Sunday Open Thread

Man, Clay Buchholz had some serious BLING going on when he pitched that no-hitter. At least 3 gold necklaces, maybe more. It was Mr. T-esque.

In the St. Louis-Post Dispatch this morning, the lead sports story was Juan Encarnacion;s career is now in jeapordy after getting hit in the eye by a fould ball while on the on deck circle Friday night. For the record, we was wearing a helmet.

You know what this (in addition to other similar news stories combined with professional sports leagues’ general over-reaction) means: Major League Ragball (coming in Spring 2009 … or starting this afternoon … as soon as enough new balls can be produced).

[quote comment=”139833″]Few college teams pull off the matching uniform/pants ensemble well. Wisconsin did a great job, its looks good. Syracuse on the other hand… WTF.

Some teams that can pull it off…
Wisconsin (Red on Red)
Purdue (Black on Black)
Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
Florida (Blue on Blue)
Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
Boise State (Blue on Blue)
Arizona (Blue on Blue)
Washington (Purple on Purple)

Some teams that can’t…
Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
Oregon (Yellow on Yellow)
Pitt (Gold on Gold)[/quote]

lets not forget W. Virginia (Navy), UVA (Navy), Colorado (Black), Wake Forest (Black) and Virginia Tech (Maroon), they seem to pull it off nicely. I’m sure there are othere but those are the only one i can think of at the moment.

As a Wisconsin alum, I was a saddened when I saw the monochromatic look. Personally, I hate the red pants for the Badgers! They should be red and white at home and all white on the road. But, none of that matters considering that UW won and Michigan lost. GO BADGERS!

I was at the game as well and I couldn’t stop saying how bad the combo looked. It was the 4th quarter and I was still shaking my head.

My mom watched the game at home and apparently Barry Alvarez said on TV how much he doesn’t like the look.

I think to say an across the board that a monochrome look is bad is not true. It can be pulled of depending on the color. Wisconsin pulled it off, which is hard to say because they hammered my alma-mater. WSU while wearing them.

here you go

link

link

Tennessee helmet stripes last year link

Tennessee Helmet stripes this year
link

link

Vs.

link

[quote comment=”139833″]Few college teams pull off the matching uniform/pants ensemble well. Wisconsin did a great job, its looks good. Syracuse on the other hand… WTF.

Some teams that can pull it off…
Wisconsin (Red on Red)
Purdue (Black on Black)
Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
Florida (Blue on Blue)
Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
Boise State (Blue on Blue)
Arizona (Blue on Blue)
Washington (Purple on Purple)

Some teams that can’t…
Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
Oregon (Yellow on Yellow)
Pitt (Gold on Gold)[/quote]

I beg to differ.
Three teams that CAN pull it off…
Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
Oregon (Yellow on Yellow, Black on Black, Green on Green)
Washington (Purple on Purple)

Teams that CAN’T…
Florida (Blue on Blue)
Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
Boise State (Blue on Blue)
Arizona (Blue on Blue)

LOVE, LOVE, LOVE the Syracuse Orange and the Oregon Yellow

I really wish Minnesota would bring back the Gold on Gold uniforms of the 70’s

Dallas Stars NEW JERSEYS: link
(The reason that they have the trademark logo and no NHL sheild at the v-neck is because these are what the Stars’ junior team will wear and these are exact copies of the real thing from what I’ve read)
link.
I like em.

[quote comment=”139845″]My mom watched the game at home and apparently Barry Alvarez said on TV how much he doesn’t like the look.[/quote]

I was watching the game on TV with my dad (a big Badger fan), and I was commenting to him how the red-on-red makes the Badgers look like a mid-major conference team. I think I said something like “They look like they’re a team out of the MEAC or the SWAC.” Maybe a minute later, Alvarez comes on TV and says the quote about how they look like a SWAC team! Apparently I wasn’t the only person thinking along those lines.

I posted briefly on it yesterday, but it got even worse as the night wore on—It’s driving me crazy how many teams have filled up the back of their helmets with little decals and logos. It looks like something a NASCAR driver would wear in some extreme cases. USC seems to be the only one trying to keep it to a minimum.

[quote comment=”139871″][quote comment=”139840″][quote comment=”139838″]As a Wisconsin alum, I was a saddened when I saw the monochromatic look. Personally, I hate the red pants for the Badgers! They should be red and white at home and all white on the road. But, none of that matters considering that UW won and Michigan lost. GO BADGERS![/quote]
I don’t really mind the red-on-red look too much for Wisconsin, but what I do mind is being lied to. It wasn’t but a month ago someone posted on here that Wisconsin appeared to be wearing red-on-red at home in the video game NCAA ’08. I went to a friends house who had the game and sure enough, there it was. I knew Wisconsin had never worn this combo before, and I didn’t hear any announcement of a new uni here in the Badger State… so I e-mailed the football equipment manager Mark Peeler who has been with Wisconsin since 1995. I explained to him that it is very unlikely that EA Sports would have gotten this detail wrong because they go to great lengths to get things accurate. He responded back to me on Aug. 8th and stated that Wisconsin has never worn red-on-red at home, and will never wear red-on-red at home. Now, he either lied to me, didn’t know, or couldn’t divulge the info. Bonnie Bernstien said yesterday the team chose the color scheme because they wanted to be “solid” (as in their performance) at home. That is fine and all, but don’t you think the equipment manager would know this less than a month before the season starts? I e-mailed Mr. Peeler again yesterday and am waiting for a response.

P.S. GO BUCKY![/quote]

Chances are good he wouldn’t tell you because he knew you would tell what you heard, which is exactly what you did.

He was probably told not to divulge what he knew.

I don’t think you have a legitimate beef.[/quote]

That is, if he actually knew anything, which is debatable.

[quote comment=”139852″]Cal Tenn observation
.
Given the fact that there are 100+ players suiting up on teams home games, how often is it that the same number is used on actual starting players?

Cal has 116 players on their roster. Numbers 1 thru 9 are all duplicated and one number, #19, is even assigned to THREE players. Only two out of the first 20 numbers are NOT duplicated. The duplicates are all opposing sides of the ball. Ex. #1 = D. Jackson WR & W.Williams LB. Both are starters. Another observation is that only two out of the first 20 numbers are NOT duplicated.

I noticed this last year when Cal had Marshawn Lynch (RB) and Desmond Bishop (LB) both wearing #10. Granted opposite sides of the ball, but it was strange always seeing #10 on the field.

In the game last night, it seemed as if there was always a single-digit Cal player on the field.

How often is does this happen, or is this simply relegated to Cal(in this scale)?[/quote]

I don’t know if anyone else noticed, but on a second-half kickoff, the kickoff actually had to be played over (essentially, a do-over) because Cal, the return team, had two players on the field with the same number, which is illegal participation but did not result in a penalty.

Naturally, Cal returned the second kickoff significantly farther than the first one. That’s just the way the game went.

[quote comment=”139865″][quote comment=”139845″]My mom watched the game at home and apparently Barry Alvarez said on TV how much he doesn’t like the look.[/quote]

I was watching the game on TV with my dad (a big Badger fan), and I was commenting to him how the red-on-red makes the Badgers look like a mid-major conference team. I think I said something like “They look like they’re a team out of the MEAC or the SWAC.” Maybe a minute later, Alvarez comes on TV and says the quote about how they look like a SWAC team! Apparently I wasn’t the only person thinking along those lines.[/quote]
Speaking of which, did anyone see what Florida A&M was wearing in their game against Southern yesterday? They were like the old Oregon State unis only in green and orange. I can’t remember if they were green-over-green or what, probably because I was momentarily blinded.

Cal might have looked like crap (I don’t love the yellow tops myself), but I wouldn’t call them monochromatic. They were yellow tops with blue pants.

As a die-hard Cal fan, I prefer the blue tops with the yellow pants. My wife, ever the intelligent one, prefers the classic blue and white combo.

Too lazy to check if this was mentioned last night, but did anyone see that James Blake was wearing the same exact Nike top as his opponent, Stefan Koubek in last nights U.S. Open match?

I really need to read closer, I just noticed someone said that a few posts up. Just ignore me!

Watching the BYU v. Arizona game my dad and I noticed something odd… At half-time BYU retired the #14 for Cougar greats Gifford Nielson and Ty Detmer. The Vs Network guys made a big deal about how nobody would ever wear the #14 again at BYU. Then we noticed that BYU had a DB who was actually wearing the #14!!! Is that weird that they would officially retire the number and then have a guy wearing it during the game????
Also just wanted to mention that the Vs network has the worst coverage of football I have ever seen.

Yesterday, someone commented that the problem is in letting college kids decide what they like. That’s at least part of the problem with Oregon; it’s almost like the worse thy look to normal people, the more the players like them. Remember, these are people who think Coors Light is the best beer on earth, so we already know how bad their taste is.

When I played so many years ago, one of our opponents had all of their linemen eat ultragarlicky food before games, and then you had to smell that nauseating aroma the whole game. Maybe this is the intent that Oregon, Syracuse, Wisconsin, etc. are trying for.

[quote comment=”139833″]Few college teams pull off the matching uniform/pants ensemble well. Wisconsin did a great job, its looks good. Syracuse on the other hand… WTF.

Some teams that can pull it off…
Wisconsin (Red on Red)
Purdue (Black on Black)
Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
Florida (Blue on Blue)
Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
Boise State (Blue on Blue)
Arizona (Blue on Blue)
Washington (Purple on Purple)

Some teams that can’t…
Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
Oregon (Yellow on Yellow)
Pitt (Gold on Gold)[/quote]

I’d add Cincinnati’s Black on Black to this

[quote comment=”139859″][quote comment=”139833″]Few college teams pull off the matching uniform/pants ensemble well. Wisconsin did a great job, its looks good. Syracuse on the other hand… WTF.

Some teams that can pull it off…
Wisconsin (Red on Red)
Purdue (Black on Black)
Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
Florida (Blue on Blue)
Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
Boise State (Blue on Blue)
Arizona (Blue on Blue)
Washington (Purple on Purple)

Some teams that can’t…
Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
Oregon (Yellow on Yellow)
Pitt (Gold on Gold)[/quote]

I beg to differ.
Three teams that CAN pull it off…
Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
Oregon (Yellow on Yellow, Black on Black, Green on Green)
Washington (Purple on Purple)

Teams that CAN’T…
Florida (Blue on Blue)
Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
Boise State (Blue on Blue)
Arizona (Blue on Blue)

LOVE, LOVE, LOVE the Syracuse Orange and the Oregon Yellow[/quote]

If Wisconsin wants to wear the all-red for every home game, I’d be in complete agreement. Out of both these lists, I think every single team listed can pull of a monochromatic uniform. White pants at home are getting dated, unless one of your two main colors is white (i.e Texas A&M, Oklahoma).

[quote comment=”139890″][quote comment=”139872″][quote comment=”139871″][quote comment=”139840″][quote comment=”139838″]As a Wisconsin alum, I was a saddened when I saw the monochromatic look. Personally, I hate the red pants for the Badgers! They should be red and white at home and all white on the road. But, none of that matters considering that UW won and Michigan lost. GO BADGERS![/quote]
I don’t really mind the red-on-red look too much for Wisconsin, but what I do mind is being lied to. It wasn’t but a month ago someone posted on here that Wisconsin appeared to be wearing red-on-red at home in the video game NCAA ’08. I went to a friends house who had the game and sure enough, there it was. I knew Wisconsin had never worn this combo before, and I didn’t hear any announcement of a new uni here in the Badger State… so I e-mailed the football equipment manager Mark Peeler who has been with Wisconsin since 1995. I explained to him that it is very unlikely that EA Sports would have gotten this detail wrong because they go to great lengths to get things accurate. He responded back to me on Aug. 8th and stated that Wisconsin has never worn red-on-red at home, and will never wear red-on-red at home. Now, he either lied to me, didn’t know, or couldn’t divulge the info. Bonnie Bernstien said yesterday the team chose the color scheme because they wanted to be “solid” (as in their performance) at home. That is fine and all, but don’t you think the equipment manager would know this less than a month before the season starts? I e-mailed Mr. Peeler again yesterday and am waiting for a response.

P.S. GO BUCKY![/quote]

Chances are good he wouldn’t tell you because he knew you would tell what you heard, which is exactly what you did.

He was probably told not to divulge what he knew.

I don’t think you have a legitimate beef.[/quote]

That is, if he actually knew anything, which is debatable.[/quote]
You are right. I stated in post #23 that according to the Wisconsin State Journal, everyone was left in the dark on purpose so Coach Bret could give out the info only a few days before the game. So I have no beef with the Mr. Peeler not telling me, because he probably didn’t know. My question is how did EA Sports find out the info of the red-on-red so they could include it in their video game? They would have had to know months before the release of the game in order to have it in their product. If the public didn’t know, the equipment manager didn’t know… how did they find out?[/quote]

Maybe it got leaked to them? That’s the only thing I can think of.

I haven’t seen it mentioned today, but Queens Park Rangers paid tribute to the late Ray Jones by wearing his full name on the back of their kits, though with normal numbers, instead of whatever Jones had wore (I caught it briefly on Sky Sports News last night).

[quote comment=”139896″]
Also, this isn’t the first time it was ‘erroneously’ set as the default home uni. I can’t remember the version, but it happened a few years back as well. Even weirder, the red pants didn’t have stripes![/quote]

EA is notorious for getting uniforms incorrect. This year’s John Madden Football came out with the Browns’ default away uniform pairing their white jerseys with brown pants, which I don’t think have ever been worn.

Ah, the St X Bombers. Those St. X-Moeller battles were legendary.

Is Steve Rasso still coach?

PS
link

Chiefs (scroll down) have the old AFL logo on their chest..

[quote comment=”139896″]If you look at EA Sports NCAA series, there has been a red-on-red uni combo for Wisconsin for years; it’s just been an ‘alternate,’ alongside the seldom-used white jersey/red pants combo and the standard unis. This is the first time ever the Badgers have gone all-red in a game (I’m a UW student).

Also, this isn’t the first time it was ‘erroneously’ set as the default home uni. I can’t remember the version, but it happened a few years back as well. Even weirder, the red pants didn’t have stripes![/quote]

I think it was NCAA Football 2005 because I would change the uniform before every game I played because I didn’t like that particular combination

[quote comment=”139858″]Home: Dark team color on top, light team color on pants

Away: White on top, a team color on pants

I’m not sure why so many teams have trouble with this.[/quote]

Because that gets boring after a while.

This may be a little late but oh well:

Honestly I don’t see what the huge deal over Syracuse’s jerseys is. I love it when teams have unusual colors that would scare off most programs. And as far as I can tell, that orange is pretty unique and the combo is unlike most others, maybe UVA comes close. I do think it would have looked better with a navy top and orange numbers with orange pants and orange helmets. But still the old school look is awesome and people are complaining that there is no outline on the numbers. Who cares? I think it is so much better without outlining. Like how the Dallas Cowboys white jerseys have non-outlined numbers. It just looks better in my opinion

Regarding Cal and the duplicate numbers: last night, on a kickoff, Cal actually got penalized for having two players with the same jersey number on the field at the same time. Back when Washington had all kinds of duplicate numbers (or maybe this was Cal last year), you’d have guys “borrowing” numbers just for special teams and then putting on the jerseys with their assigned numbers for offense or defense.

[quote comment=”139847″]As a UW alum I don’t really care for the all red. How does public opinion stand up to how “jacked” the team is over them? Should we be celebrating a team that gets excited over its uniforms?

link

Remember, this is the same school that wants all other teams not to use their stylized “W” either.

They have no clue.

i know im late on this but not only did i have to watch my vols and wolverines lose last night but i had to watch them lose to two teams with horribly unis app atae with those old nikeworld designs and the cal yellows i think my eyes got raped watching the game

[quote comment=”139901″]Ah, the St X Bombers. Those St. X-Moeller battles were legendary.

Is Steve Rasso still coach?

PS
link

Chiefs (scroll down) have the old AFL logo on their chest..[/quote]
That AFL logo is the Lamar Hunt memorial patch.

[quote comment=”139840″][quote comment=”139838″]As a Wisconsin alum, I was a saddened when I saw the monochromatic look. Personally, I hate the red pants for the Badgers! They should be red and white at home and all white on the road. But, none of that matters considering that UW won and Michigan lost. GO BADGERS![/quote]
I don’t really mind the red-on-red look too much for Wisconsin, but what I do mind is being lied to. It wasn’t but a month ago someone posted on here that Wisconsin appeared to be wearing red-on-red at home in the video game NCAA ’08. I went to a friends house who had the game and sure enough, there it was. I knew Wisconsin had never worn this combo before, and I didn’t hear any announcement of a new uni here in the Badger State… so I e-mailed the football equipment manager Mark Peeler who has been with Wisconsin since 1995. I explained to him that it is very unlikely that EA Sports would have gotten this detail wrong because they go to great lengths to get things accurate. He responded back to me on Aug. 8th and stated that Wisconsin has never worn red-on-red at home, and will never wear red-on-red at home. Now, he either lied to me, didn’t know, or couldn’t divulge the info. Bonnie Bernstien said yesterday the team chose the color scheme because they wanted to be “solid” (as in their performance) at home. That is fine and all, but don’t you think the equipment manager would know this less than a month before the season starts? I e-mailed Mr. Peeler again yesterday and am waiting for a response.

P.S. GO BUCKY![/quote]

It is very possible he didn’t know… however if NCAA 08 knows, he probably knew as well. You can’t blame the guy for trying to keep a surprise. Maybe he was just so ashamed to know they were going to look that crappy and not be able to do anything about it that he was just in denial…

[quote comment=”139913″][quote comment=”139905″][quote comment=”139863″]Dallas Stars NEW JERSEYS: link
(The reason that they have the trademark logo and no NHL sheild at the v-neck is because these are what the Stars’ junior team will wear and these are exact copies of the real thing from what I’ve read)
link.
I like em.[/quote]

There’s too many inconsistencies: no nhl logo, no rbk tag, different material than the other rbk edges, so i’m skeptical.[/quote]
Lets just hope those home ones are for real. Why couldn’t have Vancouver done that?[/quote]

Im pretty sure those pictures arent photoshopped, but im pretty sure the jerseys arent legit. somebody has wayyyy to much time on their hands and actually made those im pretty sure.

[quote comment=”139932″]new Leafs jerseys?

link

It looks very “classic”
Plain, but very good

[quote comment=”139935″][quote comment=”139932″]new Leafs jerseys?

link

It looks very “classic”
Plain, but very good[/quote]
I’ll take plain over gaudy any day! I hope the new jerseys have a tie up collar,,,,,,,,,

Some teams that can pull it off…
Wisconsin (Red on Red)
Purdue (Black on Black)
Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
Florida (Blue on Blue)
Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
Boise State (Blue on Blue)
Arizona (Blue on Blue)
Washington (Purple on Purple)

As a UW alum (that’s U-Dub, rather than U-double U, given the topics today), Washington’s only worn purple on purple once that I can remember–in 1989 against Colorado. After losing 45-28, I don’t think they’ve ever used the combo again. This was pretty soon after they switched from the gold pants to purple pants on the road and, if I recall correctly, like Wisconsin, the players wanted to wear the purple on purple combo.

I’m not a fan of the monochrome/pajama look and am glad the Dawgs have avoided it since, now if only the Seahawks would get the message . . .

[quote comment=”139873″][quote comment=”139860″][quote comment=”139858″]Home: Dark team color on top, light team color on pants

Away: White on top, a team color on pants

I’m not sure why so many teams have trouble with this.[/quote]

Because sometimes it can look so sweet not too. i.e. Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
Oregon (Yellow on Yellow, Black on Black, Green on Green)
Washington (Purple on Purple)[/quote]
I’m not sure if you’re joking or insane.

hofflalu, at least we were doing the late-game high-intensity scoring for a change.[/quote]

Not joking at all. Why can’t someone like bright color on color. Most of the Oregon players like the uniforms from what I read. Just because I hate the Yankees uniform and hate Notre Dames uniforms and love Oregons doesn’t mean I don’t get it.

[quote comment=”139903″][quote comment=”139837″]OK, maybe not Uva (Hokie Biased, can’t help it ;-)[/quote]

I agree. They look like crap in blue on blue. And I went to UVA. In fact, their uni’s overall have gone completely downhill since I started going there (1999).

link
note the cool collar design and sweet numbers

link
Note the totally boring. I kinda like the “pro style” helmet stripes and the logos on the shoulders, but they are boring otherwise. Lame looking block numbers, no collar design, and bad monochrome look. Thanks Al Groh.[/quote]

the UVA design element that bugs me the most are those Helmet stripes that only go halfway back. HATE.

[quote comment=”139947″]

the UVA design element that bugs me the most are those Helmet stripes that only go halfway back. HATE.[/quote]

I really disliked them at first but they’ve grown on me. Compared to the other changes they’ve made I’m ok with them. They look like the Ravens I believe.

[quote comment=”139947″][quote comment=”139903″][quote comment=”139837″]OK, maybe not Uva (Hokie Biased, can’t help it ;-)[/quote]

I agree. They look like crap in blue on blue. And I went to UVA. In fact, their uni’s overall have gone completely downhill since I started going there (1999).

link
note the cool collar design and sweet numbers

link
Note the totally boring. I kinda like the “pro style” helmet stripes and the logos on the shoulders, but they are boring otherwise. Lame looking block numbers, no collar design, and bad monochrome look. Thanks Al Groh.[/quote]

the UVA design element that bugs me the most are those Helmet stripes that only go halfway back. HATE.[/quote]
My biggest pet peeve right there. Titans, Panthers, etc.

[quote comment=”139933″][quote comment=”139913″][quote comment=”139905″][quote comment=”139863″]Dallas Stars NEW JERSEYS: link
(The reason that they have the trademark logo and no NHL sheild at the v-neck is because these are what the Stars’ junior team will wear and these are exact copies of the real thing from what I’ve read)
link.
I like em.[/quote]

There’s too many inconsistencies: no nhl logo, no rbk tag, different material than the other rbk edges, so i’m skeptical.[/quote]
Lets just hope those home ones are for real. Why couldn’t have Vancouver done that?[/quote]

Im pretty sure those pictures arent photoshopped, but im pretty sure the jerseys arent legit. somebody has wayyyy to much time on their hands and actually made those im pretty sure.[/quote]
They most likely are not photoshopped. The reason they don’t have many of the Reebok hallmarks such as the NHL shield or the tag or the cut of an authentic jersey is because they are not made for the NHL team. They are made for Dallas’s youth team which bears the same name and wears the same jerseys, just without NHL insignia.

[quote comment=”139954″][quote comment=”139933″][quote comment=”139913″][quote comment=”139905″][quote comment=”139863″]Dallas Stars NEW JERSEYS: link
(The reason that they have the trademark logo and no NHL sheild at the v-neck is because these are what the Stars’ junior team will wear and these are exact copies of the real thing from what I’ve read)
link.
I like em.[/quote]

There’s too many inconsistencies: no nhl logo, no rbk tag, different material than the other rbk edges, so i’m skeptical.[/quote]
Lets just hope those home ones are for real. Why couldn’t have Vancouver done that?[/quote]

Im pretty sure those pictures arent photoshopped, but im pretty sure the jerseys arent legit. somebody has wayyyy to much time on their hands and actually made those im pretty sure.[/quote]
They most likely are not photoshopped. The reason they don’t have many of the Reebok hallmarks such as the NHL shield or the tag or the cut of an authentic jersey is because they are not made for the NHL team. They are made for Dallas’s youth team which bears the same name and wears the same jerseys, just without NHL insignia.[/quote]

The home jersey looks like it belongs on the mavericks, not the stars…at least I’ll only be at away games this yr, so I won’t have to see it.

I’m gonna go cry at the loss of the star jersey now…

Purdue’s black on black does look good…however, once upon a time, right after the Drew Brees ended, we wore link
awful jerseys….including link
gold-on-gold-on-gold ensemble.

The Ohio bobcats also went with the monchromatic look last night against Gardner Webb. here’s the link.

Not to be outdone, the Hoosiers went with the monocrhomatic crimson unis. Problem is when the players sweat, the jersey is a different color than the pants.

[quote comment=”139833″]Few college teams pull off the matching uniform/pants ensemble well. Wisconsin did a great job, its looks good. Syracuse on the other hand… WTF.

Some teams that can pull it off…
Wisconsin (Red on Red)
Purdue (Black on Black)
Louisville (Red on Red, Black on Black)
Florida (Blue on Blue)
Florida State (Garnet on Garnet)
Boise State (Blue on Blue)
Arizona (Blue on Blue)
Washington (Purple on Purple)

Some teams that can’t…
Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
Oregon (Yellow on Yellow)
Pitt (Gold on Gold)[/quote]

How about none of em !!!

I would prefer the dark jerseys and lighter pants.
How about a little class, a little tradition, a little maturity, and looking less like an 85 pound team that wants to “look tough”.

[quote comment=”139887″]Yesterday, someone commented that the problem is in letting college kids decide what they like. That’s at least part of the problem with Oregon; it’s almost like the worse thy look to normal people, the more the players like them. Remember, these are people who think Coors Light is the best beer on earth, so we already know how bad their taste is.

When I played so many years ago, one of our opponents had all of their linemen eat ultragarlicky food before games, and then you had to smell that nauseating aroma the whole game. Maybe this is the intent that Oregon, Syracuse, Wisconsin, etc. are trying for.[/quote]
As a “college kid” i take offense to that. Very few kids i know like coors light, and we do have some taste. Age and level of “Getting It” do not correlate. My favorite college uni is the Rutgers Red/White jersey, mostly because they havent been good enough to get Nikeified.

[quote comment=”139942″]Please dont forget the best white/white combo TEXAS![/quote]

If you’re into see-through pants. They look like a bunch of Iggy Pops.[/quote]

You stole my thunder. With Texas’ budget, can’t they afford some pants that are made of material thick-enough that we can’t see through it?

Tenn when BACK to the wide helmet stripe…they used to wear it that way. Good choice. I think UVA’s new numbers and collar are an improvement as well.

No one has mentioned monocromatic Clemson – they’ll wear white on white, orange on orange, or purple on purple…then mix and match all three! They could go the whole year and never wear the same thing.

Speaking of, it used to be in tennis that both players would ALWAYS wear the some outfit…white on white!

The CFL’s Saskatchewan Roughriders debuted their green retro third link and link combination during the Labour Day Classic against the Winnipeg Blue Bombers.

This jersey/helmet combo is supposed to represent the Riders’ link during their heyday in the 1970s.

[quote comment=”139977″][quote comment=”139942″]Please dont forget the best white/white combo TEXAS![/quote]

If you’re into see-through pants. They look like a bunch of Iggy Pops.[/quote]

You stole my thunder. With Texas’ budget, can’t they afford some pants that are made of material thick-enough that we can’t see through it?[/quote]
White helmets need to have a stripe, otherwise they look like a bunch of eggs running around the field.

One team that can always pull off a sweet white on white: Penn State. Simple and Classic.

[quote comment=”139859″]
I beg to differ.
Three teams that CAN pull it off…
Syracuse (Orange on Orange)
Oregon (Yellow on Yellow, Black on Black, Green on Green)
Washington (Purple on Purple)
[/quote]

you are clearly reading the wrong website.

Why does everyone love white jerseys with dark pants?! It’s UGLY as sin! I say ban dark colored pants, period. White pants are fine, silver is fine, gold is fine, but orange for Syracuse and Illinois must only be worn with blue or white, not orange!

The all red look is here to stay:
link

[quote comment=”140225″]The all red look is here to stay:
link

All reds at home, all white on the road. Great…..

As a big Wisconsin Fan I’ve always loved the simplicity of their home uniforms…Red Jersey and White pants. Also another thing about Wisconsin is that all of their stripes match…double stripes on the helmet, jersey sleeve, and pants. They’ve had the same uniforms for as long as I can remember and I started watching them in 1993 when I was 6. The only change was that the motion W was added to the front on one of the shoulders. It kills me that Bielema had to go with the solid red look, because Wisconsin has worn red jersey’s with white pants forever. The red pants are only acceptable for bowl games and road games at Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota, and Northwestern. They can’t wear them agaisnt Iowa because they got pounded once while wearing them I recall and they definately can’t wear them against Penn State on the road because it started a losing streak in 2005 when they wore Red at Happy Valley.

Stick with the white pants, be tradional like Oklahoma, Texas, and Penn State.

Also its better for the white pants to have some stripes incorporated, such as the double stripe that Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Florida State have on their whites.