I'm not convinced the matte finish is a huge deviation. I don't mind them; it's not like they're changing the whole helmet design. As for the jersey's, "GET OFF MY LAWN!"
Obligatory Uniformz Post
Hey. Life rolls on. Thank you to those who have expressed condolences.
One of the running jokes on the podcast this year has been theorizing that the athletic department has someone specifically dedicated to trolling me. Evidence: "In The Big House" did not return until after the nonconference season had convinced me it was gone, and Michigan waited until the last possible moment to change Jordan Kovacs away from #32. Taken with the deployment of Denard and Devin against Ohio State, this is strong evidence indeed.
If they are deep enough inside that they knew what I was writing up this morning and chose that hour to release the latest in the ever-growing line of uniformz, I am terrified because the sleeper agent is probably me.
Anyway. We knew this was coming because Michigan's promise after they announced the Alabama uniformz was that they would not screw with the jerseys during the regular season. They are here. If you have not been on the internet, here they are:
They finally screwed with the helmet. Also Ramzy pointed out that there seem to be four different shades of yellow on this thing.
Yes, yes, the kids love it, which is why Alabama and USC are struggling to recruit these days. It is possible the kids are not quite so stupid as that meme thinks they are and make decisions based on things other than wearing goofy alternates a couple of times a year. Your assertion as to what the kids love does not seem to have much bearing on where they go to school. Alabama did not need fancy duds to annihilate Michigan earlier this year.
What gets me is that many iconic uniforms are not being futzed with, including the aforementioned teams plus Texas, Florida State, Penn State, and Oklahoma*, but the people running those athletic departments must be wrong and the man who brought us pasta inside a bread bowl must be right. I do not agree that this is necessarily the case, Kids Love It Arguer Guy.
I mean, the brand-manic NFL has strict restrictions on third jerseys, with many of the teams deploying them once or twice… ever. NFL teams are prohibited from wearing alternates in the Super Bowl, and only the Chargers have ever deployed them in a playoff game, probably because the Chargers' alternates are themselves a great tradition revived from the 1960s.
It's no real loss if Michigan looks dumb playing in Tampa, but I'll be sad if Michigan plays a Rose Bowl in anything other than classic Schembechler blue. And if you wouldn't want to wear it at the Rose Bowl, why would you want to wear it anywhere?
I promise to write another version of this post in August when alternate uniforms for the ND game are announced, because it is tradition, and tradition is important. #thisguygetsit
*[All of those teams have largely if not entirely opted out. Oklahoma wore some all-whites that were roundly panned in 2009 and scrapped the concept, and Texas altered their helmets to honor Darrel K Royal this year but that's a whole different thing everyone should be okay with. IIRC Alabama did have some sort of subtle houndstooth thing in one game. In each case any uniform alterations were one-offs or close to it, not Michigan's parade.]
The helmet and the uniform need to be separated here.
Matte helmet- looks pretty sweet, and is possibly what all football helmets will look like before too long.
The rest of the uniform, of course, is unspeakably bad.
Edit: My first double post!!
Getting in my total agreement and stated opposition to the uniformz before the flamewar begins.
Isn't 11 a "Legends" jersey, why no patch? Or does the Legends Patch lose out to the BIG logo and the Outback Bowl Patch? Wait, I just answered my own question.
A legend patch denotes that a Michigan legend wore that jersey previously. These are clearly Toledo or West Virginia jerseys, so there wouldn't be a patch.
It is a tradition to wear alternate uniforms against ND for home night games.
Seriously, those look like some sort of off-brand monstrosity only sold at Lidz.
you get triple points on your Lidz card for buying one.
for having such atrocious taste, regardless of Brian's stated opinion - those uniforms are awful in every possible way and should be burned in a red-hot furnace.
My guess is you drive a Prius or a Nissan Leaf, don't you?
Agreed. Its one thing to feel the need to deploy gimmic jerseys. Its a whole other thing to agree to terribly horrible-looking ones. I mean, who the f-ck is designing these things??? My 4-year-old son could come up with something that looks better, and he just painted a Christmas using pink and brown paint!
How, exactly, does one paint a Christmas? That kid must have talent!
LOL wtf did this picture even start out as??
That chick looks like an alien and the animal.... God only knows what that is.
And yes, the uniformz suck for all the reasons everyon has stated.....4 yellowz, look like Wal-Mart knockoffs, etc.
With all the uniformz it's like we're trying to be Oregon and failing, when we don't even need to be trying to begin with.
the animal is a Sloth.
Hello, Irony? Is that you?
You can make alternate uniforms that people will love or at least grow to like. Whomever is designing these needs to be canned for someone with some actual talent. The Jerseys are like some generic team jersey from when you would create a team in some of the early Madden games.
...than the actual uniformz is the fact that we are the home team and gave up the right to wear our home blues to do it.
I continue to not think "brand" means what Dave B Brandin' thinks it does.
Why didn't we just make blue uniformz?
By contract with the Outback Bowl, Michigan was designated the home teams and would normally wear the dark (home) uniforms.
But in order to get UM into this particular uniform, Brandon (I assume) waived this so that we wear this Adidas-inspired white outfit with the blue shoulders. Why did they do this?
I recall seeing a photograph from this weekend with the recruits and in the background there was a blue uniform with maize colored shoulders. A lot of people were wondering if that was a true alternate jersey.
I bet the answer was yes, but when comparing it with the white jersey that we just saw rolled out, a decision was made to keep it on the shelf and have the team wear the visiting (white) Adidas jersey. Who knows why the decision was made, but I bet dollars to donuts that the marketing brain trust thought they could see more of those to the general public than they could sell the home version.
What really draws my ire about this is that they could have made a real killer, all blue jersey with maize numerals and letters. Heck, just replace the numbers on the sleeves with the block "M" and change the shades of blue and maize to reflect the colors on the matte helmet and you'd get a traditional look that's also sellable.
Brandon does a lot of things well, but alternate jerseys isn't necessarily one of them. The UTL jersey by itself was okay, but it's real appeal is that it is coupled with an epic win against Notre Dame in the first night game ever. The Sugar Bowl jerseys were also good in large part because they didn't go too outside the box.
But the white striped jerseys for Michigan State and the ones used in the Alabama game were pretty sorry given the competition and the game results. MSU came out in dark green, black and bronze while the Wolverines looked like some maize-and-blue bumblebees wearing white pants. Alabama stuck with the traditional look, something that UM should have done as well. Not only did Michgan play badly on the field, but they looked like an Arena football teams in the process.
As long as Michigan has the contract with Adidas and David Brandon is giving the okay to their uniform/jersey concepts, then we're going to continue to see these sorts of things. Hopefully, the next contract for athletic apparel is with Nike. Not only is it better made, but the edit themselves when it comes to some of the wilder stylings (with the obvious exception of Oregon).
Don't understand why people think Nike won't do any alternate uniforms. ohio has had one every single season since they introduced the pro combats.
Dave Brandon will still want to buy alternates because people buy them. Period. It's all to make money.
that the blue unis we saw are for the Notre Dame game, and DB wanted to maximize profits that would be gained by selling 2 different jerseys compared to 1
Gotta admit, as much as I am an old, grumpy, get-off-my-lawn, traditionalist, I kind of really love the helmet.
The rest is shit.
....not the helmet! I'm so sick of this shit and there appears to be no end. Brandon should hear it from the fans on this one!!!
Brandon should be on the hot seat, plain and simple.
There are some things he does really well, but that does not justify keeping him around when he is whoring out central aspects of our tradidion for those Adida$ uniformz dollar$.
It's like RR. He did one thing really well, but seriously (and continually) fucked up another thing, and eventually he had to go. Same thing applies to Brandon. This shit is getting ridiculous.
I don't particularly hate them. The uniforms are still pretty simple...I guess the only thing that would really piss me off would be 1) losing the winged helmet and 2) a jersey with MICHIGAN in huge letters on the front a la sparty...
This is just a money grab right, so people will buy more jerseys?
It's almost certainly just a "money grab" -- there's no other reasonable explanation -- but that explanation itself is unreasonable as well.
In January of 1998, I remember Rose Bowl uniforms for sale in the bookstores. They were the exact same uniforms worn during the year, except that they had the Rose Bowl patch on 'em. They seemed to sell just fine, to the same people that already had a bunch of uniforms in their closet.
Selling jerseys makes sense, but are people going to buy more helmets?
The Outback Bowl jersey reminds me of the kind of Michigan gear you can get at Meijer's for $10, only now by making them "official" jerseys, Brandon can charge $75 for them. Way to go Dave.
I hate these. I haven't hated them all. In principle messing with the road uni is fine, since we don't have a particular design that is "traditional." But I think this is ugly and I hate messing with the helmet.
Altogether I would be much happier if they never messed with the uniform ever. Our main home uniform is unequalled.
As I understand from this thread, Michigan is the designated home team and elected to wear white, much like LSU, Georgia Tech, or the Dallas Cowboys. So for a game, at least, this is Michigan's choice for a home uniform.
Parade is a great word.
This is a parade of shitty uniform variations I'd be embarassed to see Oregon wearing.
For someone as focuses as he appears to be on #Branding , Doller Dave doesn't seem to understand how he's damaging Michigan's brand.
Be Leaders, not followers. Right now, we're following on all of these trends: Ugly shoulder bullshit, Shiny everything, Matte finish, etc.
"Parade" is too kind. "Clown show," maybe?
Dave Brandon is the Rich Rod of athletic directors! (What? Too soon...?)
I just want to know what the hell is wrong with Jordan Kovacs in this photograph. Fingers crossed that he ceases to be petrified and manniquin-esque by 1/1/13. Also: affirmatively like the helmetzz and could take/leave the rest.
Michigan's uniforms--largely because of the helmet--are very distinctive already. You don't need to jazz them up for bowl games. That, and the more you do deviate from the base uniform, the less of an impact anything different makes. I would be OK with doing it once a year, but more than that is just a bad idea.
The numbers are keystone to the horribleness that is those jerseys. They are revolting and should only be worn in a universe in which humans are constantly high on peyote. That much maize on white is simply not something that a football team should ever wear.
It is depressing feeling so helpless as the AD keeps churning out these atrocities.
Re: FSU -
I believe they also wore all black recently.
Texas has never worn black jerseys in a game. They have only worn the same style of orange or white jerseys that they wear now.
Alabama has never worn anything besides numbers on the side of their helmet. For the 1969 season, they featured "100" inside a football on one side of the helmet to celebrate the 100th anniversary of college football; other than that the only thing that has ever been on the side of an Alabama helmet is the player's number.
I don't know where you're getting your information.
I'm actually from the state of Alabama and I don't recall ever hearing about Bama wearing that in a game. I could easily have been unaware though.
That's because they haven't. Bluelot is out of his element.
If you're curious, the Helmet Project has a listing of every helmet ever worn for just about any school:
I don't know where that picture is from, but I know uniform concepts float around the internet pretty much constantly. I guarantee you that Alabama has never worn an "A" on their helmet in a game. Yes, I am sure about that. Find a game photo if you want to prove me wrong - you can't.
Also, Texas has black practice jerseys. They do not have a set of black game jerseys. Black game jerseys do not exist for Texas. Never have. Please don't confuse their practice jerseys (or fashion jerseys) with game jerseys. Otherwise you could be like "hay guys, Texas has a pink jersey!"
Florida, LSU (2x), Alabama (slight change in the current uniform), Georgia, Ohio State (3x) have all done this, and I would argue that these are some of the classic uniforms in all of football. Its a sign of the times changing, everything has to be throwback, fauxback, or alternate uniform these days. Would I prefer that Michigan comes out in the classic blue jersey, or a white version similar to the home jersey? Absolutely. Do I mind this new jersey? Not at all.
We can complain about adidas and Dave Brandon ruining everything, but next time you're near Michigan Stadium, Yost, or Crisler (arena) Center, look at the good that they have done for the programs. I will take a matte blue on the helmet (that looks great IMO) over having a crappy Crisler Arena, or having a stadium that all the sound escapes. It isnt the way that the jersey looks, its the players wearing the jerseys. I am damn proud of all these men, and I will root them to victory, even if they decided to come out dressed like South Carolina.
I don't recall them, as the home team in a bowl, electing to wear white shirts with crimson sleeves and crimson-outlined white (or silver, or black, or anything but crimson) numerals.
I assume you're talking about the Pro Combat uniforms worn in a 2010 game against Mississippi State (and maybe sometime after that):
But Nick Saban has nixed the idea of anything more radical , proving that he doesn't like to land recruits and secretly hopes for his athletic department to wither away from lack of funds.
Kausler, D., Jr. (2011, September 14). Uniform changes at Alabama? Nick Saban makes his feelings perfectly clear. AL.com. I'd share the link but the spam filter said no.
Everything else is garbage.
These Outback Bowl uniforms are a travesty. And so have been all of the alternate uniforms with the possible exception of the Under the Lights game ones.
If we're going to go with an alternate uniform, why can't we do these? Michigan's brand used to be that we'd always had the same uniform. And Brandon has completely destroyed that.
Check out that stylish and distinctive "4" on Bob Chappuis' jersey. And no logos!