Lose The Pro Look, Chuck

The post-Rivers mediocrity of Wolfpack football has many causes. Jay Davis wasn’t Philip Rivers and at times wasn’t Tol Avery. The team was often poorly disciplined and poorly coached. An apparent – and hopefully eradicated – “star system,�? whose poster child was the insufferably annoying T.A. McClendon, took its toll. And assistants came and went at a rate that made carnies look like stable, long-term employment prospects.

Still, one can point to an overall issue: NC State football seems to require less of an injection of talent than an adjustment in attitude. John Bunting may be a boastful toolbox and all-around no-goodnik in our eyes, but let’s give the guy some credit. He’s regularly beating our (supposedly) more talented, glitzy program by producing teams with a simple, traditional desire to kick our ass every time we meet up. You know, the way Dick Sheridan’s teams used to punk Mack Brown’s spiffy blue chippers with our “inferior�? players. It’s as if the two programs have switched places.

Worse, Chuck Amato himself led the new Pimp My Program trend. Amato can be an immensely charismatic guy, but let’s be honest. With the red shoes and sunglasses, Chuck evolved into Hurricane Clown Show last season. A sad but undeniable fact of life is that the difference between winning and losing is also the difference between being an interesting eccentric and a laughingstock.

The clown outfits disappeared as the Pack went into meltdown last season, and Amato gets huge credit for reviving a team then lurching toward historic disaster. But Amato needs to go further. It’s time to get back to basics – the let’s get it done attitude of the Rivers era. And a good way to signal a return to seriousness is: Discard the cheesy, pro-style uniforms and go back to looking like a college football team again.

A minor point, you say? Perhaps. But it’s an immensely symbolic one. Does no one else recall the seriousness, and traditionalism, signaled by ditching the O’Cain uniforms (which were left over from Sheridan anyway) and returning to a solid Block “S�? and traditional red and white ? Does no one else agree that in temporal terms if nothing else, things began to unravel at precisely the same time as the traditional uniforms were ditched for the silly “pro-style�? togs the team now uses?

Look at this picture. Look who it is. Look at the uniform:

http://graphics.fansonly.com/photos/schools/ncst/sports/m-footbl/auto_action/a-rivers-092703.jpg

Now, this sadly familiar one:

http://graphics.fansonly.com/photos/schools/mifl/galleries/footbl-102304/02-lg.jpg

The older uniforms are the symbol of the renaissance that marked Amato’s earlier years at State. They’re the uniforms in which Notre Dame was beaten – and UNC too, most of the time. Those uniforms said, “We’re serious, traditional, and here to play.�? The new uniforms say, “We’re a half-assed version of the Atlanta Falcons.�? I can’t imagine wanting to emulate the Falcons in any fashion, let alone sartorial.

Some, reading this, are no doubt claiming I’m making a mountain of a molehill. But seriously, this isn’t Queer Eye For The Football Guy here. Appearances say something. If you doubt me, and you are old enough to remember the great Dallas Cowboys teams of the Seventies, do you remember this picture?

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0000BW5C1.01-A2QUBZRFQD7A2Q._AA280_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

Or do you remember this one?

http://www.kskssports.com/ksks_sports/sports_illustrated/1980s/images/si8233.jpeg

The Cowboys whipped everyone on their white uniforms and just as regularly imploded in the blue ones. Any time the Cowboys wore the blue uniforms in the playoffs, people worried – and usually with good reason. It got to the point where they were capitalized: The Blue Uniforms, as in, The Anthrax Virus.

And that makes no intrinsic sense. The team that played in white was the same team that played in blue. But, like I said, appearances mean something. Penn State’s simple blue and white means something, as does the blue and gold of Notre Dame. While the latter may do a “special uniform�? thing from time to time (and they usually seem to lose when they do), can you imagine either school getting rid of those uniforms with the goal of resembling, say, the Philadelphia Eagles or the Indianapolis Colts? Of course you can’t.

Lose the pro look, Chuck. Go back to being NC State again. Please.

General NCS Football

82 Responses to Lose The Pro Look, Chuck

  1. Cardiff Giant 08/04/2006 at 3:06 PM #

    Primacy:

    “I do think is ridiculous is calling our coach a “Pimpâ€? and a “Clownâ€?, calling our uniforms “Clown Outfitsâ€? and “Cheesyâ€?, and doing it all in the context of a lead post on a thread at this particular blog. Therefore I think it is potentially more an issue of writer’s comprehension rather than reading comprehension – since you brought it up.”

    Hell, 90% of the ACC, including probably half the State fan base, thinks they were clown outfits. It’s not like I am the first State fan to point that out.
    Why NOT this particular blog? Independent thinking is the hallmark of this forum, IMHO.
    I think by comparison with the old ones, the new uniforms are cheesy, yes.
    “Pimp” was a joking reference to “Pimp My Ride.” Surely you know that? Are you really asserting that I seriously think Amato is a pimp? Please.

    I did overreact to your sarcasm, though, for which I apologize. I am testy from the heat myself.

    If there is something different about the smiley, it ain’t my doing. I was an English major. I can barely figure out how to post one, let alone change one.

    I wish someone would discuss the FSU recruit issue, but that is really not my role here. I can’t think of anything to say about it but, man, that sucks, why would he go to FSU instead of here? 🙂

    Peace.

  2. Cardiff Giant 08/04/2006 at 3:14 PM #

    I’ll post something in a bit making fun of Jim Rome. That’s something we can all get together on.

  3. primacyone 08/04/2006 at 3:16 PM #

    Peace.

  4. cfpack03 08/04/2006 at 3:17 PM #

    imo, ‘clown outfits’ is a stretch but I still prefer the priors. Check out more pics of the difference:

    Rivers, all white aways, 2003
    http://www.cjonline.com/photos/galleries/122303_kubowl/images/01.jpg

    Garland Heath, white aways, 2006
    http://www.packpridephotos.com/photos/SpringCover450.jpg

    Again, nike to adidas was the main reason. Are we getting more $ from adidas? Or did nike pull out? I haven’t read here the reason behind why we changed

  5. redfred2 08/04/2006 at 3:27 PM #

    ^Cardiff

    The smiley face comment was in relation to your calling me the resident “Queer Eye” expert. Insinuating that your smile had possibly taken on a more feminine look than normal. It was just another weak attempt at humor on my part.

  6. GoldenChain 08/05/2006 at 10:29 AM #

    Hey ’94wpker, I say that in the strict sense that what you wear doen’t effect your proformance (or else Oregon and Miami would never win anything!) however, I does effect your attitude (and thus your performance).
    I think it’s an understatemnet to say that the overall team attitude has not been what it was in Chucks early years.
    I say go back to a ‘blue collar (or red collar)’ look that says “we’re hear to wear you out!”

  7. redfred2 08/05/2006 at 1:30 PM #

    I say go back to a ‘blue collar (or red collar)’ look that says “we’re hear to wear you out!�

    ^GoldenChain- That statement couldn’t have been made any simplier or clearer.

    The uniforms either state something or they don’t, in which case why would there have ever been a need to change them in the first place?
    The perception of NCSU is that of “blue collar,” embrace it and enjoy it. Then we can kick people’s butt’s in the athletic arena, and also later in any job market for all of the other reasons.

Leave a Reply