're talking about 4 diferent color schemes on 1 field including the R/W/B NFL logo

Again, I literally couldn't disagree with you any more. Two different teams, likely with different color schemes, facing off in a neutral-site game of great importance. There is every reason to tailor the field as much as possible, featuring each team's colors properly. This photo would be much better with a neon green endzone. Last years' game would have looked much better with an orange endzone, particularly since the Broncos were WEARING orange jerseys, and the color is synonymous with their franchise. Neither would have been "ruined" with better endzones. And sorry, but I think the notion is ridiculous that the Patriots wouldn't want to print this photo out if the endzone wasn't in their own color scheme. If Brady sets the all-time TD record (not that he will) in Indy, are they not going to print a photo of that because the endzones are royal blue? If anything, different colored endzones would highlight that it was the Super Bowl. That picture? Other than the field being grass and the jersey patches, that's exactly as the game would look in Seattle.

And that's not to say that the Seahawks should have definitely had a green endzone, although it would have looked great and been just as appropriate for them as the Titans' light blue endzone (which looked incredible). It would have looked great had they done the Seahawks' endzone in navy, but done the letters gray with a green outline (like the jersey numbers). Aside from the awful logo placement on the Patriots' endzone, it would have looked a lot better if the wordmark had red in it.

Of course they are still going to USE the photo -- I just personally think it looks better without an obvious other team's color in the end zone. Idk if the Seahawks would have used Neon Green, but its just my opinion that - when possible - you should avoid so much clashing colors on 1 field. I think thats one of the reasons that the Super Bowl logo has been silver.. in addition to needing it to work in every location, it could easily have been red white and blue like the NFL logo, but with silver it at least matches everything.

So yeah I mean I do think its interesting to have two completly different end zones, but if they are so clashy it becomes an eye sore for me, especially against the uniforms. Just my two cents. Its a neutral playing field and yet on film it looks 50% home, 50% away... maybe they should even go to a uniform SUPER BOWL end zone that doesnt feature either team? who knows.

defintily this is an unpopular opinion but just aethetically I think more neutral is better.

[phutmasterflex]

I still don't understand how an end zone in the opposing team's colors in a game on a neutral site "ruins" a photo. The importance of moment is not altered. If the end zone was neon or gray, so what? It enhances the story of it being a Super Bowl and only in the Super Bowl do they have separate end zones.

[goforbroke]

Example from Xlvii- It's just my feeling that the photo with the purple end zone looked much better (sans what's happening in the photo I just grabbed 2 random photos)

Especially because it's supposed to be a neutral site, so it's not like the Ravens scored on the 49ers in their stadium and are celebrating in their end zone, which would make the red end zone look cool. But for the super bowl both end zones should be neutral, both end zones are the Ravens and both are the 49ers. So they should stay neutral.

Like I said this is clearly and u popular opinion and I understand it's more interesting looking with 2 different colored end zones but overall my opinion is more neutral makes more sense.

[WSU151]

I'm not sure I've ever seen a Super Bowl photo where the color of the endzone ruins the photo. If the NFL thought neutral endzones would look better, they'd change them (see: Super Bowl logos). But they also realize fans love the team-colored endzones. It's part of the overall awesomeness of the Super Bowl.

Plus, for the Super Bowl, one endzone represents one conference, and the other endzone represents the other conference. Both endzones can't be for both conferences. That's why they've always had conference logos.

[phutmasterflex]

How are you going to make a neutral thing more neutral? End zones for quite some time have always been designated with a team name or logo or something of that sort for teams in their home stadium. It's common. Since there is no actual home team, that is why the end zones are painted this way.

So is the solution is to have an end zone with no design whatsoever? The Super Bowl is a celebration and recognition of the two teams and the colored end zones do just that.

[dennisbergan]

Well, Seattle, 2006 called and it wants it's monochromatic uni back!! You are not a high school team that still wears monochromatic uni's.

No, they are a football team that wears dark jerseys and dark pants. Which is very common in football today, has been for decades now and will continue to be for years to come.

[seahawk9]

Well, Seattle, 2006 called and it wants it's monochromatic uni back!! You are not a high school team that still wears monochromatic uni's.

No, they are a football team that wears dark jerseys and dark pants. Which is very common in football today, has been for decades now and will continue to be for years to come.

OK.........What other NFL team wears the same color dark jerseys and pants at home ALL THE TIME ?????? Answer.......NONE..................................................

[Chromatic]

Few images from this year's Super Bowl. Not the best SB uni match-up, but there have been worse (i.e. last year). If Seattle went with gray pants, I actually think this game would have looked pretty good. That's just my opinion though.

Gray pants and a gray helmet would do wonders for the Seahawks. The navy-navy-navy overload ruins an otherwise decent uniform set.

I've said this before and I'll say it again. The NFL does not need ANOTHER Grey helmet/Blue jersey/Grey pants (silver if you're going to be picky) team. The fact that they're in monochrome is not the most glaring flaw with Seattle's uniforms, and they've done it long enough now that they can get away with it. It's their schtick at this point.

[fouhy12]

Well, Seattle, 2006 called and it wants it's monochromatic uni back!! You are not a high school team that still wears monochromatic uni's.

No, they are a football team that wears dark jerseys and dark pants. Which is very common in football today, has been for decades now and will continue to be for years to come.

OK.........What other NFL team wears the same color dark jerseys and pants at home ALL THE TIME ?????? Answer.......NONE..................................................

Texans, Jets, Bengals, Rams, Saints, Browns, Panthers, Cardinals, Jaguars, and Chiefs have all done it in the last few years. Rams, Saints, Jaguars, and Cardinals have worn dark monochrome on a fairly regular basis.

[VikWings]

Just because it's the Seahawks (or the Cardinals, or the Rams, or the Jags, etc) schtick to wear monochrome often doesn't make it any less ugly.

I actually like when a team will break out the monochrome once or twice per season to change it up. I thought the all black Eagles was cool for a one off (but they should've have worn white pants the 2nd time they wore black jerseys) same goes for the Chiefs and Bills. I don't even mind when my Vikings break out the grimace look if it's once every 3 years.

I just don't like seeing monochrome all the time when contrasting pants looks so much better.