Black pants, a comparison

[JRod37]

Honig's has had a huge issue with the snaps this year. I had to send two pairs back because the snaps broke the first time I opened them. They're going so far as to send repair machines to local shops and dealers so they can replace broken snaps.

Otherwise, the Honig pant is great. I haven't tried the Davis or Smitty's.

[Canned Heat]

Our crew wears one or the other, (GD & Smitty/Adams). I actually went ahead and bought the GD's after I already had the Smitty's.

I agree that the Davis brand is far and away better. The fabric is thicker and less prone to wrinkles or tears, the adjustable waistline is great for really cold days when you may need a base layer below them and/or if a guy would lose a few pounds.

[Rich]

Varsity debut tonight of the pants. So comfortable. Wouldn't have normally worn long sleeves tonight, but them's the rules, so we did. A bit warm in the first half, perfect in the second half.

Watching the highlights, I saw short sleeves with knickers, short sleeves with white shorts, short sleeves with black shorts, and long sleeves with black pants.

[BktBallRef]

The Smitty pants are supposed to be a water resistant fabric. They are definitely not as heavy as the Honigs.

I looked at Davis. There are three different styles. Which ones are you talking about, Rich?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

The Smitty pants are supposed to be a water resistant fabric. They are definitely not as heavy as the Honigs.

I looked at Davis. There are three different styles. Which ones are you talking about, Rich?

The $50 pairs.

Gerry Davis Sports: 2010 Davis Black Football Pants

Comfy. Really no warmer than knickers, IMO.

[Texas Aggie]

But maybe I am bias.

I don't want to hijack the thread, but just a quick note on a pet peeve of mine: you aren't "biased" by stating an opinion, even if that opinion doesn't take into account all facts (i.e. you used only one of many products and say that one product is very good). Bias means you either have a duty to be objective (as an official, say) and aren't or it means your opinions are offered for a motive unrelated to quality (say, you profit from the sale of something).

Sorry, back to football.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

I don't want to hijack the thread, but just a quick note on a pet peeve of mine: you aren't "biased" by stating an opinion, even if that opinion doesn't take into account all facts (i.e. you used only one of many products and say that one product is very good). Bias means you either have a duty to be objective (as an official, say) and aren't or it means your opinions are offered for a motive unrelated to quality (say, you profit from the sale of something).

Sorry, back to football.

You'd make a fine lawyer.