|1970 Kansas City Chiefs (old)|
|1970 Kansas City Chiefs (new)|
These changes only go through the 1988 season because from 1989 through 1999, the Chiefs did not wear the red pants, preferring to wear only white pants with both the home white and the red jersey. This brings us to another topic that I'd like to address regarding Friday's Bills announcement, and that is the apparent omission of the blue pants from their new uniforms.
|Which Chiefs pants do you like better with the white jersey?|
Many teams have worn both color and white pants with white jerseys throughout the years. The Cardinals were exclusively a white-pants team until they started wearing red pants in 1990. Same for the Bucs - they started wearing orange pants in 1992. The Bears famously adopted dark pants in 1984 after wearing exclusively white pants for three decades.
While white-with-color pants is a widely tried and well-executed uniform choice, the same cannot be said for the color-on-same-color monochromatic look.
Who can forget the spectacle of the monochrome-red Arizona Cardinals on the final day of the 2003 season, when they came from behind and beat Minnesota 18-17 to knock the Vikings out of the playoffs and put Green Bay in? In 1995 Sam Wyche wanted to outfit the Bucs in all-orange (he was overruled by the players) and the Bears and Dolphins have both tried the monochrome color looks in the last decade. The Jets routinely wear both green and white pants with both the green and white tops, for equally monochrome and non-monochrome looks at will.
Monochrome is monochrome, whether it is a color or white. How come we excuse monochrome-white, but monochrome-color somehow is an anathema?
Some teams, like the Browns and Colts, look good in the monochrome-white. It's what we're used to seeing. The Colts tried blue pants in 1995, and it only lasted three games. Teams like the Bears and Chiefs, I think can look good either way. The 2003 Vikings you see in the Arizona picture to the right, I think look better monochrome-white than they would have with purple pants, just because that's what we're used to seeing. Other teams, like the Seahawks, look good in monochrome color, again because we're used to it. Some Browns fans vehemently will argue that the white-on-white is the best look, while others prefer the orange pants of 1983 and some even like the brown pants. (Although I wouldn't recommend trying an all-brown monochrome look.)
|For some reason, this|
monochrome looks okay...
|...while this monochrome does not|
Therefore about the Bills' new duds? I think they should strongly re-consider not having the blue pants. They really looked good in the late 1970s and early 80s, and would look good in 2011, as well. I have no problem with them keeping the mono-white look for maybe daytime road games, and reserving the white-top/blue-pants for night-time games only. And hopefully they could avoid wearing the monochromatic blue look entirely.
|Monochrome is monochrome, whether white or color|
~ ~ ~
Now to announce two contests here at The Gridiron Uniform Database. Starting tomorrow you can vote in our first all-time best NFL uniform contest. Over the coming weeks and months, you will be able to vote for the best NFL uniform ever in a tournament-bracket style contest. The first round will begin tomorrow with eight pairs of first-round matchups to vote for.
And for a second contest, our 100th twitter follower will be in for a big surprise. As of right now, we have 58 twitter followers, so follow us on twitter and maybe you'll be the big winner.