Als 70s Uniforms

I had a thread about this and it actually got a lot of response but it eventually died last August. I thought I'd put it out there to see how people feel about it 6 months later. The question being posed is whether you personally think the Als look better in their modern uniform:

http://sportsfullcircle.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/anthony-calvillo.jpg

or in their 1970s vintage uniforms:

http://www.canada.com/sports/3415392.bin?size=620x400

Personally, I don't even think that the two are even in the same "league". The retro uniform of the 70s looks so much classier and is 1000x more beautiful than what they have now. The insignia is also timeless unlike that stupid cartoon bird logo that makes the Toronto Blue Jays mascot look tough. Cartoons are never something you want to see on a pro football team because they cheapen it somehow. Football is a serious physical game and it's hard to take a pro team with a cartoon symbol seriously. Remember how the people in Miami responded to the cartoonish dolphin and that's just a minor change that most people can't even see. The people of Miami are right. A football team is serious business and cartoons make them appear weak. The retro jersey sold so well that there was a shortage of them and I was lucky to get mine. Every time I compare it to my other Als jersey I just shake my head at how much better it looks. There's no wrong answer here, I'm just looking for opinions.

Wow, 10 people viewed and not one even voted. People be hatin'!

You have my vote.

Thanks Backer, I was beginning to think that all I wrote was for nothing! You rock! :rockin:

Absolutely yes. In fact, yes to all the teams returning permanently to their best look from the 1970s.

I agree except for one team. I found that the Lions looked better with the silver helmets and black jerseys over the white helmets and orange jerseys. Other than that, the 70s and 80s did look best.

No.

The uniform of the 70’s is meant to represent the 70’s. This is 40 years later. It’s a new generation with a new jersey to follow suit. I wouldn’t mind changing the one we have now, not that I think it looks bad (in fact, I like it), but I wouldn’t want to return to an old jersey.

That’s just my opinion, though, and I welcome anyone to whole-heartedly disagree with me. I’m not a big believer in “tradition.”

I'm split here. I hate our current logo, but like the color scheme of the uniforms. So while I'd welcome a change back to the stylized '70s logo, I'd like to keep our jersey colors intact. That, to me, would represent an effective way to acknowledge our past without losing sight of where we are today. After all, we're coming off back-to-back Grey Cups ... we don't need to wallow in nostalgia. :wink: :wink: :rockin:

I, too, am split on this one.

For those of us who can remember his name, Doug Smith used to call Als' games and referred to them as "the Big Red team". While I liked the 70's uniform, it was predominantby blue with red and white trim. So, I would say red has to be the predominant colour. I like the silver and red shceme they now have, but as other posters have mentioned, I hate that schizoid Woody-Woodpecker logo. I suppose it was an attempt to make a bird (a lark) look fearsome....!

How about a combination of current uniform and the 70's stylized letter "A"?

Agreed. The Woddy-Woodpecker logo is far inferior to the logos of decades past.

Well I could point out that some teams NEVER change their uniforms (Packers, Browns, Bears) and some teams DO revert to their 70s uniforms (Giants, Jets). Think about that for one moment. The Packers and Browns have looked exactly the same for over 50 years. The Giants went back to their old "ny" logo and the Jets went back to wearing the white helmets of Joe Namath. Now, one could say that the Jets need the old days because they haven't won anything since Namath played. However, the Giants are not in that position. They have appeared in 4 Super Bowls (they won 3 of them) in the past 24 years. Going to the Super Bowl every 6 years on average over a quarter of a century is a phenomenal feat, especially when one considers that you have 15 other teams in your conference who are also trying to get there. It's not about needing the past and it's not about being ashamed of the present (although I AM ashamed of those silver helmets with the Starling on Steroids). The Alouettes old red uniforms were, well... IMHO, disgusting. They looked like they were having an identity crisis. They looked like the love child of the Chicago Cardinals and the Philadelphia Eagles. The wings on their helmets looked more like the arms of a seriously deformed chipmunk.

Some say that they were really supposed to be the pronounced eyebrows of the Alouette but they still looked like they had been painted onto the helmets by a grade 1 class using cheap watercolours. And PLEASE don't get me started on what came after that... they went GREEN like the Roughriders! It only serves to prove that they were tired of looking like the Cardinals and wanted to look like the Eagles instead, but I digress...

Then they decided to make matters worse by combining red and green TOGETHER! Just in time for Christmas eh? lol Those were the uniforms with a bird on the side of the helmet that looked like it was made by the same grade 1 class that made the misshapen "whatever they were supposed to be" on the previous helmets:

Could you imagine the SHAME that these proud men must have felt having something that looked like that on their heads? I think they did that to make the old ones look not so bad. Without a doubt, as much as I love them, the Alouettes have historically had the UGLIEST uniforms in the CFL. That red and green debacle looked about as threatening as the "creamsicle" look of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers before their management realised that the image you convey to the other team has a significant impact on the game. It wasn't until they adopted Montreal's "Bleu-Blanc-et-Rouge" colour scheme that they actually looked like a real football team. I think that the reason they were primarily blue is because they didn't want to look like the Habs. God knows everyone in Montreal has the Habs on their minds 24/7 (even the people who hate the Habs do). You have to imagine though that there was a serious difference between a team made up of men that looked like they were about to give you a Christmas present as opposed to one that looked like they wanted to mortally wound you. The current uniforms are too high-tech and civilised in their design. There is something to be said about your opponent running at you and looking like this:

http://www.cfhof.ca/uploads/assets/cflhof/Hall_of_Famers/Glen_Weir.jpg

The "retro" jerseys they wore last year weren't the proper dark royal blue that the 70s team wore. They were more of a deep ultramarine. Beautiful yes, better than what they have, yes, but not as scary looking as Mr. Weir there. Ask yourself one question:
Do the teams that have won the most championships in their respective football leagues wear dark colours or light? Do they use fancy colours or stick with the primaries? In the NFL, what team has the most Superbowl wins? The STEELERS. They wear primarily BLACK. In the CFL it's the Argonauts who wore nothing but a DARK NAVY BLUE (until some douchebag decided to add that really gay-looking powder blue to it, probably the same douchebag that designed the Titans' uniform). The Packers wore British Racing Green, the Bears and Rams wore Navy Blue (The Bears' navy blue is so dark that it's almost black). The Cowboys, well, before they became so enamoured with their white jerseys wore dark navy blue at home. The Redskins wear a colour that I cannot identify except to call it a dark, menacing (and ugly as sin) mix of red and brown. The Colts used to wear dark royal like the Giants back when they were a powerhouse in Baltimore. They lightened up when they moved to Indy. Check out old Superbowl tapes and you'll see it. The only team that has had any serious measure of success without a dark colour is the San Francisco 49ers but they had other things going for them. A bright, blazing crimson like they wear is psychologically unnerving to their opponents and the gold helmets kept the sun in their eyes (I'm kidding about that part but who knows?). Remember that bright green is considered a "friendly" colour. Now which team was it that has only won 3 Grey Cups in their history? While we're at it, what is the only team in the NFC East that has NEVER won a Superbowl? Keeping in mind of course that the other 3 teams have won at least 3 each. So what did the Eagles do? They changed their shade of green to something really dark. The Jets did the same thing when they reverted. There used to be another team in the NFC East that never won it either but the Cardinals had white helmets with dumb red birds on the sides. If you want to use a bird as a team name, you have to make it look menacing. The type of bird makes no difference. Consider that logically, the Eagles and Falcons should look the most menacing because their birds are apex raptors. The most menacing looking bird-team in the NFL however, is the Ravens. The reason? Black and Dark Purple. I could go on forever and pile even more evidence but this message is long-winded enough. Suffice it to say that in the game of Canadian/American football, more than any other sport on the planet, the team uniforms make a HUGE difference. (To this day I still think the Raiders are a scary-looking team and of course, they've won Superbowls)

So if all these other teams jumped off a bridge....The Als should jump off a bridge as well?

Sorry leave the unis and especially the logo as they are. Todays logo is the best in the league, and the 70ies was the worst!

What exactly is it?
How does it relate to football.
Except for Alouettes being in the logo, how does it relate to Alouettes or Montreal?
Its 40 years old, dead and burried, and a reminder of the Als' darkest days. A reminder of when they folded

I loved the 60's retro uniforms.

You don't know how it relates to the city of Montreal? You need some education there son. I'll use a picture to explain:

http://www.canadiandesignresource.ca/officialgallery/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/alouettes.jpg

The blue triangle symbolises the letter "A" for Alouettes but it also symbolises Mount-Royal. At the base of Mount-Royal is the red letter M symbolising the city of Montreal. The little white diamond in the middle symbolises "Alouette", Canada's first orbital satellite. Do you still think it's a horrible logo? You'd rather have a stupid cartoon bird on a pro football team? Let me explain something to you. The Alouettes do NOT have the best logo in the league, they have the worst. It's a semi-pro logo at best. The best logo in the CFL right now is probably Saskatchewan's. It's simple, elegant, proud and strong. There's no glitz, no glamour, just substance. The S for Saskatechewan flanked by wheat. Football is not a glamourous sport, it's a dirty, painful and brutal sport. Those traits will never change. Football is a war, the gridiron is a battlefield and the soldiers need every edge they can get to achieve victory. If that sounds too preachy, how about the fact that those retro jerseys flew off of the shelf at a record pace? As I said, I was lucky to get mine so they were also a huge boon for the team from a financial standpoint. The owner of the store (Who I've known for years) told me that he couldn't get any more because both the Alouettes and Reebok had grossly underestimated how popular that jersey was going to be. That season, the retro jersey outsold the modern jersey at a rate of around 2:1 (kind of like the current poll stats) and you're going to try to tell me that it sucks? Your words are deafened with every person who sees me wearing the jersey and compliments how great it looks regardless of the fact that I live in Toronto.

Listen buddy....You raised a poll and asked for opinions
I gave mine. if you cant handel the fact that some people wont agree with you, fine dont ask for opinions

There is no need for your condecending insults

And by the way

Just because you believe something represents Mount Royal, or a satalite or an M for Montreal Does not make it so

I love the 70's uniform and logo.

Short of abandoning current colours/logo, one could decide to use it for more home games this season.

I think this debate is split between aesthetics and tradition. From a purely aesthetic point of view, I hate the current logo and would prefer the old one. From the point of view of tradition, I don't see the need for the team to replicate jerseys from one of the darkest periods in franchise history. The last decade has been a magical one for Als fans. Why change the colors when we have been the league's dominant franchise for the past 10 years? This is why I believe a compromise -- using a modified version of the '70s logo (like the one the players wore for retro week the past couple of seasons), but retaining our present-day jersey and colors -- would be best.

Love the current logo and uniforms...wouldn't change a thing.

That lark rushing the football is the symbol of champions! :rockin:

You know what they say though...."What's old...is new again" The 70's Jersey's rock! :rockin:

You know what, you’re right. I totally agree with you. Just because I believe it to be so does not make it so. Do a little research and you will find it, I guarantee you that. It wasn’t my intention to be condescending, I was just kinda shocked that you didn’t know something that I always thought was simple Alouettes general knowledge.

Here is a post from my old thread from 6 months ago:

Here’s the thread URL:
http://forums.cfl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=58591&p=966177#p966177
And here’s a random comment made by someone on a site that celebrates sports logos:
http://www.sportslogos.net/logo.php?id=6095
Now, before you go saying that I wrote it, please note that the post on that site was made back in December.