SMA Dailey wears “Pinks & Greens” to Army-Navy game

| December 10, 2017 | 85 Comments

Sergeant Major of the Army Daniel Dailey Tweeted out a picture of himself yesterday while he was attending the Army-Navy football game wearing the “Pinks & Greens”. In another Tweet, he credits the uniform for contributing to the win.

From the Army Times;

The Army is working on a revival of the iconic uniform, and the prototypes first made their debut on the conference floor of the annual AUSA meeting in Washington, D.C. Dailey and the prototype models have since made the rounds in the uniform, including to a reception on Capitol Hill.

Saturday was the first time Dailey had been spotted in the uniform.

So, I guess the fix is in. You can’t avoid the fashionista train.

Category: Army News

Comments (85)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. sj says:

    Bring back the white name tapes on fatigues!!! Geeze out.

  2. Ex-PH2 says:

    Okay, so is the Army going back to khakis in the summer? I’m getting confused with all these wardrobe changes.

    • Claw says:

      Khakis? I hope not. Stiff, sweaty SOBs.

      If they go back to something like that, I hope it’s the TWs (Tropical Worsted) they opt for.

    • 19D3OR4 - Smitty says:

      Nope.

      So remember a few years ago when we had a Green uniform and a dress blue uniform? Then the powers that be decided it made more sense to have just one standard dress uniform and got rid of the greens?

      Well we are going back. Just with the pinks and greens instead of the forest greens.

      It will be a mandatory uniform worn for everything but the fanciest of occasions.

  3. OWB says:

    Pinks & greens – yeah! They looked good back when and they still look good.

    But, I would ask why the men have their asses covered but the woman has to expose hers. That’s just not right.

  4. Claw says:

    If they want to do this right, they’ll bring back the Blue (for Infantry) piping on the garrison cap and all will be right with the world.

    One question, though. The SMA doesn’t have to wear a name tag?

    Or are the other two soldiers out of uniform by wearing a name tag?

    Maybe too soon to tell since the uniform hasn’t been rolled out officially yet.

  5. SgtBob says:

    So the SMA gets a self-approved waiver on a non-regulation uniform?S

    • Mason says:

      Why not? He is literally the only person on active duty wearing those stripes anyway.

      If I remember right, three stars and higher can modify the uniform to their pleasing. Embroidered ribbons, Ike jacket, and so forth came from that.

    • Eden says:

      As I understand it, there are some Soldiers who are “field testing” the Pinks and Greens. I guess he gets to field test it, too.

      • Jonn Lilyea says:

        Field testing uniforms is just a pencil whipping exercise. They spent years grunt-proofing BDUs before they hit the field and a week after the authorization, there were daily messages about what we can or can’t do. Things like “don’t wash them with Tide, because Tide gets them too clean and they fade”. I guess field testing didn’t include washing BDUs in the cheapest laundry soap in the PX.

        • David says:

          not to mention not drying them or you would screw up the anti-IR supposedly on them, or just light damp drying, or full drying but no ironing, to light ironing but no starch, to full-on starch – that whole evolution took maybe a year.

  6. OleJumper says:

    Although I am retired Army, speaking from an NCO pov, I think they should go back to stripes on the sleeves like the USMC. It just looks sharper to me.

  7. Noahbody says:

    Bad tailoring, or do both of the men in the tweet picture have broken ankles?

  8. REM says:

    P&G are great. Wore them at TAMU. BUT I really can not wait for the return of the “Mid-Night” Shirt, Boots, and Boot Pants.
    Really all this is: 1. A waste of time/money, 2. Shows the clowns in the mid-50’s were wrong with the “Army Greens” and 3. If this is what the Chief of Staff is doing, he needs to be fired. We are at WAR and the Army is not in the best condition. He should be thinking WAR not BS fashion.

  9. 26Limabeans says:

    OD Slant pockets and bloused trousers.
    No exceptions.

  10. Yef says:

    But, I like the bus driver uniform we are wearing now. ASU for the win.

  11. Dave Hardin says:

    Two games, a streak does not make. Two games is little more than a stain. Just sayin.

  12. Mustang Major says:

    Now I see what is going on with the Army’s Class A uniforms (if they are still called that). Army uniforms are in a 100 year cycle. The cycle goes like this:

    Blue Uniform
    Pinks and Greens
    Ike Jackets
    Dress Greens
    Start all over again

  13. borderbill (a NIMBY/BANANA) says:

    Reminds me of my Dad’s uniform when he served. Looks good, Army. (I’m a Marine.)

  14. sj says:

    I’m surprised that that the Ladies of TAH haven’t done their usual lusting over the SMA. Maybe its a victim of the deviant purge going on in DC and Hollowwood. Or maybe they don’t like him in the “new” uniform?

  15. Green Thumb says:

    They will just change it again in a few years.

    The Army is, you know, focusing on the important stuff….

  16. Ret_25X says:

    The excitement is misplaced…this will just be another uncomfortable, insanely expensive uniform no one will like because it is just the old greens wrt to fit and form dyed new colors.

    Just like going to the ASU, this is something the Army just cannot get right.

    Get rid of dress uniforms entirely and make them exclusive to the optional category.

    • Reddevil says:

      I think that would be a huge mistake. The Service and dress uniforms are not only part of our heritage, they are an important element of the professionalism of the force. You have to have uniforms that are appropriate for all occasions. We already wear OCPs in far too many situations where we should be in a service uniform.

      I know that my paratroopers took immense pride in wearing their Class As with jump boots and berets, and always looked good while performing ceremonial duties from a Color a Guard to funerals.

      Our mistake was combining our service uniform with our dress uniforms. It made us overdressed for daily wear and underdressed for formal occasions.

      This really becomes apparent when you work with other services, especially the Marines.

      • Guard Bum says:

        Bingo. I was a Marine for 16 years and the uniform was almost always appropriate for the ocassion and we didnt just wear cammies in garrison. When I went Army I took great care of my various uniforms but my greens went mostly unused and we wore ACUs even on military business where a more formal attire seemed appropriate.

        I like the pinks and greens and to me they rival the Marine Class As. No one likes change but I like this initiative. I live close to FLW and saw some recent grads a couple days ago at Wally World in their blues….looked like blue potato sacks.

        Give it a chance.

  17. Kevin says:

    It’s lucky the army has solved all their problems with small arms, communications, and combat vehicles and has all this excess money and underemployed leadership looking for new problems to solve.

    • Reddevil says:

      this effort doesn’t really take anything away from other equipping efforts. There is an organization dedicated to uniforms- Program a Executive Officer Soldier Has a Program Manager Soldier Clothing and Individual Equipment. Their day job is figuring out what uniforms Soldiers wear. Basically, a bunch of Acquisition Coprs dudes that work with the SMA and the Army Uniform Board.

      I doubt Dailey is just doing this out of boredom. The current ASU is unpopular with Soldiers, who want a uniform they can be proud of.

      • Hondo says:

        Actually, it does.

        All such efforts require resources – specifically, staff-hours and funding. The Army’s resources are effectively fixed each fiscal year.

        Money and personnel/time tied up in playing “uniform du jour” games isn’t available to do other things – like equip, train, and maintain the force.

        • reddevil says:

          Sure it requires resources, but these resources have already been allocated as part of a process that has been in place for decades. Coming up with a new uniform is not additive, and it does not detract from other work.

          First and foremost, this is not a new item- all enlisted recruits are issued a service uniform, and are given a uniform allowance to maintain it every year.

          Up until 2008 or so it was the green Class A uniform. Schoomaker replaced it with the current blue uniform, which did double duty as a service (business suit) and dress (formal and ceremonial) uniform. There were no real cost savings because most Soldiers were not issued dress uniforms- dress blues were not a clothing bag item. In reality he swapped a blue jacket for a green one, and forced new NCOs to buy new pants.

          That said, there is an existing life cycle program for all of this. The Army, specifically the Program Manager, reviews this every year- they also do boots, gloves, Combat Vehicle uniforms, Flight Crew uniforms, mechanics overalls, etc, etc, etc.

          They determine if the current uniform is meeting current requirements, and if not they write up a requirements document and various vendors bid on it.

          We are already buying 70,000 or so new ASUs a year for new recruits, and forking out roughly 500,000 uniform allowance checks a year- a lot more if you count the Guard and Reserve. Assuming this uniform is not wildly more expensive than the ASU, it should be a wash resource wise.

          The Army will then issue a wear out date for the ASU based on how many we have in store (basically use up the ones we already bought). At some point the new guys get the new uniforms at reception, and old guys use their annual uniform allowance to buy the new one (theoretically-in reality it is spent on beer, strippers, and rims). Officers, of course, have to pay out of pocket upon commissioning, and are expected to have service and dress uniforms as company grades and mess dress as field grades.

          • Hondo says:

            (sigh) Once again, someone who’s apparently intelligent doesn’t quite “get” the concept of a zero sum game.

            The Army’s resources are in general fixed each fiscal year. The only way the Army can get more is to go to Congress and ask for them.

            Because resources are fixed, ANY EFFORT that consumes resources makes those resources (time/staff hours/funding) unavailable for anything else. The fact that the effort in question has been “programmed” previously is irrelevant; provided they’re not Congressional earmarks, resources can (with varying degrees of difficulty) be reprogrammed for other uses so long as “color of money” and other legal constraints and restraints are followed.

            Developing anything consumes resources (money, facilities, staff time, etc . . . ). Those aren’t available for use doing anything else. Developing a new uniform when there is no compelling need to do so thus detracts from Big Army’s primary mission to equip, train, and maintain the force.

            When someone can explain why developing a modern version of “Pinks & Greens” is more important than funding for training, repair parts, or purchasing something else the Army needs (like ammunition or medical supplies or rations), I’ll listen. But saying that developing a new uniform doesn’t detract from doing those core missions because it was “previously programmed” is simply inaccurate. It does – because unless there’s a compelling need, it ties up resources that could be better spent doing/buying something else.

            • Reddevil says:

              Sorry it took me so long to respond, but I spent a few hours showing everyone that would listen that someone finds me intelligent. I was riding the wave right up until my wife pointed out you qualified it with ‘apparently’…

              Your point is valid, especially if we were talking about how things oughtta be instead of how they really are.

              The Army’s has the Title 10 responsibility to equip the force, which includes clothing the force. The question isn’t whether or not we should buy a service uniform, it’s what service uniform should we buy- we have to clothe all new Soldiers and pay those already in to buy new uniforms or maintain the ones they have.

              The only way to save this money is to not have a service uniform at all or buy the absolute cheapest option available- maybe Old Navy khakis and a polo shirt with the Army logo. Guys could wear unit baseball caps and their PT shoes.

              I don’t see that happening, although of all CSAs in recent memory, Milley is the one that would go for it.

              Second, these funds are not fungible- if we decide not to buy uniforms, that money does not magically go to another MDEP- it just goes away.

              In terms of the SMA having better things to do, really he doesn’t- as Tommy Franks pointed out, Dailey and Miley are ‘Title 10 M**ther ****ers’. Perkins and Davenport recruit and train Soldiers and modernize the Army (although that will change when Modernization Command comes on line), Abrams and CSM Grinston train the force, and Vandal and Merrit will fight it.

            • USMC Steve says:

              It is still more important than paying for gender benders to get their freak surgery at government expense. I wonder what fund that comes out of?

  18. Jonn Lilyea says:

    Will paratroopers on jump status wear bloused brown boots now?

  19. Mike says:

    The Pinks and Greens are pretty sharp and don’t know why they discarded them when they did. A small fortune has been pissed away (both by the government and the soldiers) in the Army’s uniform quandaries! The end game is that they have no uniform tradition that the civilian populace recognizes such as the Marine Corps and Navy uniforms. When progress seems to be lacking. Do something. Change uniforms or change headgear! What is the dress uniform going to be now that they have downgraded the blues to a duty uniform?

    • Martinjmpr says:

      The Pinks and Greens are pretty sharp and don’t know why they discarded them when they did.

      The original P&G was done away with after WWII as one of the changes made following the Doolittle Commissions findings.

      The P&G, the best looking uniform the Army had, was an officers-only uniform. That’s one reason I laugh a bit when I see so many enlisted “P&G” uniforms – they are harking back to a uniform that never existed (enlisted P&G.)

      One of the things that the Doolittle commission determined was that soldiers disliked the fact that officers and enlisted men had different service uniforms. AFAIK the only service that does that is the Navy and I think they have even been moving away from separate officer and enlisted uniforms in recent years.

      • Ex-PH2 says:

        End the separate O-ganger and E-ganger uniforms in the Navy???

        Yeah, martinjmpr, the idiots in the Good Idea Fairy Brigade tried that in the 1970s when Jimmy Carter was in office. The sailors looked like they belonged to Spetznaz instead of the USNavy. It was ridiculous to do it then and it’s ridiculous now.

        • Reddevil says:

          Junior sailors look like overweight Marines these days- black pants and khaki shirts…

          Officer, Chief, and enlisted alike all look ridiculous in the aquaflage.

        • Ex-PH2 says:

          Put them back in chambray shirts and dungarees for grunt work and stick with the crackerjacks for other things. Practical application seems to have flown out the window starting back in 2008.

  20. Ex-PH2 says:

    How about we just dump all this stuff, go with a simple USF-A or B getup, with a nice, simple STS Fleet patch that everyone can wear?

    http://www.thelivingmoon.com/45jack_files/04images/Space_Craft/dod_1.jpg

  21. Thunderstixx says:

    They should just let the boys and girls wear the pajamas that everybody in Walmart seems to have on wandering around…

  22. Evilone03 says:

    Dear Dipshits in charge of the US Army uniforms,

    We are in the middle of two conflicts, and potentially about to rekindle a major conflict with North Korea. If you seriously think spending millions of dollars outfitting the entire US Army with a new uniform, from the relics of WWII, do the rest of us a favor. Please retire, separate, or suck start your pistol. The amount of time, money, and resources spent on this sham is frivolous. There are bigger concerns than a uniform.

    Sincerely,
    Combat Vet on his 7th deployment.

    All dissenters, please GFY!

  23. Martinjmpr says:

    As I’ve said before, as much as I detest the blue ASU, the one thing they could do to make it a superior uniform is to go back to putting shoulder sleeve insignias (shoulder patches) on it. The SSI on the service uniform is a proud Army tradition that should never have been done away with.

    I noticed that the proposed P&G uniform includes the SSI (as it should.) SMA dailey is showing his 4th ID FWTS-SSI (Former Wartime Service Shoulder Sleeve Insgnia), usually referred to as a “Combat patch.”

  24. Green Thumb says:

    I wonder if a riding crop will be issued with it?

    Ooooh. And a monocle!

    • Ex-PH2 says:

      Riding crops? Those come only with the 1940s baggy breeches, which lasted in the horse competition field until about 1995, and everyone went to skin-tight stretch breeches. And you have to wear the full-length boot, too, which you can now get at Kohl’s.

  25. Anonymous says:

    I support this move, we talked a lot about bringing these back in 2009 or so when we were discussing the future of the greens. But the “Pinks and Greens” with the waist belt were the officer version of the Army dress uniform during WWII. Enlisted Soldiers wore green pants with a four pocket green jacket with no belt around the waist. I agree that the officer uniform looks cooler, but if we are going to revive history, let’s at least be true to it. If we’re going to do whatever we want, why not have everyone wear jump boots with the uniform just because they look cooler than shoes?

  26. Sj says:

    I liked the greens. I liked them better when we went to the AF version of the shirt with rank epaulets and nothing else. Blues are for hail and farewells etc. But I’m a cumudgen dinosaur. Haruuumph!

  27. LTC Murph' says:

    Jeezuz, what’s with all the sand-in-the-vag? One green service uniform and one dress blue uniform (and an optional mess dress uniform). Seems perfectly reasonable. Have you seen all the damn uniforms the Navy and Marines have? At leaset we don’t have khakis, and whites, and so on and so on.

  28. Martinjmpr says:

    Much as I like the proposed P&G (and I do, much better than the awful ASU), if the problem is bad looking uniforms, changing the uniform is not going to fix it.

    The REAL problem with Army uniforms, as I’ve said before, is that there is a complete breakdown between “concept” and “execution.”

    IOW, the Army uniform board comes up with a proposed uniform. The proposed uniform, of course, is tailor made to fit the model and is made of high quality materials. No wonder it looks good!

    But once they uniform is adopted, manufacture of uniform components is farmed out to lowest-bidder contractors who use cheap, crappy material.

    And then Big Army compounds the mess by making little or no effort to fit uniforms to individuals. Soldiers are shuffled through uniform stations on a “close enough for government work” basis, resulting in soldiers receiving ill-fitting uniforms that look like a sack of crap.

    And you can’t blame the soldiers for this. What kind of 18 year old knows how to properly wear a tailored or fitted suit? I sure as hell didn’t.

    Ultimately what happens is that one-term soldiers typically wear their shitty basic-training issued uniforms until they ETS. Career officers and NCO’s learn very quickly that if they want to look like something other than a ragbag, they spend the extra coin on a quality, tailored uniform for a sharp look.

    IMO there’s nothing wrong with current uniforms that can’t be fixed with better materials and more careful fitting.

    And on the flip side, adopting a new uniform and using the same low-bid sourcing and sloppy fitting won’t make them look any better than the current ones.

  29. Old 1SG, US Army (retired) says:

    Well some of our members have made very eloquent arguments for and against uniform changes.
    I won’t bother with that, instead I’ll just bitch and moan a little…

    As much as I hate to see the Army change uniforms, yet again, this would be an improvement over the Dress Blues converted to Service Uniform fiasco.

    I mean who the hell thought that dress blue trousers with a white short sleeve shirt was appropriate office attire? They look absolutely ridiculous! Dress blues should not have been made into a service uniform in my humble opinion…

    The “pink and green” (maybe we should call them tan or khaki and green… lol) with trouser the same color as jacket might be an option…

    I guess every era has to go through the uniform shuffle…

    I remember when…

    Utility uniforms…

    Issue boots (black)
    Starched fatigues
    White T-shirts under fatigues (except combat arms in down range)
    OD green T-shirts under fatigues
    Permanent press fatigues
    BDUs (disco collars)
    Jungle fatigues (some issued or optional purchase)
    Jungle boots (some issued or optional purchase)
    Lightweight BDUs (should have been made standard)

    Field gear…

    Jungle fatigues
    Jungle boots
    Field pants, wool pants, etc, etc

    Dress or office…

    Starched Khakis
    Permanent pressed Khakis
    Wool Class A’s (Greens)
    Non-wool Class A’s
    Green overcoats
    Green Rain Coats
    Poplin Shirts
    Light green short and long sleeve shirts
    Shoulder Boards
    Black Sweaters
    Black Overcoats
    Black jackets

    Formal…

    Dress Blues, Whites, Mess (optional)

    And we can’t forget the PT uniforms…

    Bumble bee reversible t-shirts (two shirts in one, how nice – sarc)
    Yellow shorts and sweatshirt jacket and sweat pants (wash them once and they shrink to half their original size)

    Grey shorts an T-shirts (comes with sewn in panties as a bonus)

    Now the black PT uniform with reflective markings… are you kidding me? Who did the safety and risk assessment on these? Oh, don’t forget the reflective PT belts…

    I feel better now…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *