The Newest White Shoe Firm

This weekend, the Packers opened their season by beating the Seattle Seahawks 17-9 at Lambeau Field. And I bet that you were so happy to have the Packers back that you didn't notice the newest change to the Packers' uniforms.

Do you see it? Granted, it's subtle. So subtle I couldn't find a better picture to show you. Now take a look at Ha Ha Clinton-Dix.

See it yet?

White shoes.

Until this season, the NFL required players to wear cleats in team colors and either black shoes or white. That latter choice was made by the team for the entire roster, and the Packers have been black since 2008 (and the earliest days of this blog). For 2017, the league has relaxed that rule, meaning black and white shoes can be worn interchangeably.

A minor change, to be sure. But when you're cataloging a team as constant as the Packers, you take the changes where you can find them.

Not Just an Ugly Ribbon

The Packers have released some of the details from this Sunday's "Salute to Service" event to their Facebook page.

First, a look at Lambeau Field being set up for the card stunt (their words, not mine).

Over on the left, does that look like the tail end of "THANK YOU MILITARY"?

In addition to the stunt, Lambeau Field will be draped with event-specific signage. The NFL's digi-camo ribbon created for last season will be festooned on the goalposts and goal line pylons, game balls and sidelines. It will be worn as a decal on helmets, a patch on the officials' uniforms and a pin on the coaches' sideline gear. For whatever reason, the NFL didn't slap its logo on uniforms last season, but they're more than making up for that this year.

Of course, Nike will get in on the action as well, loaning out their attention-seeking gloves to a new cause:

The biggest element of this event, from my perspective, is the helmet decals. Right next to the afore-mentioned digi-camo ribbon decal, Packer players will be wearing a service decal on the back of their helmets.

Rodgers will apparently be repping the Navy, but all branches will be included.

Seeing all this, I can't help but wonder if I'm the only one who is very wary of the growing military-as-video-game aspect of our culture in recent years.

Sure, servicemembers deserve our respect and our thanks. So do cops and firefighters and paramedics and others who similarly put their lives on the line for us every day (so do teachers, for that matter, but they of course have fewer friends in Congress). I have long since become tired, however, of renting out the Packer uniform in the service of any cause, no matter how worthy.

Primary Colors

Paul Lukas has an interesting article in today's Uni Watch. A reader has sent in the NFL's proposed rules for alternate uniforms:

A few days ago I received a note from reader Zach Smith. He sent along a PDF of what he said was an internal NFL memorandum that had been shown to him by a friend who works for the league. I've done a bit of checking and have confirmed to my satisfaction that the memorandum is legit.

Zach has asked that I not show the memo itself but says it's fine to describe and discuss its contents. His own description is a good place to start:

[The memo is about proposed] changes to the NFL's alternate uniform rules. As I'm fairly certain has been covered before, the rules currently allow teams to wear their alternate uniform twice in the regular season and once in the preseason, but the NFL is looking to tighten those restrictions.

Here’s what they're proposing:

• Alternate uniforms would be limited to two uses in the regular season (eliminating the preseason option).

• Alternate uniforms would only be used in Sunday-afternoon games (not prime-time or nationally televised games).

• Alternate uniforms would only be worn prior to the start of the "flexible scheduling" portion of the schedule, which begins in Week 10.

The rationale appears to be an attempt to "protect" the team's brands [specifically, the memo says that the increasing use of alternate uniforms could "potentially compromise a club's national brand equity" — PL], although given most of these third jerseys' popularity with teams and their fans, I tend to think the real reason is that the NFL doesn’t want a casual fan to turn on a Sunday/Monday night game and find the Jets wearing navy and gold and have no idea who's playing. An unfortunate change, in my opinion.

One small detail in the memorandum that Zach didn’t mention: The proposal would also limit alternate uniforms to games played in the United States.

I think these rules look pretty good, although they would seem to preclude the throwbacks commonly worn by the Lions and Cowboys on Thanksgiving. It may be, in Lukas's words, "typical NFL micromanaging," but I'd rather see the NFL's style than the free-for-all we have in baseball. Uniforms are the core of a team's branding.

If the NFL's motivation is to ensure that "a casual fan (doesn't) turn on a Sunday/Monday night game and find the Jets wearing navy and gold and have no idea who's playing," then I'm all for it. Good for them.

One could make a case that there is a time and place for things like alternate uniforms (even the ones created as marketing stunts). The larger stages, however, shouldn't be that time. Wear the funky alternates in front of your home fans, but when the nation's watching, wear your best look. If that's really your alternate, then adopt it as your primary.

Lukas also adds some insight to 2012 and beyond:

The real news here, it seems to me, is that the league's shift from Reebok to Nike isn’t going to bring any drastic changes. Even though this memo is just a proposal (Zach's source at the league isn’t sure whether it's been voted on or approved yet), its wording makes it pretty obvious that the NFL is way too conservative, way too committed to its core brand identities, to allow major tinkering by the swooshkateers. An NCAA-style parade of alt designs? Not gonna happen.

Which, incidentally, is exactly what I’ve been saying all along. People can make all the crazy-ass mock-ups they want, but the NFL is still gonna look like the NFL in 2012. Bank on it.

Agreed. As much as Nike has manhandled the college teams they outfit (with a few notable exceptions), their European soccer designs have been remarkably respectful of the teams' history. That's why I'm not terribly concerned about their taking over the league-wide uniform contract (not to mention that I'm still hoping Nike will solve the little uniform problem the Packers have struggled with in recent decades)

And again, if you're not reading Uni Watch every single day, you should be.

(h/t: Paul Lukas, Uni Watch)

Massaging the Numbers

Lost in the changes to the NFL's postseason overtime rules, announced last month, was a change to the League's player numbering system.

Centers previously had to choose numbers between 50 and 59, with 60 to 79 available if 50 to 59 weren't available. They now may choose any number between 50 and 79.

Defensive linemen may now choose from 60 to 70 and 90 to 99, and linebackers may pick a number from 50 to 59 or 90 to 99. These changes were aimed at recognizing the overlap between linebackers and defensive ends, especially in the 3-4 defense.

Also, the rules now permit a player to move from one position to another and keep his number, if he played the prior position for at least a year and if he is moving from a position that is eligible to receive passes to another eligible position, or if he is moving from one ineligible position to another ineligible position.

The NFL originally experimented with assigning numbers by position in 1952, formally codifying the system in 1973 and amending it in 1989.

The Golden Ghost

Here we see Tony Canadeo, the Gray Ghost, modeling one of the Packers' most unusual uniforms - gold over gold.

This was part of Coach Ronzani's rotating series of mix and match uniforms. Here are the all-golds in action against the Lions:

How likely is it that we could see the Packers in gold/gold/gold again? Well, the Packers have been selling a gold fashion jersey for years.

Of course, this is just merchandising. The Packers have never expressed any inclination towards wearing them on the field. But plans can change.

It wouldn't be unheard of; the NFL is no stranger to fashion faux pas. Even the once-reliable Black and Blue Division has had its share of regrettable choices in recent years. And we all know the Packers aren't immune.

NFL uniform regulations allow for alternate jerseys, so long as they remain within the team's color palette. So no problem there. The team would then have to keep it as the only alternate for five years. It's not likely the Packers would adopt another alternate during that period, so again, no problem.

If the Packers were to make this a real alternate and not just a fashion jersey, they'd have yet another set of mismatched sleeve stripes that need fixing. Hopefully, it'll never get that far.

Week 4: Fox in Socks, Rules & Regs

Following on the heels, if you will, of last week's conversation about cleats, this week's topic is socks.

There's supposedly rules about the way in which NFL players may wear their socks, but you'd never know it from watching the games. 

As recently as last season, this sign was hanging in the Cleveland Browns' locker room:

First reaction - Wow.  That graphic has to be twenty years old - the guy still has sleeves.  But that's a topic for another day.

Couple things to note:

"The exterior stocking must be a one-piece unit solid white from the top of the shoe to the midpoint of the lower leg, with approved team color or colors from that midpoint to the top of the stocking"

"Stockings must meet the uniform pants below the knees"

So let's look at the Packers.  Last week, we had some very unique interpretations of those rules:

Personally, that one's my favorite look.  I love the strong colors, with little to no white at all.  I'd like to see football go baseball's route and wear solid colored socks with no whites.

By my reading, Aaron Rodgers is the only one who actually conforms to the uniform code.  Low whites, big gaps between the pants and socks either because the pants are worn high or the socks or worn low or both, all sorts of violations.

This reminded me of the Denver game last year, in which Charles Woodson and Al Harris decided to wear their whites high, and no green socks at all:

Also "Sleeves must not be torn or cut".  So how the hell does Chris Hovan get out on the field each and every Sunday?

But now we're back to sleeves.  And again, that's a subject for another day.

The Wearing of the Little Green Dot

Even for a team as sartorially consistent as the Packers, changes abound. Last year, the NFL introduced a little green dot to mark all radio-equipped helmets:

Photo: Tom Lynn, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

This year, there are two modifications. First, the defense will be allowed to radio one player, which means a little green dot on both sides of the line. Second, the dot is New And Improved - no longer a plain Staples-issue sticker, but fully authorized and licensed by the National Football League. You can tell because they slapped their logo on it:

Last season I thought the dot was ugly, but hey - now that it's all official-like....

I'm sure I'm not the only one who found this somewhat familiar. Apparently Mr. Yuk comes radio-equipped.