Skip to content

Packers to Wear White Color Rush Uni for First Time in Three Years

Posted in:

Surprising news yesterday out of Green Bay, as the Packers announced that they will be wearing their all-white Color Rush uniform for tomorrow night’s game against the Titans.

Why is this surprising (at least to me)? Three reasons:

  1. When the CR program debuted for Thursday-night games in 2015, it was optional. The Packers were among the teams that opted out.
  2. When the Packers eventually did add a CR design in 2016, they went with mono-white, which I interpreted as “We’re really not into this program, so we’re half-assing it with a white uniform instead of one of those crazy team-colored costumes that most of the other teams are wearing.”
  3. They didn’t wear the CR uni at all in 2020 or 2021 (the last time they wore it was on Oct. 14, 2019 against the Lions), which I interpreted as “Thank god that nonsense is over. Now we’re burning the white pants.”

But I was clearly mistaken! So the Pack will be bringing back this uniform tomorrow night. It’s not a terrible look, but definitely not as good as their usual home and road uniforms.

A few other notes about this:

  • According to the Gridiron Uniform Database, this will be only the sixth time in Packers history that they’ve worn white at home.
  • I suppose the one good thing about the mono-white combo is that we don’t have to worry about some players wearing white socks instead of the team color, because everyone will be wearing white socks — or, in most cases, white tights. Speaking of which: In that photo of Aaron Rodgers at the top of this page, see those vertical seams running down the length of his tights? I reallyreallyreally hate that. Seems to be standard on whatever brand of tights NFL players currently wear, and holy shit does it bug me.
  • The Packers’ opponents tomorrow night, the Titans, will be going mono-navy, so this will be an old-fashioned Thursday-night mono-vs.-mono game.


Sacre (Powder) Bleu!

The Canadiens debuted their new Reverse Retro uniforms last night (additional photos here). I rated this design pretty low in my recent RR Power Rankings, but that was based solely on the jersey. Now that I can see the full uniform, it’s better than I expected — not awesome, but respectable. Have I mentioned lately how much I hate it when teams/leagues unveil just a jersey instead of the full uni?

Here’s how the Habs uniforms look in action:



Substack Reminder

In case you missed it on Tuesday, I had an exclusive story on why the Bucks can no longer wear cream uniforms. It’s a truly fascinating story, and also an enraging one. It’s over on Substack, but it’s not paywalled — you can check it out here.

• • • • •
Happy Birthday to “Collector’s Corner” columnist Brinke Guthrie, who’s celebrating another trip around the sun today. Enjoy your special day, Brinke!

Comments (39)

    Habs fan here…I’m sorry but it needs a little bit of red, literally anywhere else. If they’re really trying to salute the Expos, then they were great at having red and blue on the powder base! This is just too blue. Turn that white bottom stripe at the hem red? Outline the numbers in red? Do the NOB’s in red? Something red! As it is, it looks like a random blue jersey but where the jersey designers forgot the Canadiens have red on the logo and didn’t hear that the standard equipment would get worn.
    Reverse Retro seems like a fun program, but clearly YMMV by team. It’s just not working for us. And the record sucks…we’re 1-4-1 in RR and the 1 was a shootout

    It reminds me of the old Atlanta Thrashers alternate that was light blue. Not in a good way. I also associate “blue” with Toronto

    What helps the Canadiens uniform is the alternating royal blue and powder blue (and white) elements and stripes.

    Another that helps the Canadiens RR is the fact that it’s the Canadiens, and even when they look bad they still look good.

    HBD Brinke… always enjoy CC! And I like the subtle little jab there: old-fashioned TNF mono on mono.

    Fortunately white over white isn’t a bad look, and while a downgrade from the standard white over yellow, it still looks good (minus the lack of socks).

    I think uni watch needs to update the definition of mono, specifically with regard to the NFL. When teams could only wear one helmet it was sort of appropriate (though still incorrect) to refer to various looks as mono because the only things that could change were the pants and jersey. Now that teams can choose to have an alternate helmet to create legit mono (head to toe) it seems inaccurate and misleading. In the age of alternate helmets, if I see a headline that says “Packers going mono white” I am going to assume they are debuting an alternate white helmet as well. Not sure what the appropriate new term should be, something like matching pants?

    I think white over white works because we are more accustomed to seeing it in other sports, especially baseball. You bring up a good point, though, since if the whole point of “color rush” is overwhelming the eyes with a single color, why not go from head to toe and wear this?


    A Packers white alternate helmet would indeed be an interesting look. Imagine going full-mono-white in a classic Green Bay playoff blizzard?

    Disagree- the white pants would make excellent road pants for the packers against teams that don’t wear white pants. Green and gold look even better sometimes when they have the space to breathe.

    The habs look like garbage in those breezers. Lazy garbage too, like someone scarfing a Mountain Dew and dropping an empty flamin hot Cheetos bag on the ground, even though he stands a meter away from the waiste receptacle.

    The Habs should have gone with alternate breezers and gloves, replacing the red trim with the light blue to better complement the RR uni. As is, since outside of the C on the logo there is no red on the jersey, the red trim on the equipment looks a bit out of place.

    This is going to be a hot take, but I prefer the Packers’ all-white over the yellow pants. I understand the yellow pants are traditional, but I’m generally not a fan of white-over-yellow.

    Although they would certainly look better with green socks rather than white.

    As a guy whose college team uni was just like the Packers I would have loved to have worn the all whites.

    Packers in white jerseys and pants somehow screams college or CFL. Not bad looking but not the best: yellow helmet, yellow pants with the same striping. And preferably a green jersey. Not a Packers fan but I love their uniform, one of the best ever.

    Why is there an ever-so-slight White trim between the striping in the Packers jersey sleeves and neck, but not on the stripes down the side of the pants? LSU has the same issue, but in reverse. What gives?

    Packers CR could be so much worse. I assume Tennessee will then be wearing their oompa loompa blueberry duds. Go Titans!

    FYI Olbermann mentioned the Bucks and the end of the Cream City uniforms on the Countdown podcast today

    The Packers are a bit hidebound, so much so you could introduce another green and yellow team, upset all the traditions of Green Bay, and still come off with a pretty good uniform. For instance, I’d love to see the Pack with two-color numbers, but I know it’ll never happen.

    Speaking of CR, and saving a final grade until you see the full uni on the field…did ANYONE see or even care about the all black/black/black debut by the Carolina Panthers last Thursday??? I usually dislike CR, especially all black (I think it’s lazy and REALLY don’t like it at all when it is BFBS.)

    But, I actually found myself liking the combo for Carolina. Black is one of their main colors, and we think of Panthers being mostly black in color (I know, panthers are not truly black in real life, but it is what comes to mind.). The helmets looked sharp (could have used a little while to help see the logo/stripes better) and the numbers tally popped off their jerseys.

    If I missed the comment on the page I’m sorry.

    I thought the Panthers in head-to-toe black looked like what a 12-year old thinks is “fire”.
    For me, their get-up was a minor league/high school/Hollywood style of look, and decidedly non-NFL.



    random question… why does the “winged severed foot” icon in the Uni-Watch Plus logo missing a feather? Is that intentional? Asking because…I mean….if I have to explain why I am asking then you probably don’t “GET IT”…lol.

    But seriously… what am I missing?

    random question… why does the “winged severed foot” icon in the Uni-Watch Plus logo missing a feather? Is that intentional? Asking because…I mean….if I have to explain why I am asking then you probably don’t “GET IT”…lol.

    But seriously… what am I missing?

    Overlooking the helmet, The Packers “crazy team colored costume”…the green/yellow 1950-something throwback set… makes for a better CR than does the white-over-white, which is a really nice looking change of pace.
    The Titans mono-navy is ok to trot out occasionally; it’s much more tolerable than the all-Titan Blue CR used before the redesign.

    Happy Birthday, Brinke!

    This should be at least the 6th time GB has worn white @ home. GUD’s white at home page doesn’t include the 2019 game vs Detroit

    The Packers white/white would be a very solid uniform if they wore some nifty striped socks like back in the 60s to go with.

    100% agree about the seam on the tights that players wear. It cheapens the whole look.

    The Canadiens are known as the bleu, blanc et rouge in French Canada. So why couldn’t the jersey have some of that rouge besides the crest? How about red numbers outlined in dark blue or white? Two-color NOBs, sil vous plais!!

    The all-white uniform, when paired with actual socks, is actually a nice look for them every once in a while.

    not a packers fan but the all white unis work for them….not sure if pairing them with the green jerseys would work or not, just to change things up once in a while. wonder if they will ever go all yellow again. an interesting look that reminds me of the new bears all orange unis.

Comments are closed.