The Uniform Guru: NFC Teams
East / North / South / West
(Go to AFC Teams)

The NFC East may have lost a team to re-alignment that it's had for as long as I can remember (Cardinals), but their loss is also a gain, as the Guru looks favorably on ALL 4 teams that still call themselves "East".

Dallas Cowboys:
When the Guru takes time to weigh his opinion on a teams' uniforms, he does not allow personal feelings for said team to come into play. If that wasn't obvious when it came to Miami, it should be obvious now. The Cowboys have one of the best uniforms in the NFL. The helmet is instantly recognizable, and is an NFL Classic. The metallic Silver is great, and the Star symbolizes Texas. The "Home White" jerseys haven't had any drastic changes thru the years and that's quite a welcome thing, considering their Owner will do anything for a merchandising dollar. To his credit, he's left the White jerseys alone, while trying to make some money, and break an imaginary(?) curse, by only messing around with the Dark jerseys. I always liked the Cowboys Blue jerseys in the 70's and 80's and they're better than the current version. The big star on the sleeve is a nice touch, but the outlined numbers need to go.

Dark Jersey: B- [Go back to the cursed jerseys of the 70's]
White Jersey: A [Nothing fancy, but it doesn't need to be]
Helmet: A+ [I also liked when they added a Red stripe in 1976]
Logo on helmet: A+
Pants: A [The silver pants always seemed a different shade when worn with the Blue tops. Are they/were they different? And does anyone remember when they had their uniform numbers on their pants?]
History/Classicness: A [From Staubach to Emmitt, nothing much has changed]
Old vs. New: The original Cowboys uniforms were pretty bad. White helmet with a blue star. Ugly shoulder stars. Yuck. So bad that Jerry Jones altered them in their Throwback Mode a few years ago. NEW wins hands down.

New Jersey Giants:
I must say, I LOVE the Giants uniforms now that they've gone back to their classic style of the 50's. OK, they play in Jersey, they're "Jersey's Team", yadda yadda yadda. As long as they are still the "New York Football Giants", the "NY" on the helmet is OK with me. I never liked the "GIANTS" logo anyway. I love the Red numbers on the White jerseys, I love the extra set of numbers on the front of the helmet, and I love the gray pants. While I'd like to see something on the sleeves, stripes or another "NY" or maybe even an outline of the state of NJ (blasphemy?), I accept that none of those things were present on the shirts in the 50's, so it's ok for them to be missing now. Are their uniforms so much better than any other team in the league? Not really. I just really like them, and that's all that matters here.

Dark Jersey: A [Solid Blue, nothing fancy, nothing wrong]
White Jersey: A+ [Red numbers make this jersey]
Helmet: A [The single Red stripe works well]
Logo on helmet: a [Letters, but not capitalized... gutsy]
Pants: A [Can't say anything bad about these uniforms]
History/Classicness: A [When you can imagine Sam Huff wearing these, it's a good thing]
Old vs. New: Without question, NEW. These beat out any of the alterations they tried thru the years. The Double Outlined "NY" logos, the White stripes on the helmets, the Blue pants they wore for one season, throw them all away.

Philadelphia Eagles:
Although I basically dislike everything Philly, I have no complaints about the Eagles current state of dress. Thru the years, they've done some interesting things with the Green, White, Silver color combination. In the early 70's, they couldn't have been much uglier with the white helmets and green wings. When they went to the green helmets, they added silver (which they also had in the 60's) and had some crazy multi-stripes on the sleeves thru the Ron Jawarski era. At one point, they went to a stripe-free jersey with an Eagle in flight on the sleeves. (I prefer that bird to the Eagle head they have now.) And at some point in recent years they updated the Wings on the helmet to look a little more realistic. One of the few teams to not have an actual "logo" on their helmet, instead opting for what might be considered an "appendage". Often times they wear dark green pants with the white jerseys, but I much prefer the all white look they sport in the photo above.

Dark Jersey: A- [Not sure I like the choice of font for the numbers]
White Jersey: A [It just goes so well with the green helmet]
Helmet: A [Can't go wrong with dark green. Sharp]
Logo on helmet: A [... for Appendage]
Pants: B [I can't give them an A because of the green pants]
History/Classicness: A- [Improvements/changes have been subtle and positive. Green helmet with Silver Wings means Eagles]
Old vs. New: NEW. These uniforms have only gotten better over time.

Washington Redskins:
The Redskins are another of those teams that haven't changed anything in their uniforms for the past 25+ years. And that's a shame. This year they are honoring their 70th Anniversary by wearing a special Home Dark outfit that they should change to permanently! I very much like the darker Red, and I love the Spear on the helmet. The Skins have had their share of ugly outfits thru their 70 years. The Yellow helmets of 1971-72 were truly horrid. In 1973, when they went back to a red helmet but swapped the big "R" with an Indian Head, it was most certainly for the best. And that's a classic look that was just great for awhile. But I'm tired of it, and after 30 years, it's time for a change again. As Bono of U2 might say, "Florida State University stole the Spear from the Redskins, and now we're stealing it back!"

I'll critique their Standard Version AND the Anniversary Version
Dark Jersey: Standard: B, Throwback: A [I like the Spear on the sleeve on the Throwback]
White Jersey: Standard: B [The single red/yellow stripe was cool in the early 80's, but not anymore]
Helmet-Standard: A- [A reluctant "A". A fine helmet that I'm just tired of]
Helmet-Throwback: A+ [Did I mention I Love this helmet?]
Logo on helmet-Standard: A [Almost as many feathers as the Eagles]
Logo on helmet-Throwback: A+ [The Spear rules]
Pants-Standard: B [There was a time I liked these pants. That time is gone]
Pants-Throwback: A [The yellow pants return! Anniversary patch is a nice touch]
History/Classicness: A [Same helmet for 30 years]
Old vs. New: Since I like the New Throwbacks, I guess OLD wins here.

NFC North: Black and Blue (and Green and Purple)

The NFC North will always be known as the Black and Blue division. OK, that's what the NFC Central used to be called, but since the four teams that were the heart of that division for so many years are still together in the new North, I think the name still applies. Maybe that name comes from the Chicago Bears uniforms: Black (or) Blue? Who can say exactly? Not the Uniform Guru, for sure. Read on...

Chicago Bears :
When Dick Butkus was a Bear, I'm sure their colors were Black with a hint of Orange. At some point in time, they started telling anyone who would listen that the Black was actually a very dark Blue. These days, they do look more Blue than Black. Who knows? Tradition reigns in this division and the Bears have done their part in that regard. Dating back to the early days of helmet logos, the "C" on their helmet has remained a constant. For years it was a plain White letter, eventually upgraded to be Orange with a white border, but still instantly recognizable. The 3 orange stripes on the sleeves on their dark shirts remain as do the 3 stripes on the white shirts. Nothing fancy, but what makes this look unique is the "GSH" on there to honor their founding father George Halas. It first appeared the year he died, and has remained ever since.

Dark Jersey: B ["B" is for Blue, or is it for Black?]
White Jersey: B [The number font is odd, but cool]
Helmet: B ["B" is for Black, or is it for Blue?]
Logo on helmet: C [What other grade could it possibly receive?]
Pants: B [Dark pants with white top: Good. Dark pants with dark top: Bad]
History/Classicness: A+ [Butkus could suit up today and look the same as he did in the 60's. That's Classic!]
Old vs. New: What's new? Nothing. And that's the way I like it. Old wins.

Green Bay Packers:
Roy pointed out to me this week that there are no all-yellow uniforms, although Yellow IS a primary color. This is true. It's also an ugly color. Well, I should amend that statement and say that Yellow is a wonderful color that has it's place in society. Just not on the football field. Credit the Packers for having the guts to be the only Yellow helmet team in the league. Washington tried it for a couple years in the early 70's, but failed. When worn with the Green jersey, the yellow helmet is not so bad. When worn with a White jersey, the yellow helmet is nasty. With this being the case, I definitely prefer the Packers in dark than white. Virtually no changes thru the years is always a positive factor in the Guru's eyes. For a short time in the 80's, they had the "G" logo on the sleeve amidst the stripes. I'm sorry to see that gone, the Guru loves logos on the sleeves!

Dark Jersey: B+ [Why not an "A"? Good question]
White Jersey: B [Kinda bland, but could be worse]
Helmet: B- [I don't like the yellow, but the Green facemasks are a big plus. The stripes are good too]
Logo on helmet: A- [Another classic logo]
Pants: B [My distaste for the color Yellow is showing. Still, I think here it's better than White (or heaven forbid, Green)]
History/Classicness: A+ [Bart Starr and Lombardi would be proud]
Old vs. New: We can go back to the "throwback" look of the 20's, and barf. Otherwise, The current "Old" look is appreciated here.

Detroit Lions :
Another team that has done little to change their look over the years and another round of applause for it. Even tho they look too much like the Cowboys, they had the Silver and Blue look going well before Dallas went with it too. It's hard to say which team in the NFL has changed the LEAST since the 50's-60's, but the Lions are right up there in that respect. The logo is the only one they ever had. The light-ish Blue jerseys and Silver pants are a mainstay since forever. This might change in 2003 as word has it they intend to add a dash of Black into their uniforms. If they add just a hint of black, it should be ok. But can a Black alternate jersey be far behind? Hope not. If so, you can add it to the list of bad decisions that have kept this franchise in the hole for so many years.

Dark Jersey: A- [Always was a jersey that I would wear myself. The Silver numbers are a good match for the light shade of Blue]
White Jersey: B [Not bad, really]
Helmet: B+ [A very solid looking, traditional helmet]
Logo on helmet: B+ [Pouncing Lion makes a nice effect]
Pants: A- [Kudos for having one pair of pants, and sticking to them]
History/Classicness: A [George Plimpton and Alan Alda would be proud]
Old vs. New: New. If Old is the plain "throwback" things they wear, then give me the New anytime.

For 2003, Lions added some black trim, but kept their traditional light blue and classic "Leaping Lion" on the helmet. A wise decision. I think the new look is a positive one. New stadium, new uniforms, but the team still sucks. Oh well.

Minnesota Vikings :
My favorite color is Purple. One of my favorite quarterbacks growing up was Fran Tarkington. One of my favorite uniforms thru time has been that of the Vikings. Coincidence? Maybe. But I still have strong feelings about all three. The only problem I have with the Vikings uniforms is that the Purple jerseys often seem to be a different shade of purple than the helmets. Why is that? I have no answer. I do know that the hint of Yellow along with the purple makes a great combination. (Oh sure, when the Packers have Yellow in their scheme you don't like it, but in the Vikings scheme you think it's great? Tough sh*t, the Guru is a fickle b*tch, deal with it!) Along with the Eagles and Rams, the Viking helmet logo is actually a 1-D version of what would otherwise be a 3-D object. Imagine if they actually had those Viking horns protruding from the helmet? Cover your eyes, opponents!
The other thing I love about the Vikings jerseys? They are the only team in the NFL that has sleeve stripes on the Dark jersey, but shoulder stripes on the White jersey. Pretty much always been that way too. Also, the recent addition of the Viking Head logo on the sleeves is a sight for the Guru's sore eyes. I would also love to see the return of the Purple pants with the White tops (circa Jim Marshall's wrong-way fumble return). This goes against my general feeling towards dark pants, but it's the Purple, man! I dig the Purple!!

Dark Jersey: A- [A "minus" here for the inability to match the helmet color]
White Jersey: A+ [Possibly my favorite White jersey, ever]
Helmet: A+ [Purple just rules, Dude!]
Logo on helmet: A [Took me years to figure out that the yellow thing was the round base of the horn on a real Vikings headgear]
Pants: A [The Purple and Yellow stripes just work]
History/Classicness: A+ [Joe Kapp and Bud Grant would be proud]
Old vs. New: Tie. Very little is different since they came into the league. Give me the Purple pants and keep the rest of the New.

The next to last stop in the Guru's tour of the NFL is the NFC South. A mixture of old and new, and kinda boring. None of these 4 team's uniforms jump out at me as being really pretty or really ugly. The one thing it has going for it is that all four teams sport a logo on their sleeve, a favorite item of the Guru's.

Atlanta Falcons:
A few years ago, when the color Black was coming into vogue, the Falcons, no doubt led by Jerry Glanville, jumped on the bandwagon and ditched the Red that was their primary color for Black. Hard to say which I prefer, but the black looks good on them and real Falcons are more black than red anyway. The black logo on the black helmet is a bit odd, but it still works. And the Red and Silver added to the Black makes for a decent looking uniform. The red numbers on the white jersey get a thumbs up as well.

Dark Jersey: B [The logo on the sleeve saves an otherwise bland jersey]
White Jersey: A- [The red numbers bump up this grade]
Helmet: B+ [The only Black & White in the league]
Logo on helmet: B [It takes some imagination to see that this is a bird in flight, and the wing is on the downward swoop]
Pants: A [Good stripe combination on the silver pants]
History/Classicness: C+ [The logo remains intact from the old days, but too much black and not enough red]
Old vs. New: OLD. The more I think about it, the more I think I prefer the Steve Bartkowski Red helmets and jerseys.

 For 2003, Atlanta went crazy and came up with what will probably become a new trend on the sleeves. I say that because it's ugly, and ugliness seems to fester in the fashion stylings of the NFL. The new logo is OK, keeping the basic look of their traditional logo while dressing it up a bit. Not too sure about that piece of white stripe on the black pants.

New Orleans Saints:
Before this past Sunday, I never had a bad thing to say about the Saints uniforms. Yes, more Black, but they've been black from their beginning so that's ok. The Fleur-de-Lis logo is very French and honors the French Quarter of old New Orleans which is quite nice. Full approval here for any team that honors it's Home city like that. And not much has changed thru the years. When they began, the helmet stripes were two white stripes around one black in the middle stripe. That has given way to the black-white-black they have now. The Gold numbers look good on the Black shirts as well. I prefer the gold pants over the black pants, but that's close to being a toss-up. For a time a few years ago, they had an outline of Louisiana with a Fleur-de-lis in it on the sleeve. I miss that. That's something that is missing on the Houston Texans outfit. An outline of the great state of Texas on their sleeve. When the Dallas Stars moved here from Minnesota, they put one of those on their sleeve and it's great. Recently the Astros have done similar, while the Texas Rangers have had variations of such thru the years (today the Rangers have a Texas Flag on their sleeve). Back to the Saints...

This past Sunday, they broke out an Alternate jersey that just sucked. You'll see a photo of it in the NFL Happenings section down below. Gold tops are not attractive, and the gold didn't really match the gold helmets, definately a fashion faux-pa (so long as we're speaking French here.)

Dark Jersey: B+ [Good sleeve logo, but the outline of La. was better]
White Jersey: A [Gold trim on the black numbers is a nice touch]
Helmet: A [The stripes look nice, the logo is nice, it's all just nice]
Logo on helmet: A [Classy, French]
Pants: B+ [Gold is better than Black. Logo on the pants wins me over everytime. Put a gold stripe on the black pants and make me happy. Actually, they used to have black pants with gold-white-gold stripes.]
History/Classicness: B+ [Same helmet logo their entire history, same basic color scheme. Tom Dempsey would be proud.]
Old vs. New: TIE. Take the best of the old and add the best of the new and we'll talk again. Burn the Gold alternates, tho.

Carolina Panthers:
More Black? Oy. But there are some things I like about this look. The light blue goes well with the black, and there's just enough of it to offset the boring black. The White jerseys look better than the Dark ones. But there are serious stripe issues going on that I'm not happy about. The weird "half-stripes" on the helmet need to go. Maybe they are supposed to resemble cat whiskers, but, yuck. I'm not a huge fan of the shoulder stripes, but they look good in light blue. The stripes on the pants would be fine if they didn't taper off into a point at the bottom. But the logo on the sleeves and pants almost make up for the bad stripes. The Silver helmet is good, even tho there isn't any other silver in their scheme. Basically, the Guru is swimmy-headed over this one. Good? Bad? I can't decide.

Dark Jersey: B+ [There's a lot going on here, which can be a good thing. Still I prefer the White tops.]
White Jersey: A [My favorite part of their outfits.]
Helmet: B- [Silly stripes need to go. Full stripes or no stripes, pick one of those.]
Logo on helmet: A- [I like it, I think. Better than a Paw print at least.]
Pants: B+ [Good colors, bad stripes, good logo.]
History/Classicness: No history here since they've only been around for about 5 years.
Old vs. New: NEW is the only choice here.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers:
Pewter? Well, it's a far cry better than Orange. Coach Sam Wyche once said of the old Buccs logo... "How can you respect a team that has a Gay guy with a feather in his cap winking at you on their helmet?" Excellent point Sam. The new logo is far superior to that old one. When I was younger and less fashion conscious than I am now (could I BE any LESS?) I actually kinda liked the bright Orange with red trim. The gay-looking pirate on the helmet was a bit silly tho. Now with the skull and swords on the flag held upright by another sword, with a little orange football thrown in for good measure, they have one of the better logos in the league. The Red jerseys are nice, and the extra outlines around the numbers on the White jerseys are nice too. The Pirate Ship logo on the sleeve is also very cool. But Pewter? Um, no.

Dark Jersey: B+ [The dark red, the priate ship logo, a little black trim, in all a good combination.]
White Jersey: A- [It's no wonder they wear their White's more than their Dark's. They are just better.]
Helmet: B- [Pewter? Stripeless and a cool logo save the day]
Logo on helmet: A+ [Can't ask for anything better than this.]
Pants: B- [More Pewter? The stripes are nice, another save.]
History/Classicness: D [In ten years this will be a classic look. Today, not.]
Old vs. New: NEW. Anything other than that orange and winking pirate has to be better.

NFC West: A Fashion Statement Gone Awry

The final stop on the Uniform Guru's tour of the NFL is the newly revamped NFC West. The uniforms in this division go from Pretty (Rams) to Bland (Cards) to Ugly (Seahawks). Recent changes made by the Rams, 49ers, and Hawks have been for the worse, while the Cardinals haven't done much changing in the last 50 years. You'll likely see grades of A to F and everything in between here. Read on...

St. Louis Rams:
There was a time when the Rams had the best uniforms in the NFL. They were the first team to paint an insignia on their helmets back in the 40's, and a great one at that. The Ram horns are still one of the best things to be put on a football helmet, ever. At first glance, the Rams outfits are still a whole lot better than most. My problems with the look arise when it comes to the colors. Those first horns were yellow on a blue helmet. In the 60's, they did away with the yellow and went with white on blue. It was a tired look in the 70's, and when they switched back to yellow, I was very supportive. They even put those horns on the sleeves, making it seem to be just a shoulder stripe of yellow, but in reality the stripe hooked around and formed a horn with the number in the middle. Awesome. The Rams won a Super Bowl in those uni's, then ditched the yellow for Gold and went with a darker shade of Blue. Bad move. I'd have preferred they go back to the Blue/White look of the 60's. I still wish they would. I like the little Rams logo on the sleeve, but the stripes need to go. And I didn't even notice that in 2002 (far right) they got rid of the under-arm stripes that I hate so much!

Dark Jersey: B+ [Still a fine uniform, but the thin white stripe and thicker gold stripe just don't work for me.]
White Jersey: A- [The blue sleeve can stay. The logo on the sleeve is fine. Please put the horn stripe back on the sleeve!]
Helmet: A- [The first painted helmet, the one that started it all. I just prefer Yellow or even White instead of Gold.]
Logo on helmet: A+ [Best logo in the NFL]
Pants: C+ [No stripes? I need stripes on pants! Where'd they go?]
History/Classicness: A- [The logo makes this grade possible. While the colors may
change, the basic horns on the helmet have remained since the day they were put there.]
Old vs. New: TIE [A mixture of Old and New is what's needed here. Oh if only they let ME design their uniforms, then you'd see something very cool.]

San Francisco 49ers:
This is a team that generally gets it right. For many years they had what I'll call the Montana-era look (as pictured to the Left.) That was fine. In the 90's, when the NFL celebrated their 75th anniversary with "throwbacks", the '9ers took a page from their history books and went with cool 3-D like numerals. They kept that with their latest design and it works well. The "SF" logo was also something they tampered with a bit, but left enough alone to simply modernize it. They took the bold White stripe off the helmet and pants and tossed in a dash of Black. I'm still a bit shaky on that one, but I suppose it looks ok. Logos on the sleeves and pants score points with the Guru. Overall, I really have no complaints, although I wouldn't consider them to be among my favorites. I mean, where else but San Francisco would you expect to see the most fashion-conscience team?

Dark Jersey: A [The 3D numerals are cool. Still have the 3 white stripes and added a logo to the sleeve.]
White Jersey: A [Same reason's as the Dark jersey. It's a nice look.]
Helmet: B+ [I prefer the old style helmet over the new one. I liked the striping better. But the Red facemask is better than Gray.]
Logo on helmet: B+ [The "SF" is cool. Not sure about the uneven gap between the inner Red and Black outline.]
Pants: B+ [Almost a 'Yellow-Gold' color. I dig the old style stripes better. Logo makes this a half grade higher.]
History/Classicness: A [Always been Red/Gold, always had the SF logo, best example of mixing the old with the new in the NFL.]
Old vs. New: OLD [But just by a hair. This one is almost too close to call.]

Arizona Cardinals:
Some things never change. One of those things is the Cardinals uniforms. From Chicago, to St. Louis, to Phoenix, to "Arizona", they've had solid white helmets, red shirts, sometimes red pants,and their only logo has been that Cardinal head. But is that such a bad thing? I must admit, I'm very 'on-the-fence' about this one. On one hand, it's nice to see a team stick to tradition with such conviction. They've been so bad ON the field thru the years, you'd imagine they change their uniform to distract what fans they have left. It's a classic look and they should hold onto it. On the other hand, it's boring and I'm tired of it. I just can't decide. Something about the Dark jersey's I always liked. Simple, understated, similar to the Raiders with no stripes or outline on the numbers or anything. And the Red pants look nice with the White tops. On those White tops, there was a time when they had the Cardinal head logo on the sleeves along with the Red and Black stripes. That was cool. Since they moved to Arizona, they have a small Arizona State Flag on the sleeves which is also very cool. More teams (Texans?) should do something like that. Maybe it's just the helmet I'm tired of.

Dark Jersey: B- [I'd put the numbers on the shoulders and add some stripes and the AZ Flag to the sleeve.]
White Jersey: B [But then the Dark jerseys would be the exact opposite of the White's. The fact that they are now rather different from each other is a good thing.]
Helmet: C [Too much White. The Gray facemask has to go. Why not add some stripes to the top? A pair of Red stripes would be nice. Or even, dare I say it, Red helmets?]
Logo on helmet: A [An historical logo that's been copied by thousands of high schools and colleges.]
Pants: B [The Red pants are nice. This year they've tried the all Red look and the all White look, neither work.]
History/Classicness: A+ [With nothing but subtle changes in all their years, the Cardinals are the Poster Child for "Classicness".
Old vs. New: These are OLD.

Seattle Seahawks:
Is it just a coincidence that I've saved the worst for last? Because the current Seahawks uniforms may be among the worst I've ever seen. When they came into the league in 1977, I took an instant liking to their uniforms. The Blue and Silver was an established color combination and with a touch of Green thrown into the logo and the stripes, they had one of my all-time favorite uniforms. At some point the stripes on the sleeves morphed into the Hawk head logo and it was beautiful. The helmet was great too. Enter 2002. What the hell happened? Something went wrong in the design studio. The color they call "Seahawk Blue", and other's might call "Monochrome", I call Plain Ugly. As a helmet color, it's not entirely awful. But from head to toe? Yuck. And why is the sleeve Black? And why is there a hint of Greenish Yellow in the trim? And why, if you're going to put a logo on the sleeve, is it barely bigger than the Reebok logo? And why does the shoulder area intrude on the sleeve like a Hockey jersey might? And why, if you have a White version of the pants, do you not wear them with the Dark jerseys? It certainly takes away from the ugliness of the all-dark look. It just scares me how bad these things are. I was frightened by them on Opening Day, and after a full season to get used to them, they still frighten me.

Dark Jersey: F [It's just bad.]
White Jersey: D+ [Less Seahawk Blue is a good thing. The sleeves are still bad tho.]
Helmet: C+ [Only because the Logo is still so cool.]
Logo on helmet: A- [Always a great logo, but it got caught in the 'bad color machine' with the rest of the uniform.]
Pants: C [The Whites are OK, but I still don't like the yellow/green stripe.]
History/Classicness: F [Hopefully it won't be the look of the future either.]
Old vs. New: OLD [They took a good thing and replaced it with a bad thing.]