Gear up for the 2020 MLB Season with new gear from Nike

Red Menace


In case you were busy leading a well-adjusted life yesterday, Georgia unveiled its Amateur Pacifist costume, which will be worn in the Chicken Sandwich Game, or Christian Sandwich Game, or whatever it is, on Sept. 3 (additional pics — about half of which focus on the nose bumper for some reason — here). Yes, that’s a striped facemask, which surely qualifies as a high point in the annals of human achievement.

Boise State, incidentally, will be wearing its own monochromatic costume for that game, so it’ll be a rare color-vs.-color match-up. ”” Paul

+ + + + +

Benchies HeaderBenchies

by Rick Pearson


Really sucks when your quarterback goes to a new town (click on comic for larger version)…

s-Ozzie QB mono RED-1


65 Candles65 Candles

By Phil Hecken


Sometimes, it’s best just to say nothing.

Birthday Benchies 65

Happy Birthday, Rick!

140 comments to Red Menace

  • The Jeff | August 21, 2011 at 8:18 am |

    Well after all of the discussion yesterday… I’ll just say meh, they look fine. Not really as good as what they normally wear, but not that bad either.

    Also, YES!! at the game being color vs color.

    • Kyle Allebach | August 21, 2011 at 10:32 am |

      I love the idea of color on color, however, the uniforms involved are sub-par.

  • Peter S | August 21, 2011 at 8:20 am |

    With both teams wearing their actual school colors, maybe the Nike Pro Combat folks have wised up a little bit. I’m sure there were many people indignant at last year’s black versus grey matchup in the Boise-VT game.

    • Gary | August 21, 2011 at 1:01 pm |

      UGA school colors are Red & Black. So what’s Silver doing on the helmet? My bet is these unis won’t be around next season – if they make it through this one.

      • Simply Moono | August 21, 2011 at 2:57 pm |

        Silver is a UGA color, used in the famous “Silver Britches” (for how long I don’t know) and the silver helmet until 1964? (correct me if I’m wrong)

  • Dumb Guy | August 21, 2011 at 8:45 am |

    All the GA helmet needs now is tape on the facemask in the shape of a cross and they’ll have the tri(colored)fecta!

    I sort of dig the wide “stripe” though.

  • ClubMedSux | August 21, 2011 at 9:33 am |

    Georgia unveiled its Amateur Pacifist costume…

    I myself dabbled in pacifism once. Not in ‘Nam, of course.

    And for the record, I actually kinda like this one, though I hope the players get belts that fit properly.

  • Drew Glover | August 21, 2011 at 9:52 am |

    The facemask surely is the most interesting part of their uniform.

  • Ricko | August 21, 2011 at 9:53 am |

    Y’know, Nike can talk all they want about how these unis are “heritage” inspired (and write all their bogus and inaccurate histories), but the truth is (and it continues to amaze me that so few see it)…this is one giant Turn Ahead The Clock promotion. For them.

    Don’t you get the sense you’re watching ROLLERBALL or STARSHIP TROOPERS? Seriously, doesn’t it feel like that?

    It’s Nike (and others to a lesser extent) telling us how THEY, with their consummate clarity and correctness of vision, see the future of football uniforms…and, sadly, that they intend to determine it.

    Was there something terribly wrong with the look of football uni 15-20 years ago? Was America watching, thinking, “These unis need to be more futuristic.” Did anyone watch Bo Jackson at Auburn and think, “Too bad that uni isn’t more dynamic.”

    Of course not. This whole design “revolution” or “leap forward” is externally driven. A small group of designers and manufacturers have decided THEY know better, and (in case no one’s noticed) are making maker-recognition more important than making the teams look good.

    And please, I am NOT talking about fabric or other technology. I’m talking visual design style. I know there’s progress; I played high school baseball in flannels that weighed as much as a small dog. And were just as scratchy.

    In baseball, TATC is universally lambasted. Yet in football—and because it’s generally Nike at the forefront, I suppose—people swallow the whole thing like a horny trailer park single mom.

    Tolstoy once said that all wars are a testament to the gullibility of the 18 year old male.

    So is this whole Pro Combat thing, and its traveling companions at the other uni providers.

    • Pierre | August 21, 2011 at 10:09 am |

      I was thinking along the same lines…it’s just a huge Nike promotion designed solely to draw attention to Nike. But, with rare exception, Nike’s line of Pro Combat uniforms look like clown outfits. Hey…I’m not averse to progress. New fit and fabrics that are less cumbersome to the players is great. But, in my old-fashioned opinion, Nike is making outlandish football costumes just to be controversial and to get people talking about Nike.

    • The Jeff | August 21, 2011 at 10:19 am |

      No, there’s nothing wrong with Georgia’s normal uniforms. There’s also nothing wrong with trying new things.

      Did you react like this to the Chargers lightning bolts in 1960? What about the Bengals tiger stripes in ’81 or the Michigan Panthers helmets in ’83? What about the huge logo on a couple of the American CFL teams in the 90’s? Or some of the looks in the WLAF/NFL Europe? Or the Arena league?

      Yeah, fine, Nike are being attention whores…to a point, but what does that have to do with whether or not the designs are any good? Besides, it isn’t all Nike. As we can clearly see with Penn State’s uniforms, the schools *do* have the final say.

      …and you know what, I like Starship Troopers.

      • Pierre | August 21, 2011 at 10:38 am |

        The Bengals’ original tiger stripe unis were great. The current version is crap.

        The original Chargers’ lightning bolt unis were great. The current version is crap.

        It’s not that innovation is bad…the point is that the design standard of many modern uniforms is crap. They’re just not pleasing to the eye…

        • The Jeff | August 21, 2011 at 10:45 am |

          Eye of the Beholder, man.

          I brought up the Bengals specifically because I remember seeing a clip recently about that change in 1981 and the general fan reaction at the time being “WTF is this?”.

        • Pierre | August 21, 2011 at 10:52 am |

          I know it’s very subjective…

          But take the Chargers’ current uniform as an example. Are the lightning bolts on the jerseys supposed to be high sleeve stripes or are they shoulder stripes? Every time I see that uniform my mind tells me something is not quite right. If you see truncated stripes when you’re accustomed to seeing full stripes, your mind tells you something is wrong. A good uniform should be one that you don’t necessarily pay much attention to…one that doesn’t draw your attention to bothersome details.

          But I still think the major reason for football uniform angst today is because the fit and fabric of modern football uniforms are entirely different from unis past. You can’t always recreate an old look in a modern uni, IMO.

        • Ricko | August 21, 2011 at 11:30 am |

          While I don’t disagree, Pierre, the Chargers’ uni still stands as one of the better (maybe the best) adaptation of that style with the newer sleeveless jerseys.

          I don’t love it generally, but in the context of today’s game, it looks pretty good. That’s compared to the rest, of course, which give most lineman that wonderfuly pinch-shouldered big belly look that’s so athletic.

    • pushbutton | August 21, 2011 at 10:29 am |

      I agree. Progress is fine. We just want some respect for the basic markings of the uni, and for this to fall under the heading of tradition; to be a link from one generation to the next.

      People of a certain age, like you and me are….well, we’re just going away. But today’s 18 year-olds will be us sooner than they think, and just as I shed a wistful tear at the sight of a grey facemask today, they’ll be pining for every still-visible anachronistic scrap of this type of uni design in 2045.

      I just wonder if there will be a retro design trend by then such as what gripped baseball in the mid 80s. Timelessness seems to trend weaker in football. All the more reason to demand it now.

      • Kek | August 21, 2011 at 11:37 am |

        Gotta say I’m with The Jeff on this one. That Bengal helmet was a real game changer as far as style is concerned but I’m sure back in ’81 people thought it looked garish.

        I think another thing is the propensity for plain block numbers. For many years, outside of the Bears, we were pretty much hit with more or less one font style. I’m thinking modern era, post-Super Bowl. These other styles make one thing futuristic I’m sure.

        This Georgia uniform, like Bernard said yesterday, not Nike’s best work. It’s just too much red for my taste.

        Also, are we anti-Chikfila in here now? Because if so, I’m sorry, I just can’t get behind that movement.

        • Paul Lukas | August 21, 2011 at 1:02 pm |

          Also, are we anti-Chikfila in here now? Because if so, I’m sorry, I just can’t get behind that movement.

          Speaking, as always, only for myself (not for the larger “we”):

          1) I tend not to like chain eateries (although I freely admit that I’m hypocritical on this point when it comes to White Castle).

          2) I tend not to like corporate sponsorship of football games.

          3) I tend not to like businesses that go out of their way to identify themselves as sectarian, because that will by definition make certain people feel less welcome (no matter how many times the company says, “No, really, we love everybody”).

          4) I particularly tend not to like sectarian-identified businesses that use their sectarian identity in affiliation with and/or in support of anti-gay rhetoric.

          Add it all up and you have my feelings about a certain sandwich and a certain game on Sept. 3.

          But that’s just me.

        • StLMarty | August 21, 2011 at 1:11 pm |

          Don’t forget the Waffle House.

        • Paul Lukas | August 21, 2011 at 1:24 pm |

          Ah, yes — thanks, Marty.

          For the record: If there’s ever a Waffle House Fiesta Bowl, I’ll be first in line to buy tickets. (Granted, I’ll probably end up selling those tickets on StubHub, but still…)

        • ATLien | August 21, 2011 at 3:19 pm |

          Yankees (Metters?) don’t get Chick-fil-a, so they don’t understand. Much like savages in an earlier time.

          As for the other points:

          2: If it helps keeping the games on tv, I’m ok with it. I watch the games. Not the pre-game, not half-time, not the post-game show.

          3: Again, don’t really care. They make good sandwiches. Sure it’s annoying if you crave one on Sunday, but these are the breaks (break it down, break it down, break it down.)

          4: I don’t care about gay people. But i do think sometimes gay activists tend to get in people’s faces, and that alone tends to turn some people against their cause (maybe like Nike?.)If straight people threw their sexuality in my face, I’d be annoyed with them as well.

          I wouldn’t trust or want to interact with anyone that doesn’t like the Waffle House.

          I don’t agree with Paul on some things, but at least he tries and educate/illustrate how important uniforms are, and reminds people that their teams really don’t have to dress up like clowns.

        • StLMarty | August 21, 2011 at 3:52 pm |

          “If straight people threw their sexuality in my face, I’d be annoyed with them as well.”

          Do you not go out in public? Do you not watch T.V.? Compare the number of advertisements promoting homosexuality vs. heterosexuality. The hetero wins by more than a landslide.
          You may as well have said,”I like them better in the closet.”

        • Pierre | August 21, 2011 at 4:25 pm |

          “If straight people threw their sexuality in my face, I’d be annoyed with them as well.”

          I take it you don’t own a TV…

        • StLMarty | August 21, 2011 at 5:18 pm |

          Wait a minute, Pierre. Are you responding to me, or the Outkast guy above me?
          I was quoting him. I mentioned t.v. as well.
          Please don’t attach any homophobia to my name.

        • Pierre | August 21, 2011 at 10:55 pm |

          Marty, I was responding to the guy I quoted. Television advertising is so sexually charged these days…of the heterosexual kind.

        • Jack | August 22, 2011 at 4:59 pm |


          We should not forget to boycott sectarian events sponsored by large corporations.

    • Ricko | August 21, 2011 at 10:51 am |

      (sigh) You seem to think everything can be lumped together, especially when it suits your position.

      Comparing the Charger bolts or Bengals tiger pattern to the Pro Combat thing is apples and oranges.

      Nike’s position is to fundamentally change the approach to unis, as if everyone’s had it wrong all these years and thank god they’ve come along to get it right…starting with the painfully obvious platform of No Straight Parallel Striping (is that an anti-adidas position?; who knows)…when they’re left to their own devices.

      Anyone who can’t see that “No Typical Stripes” is absolutely fundamental to Nike’s design template and calls themselves a designer just ain’t paying attention. Or isn’t really a student of design.

      And I never said teams weren’t culpible, too. I’ve always said more of them should have the balls to tell Nike to fuck off. Unfortunately, they’re drinking the Kool Aid, too. But it’s Nike who puts the designs, and their attendant bullshit, on the table in the first place.

      What I’m saying is, if someone comes to you and asks, “What can we do with our uniforms?” and you change everything…it means you have an ego the size of Siberia because your mindset is that anything you do can’t help but be better than what you found when you got there. That is—absolutely, positively—designer arrogance.

      A really good designer knows sometimes the key is working inside a framework, and that often a small change can make all the difference (the Chargers unis, which were Colts unis with lightning bolts added, being a perfect example). The conceited ones change everything. And expect everyone to bow.

      And hang a picture of their work on the refrigerator.

      • Pierre | August 21, 2011 at 11:22 am |

        While I agree that, generally, Nike’s aesthetics stink, I will commend them for the high tech improvements to football equipment that players seem to appreciate.

        My understanding is that Nike’s concept was to create lighter uniforms that didn’t retain moisture and which moved naturally with the player’s movements. Pants and jerseys are now made with oddly-shaped panels with combinations of different materials. For example, thermography was used, I believe, to identify which parts of a player’s body generated more heat in play and thus required more ventilation. That’s why some football pants now have mesh panels as well as jerseys.

        So, I give credit to Nike for advancing technology designed to improve player performance. It’s just in the aestetics department that some some of their is a major fail…at least in my opinion.

    • moose | August 21, 2011 at 12:14 pm |

      first of all, happy birthday ricko, and i hope to see you again in person before i hit 65.

      jeff, you are comparing a university that has been playing football since maybe 1890ish, with teams from a 3 year league like the usfl? if that isn’t apples and oranges i don’t know what is. obviously nobody here could argue that the michigan panthers were spitting on their 1 year tradition when they changed a uniform, nor is this permanently changing a uni element either, it’s a one and done nike commerical. and to be honest not too many people are going to complain too much at subtle modern changes to traditional uni’s, and if they do they are just complaining to complain. Tosu for instance, while essentially unchanged for 43 years have updated and changed things to fit the times, tear away jerseys, small buckeye gigi’s, changing stripe thicknesses, various shades of grey and scarlet, the sleeve stripes, that 70’s large hole mesh jersey crap, whatever. but when they wear one of these stupid pro combat uni’s for say a michigan game, it disgusts me, i want to see the team i recognise, the team i root for every week, not some bullshit drawing board team with a flimsy concept. see, i know you like it when people get rilled about their schools ditching of tradition, or shamelessly selling out to nike because your name should be “the schadenfreude”. and i know you don’t like the tradition, but frankly you are not a part of one either, so why should you care, why would you try to understand. so trying to explain why it matters to you is like trying to explain to my cat how it is disgusting to eat a giant fly, i know my point will never get across. how you don’t understand a link through time, how you don’t understand why that is important, how you can get anything from this site not knowing that, or how you equate modern with good universally as if people are not going to look at you 100 years from now the same way you look at the past as if you are slow moving and antiquated is beyond me. do people sometimes get carried away, and hold on too much? sure, but only because they care about something jeff, i don’t know what you stand for other then nothing. the point about georgia isn’t even is their everyday look is good or bad(i am not a huge fan, but it doesn’t rot), or if this NPC mess they will wear is good or bad(it is awful), the point it isn’t georgia. and why are they going to open up the college season, and face boise community as a storm trooper rather then as a proud SEC power? because nike said bend over, and their AD didn’t ask the domi-nike-trix to be gentle, so she gave him the full mamba without the lube. i am sure he is in a dark closet rocking in the fetal position eating a jelly doughnut and crying real tears right now. look jeff i don’t care if you like it or not, and this does not mean that certain things do not have to change with the times, but at its core college football is 100% about tradition, and if you can’t understand that, if you can’t like that, then don’t watch it, and don’t comment on it. go watch your oakland raiders, and sci-fi, and leave college football to the people who actually have a real interest in college football. if someone who actually likes college football, someone who went to georgia or whatever, wants to take your position fine, i’ll listen. but your railing people for their love of what college football is is no different then someone like me saying the stormship trooper tv show is fargin stupid. why do i think that, because aaaaaall those shows are stupid, but i don’t comment on them either because maybe i don’t understand, and to each his own, so i leave it alone.

      larryb from yesterday. texas is a perfect example of how a university should treat the pro combat. nike says we have this space age blah blah blah for you to wear, and texas says, okay, we wouldn’t mind be 2.9% lighter, and 3.2% wickier, but make us look like texas, and nike does. so they slapped a retro number on the helmet, and make everything look like texas. if anything that makes it a throwback using the new template. how is that different from alabama? subtle i agree, but houndstooth numbers never existed, so they drop out of the top 5 and into receiving votes because they soooort of stood their ground, but still at least took the domi-nike-trix tip, maybe i need to rethink bama. i admit what i wrote was maybe not completely thought out, but schools like Tosu and now michigan are not even in the teams getting votes section, they are out of the title hunt for standing up to he jersey companies and saying we are the ones in charge, not you. since we are both big ten guys…wisconsin, iowa, purdue, all have done true throwback games, and not one of them have done it for a rivalry game either as i recall, so they were doing something for their fans in a double directional state homecoming type game, that is not nike on nike national tv opener, not a riflery week national tv game, not a jersey company commercial plain and simple. but i appreciate your reminding me about texas and sconnie yesterday, i should have thought that out better.

      • The Jeff | August 21, 2011 at 1:04 pm |

        You actually think BCS schools care about tradition?

        It’s been about money and NFL player development for years. Ever seen the Wizard of Oz? NCAA tradition is the big scary wizard. Try looking behind the curtain.

        • Kek | August 21, 2011 at 1:14 pm |

          Man, but that chicken sandwich is so good.

          And I’m cool with not being able to get it on a Sunday. Makes getting one Mon-Sat all the more enjoyable.

          They have, by far the best customer service of any fast food chain. And that’s consistently over many locations, not just “that one down by my house is really good”

          I hear you on your other points, agree on some, disagree on others. But a full on boycott of that chain and those delicious nuggets, sandwiches, waffle fries and cole slaw, that ain’t happenin’!

          And yes, White Castle is awesome. As a Pittsburgh guy, I appreciate them tremendously as we don’t have them here. (have a trip to Indianapolis coming up next weekend, can’t WAIT!)

        • Ricko | August 21, 2011 at 1:29 pm |

          Totally valid point.

          And actually helps make mine. Athletic Departments now apparently feel more allegiance to their uni-suppliers and 19-year-old (ahem) student-athletes than they do to their alumni.

          (That’s the short version of moose’s comment).

        • moose | August 21, 2011 at 1:45 pm |

          i know what it is about jeff, i know the wizard behind the curtain, i agree with you on that for sure, and would never argue that you were wrong, i woud be foolish to do so. but that is an entirely different thing altogether. what i am talking about are the people associated with the different universities that follow their teams, to them it is about the tradition. are we foolish to believe in the santa claus that is ncaa football, sure, but i like believing in that santa, and i think most people who watch do. but you are right, it is big business, and i can not argue against you on that.

      • Jeff P | August 21, 2011 at 1:12 pm |

        Moose, for somebody getting so worked up about college athletics, your post sure reads like you never attended one.

        Clean up your writing and your argument. That was a long and (so far as I got into it) completely incoherent rant.

        • moose | August 21, 2011 at 1:48 pm |

          who said i went to college? i went to ohio state.

        • ClubMedSux | August 21, 2011 at 1:54 pm |

          It’s a good thing you weren’t Faulkner’s editor (or Joyce’s, or Pynchon’s, etc.).

        • moose | August 21, 2011 at 2:12 pm |

          thanks CMS, my free form, free association, stream of consciousness style is certainly not going to be everybody’s taste, but that’s why i comment and don’t have my own forum.

        • ClubMedSux | August 21, 2011 at 3:37 pm |

          Personally, while I’m a stickler for grammar, punctuation, etc., I find that calling out others on the internet has a Godwin-like quality to it. I figure if somebody has to make that point then they don’t have a substantive rebuttal to offer.

        • StLMarty | August 21, 2011 at 3:54 pm |

          Plus, it sucks when people just want to be mean.

        • Ricko | August 21, 2011 at 4:10 pm |

          Probably you don’t want to read ee cummings.
          Would drive you nuts.

          Or Hunter Thompson, for that matter.

        • moose | August 21, 2011 at 4:39 pm |

          i don’t care if someone wants to try to cut me down marty, i really don’t, he has a right to his opinion like i do, and if that is the direction he wants to go with what i said, that’s fine. and like i said, i am not everybody’s cup’a.

          ricko, i think you more or less boiled that down for me. where should i send the iced cream cake?

          by the way jeff, i have had something in moderation forever, so i am just going to rcut and paste it at this point…

          i know what it is about jeff, i know the wizard behind the curtain, i agree with you on that for sure, and would never argue that you were wrong, i woud be foolish to do so. but that is an entirely different thing altogether. what i am talking about are the people associated with the different universities that follow their teams, to them it is about the tradition. are we foolish to believe in the santa claus that is ncaa football, sure, but i like believing in that santa, and i think most people who watch do. but you are right, it is big business, and i can not argue against you on that.

      • LarryB | August 21, 2011 at 1:39 pm |

        I too want to say Happy Birthday to Ricko,

        moose I understand what you are saying about Texas.But that was a Texas throwback. As a throwback love I would much rather see current teams wear uniforms of their past. Not these new Nike creations.

        Georgias are not bad. I like the helmet because it reminds me so much of what Ohio State wore from 1960-65.

        I did not like Ohio States 2009 Nike made up creation. That was supposed to honor the 1954 National Champions. It was not like anything ever worn. Last years version was very close to the 1942 Buckeye uniforms. I even bought one of those jerseys.

        I was hoping Ohio State would wear something close to the early 60’s Buckeye uniform. But seeing the Bulldogs helmet makes me think it is not going to happen.

        • moose | August 21, 2011 at 1:57 pm |

          i don’t hate the helmet, and i too saw it a similar to the puff-head era of the buckeyes, but the facemask? and the rest of the uniform is brutal. they should just play boise as georgia, that’s all. and i would venture to bet that most UGA grads, and even students feel the same way.

          both of those ohio state uniforms were brutal because it was the michigan game, it doesn’t need the bells and whistles it’s already the michigan game. if they want to honour a team from the past, wear a true throwback against akron, the pour bastards who pay top dollar to watch a 50-2 scrimmage deserve to see something. but i will agree i did like the number font on last years jersey, and would support a permanent change to that. grey numbers, black outline, and ditch the stripes on the current jersey, and that is a great look.

        • LarryB | August 21, 2011 at 5:52 pm |

          I for one did not get upset they were used for the Michigan. Especially last years 1942 era unis. But I can understand others opinions.

          As I said I wish more teams would wear throwbacks and not the Nike creations.

          And I do not care for the trend towrds multiple unis and helmets such as Arizona State and Wyoming this year. Oregon, Ok if that was their gimmick. That being said ASU’s have grown on me.

          I checked some Georgia message boards yesterday. Most do not like the look.

        • moose | August 21, 2011 at 7:36 pm |

          we can agree to disagree because you can make valid arguments for both, i’m fine with that, but i don’t even like the throwbacks outside of the pre-big ten schedule. UNLESS it marks the anniversary of some big game with iowa or someone that is worth remembering for some reason, like maybe on the 25th anniversary of the krenzel’s holy buckeye they could wear that uni against purdue, but why would you wear it against michigan, we drilled the 24-9, so marking that team by wearing it against michigan was false. what kept that team in the conference title hunt and ultimately the, yawn, national title hunt was the purdue game. i am not thinking of a good example outside of that, but that is only because i is still off season, i am still geting my mind back in gear. i will think of better ones by the time we have this discussion again, because it seems the two of us are always on the opposite side come time for these discussions.

        • moose | August 21, 2011 at 7:42 pm |

          missed an m on them, “would be” not “should be”, and “pointless” not “false”. sorry, i was rushing so i good go cook some grubs.

  • Nate James | August 21, 2011 at 10:11 am |

    Wow, I haven’t even been 100% anti-Pro Combat, in fact I liked a few of them, but that wide stripe / two color facemask is awful, I really hope that doesn’t become popular at some point.

    • LarryB | August 21, 2011 at 2:04 pm |

      Gee I admit I had not even noticed the 2 color face mask. I was only looking at the wide stripe and helmet color.

      I like the helmet but do not like the 2 color face mask. I simply missed it.

  • Murphy | August 21, 2011 at 10:24 am |

    The Boise article actually states “the Broncos’ uniforms are predominantly royal blue, a salute to their famous turf”. Color me: annoyed. I guess their school colors had nothing to do with it.

  • Pat | August 21, 2011 at 10:28 am |

    Just curious, if being a Christian is a choice then how can a sandwich be Christian? Since that chicken A probably didn’t choose to be slaughtered and 2 can’t make choices on a philosophical level anyhow. It’s sort of an oxymoron. If any religion is a choice then there are no such things as Catholic or Budhis beads, Mormon colleges, Christian T-Shirts or Muslim head coverings. Sorry not really a uni-notable comment but hey you through it in their so it’s fair game.

    • Pierre | August 21, 2011 at 10:45 am |

      Chicken sandwiches don’t believe in evolution…’nuff said.

    • The Jeff | August 21, 2011 at 10:46 am |

      I think you need to pass that to the left now, man…

    • Paul Lukas | August 21, 2011 at 10:53 am |

      If you were in a Nazi-occupied country during WWII, you didn’t “choose” to be Jewish. That choice was made for you.

      • Chris | August 21, 2011 at 8:08 pm |

        I’m sorry, and I could be wrong, but are you comparing Chik-Fil-A with Nazi Germany?

        • StLMarty | August 22, 2011 at 12:39 am |

          Keep looking. Never ask a question without thinking about the answer first.

      • EMD | August 23, 2011 at 5:34 pm |

        A little too close to Godwin’s Law there.

    • Pat | August 21, 2011 at 6:49 pm |

      So I never intended to cause a firestorm. I was just simply stating that an inanimate object or dead animal(live one for that matter) in the form of a sandwich can’t have a religious affiliation because somebody’s faith is a personal choice. To state that it’s a Christian Sandwich Game is not only tacky, slightly ridiculous as well as potentially intended to poke a fight(but I have no way of knowing your true intentions, your comment could have just been tongue-in-cheak and was blown out of proportion by me or others), it’s also a plainly false statement due to the fact that a chicken sandwich can not make a decision whether it wants to be Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Jewish etc.

      The whole comparing my comment to Nazi Germany thing was interesting to say the least. What am I supposed to do with that? What happened to Jews during the holocaust was horrendous and to somehow bring that into a conversation about chicken sandwiches, football uniforms and personal faith seems slightly extreme and out of place. To try to prove a point by going to the utmost extreme and putting me into a corner where I have to argue against the holocaust puts me in an extremely awkward position.

      Also, as a Christian I don’t even take offense at your comments about a Christian Sandwich Game. I only posted my comment to make people consider that calling an inanimate object with an adjective of religious faith is sort of an unvalid comment. As far as I’m concerned the Christian church has it dead wrong when it comes to it’s treatment of homosexuals and homosexuality. Standing with picket signs and trying to shame people is in no way, shape or form giving away the love that I have experienced through my faith.

      That all being said, the uniforms are ugly, I’ve never had food from Chic-Fil-A, I don’t mind chain eateries though, I really enjoy your blog even though I can agree to disagree sometimes, and chicken sandwiches are just chicken sandwiches even if you call them Christians.

      • StLMarty | August 22, 2011 at 12:40 am |

        How do you spell gobbolygoop?

  • Britton Thomas | August 21, 2011 at 10:38 am |

    It’s not often Boise is the best looking team on the field. These are an abomination.

    On another note, here is a first look at the Braves patch honoring Ernie Johnson, Sr.

  • Cedric | August 21, 2011 at 11:05 am |

    Check out the new USF Football unis and helmets… the green helmet is awesome!

    • EMD | August 23, 2011 at 5:36 pm |

      Ugh. Unis look like the super-stretchy travesties the Giants wear.

  • John | August 21, 2011 at 11:12 am |

    Does Nike really think the “Nike Pro Combat” word mark is necessary? Like someone could look at either of those sets and think “Geez, I wonder who came up with that uniform?” It’s that little touch that pushes excess into absurdity.

    Why can’t teams (and really, boosters) embrace the less is more idea? A great team should want to wear straight forward designs, and let their play on the field speak for itself. Then again, given Georgia’s recent mediocrity, maybe it should be no surprise they need a gimmicky uni to get some press. Since the next press will be about getting steamrolled by Boise.

    • Paul Lukas | August 21, 2011 at 11:31 am |

      Very little that Nike does is “necessary.” Most of it is simply to reinforce the notion of Nike.

    • pushbutton | August 21, 2011 at 11:41 am |

      Why can’t teams (and really, boosters) embrace the less is more idea?

      Concept that I wish would take hold, somewhere: every uni change is an admission that something was wrong with your uniform…your FLAG….your way of life….

      Have more pride than that.

  • Ricko | August 21, 2011 at 11:14 am |

    A good night at Candlestick for Raiders-49ers.

    C’mon, people, if you’re so all about fighting for colors go enlist, for god’s sake. Put your macho where your mouth is.


  • MC | August 21, 2011 at 11:21 am |

    You know… I never thought I’d see the day when my Hokies didn’t take part in some whoring out to Nike’s desires. So, so glad they opted out of Pro Combat this year. Last year was bad enough. Though, matte black was pretty awesome. Wonder what a matte maroon helmet would look like?

  • Jim Vilk | August 21, 2011 at 11:24 am |

    Of course, I’ll need to see game photos to make an accurate assessment. But until then…

    1) I’d wear the UGA Toy Combat uni. Like the helmet, like the jersey and the contrasting sleeves, don’t mind monochrome red. The facemask? Meh. Not a dealbreaker, though.

    2) While the Dawgs’ costume isn’t as good as the regular uni, the Broncos’ costume far exceeds the regular stuff they wear. The game may actually look better than if both teams decided not to dress up for the occasion.

    This is assuming there are no butt stripes or tramp stamps on the pants.

    • Simply Moono | August 21, 2011 at 3:21 pm |

      “This is assuming there are no butt stripes or tramp stamps on the pants.”

      In that case… Prepare for Combat, BCC. Their Pro Combat uni (which they wore in the 2010 Maaco Bowl) is essentially a toned-down version of their normal uniform, so we’ll be seeing a normal Bronco team, sans-shoulder tabs and butt stripes.

  • Jim Vilk | August 21, 2011 at 11:32 am |

    Happy Birthday, Ricko!

    Love the dueling comics today. So Phil…they say the camera adds ten pounds to someone…apparently the comics add muscles to you? ;)

    • Ricko | August 21, 2011 at 11:44 am |

      And hair.

      • Phil Hecken | August 21, 2011 at 6:16 pm |

        i think we’re *both* a bit younger in that strip than we are now…

    • pushbutton | August 21, 2011 at 11:53 am |

      Oh yes! Happy birthday and I loved the football strip!

  • mmwatkin | August 21, 2011 at 11:33 am |

    I don’t get the outrage for the Pro Combat uniforms. The players get excited for them and they are a great recruiting tool for programs.

    It is one game.

    • Paul Lukas | August 21, 2011 at 11:38 am |

      That is a perfectly reasonable position — if you don’t care about uniform design.

      But most of the people who read this site DO care. So they get outraged (or, sometimes, excited, or whatever). Makes no sense to come to a uni-centric site and tell people not to get worked up about uniforms.

      • mmwatkin | August 21, 2011 at 11:47 am |

        I love uniform design. I love old school looks opposed to modern design. I have read this blog every day since day 1.

        But this is one game. Georgia is going to go back to their regular uniforms in week 2. And personally, I don’t think that this particular PC uniform is worth getting worked up about. Outside of the helmet, it is pretty tame. The wide stripe looks goofy, but I like the two-toned facemask. I think that could be used in some pretty interesting ways.

        I follow the Michigan State program and the development of the Pro Combat uniforms they are unveiling on Sept. 1. It wasn’t an issue of Nike cramming these things down their throats. Players went to head coach Mark Dantonio and asked about Pro Combat uniforms for this season. Calls were made and Nike agreed. The players have had the majority of control over the design. While I may or may not agree with the outcome, I like that the players who have put a lot of time, energy and commitment into the program get to design a uniform for ONE GAME.

        So while a lot of us seem like old men yelling at clouds, I like that the uniforms are highly anticipated by players and fans alike.

        • Paul Lukas | August 21, 2011 at 11:53 am |

          While I’m not particularly interested in letting the inmates run the asylum, I’d be more favorably disposed toward your point of view if the uniforms were called “Players’ Choice” or something like that, instead of some bullshit marketing term that’s designed to glorify Nike.

        • Kyle Allebach | August 21, 2011 at 10:40 pm |

          Why don’t they make “Pro Combat” look like real professional uniforms? Or would that remove the Nike from the design?

    • Ricko | August 21, 2011 at 11:41 am |

      How’s that general attitude (“Please, oh, please, say you’ll pretend to go to college and play for us wearning these cool superhero/video game unis”) working out for college football these days?

      Can we spell “Miami”?

      • Bob | August 21, 2011 at 11:54 am |

        If it were up to the players and students they’d have a big picture of T-Pain on the helmet and the jersey would have ads for Twitter and Facebook all over it, because that’s what aesthetically retarded young people think is cool right now.

        • Jim Vilk | August 21, 2011 at 12:03 pm |

          It would probably look like a giant tattoo.

          Like this,

          only with numbers on it.

        • Kek | August 21, 2011 at 3:10 pm |

          T-Pain! LOL!

          Twitter handles as NOB…hmmmm…

          But this string brings up a pretty interesting debate. We as critics of unis can like or hate certain designs all we want but if the players are excited about trying new things that it does show a disconnect.

          Let’s face it, I haven’t heard any college player come out and say “these uniforms are awful”.

          However, I’m sure there are many stories of bad uniforms in the 70s and 80s getting rejected or lampooned by players.

          It’s just a “times they are a changing” type thing. I don’t see anything wrong with a blend of traditional style combined with input from players. An even balance can help that inmates from the asylum type thing from occuring.

        • Simply Moono | August 21, 2011 at 3:47 pm |

          “Let’s face it, I haven’t heard any college player come out and say “these uniforms are awful”.”

          That’s because the media will be on that player like flies on pie.

  • Bob | August 21, 2011 at 11:48 am |

    This uniform wouldn’t be so abominable if it were imposed on a school other than Georgia, which has one of the top five uniforms in all of college football. But when you go from a kit as gorgeous and timeless as the real one to this…..words escape me. Nike is a cancer on professional sports. This looks like something out of Buck Rogers in the 25th Century.

    • Bob | August 21, 2011 at 11:49 am |

      *Nike is a cancer on professional AND college sports, excuse me.

      • Jim Vilk | August 21, 2011 at 11:52 am |

        Same thing. ;)

        • Ricko | August 21, 2011 at 12:20 pm |

          Wait’ll this Miami thing is done. This looks very much like a tipping point.

          Either college athletes will become low paid professionals or there’ll be a movement back to the concept of student athletes (giggle) Oh, THAT’s likely.

          Actually, it would be just as well if kids could give the NFL a shot right out of high school. They aren’t serious about college anyway, and it would very quickly get all those with the IQ of an ice cube out of the system entirely. I think both games, college and pro, would be better off.

          No one is saying anyone should be deprived of work. Just let’s see if they’re really qualifed and be done with it. Let’s remind them that growth and maturity ARE ncessary components in life.

        • Tim E. O'B | August 21, 2011 at 12:46 pm |

          “it would be just as well if kids could give the NFL a shot right out of high school.”

          Ricko I know it’s your birthday but NO!

          That would do to NCAAF what has happened to NCAAMBB: a complete dilution of the talent.

          I don’t care if student athletes don’t care about class, they still have to go (granted to some easy classes but…).

          The average student athlete’s time is taken up year round by training for his/her sport and has a difficult time finding work around their bizarre schedules. Compensate them so the boosters seem like an unnecessary risk and be done with it.

        • Ricko | August 21, 2011 at 1:05 pm |

          That’s what I said. College students are very close to being paid. Enough with the pretense.

          Although I can’t help but think of Christian Ponder being “disappointed” that he still wasn’t listed as the Vikings #1 QB after the McNabb trade. Did he really think there wasn’t a difference between the college game and the pros?

          So we’re pretty much saying the same thing. “You ain’t ready for the NFL kid, and maybe not life, either. So go to college (I mean, actually GO to college) and play football there first.”

          The problem is that colleges, in their raging desire to win, take kids who have no intention of being degree-oriented…and that’s when things go the hell. THOSE are the kids to whom I wish we could say, “You think you’re hot shit, don’t need to make the sacrifices to play college ball? Fine. Let’s see how you do in an NFL minicamp.”

  • Lloyd Davis | August 21, 2011 at 12:26 pm |

    Oops. Don’t know how that comment I posted about the Jays unis got filed under Ricko’s about the nastiness at Candlestick. Can someone please ‘tweak’ the placement?

  • Tim E. O'B | August 21, 2011 at 12:30 pm |

    Speaking of Nike Pro Combat, today over at I posted a new article featuring my take on the Pac-12’s football unis. Lots of fun designs, if I do say so myself.

    And Happy Birthday RICKO!

  • tosaman | August 21, 2011 at 12:39 pm |

    Attended a rare (for these parts) Saturday night high school football game.

    Gotta say it was a good-looking game, uni-wise, even if the visitors were BFBS. No extraneous piping, no weird stripes or blotches on the jerseys and pants, no additional bumper stickers.

    Red beat Green 21 – 13 with 2 4th-quarter TDs.

  • StLMarty | August 21, 2011 at 1:42 pm |

    Is Cam Newton the first player to play in the same jersey he wore at the draft?

  • StLMarty | August 21, 2011 at 1:45 pm |

    Has anyone ever discussed the radness of the jersey #’s of the #1 picks from 2000-2004?

    • StLMarty | August 21, 2011 at 1:46 pm |


  • JAF | August 21, 2011 at 2:10 pm |
    • JAF | August 21, 2011 at 2:15 pm |

      This article highlights the companies involvement with the Georgia facemasks.

  • Geeman | August 21, 2011 at 2:43 pm |

    Three-way tie for first place in tackiness:

    1. Calling it the Chik-Fil-A Bowl or Game.
    2. Georgia’s new uniforms.
    3. Calling it the Christian Sandwich Game.

  • Bob | August 21, 2011 at 2:50 pm |

    Sadly this is likely going to be far from the worst design Nike shits out on to the public. Scrap the helmet and tweak the uniform somewhat and it would be a reasonably serviceable design, unlike some of horrific Pro Combat monstrosities they’ve released in the past. As a die-hard Army football fan I dread to see what they have in store for us, although I suppose they couldn’t do any worse than that camouflage abomination we trotted out last year. Wait….could they?

  • Kek | August 21, 2011 at 2:59 pm |

    Andrew McCutcheon (sp?) going high pants today…hit a HR, so there will no doubt be cry for him to make that a full time look.

    • Brian C. | August 21, 2011 at 3:05 pm |

      Did they get the game going? Since the switch to digital cable my FSNP (I still call it FSNP & 3 Rivers) only comes in when it wants to. Funny how the regulars started the year & the team was awful then when they got hurt & guys that could actually play were in there they made it to 1st. Now that the regulars are mostly all back they’re down the crapper again. As long as the Nuttings make their $ nothing will change.

      • Kek | August 21, 2011 at 3:26 pm |

        hahah, you mean ROOT…er, I’m still calling it KBL!!!

        Yes, they 2-0 Bucs heading to the 5th

        • Brian C. | August 21, 2011 at 5:17 pm |

          Of course it has now decided to work. Just in time to see the 9th. Fantastic!
          Not uni-related but I’m hoping this doesn’t just bug me. I REALLY wish they’d fix that indented block at the bottom of the wall behind the plate. Can’t see it much when righties bat but when a lefty us up it’s all I can look at. It’s been like that since the park opened too.

  • Brian C. | August 21, 2011 at 3:00 pm |

    After seeing these for the 1st time today I don’t hate my Falcons clown suits quite as much anymore. They’re not great but if this is what they come up with using similar colors maybe I should stop hoping the swoosh will decide to change things up for Atlanta when they take over. Even as a modernist that is just painful to view.

  • Silver Creek Doug | August 21, 2011 at 3:03 pm |

    As an UGA alum, I can tell you this.

    Most fans hate them and the players love them.

    My biggest beef with them is the monochrome red (and it’s not even the right shade of red). I would have preferred keeping the silver britches.

    Also, I like the silver helmet (we wore silver helmets from the 40s to the early 60s), but would have liked a narrower red stripe. A black stripe would have been fine too.

    The two tone facemask is garish. Black or red please, not both.

  • hugh.c.mcbride | August 21, 2011 at 3:35 pm |

    Happy 65th, Ricko. Appreciate the history & perspective you provide here. Also, props to Phil & his flowing locks for the b-day ‘toon.

  • Casey Hart | August 21, 2011 at 4:13 pm |

    It’s days like today I’m less ashamed of Carolina’s supposedly-navy-but-really-purple pants.

  • traxel | August 21, 2011 at 4:19 pm |

    Knee jerk reactions to UGA uniforms….

    1. Too much red. Silver pants would be good.
    2. Belt is too big.
    3. Very plain, in a good way.
    4. Hope to see the undershirt on everyone. That alone, there not being any exposed pits, is a GREAT thing. IF it is consistent on all players.
    5. The lines on the collar would look better if they were on the black of the sleeves too. Consistency.
    6. I’d put a small white stripe between the sleeve black and red. This would match the white number outline.
    7. Hope the socks aren’t red, unless they were wearing silver pants.
    8. This is true for most teams, the numbers are too small. I like Alabama’s HUGE numbers.
    9. I like the helmet. I think it will get old very quickly, but for one game, even a couple of seasons, I like it. The old one is still better though, but would not look good on this all red getup.
    10. I like the face mask. I realize they are now designing every piece of canvas they possibly can but it is subtle enough to not bother me. And I actually find it kind of interesting.
    11. No superfluous color swatches. The sleeves are basic and work with the no sleeve format of today. No goofy lines. Good.
    12. VERY glad they didn’t go all black.

    As for Nike, I consider it a school problem, not a Nike problem. Nike is a private company who has been allowed to come in and control too much, as we all know. I don’t particularly like it but the colleges have allowed it to happen to them instead of controlling it in the first place. They had a choice. Now, that being said, sometimes we don’t realize a problem until we have already been overcome by it. And that is what seems to have happened. Getting rid of a cockroach problem is always much harder than preventing one. Don’t have an answer for you. Good luck college presidents. You have a cockroach problem and you need an exit strategy.

  • traxel | August 21, 2011 at 4:24 pm |

    Happy 21st Birthday Ricko. Now, do you have enough pull to get a comment out of moderation?

    • Ricko | August 21, 2011 at 4:35 pm |

      Up top, click on “CONTACT” and type “Moderation sucks”.

      That usually works.

  • teenchy | August 21, 2011 at 4:30 pm |

    I’ll pile on and wish Ricko a happy 65th as well. I don’t have strong opinions on a lot of things discussed here but I appreciate those that have some logic behind them. Ricko’s typically do (at least, that I can follow) and are infused with a healthy dose of perspective.

    I also think Benchies is thisclosetobeingsyndicatable. It has some of the better elements of Non Sequitur and Shoe without the logical inconsistencies or tired stereotypes. So thanks for what you bring to the plate here, Ricko, and here’s to many more.

    • teenchy | August 21, 2011 at 4:32 pm |

      Oops, I didn’t close those italics.

  • jewlover | August 21, 2011 at 4:34 pm |

    What a racist comment by Paul the Jew!

    • Phil Hecken | August 21, 2011 at 6:02 pm |

      sorry i didn’t catch this sooner, but you, just bought yourself a lifetime ban from uni watch

      don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out

  • jewlover | August 21, 2011 at 4:35 pm |

    Have fun in the oven with your peeps!

    • Ricko | August 21, 2011 at 4:38 pm |

      So it’s okay as long as YOU’RE the racist?
      Is that whay you’re saying?

      What a dumb question.
      It IS called “white supremacy”, isn’t it.

      Boy, for a white guy I sure am stupid.

      • jewlover | August 21, 2011 at 4:50 pm |

        If Paul the Christian hating Met fan Jew wants to be racist than so will I! Hey Paul I dropped a penny on the ground, quick jump on your bike and come pick it up!

        • StLMarty | August 21, 2011 at 5:23 pm |

          May the lord bless you and keep you.
          Seriously. He can keep you as long as he likes.

        • Brian C. | August 21, 2011 at 5:25 pm |

          Wow. I don’t do the religion thing at ALL so I don’t care who thinks what as for that but with the economy the way it is I’ll snag that penny before it ever got near the ground. Every cent helps these days.

        • moose | August 21, 2011 at 5:58 pm |

          i have a strange feeling he won’t be meeting any lord worth meeting marty, least of which the one he thinks he will, but i think it is safe to say he will be keeping him an eternity.

        • Chris | August 21, 2011 at 8:14 pm |

          I disagree with Paul on just about every political position his has. But you sir, are a schmuck.

  • BurghFan | August 21, 2011 at 5:29 pm |

    Happy birthday, Ricko.

    My favorite description of the 1982 AFC Championship was that with the tiger stripes and lightning bolts, people around the country would be trying to adjust their vertical hold.

  • Phil Hecken | August 21, 2011 at 6:07 pm |

    oh yeah, happy birthday (again) rick!

  • Simply Moono | August 21, 2011 at 6:07 pm |

    Happy Birthday, Ricko! =D

  • Paul Lukas | August 21, 2011 at 6:10 pm |

    Just got home after being out and about for a few hours and read this (from the sandwich discussion above):

    If straight people threw their sexuality in my face, I’d be annoyed with them as well.

    Quite possibly the single most ignorant, idiotic thing ever said on this site.

    • EMD | August 23, 2011 at 5:32 pm |

      Apparently, he’s never seen Jersey Shore.

  • Graf Zeppelin | August 21, 2011 at 7:14 pm |

    OK, I know it’s preseason, but I’m starting to think that Fat Bastard has something against the Jets’ standard home uniform. They only wore it 4 times last year; they wore white at home twice, and green-over-green twice.

    Green-over-white is my favorite Jets uni; I want to see more of it this year.

    • Paul Lukas | August 21, 2011 at 7:19 pm |

      That does seem odd. Do you know if he lets the players have a say in what gets worn?

      • Graf Zeppelin | August 21, 2011 at 7:54 pm |

        I don’t think so; I’ve never heard or read that he does. Jets have worn white in home openers in recent years, due to heat, I guess, but last year’s home opener was a night game. There was a blurb on the Jets website last year that Rex had broken out the all-greens against the Texans because they hadn’t played well at home.

        I don’t know; between the injuries and the refusal to wear their best uni combo it seems the Jets are turning into another local club with early-60s vintage…..

        • Paul Lukas | August 21, 2011 at 7:56 pm |

          Remember, the classic Namath-era look was brought back by Parcells when he became coach/GM. Wonder if Rex is trying to create his own look/feel for the team….

        • Graf Zeppelin | August 21, 2011 at 8:07 pm |

          Maybe; they did win SBIII in the all-whites (as Phil points out below), and Rex is really into Jets history so I was surprised that he didn’t retire the green trou. But the Jets wearing white all the time reminds me of the Joe Walton era.

        • Chris | August 21, 2011 at 8:25 pm |

          The Joe Walton era. I’d successfully blocked that from my mind. Until now. Thanks for nothing.

    • Phil Hecken | August 21, 2011 at 8:03 pm |

      what uniform did the jets win their only super bowl in?

      i know it was a LONG TIME ago … probably before you were born, and I’m having trouble remembering how they looked then

      • Graf Zeppelin | August 21, 2011 at 8:08 pm |

        The all-whites, but not by choice; they were the designated visiting team in SB III. They won the AFL title at home in the greens.

  • Andrew Seagraves | August 22, 2011 at 12:05 am |

    has anyone found a screen grab of McLeod Bethel-Thompson’s jersey for the 49ers? I am watching a replay of the Niners/Raiders preseason game and talk about a LONG NOB!

  • Tripple Lindy | August 22, 2011 at 12:41 am |

    As a UGA alumnus, I sincerely apologize for the corporate kowtowing our athletic department is currently displaying. When this game was announced last November, my excitement immediately turned to dread, because i knew Nike would taint it like they did Boise/VT. As a designer, i have to say these uniforms are an embarrassment to the university’s history and just plain offensive to the eye.

    Tinker Hatfield and his cronies at Nike Design care nothing of the universities, alumni, or heritage they claim to be respecting. It’s all about the brand, although anyone reading this blog understands that already.

    Just wait until Nike gets ahold of the NFL contract; fun times ahead…