Mike32282 Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 i dont want to see the throwbacks permanently...i rather like our new ones... 448646[/snapback] I'm with you. The throwbacks are nice, but I still prefer the charging Buffalo helmet and do like the home uniforms (blue on blue). I've gotten used to the away and I don't like the old helmet. It's boring. If it was the old white charging Buffalo helmet, I'd prefer that.
Risin Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 Say it one more time for effect, and pass the cross-eyed redhead with gas, 448698[/snapback] lmao!
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 Is that per infraction? I wonder if they would multiply that fee by the number of players and the number of articles that are unsanctioned?... 448653[/snapback] Per player. TO got fined $10k for his Sharpie incident, as I recall. Had he done it in every game...$160k for the season. Had EVERY SF player worn a Sharpie in their sock for every game...$7.5 million in fines. PLAYER fines. I guess the league could sanction the club itself...but they could certainly take it out on the players.
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 I hope we at least keep the standing Buffalo helmets. They the bomb. I've never liked the buffalo wearing the "ribbon". 448652[/snapback] "Streaking" bison. What a God awful fad from the early '70s. I always liked the idle one too. Doesn't Howard University use "our" new style? How did they manage that and get it past the Bills? Is it because they are the "Bison" and it is printed on the ribbon? Verses Buffalo "Bills?" Going back to the old one would makes the Bills unique again.
Ghost of BiB Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 Honestly, I don't care if they wear tights and pink tu-tus as long as they start consistently winning games.
Mark VI Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 I don't care if they wear tights and pink tu-tus448964[/snapback] Merchandise sales might take a hit.
scribo Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 The $10-grand fine last year was against the Deadskins, and they were just wearing the wrong socks -- not the wrong jersey, pants, helmet, socks and shoes. I would think a fine for all that would be much higher. Worse, it would send a message that the Bills think they are above the rules.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 Doesn't Howard University use "our" new style? How did they manage that and get it past the Bills? Is it because they are the "Bison" and it is printed on the ribbon? Verses Buffalo "Bills?" 448960[/snapback] Bucknell U does.
IowaBill Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 How would the NFL stop them? Would the NFL Uniform Nazis show up on Gameday with guns drawn and force the Bills to wear different uniforms? I would give a big middle finger to the NFL and wear the throwbacks every week. In fact, I would stop calling them throwbacks and declare "these are our new uniforms and there is nothing you can do to stop us Mr. Hitler...err... Mr. Tagliabue" Screw the NFL and their assinine uniform policy. Everybody loves the Bills Throwbacks. Even ESPN was talking about them before the Giants-Saints game. The Bills would make tons of money if they were the permanent new uniforms (they would even have to add a white jersey) Why is the NFL against a team making the most money they can on merchandise sales? Someone explain how/why it takes a year to make a uniform change? If they alraedy have the uniforms, what the hell would the holdup be? 448520[/snapback] The NFL "uniform nazis" have built the most succesful sports marketing franchise by making sure each franchise adheres to an established set of standards. This is extremely basic marketing. One of the reasons the NFL merchandise sales program is so succesful is because of the standards set and enforced by the NFL. many of thier decisions may seem petty to us (fining someone for not wearing the right socks, only allowing two apperances of the "throwback" uniforms per season, etc) but their decision are based in pretty sound business principles. It is much easier to enforce the standards if the franchising organization, in the case the NFL, doesn't allow any non standardized uniform items to appear. let some people get by not adhering to standards, the next thing you know, none of the teams are folloing the standards. This in turn weaknes the NFL's control over the copyrighted logos and merchandise. That would mean more "non approved" merchandise, which in turn would have a negative impact on the revnues ditributed to the teams, which would have a negative impact on small market teams (like the Bills), etc, etc. I like the "throwbacks", they bring back memories of being a kid again, and watching the Bills with my family. having said that, I undertstand why the NFL makes the decisions regarding uniforms the way they do.
UConn James Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 The NFL "uniform nazis" have built the most succesful sports marketing franchise by making sure each franchise adheres to an established set of standards. This is extremely basic marketing. One of the reasons the NFL merchandise sales program is so succesful is because of the standards set and enforced by the NFL. many of thier decisions may seem petty to us (fining someone for not wearing the right socks, only allowing two apperances of the "throwback" uniforms per season, etc) but their decision are based in pretty sound business principles. It is much easier to enforce the standards if the franchising organization, in the case the NFL, doesn't allow any non standardized uniform items to appear. let some people get by not adhering to standards, the next thing you know, none of the teams are folloing the standards. This in turn weaknes the NFL's control over the copyrighted logos and merchandise. That would mean more "non approved" merchandise, which in turn would have a negative impact on the revnues ditributed to the teams, which would have a negative impact on small market teams (like the Bills), etc, etc. I like the "throwbacks", they bring back memories of being a kid again, and watching the Bills with my family. having said that, I undertstand why the NFL makes the decisions regarding uniforms the way they do. 449074[/snapback] You mean how they exempt them for certain clubs but not for others? I don't understand why the policy is for one year of notification when the uniform has already been part of the repetoire for 40 years. If it were a completely new jersey, such as if the Bengals suddenly went from their old one to their new ones, I could understand that. But if we want to wear the '65 design or if the Patriots want to wear their Patriot Pat unis, they should be allowed. These have been standing copyrighted logos for the clubs since their inception; that copyright doesn't magically disappear when they switch designs.
Kelly the Dog Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 You mean how they exempt them for certain clubs but not for others? I don't understand why the policy is for one year of notification when the uniform has already been part of the repetoire for 40 years. If it were a completely new jersey, such as if the Bengals suddenly went from their old one to their new ones, I could understand that. But if we want to wear the '65 design or if the Patriots want to wear their Patriot Pat unis, they should be allowed. These have been standing copyrighted logos for the clubs since their inception; that copyright doesn't magically disappear when they switch designs. 449109[/snapback] Never heard anything from the NFL but it seems to me it's just basic common sense. The Throwbacks are a novelty. There is a lot of promotion and photos and posters and advertisements and footage used to promote the teams and games using the official Bills uniforms. If now they are wearing different ones all the time, it lessens some of it. I agree with Iowa, the NFL does a remarkable job with their marketing policy. Yeah, it's fairly petty but it's smart and sound.
ch19079 Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 part of the appeal of the "throwback" unis, is that they are only warn once or twice a year, if that. its a "treat" to play in them. kinda like getting a piece of candy as a treat, or snack. it wouldnt be as good, if you ate candy as your 3 meals a day. but as for the NFL not allowing it, its their league. and yes it has A LOT to do with sales of jerseys. if they only played in the "throwbacks", then sales of the regular jerseys would fall. and people would start buying the "new" throwback unis. the NFL probubly doesnt have that many throwback unis on hand. what would they do with the old ones?? its a buisness thing. and i think the NFL would do a little more than jsut fine ralph 10,000 a game, if he continued to break the rule. they would probubly increase the fine after each game. hell, he would be deliberatly and repeatedly break a NFL rule.
Ghost of BiB Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 They might even black flag him for a three second stop and go.
Campy Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 Remember that Ralph is still in line for the HOF... 448680[/snapback] True, but as it's the Pro Football Hall of Fame and not the NFL Hall of Fame, that shouldn't make a difference. That said, I just don't see, nor do I particularly want, Ralph ignoring the NFL on this. Leave that stuff to the trash like Jerry Jones and Al Davis. IMO, the Bills should petition the league for a uniform change and do it through channels - if that's indeed what they want to do.
The Dean Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 Say it one more time for effect, and pass the cross-eyed redhead with gas, 448698[/snapback]
Buftex Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 If the Bills are going to change to a "throwback" permanently, I would love the new jerseys, but would prefer the white helmet, with the charging Buffalo on it, as opposed to the standing still Buffalo. Is anyone else with me on this?
Mile High Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 Yes. It would look way better. Good call If the Bills are going to change to a "throwback" permanently, I would love the new jerseys, but would prefer the white helmet, with the charging Buffalo on it, as opposed to the standing still Buffalo. Is anyone else with me on this? 449668[/snapback]
Campy Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 Yes. It would look way better. Good call 449676[/snapback] The blue face masks got to go though.
Buftex Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 Start a petiton now! Not only would it honor the 60's teams, but the OJ era Bills, and my favorite, the Knox era Bills....then in say, 2020, they could go back to the 90's uniforms! The marketing possibilities are endless!
XNorthBuffaloLad Posted September 21, 2005 Posted September 21, 2005 If the Bills are going to change to a "throwback" permanently, I would love the new jerseys, but would prefer the white helmet, with the charging Buffalo on it, as opposed to the standing still Buffalo. Is anyone else with me on this? 449668[/snapback] No ... because I'd like us to wear the 1965 Throwbacks as - is and Blue pants for the white jersey, for the away games like in 1973, the last year for that helmet & logo
Recommended Posts