Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 2:59 pm
Yea. Agreed.
Page 6 of 8
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 3:02 pm
And I agree!
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 4:38 pm
me@smu wrote:expony18 wrote:how about this?
this image was provided by:
http://smufootballblog.blogspot.com/200 ... -ebay.html
Ding ding ding we have a winner
BUSH LIBRARY!!!!!
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 4:46 pm
Lets try to not get to close to "New Team-New Attitude" we tried that once before. I wore both the white/striped and dark blue helmets. I have to say that I prefered the latter. I think that we should go back to the early 80's unis with the stripes on the helmets. Plain just looks a little silly to me.(Remember the "Jets" unis) 
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 4:53 pm
35straight wrote:Lets try to not get to close to "New Team-New Attitude" we tried that once before. I wore both the white/striped and dark blue helmets. I have to say that I prefered the latter. I think that we should go back to the early 80's unis with the stripes on the helmets. Plain just looks a little silly to me.(Remember the "Jets" unis)
35
Thx for comment. Any other insights on what players prefer. Appears you played recently? Colors? Home/Away? Stripes? Swooshes? Preference looking downfield for a teammate or the enemy? Practical issues? Cool factor?
.............
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:02 pm
Not sure I agree with you, cause I'm not sure what you're saying. Unless you are saying we shouldn't have changed the unis from the classic national championsip uniforms. Old school uniforms do not deter recruits. Tell that to LSU and Ohio St. and especially Penn St., who haven't changed their unis since Warren Van Buren was president. I agree with DickerJames, there are some things a coach should not be able to touch.
That's our problem. You guys still believe that we are the equal of the LSU's Penn. State's and Ohio State's. So far, SMU is the mold on the dirt under the mat that those schools use to wipe thier feet on. You want to attract kids to East Be Nowhere State (aka present day SMU) you'll need to do something to stand out to the current crop of recruits, not their fathers.
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:13 pm
I prefer the classic look of the 80's. As long as we don't emulate...
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:29 pm
EastStang wrote:I prefer the classic look of the 80's. As long as we don't emulate...
That is one terrible looking uniform:
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:33 pm
almost as bad as this:
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:34 pm
What's with Oregon teams?
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:35 pm
FWMustang wrote:almost as bad as this:
this uniform top looks like he's wearing a bra and it was just pushed up.
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:36 pm
Water Pony wrote:What's with Oregon teams?
N-I-K-E
thank goodness we're w/ adidas now. No more piping, panels or ridiculousness
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:37 pm
cs09viking wrote:this uniform top looks like he's wearing a bra and it was just pushed up.
sorry I found a different pic that had all of them
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:37 pm
cs09viking wrote:FWMustang wrote:almost as bad as this:
this uniform top looks like he's wearing a bra and it was just pushed up.
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:37 pm
FWMustang wrote:Water Pony wrote:What's with Oregon teams?
N-I-K-E
thank goodness we're w/ adidas now. No more piping, panels or ridiculousness
I don't think you can blame Nike, it is the school's decision. USC, Penn State and UT among others use Nike and are classics.