Brian Libby

There are plenty of five-star prospects who don't work out, for a variety of reasons: over-estimated talent, lack of development, injury, transfer, multi-sport aspirations, etc. As Charles noted, there are reasons to be unsure about exactly where this kid's talents will take him — to becoming a track-first guy who spurns football, or to becoming a great football player who dabbles in track. As one commenter noted, the star system itself is far from a perfect predictor of success (because doing so perfectly is impossible). And as teams like TCU have proven, having a roster of top talents isn't always better than having a roster of gritty players who play together. Oregon in its Rich Brooks years proved the same thing. Yet it would be the height of folly, and maybe even a dangerous direction, if we start second-guessing supreme talents who want to come to Eugene. Even if this kid DID ultimately give up football for a track career at Oregon, we should thank him for it. Losing a scholarship when a five-star football player seeks other pastures is more than worth it. The REAL risk is in not welcoming a talent like this. The risk here is in over-thinking it. I mean, what are we going to do, withdraw this offer and give the slot to a three-star guy? Great programs must fight other great programs. But they also must guard against their own hubris

I could be wrong about any of this, but my recollection is that new recruits often seem to be photographed wearing previous versions of Oregon uniforms during their visits, or slight variations. For example, in the past two years I've repeatedly seen photos of recruits in the Puddles-style uniform with the orange socks, but the team has not taken the field wearing those in several years. As for these eggshell uniforms, they are so rapturously hideous it seems like the uniforms were designed specifically to annoy old guys like us. But it's the nature of the game. College football is the bait in the business of corporations fishing for jerseys sales and TV contracts. I love my Ducks, but I feel like I could curate an entire museum of ill-advised and instantly-dated Oregon uniform combinations and misuse of non-Kelly shades of green. But don't listen to me: my football uniform tastes are forever locked in the early '80s.

I remember learning this for my 2008 book Tales From the Oregon Ducks Sideline. Really webfoots is kind of a term like tar heels. I actually wouldn't have minded if it had remained the team name, although there's something about "foots" that feels wrong, and yet "webfeet" would sound no better.

I do think it's true that each of us tends to love the uniforms from the times in our lives when we first fell in love with the team. For me, that means the Rich Brooks era, but a very specific one: when there were still stripes on both the helmets and the pants, and yellow helmets matching yellow pants. But I do think the 2019 uniforms, finally free of all that ridiculous fake-wing or fake-diamond-plating patterning on the shoulders, looked terrific. I can appreciate fans in this thread with more of a rah-rah point of view. "It's my team, so they're number one!" I have felt the same way for much of my life. But what can I say? I don't like fake diamond plating or brown-green jerseys or gray-green jerseys.

The winged helmets are great! I say that with one asterisk: I've always felt putting the O on the back takes away from it. I wish they'd either fully embrace the wings or go back to the O as the primary decal, but not try to do both. Does Michigan need an M on the top of its winged helmets to remind you who they are? And while I completely understand that it's all inspired by the Harley, the O in that spot just looks silly to me. Even so, the wings themselves are terrific, especially when they go all the way to the facemask without the gradient.

That USA today piece reads like it was written by a 12-year-old. He doesn't appear to have any knowledge of how various teams' uniforms have evolved over time, and even uses a Beavers uniform photo from one of their previous looks. He basically just gives a gut response to the color combinations, gives teams unnecessary kudos for their more gimmicky one-off combos, and has nothing nuanced to say about the Ducks, his admitted own team. I'm not saying he's wrong to like Oregon uniforms, but he has nothing new or insightful to say. All that said, it will be interesting to see what kind of inclinations Lanning has with regard to uniforms. When Cristobal took over, the uniforms at least initially got simpler in style, and there were fewer one-offs, both choices I loved. But then last year the uniforms started to get gimmicky again. Being young, I suspect Lanning will allow Oregon to be its boldest, most chameleon-like self.

I find the notion of a fast-paced pro-style offense very intriguing: both in terms of strategy right now and also how it relates to Oregon's past. Playing with speed is pure Kelly/Helfrich, of course, but returning to a pro-style offense for the first time since the mid-2000s brings us full-circle back to Mike Bellotti and Rich Brooks days. I suspect that a creative pro-style offense can be very dynamic in this case, and it doesn't have to mean we become Stanford or the New York Giants. I mean, it created a Rose Bowl passing record in January 1995 that stood for 27 years!

I certainly prefer green and yellow uniforms, and I've always disliked Oregon's use of black or gray. I also agree wholeheartedly, Charles, with your "it's been done" sentiment. Even if it looked fresh a decade ago, it's tired now. But I've kind of given up on the whole complaint, because today college football teams are runway models for the apparel companies selling jerseys. To Nike or Adidas or Under Armour, making just one or two jersey types doesn't give them enough different products to sell (in their minds). For me, it's not so much the non-Oregon colors that the Ducks sometimes wear that is the most distasteful. It's the one-off themed uniforms that don't even say Ducks, like the ridiculous Lewis & Clark tribute one-off uniforms of a few years back. And it's the very silly faux patterning that Oregon used to have on its jerseys. At the end of the day, I'll take a black Oregon jersey if it doesn't have fake diamond plating or fake feathers.

I've been on a few design award juries over the years, and I think this is a good example of how the award-givers' criteria is different from the general public's. An award like this is really only considering new uniform designs, so any classic ones don't really count, or aren't considered. I'm not a big fan of this uniform, because as an old-school fan I don't like any faux patterning on jerseys. But I can see why it won an award. There are SO many new uniform designs that are just poorly executed. This one has real clarity from a design point of view. It distinctly takes inspiration from Polynesian culture, which is clear, and the colors really pop against the black jersey. Charles, I'm with you all the way when it comes to personal tastes and uniforms. It's just apples and oranges.

I remember when Oregon played Ohio State for the national championship in 2015 (end of 2014 season), as the higher-ranked team the Ducks had the choice of uniforms. They chose an all-white away uniform that looked great, but as a Wall Street Journal article pointed out at the time, the team had very different records in different colors and combinations. The all-green outfit they'd just worn in the Rose Bowl against Florida State was one that the Ducks had a dominant record in, while the white outfits had the worst record of any look. I'm not at all saying that Oregon would have won the national title that night simply by wearing a different uniform combination, but I do suspect sometimes that different uniforms can produce different psychological effects. In any sport, the biggest challenge of all is to get your players playing hard and confidently. Every little bit helps.

I'm not too fond of any of these gray combinations, especially if it's all-gray. Sometimes Oregon has worn gray football pants with white jerseys, like in the game-clinching win against OSU in 2010 to finish 12-0, and those aren't too bad. What really makes me cringe the most is loud patterning on the jerseys, but I agree that it's hard to get excited about gray.

One thing I really love is the winged helmets — everything except the O on the back. I realize the whole thing (both the wings and the O placement) are meant to evoke a motor cycle like the Harley used as part of the pregame ceremony. But I just think that O on the back looks silly, and negatively impacts the otherwise-great look of the wings.

I agree with you completely, Charles — well, until you went and chose a uniform with wings on the shoulders for your second favorite! For the most part, I am all about the pre-1994 uniforms: not just the yellow pants and helmets, but with a stripe on the pants and down the center of the helmet. As newer uniforms go, I actually like best the look Oregon has worn for the past couple years, especially last season. All that faux gimmickry was finally gone from the jerseys and pants: the fake diamond plating, the fake wings. It looked RIDICULOUS. Only because we were winning so many games did I make peace with them. But I actually also really liked the original uniform redesign of 2000-2003 or so: the ones Joey Harrington wore. Also, in my book, apple green is not Oregon's color. Brownish green is not Oregon's color. Forest green is not Oregon's color. Gray-green is not Oregon's color. In my mind, we will always be Kelly green and yellow.