ADVERTISEMENT

Traditional Uniforms

The RUTGERS on the front was big, the names on the back were big, the numbers were big, the block R on the helmets and pants stood out.
We wore black socks and black shoes...bad ass!

But the uniforms after 2006 had Rutgers' font on it instead of a generic one. Other than that, the color scheme and layout was nearly identical. The numbers are still big. The font is less stretched. So why is 2006, with the same, generic font found on multiple high schools, so cool?

Do people just like the generic?
 
The new uniforms look like we are some directional university in a 3 electoral vote state. Maybe we should make the field salmon pink too.

Always love the directional school comment. Like Northwestern? UCLA? USC? Cal Berkeley?
 
"Do recruits really want this or do they want a classy, tradition based uniform? If not, how do the SEC and Big Ten teams recruit? I don't believe it helps recruiting."

It ABSOLUTELY helps with recruiting. As much as many here despise Penn State, thousands of kids grow up wanting to wear those uniforms -- the same ones used for decades. Same with Michigan and Alabama and many, many other programs.

Why is it that the traditionally strong programs are able to keep the same uniforms for decades while other programs have to switch weekly in order to catch the attention of high school students? I think it's the same reason people here wouldn't want the NY Yankees to change their uniform. The same reason I HATED when the NY Rangers brought on a 3rd Jersey. Tradition means something to die-hard fans.

I'm not saying you're not a die-hard fan if you go for the gimmick uniforms or love the way Oregon puts on a new uniform each week, but the die-hard fans who dream of one day playing for their team have a certain uniform image in their mind. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that's why most of the biggest schools in college football and why most of the biggest pro sports teams DO NOT change their uniforms. It doesn't make them old fashioned... it means they have pride in their history.

I'm in my forties... I know many people in their forties who like the flavor of the week uniforms and many more who don't. It may strictly be an age thing, but I think it's more of a generation thing. When I was 8 years old I loved the same uniforms I love now. Tradition meant something to me as a kid and still does. I'm sure it means something to most of the kids who grow up wanting to play for the Penn States, the Alabamas, the Michigans of the world as well.

Maybe RU just hasn't won enough for people to care about the jersey...
 
I'll have to agree with whoever thought the "traditional" uniforms have a high school vibe about them. I'm not saying the salmon ones are better, but I was never a big fan of the fake traditional uniforms Schiano came up with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bamm Bamm Rubble
We should:
-Wear the 2011 uniforms on every Homecoming
-Wear white pants and make the silver numbers white on the new red home uniforms
-call it a day

Yes! I'm not a fan of the "abused chrome" helmet look, but I can tolerate them. What I can't stand is not being able to see the numbers unless it is a close-up shot. On Rettig's rushing TD against Norfolk State, a lineman (I believe it was Nelson) made a great block to give him open field. No matter how many times I've watched that replay, I've never been able to see the number of the player.
 
I don't know what generic font means, nor do I care. If you ask me if I like big and bold, with black shoes and socks, the answer is yes.
 
But the uniforms after 2006 had Rutgers' font on it instead of a generic one. Other than that, the color scheme and layout was nearly identical. The numbers are still big. The font is less stretched. So why is 2006, with the same, generic font found on multiple high schools, so cool?

Do people just like the generic?
I prefer the 2006 jerseys slightly more simply because I prefer the font for the numbers on that one than the thinner, rounder numbers on the ones that came afterwards. Also if I remember correctly, I think the helmets worn between 2006 and the current ones had some kind of weird sparkly thing going on while the 2006 helmets were flat red. I do like the use of the block R font for the "RUTGERS" on the front of the jersey though.
 
But the uniforms after 2006 had Rutgers' font on it instead of a generic one. Other than that, the color scheme and layout was nearly identical. The numbers are still big. The font is less stretched. So why is 2006, with the same, generic font found on multiple high schools, so cool?

Do people just like the generic?

Actually, if you look closely, the lettering on the 2006 jerseys is different than 2005 and earlier jerseys exactly because the font/typeface has been changed to match the Block R style. The earlier jerseys had a generic font/typeface with squared-off style letters, but the 2006 changed to rounded letters for the Rs, U, G, and S. Now, that said, the proportioning and spacing of those letters on the 2006 jersey were slightly off from the post-2006 jerseys where I believe they had embroidered letters exactly to Block R specifications stitched onto the jerseys. They were also a smaller size typeface for the RUTGERS lettering, which is why I think zappaa likes 2006 more. IIRC, after 2006 is when the jerseys also went to the white, V-shaped collar and then, later still, to the circular numbers.
 
Old uni's sucked even as "traditional" uni's. Gotta go the new way. The white and black look great....red ones need a little work but are fine. Can't wait for Nike to give us a new design.
 
I saw as many Liverpool FC and Man U jerseys as I saw current Rutgers jerseys this past Saturday and I didn't wear my Liverpool shirt.

The current red Jerseys are simply awful. Used to see plenty of RU jerseys around the stadium.
 
Old uni's sucked even as "traditional" uni's. Gotta go the new way. The white and black look great....red ones need a little work but are fine. Can't wait for Nike to give us a new design.
You really are miserable, to even say the uniforms Ray Rice and Brian Leonard wore in 2006 sucked is plain awful.
 
Old uni's sucked even as "traditional" uni's. Gotta go the new way. The white and black look great....red ones need a little work but are fine. Can't wait for Nike to give us a new design.
Hahaha. Old unis sucked. But can't wait for Nike to get rid of the current ones. Jeeze you can't make this ship up! Stupid is as stupid does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yesrutgers01
Look at the Yankees. Two uniforms. One home, one road. Both pretty "generic" looking. Been that way for 100 years. No selling out to Nike. That's what I'd like to see at Rutgers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lighty and MozRU
I always wanted to see an all grey uniform and helmet with : (image below) on the side of the helmet. Anyone else like that and how do I make this happen?

uakjmedjwh9ndzd4lkll.gif
 
Look at the Yankees. Two uniforms. One home, one road. Both pretty "generic" looking. Been that way for 100 years. No selling out to Nike. That's what I'd like to see at Rutgers.

Yeah, but that 100 years thing is kind of the point. And the winning. I don't like the Yankees, but they've won. And their "generic" uniform is iconic. It's like Michigan's. Not particularly complex, but it's been that way for many successful years. History of success. We just don't have that.

I always wanted to see an all grey uniform and helmet with : (image below) on the side of the helmet. Anyone else like that and how do I make this happen?

uakjmedjwh9ndzd4lkll.gif

No. No no no. A thousand times no. It took us this long to have a good branding symbol in the Block R. We do not need that loco logo. No. Nonono.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bamm Bamm Rubble
I'd be okay with all greys and a block R too, just think the knight brings the idea more full circle. It's no big deal, no reason to get upset about something I'd personally like to see for no other reason than I think it'd look cool.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT