you are old
I'VE HAD JUST ABOUT ENOUGH OF YOU SONNY
It's cool, guys. We're just in our teal phase.
Ty Cobb; Al Kaline and Harvey Kuenn; Magglio Ordonez
Gordie Howe; Steve Yzerman; Henrik Zetterberg
Bill Laimbeer; Allan Houston and Grant Hill; Ben Wallace and Chauncey Billups
Tom Harmon; Jim Mandich; Tom Brady
UPDATE: someone said the "fair comparison" is the changes in Michigan's away uniforms over the years, as if 1) the Notre Dame game was not at home, 2) Michigan changed their away unis three times in a season, four if you count helmet numbers, back in the day 3) and looking stupid is acceptable as long as it's a road game. Here are the incredible changes in the last 40 years.
1971 MSU program; Jim Harbaugh; Mike Hart
Dave Brandon; Dave Brandon; Dave Brandon
you are old
anything is better than seeing those MSU abominations again.
I really only hated the unis we wore at MSU, I liked the UTL jerseys. The biggest problem for me was the white on white. There's only a few colors that actually look good for both the shirt and pants, and white's not one of them.
I think these will look good with yellow pants, and I know a lot of people don't like the M on the front of the jersey, but I think that's pretty sweet too.
A. We wear maize pants, not yellow.
B. White on white is a great combo. I think Texas looks great in it. (I'm not advocating we wear it, just sayin it looks good on some teams)
White on white looks good with a white helmet (e.g. Texas). For teams with a dark helmet, it looks unbalanced. It looks especially unbalanced in uniforms like the ones we wore for MSU, when the helmet and the top of the shoulderpads have dark colors and the rest of the uniform is white.
Take out the undershirt and they really aren't that different from the other variations of away jerseys we've had over the past few decades.
Interesting: Dictionary.com definitions of the word "uniform" -
-"without variations in detail"
-"constant; unvarying; undeviating"
Just something to ponder...
if you think about this as a design project, you realize that the thing that walks out on the field and into the M-Den is just a completely arbitrary pile of things. why white pants with maize striped shoulders and not maize pants? why no maize trim on the letters for MSU but for the Sugar bowl? why adidas clover for UTL, three stripe in center under collar for MSU and on right shoulder for sugar?
so, its not a "tradition only - blargh" thing, its a "the designer doesn't know what the f**k he/she is doing and is clearly just flailing" and my team looks like a sun belt reject as a result. you can have alternates, just not a bunch of watered down bad ideas.
to show that white pants were worn in the late 70s /.early 80s
So if we're in the teal phase that means we missed the short shorts phase? Damn.
Can we all just be happy that the Adidas stripes have survived yet another change? True, this might compromise the Michigan brand, but dammit, it sure doesn't compromise the Adidas brand. Priorities.
If Dave Brandon ventures any further into making us the Adidas Test Kitchen im going to ....uh whine on the internet i guess. grrrrrrrrrrrr. fack. shit. balls
Make an improvement and just stick with it.
Just for the record: I didn't like the "special" uniforms we wore this season. The ones against Little Brother where especially ugly.
No more shoulder stripes. No. More. Keep the sleeves single-color classy.
Putting myself on the reverse side of the argument, I kind of like the numbers on the helmet, and that at least is associated in my mind with "Hoke puts his mark on the program," which is a good thing so far.
I wouldn't mind the shoulder stripes (temporary flair like the yellow arm bands or piping) but for the fact that they look far to similar to the Adidas logo the decostruct and vomit all over their clothing, and one large brand logo is enough.
Are the numbers on the side of the helmet just for this year or are they staying?
You don't pull on Superman's cape
You don't spit into the wind
You don't pull the mask off that old Lone Ranger
And you don't mess around with jerseys for UM.
I wish we'd just say screw it and wear blue all year long.
Know what would be awesome? If they got rid of the stupid undershirt, ditched the stripes and slapped numbers on the sleeves. Yep, that's the ticket.
...but I actually dig the white pants and I'm ok with slight changes to the road uniforms throughout the year. And, I'm usually a "Get off my lawn" guy.
The two stripes remind me of the two blue stripes on top of the helmet (or inbetween the yellow stripes if you prefer negative space..).
I also get why people don't like the different versions, but it's not as out-there as the MSU stripe-a-thon.
Imagine if this would have happened under Rich!
how can I post a picture, whether from paint or elsewhere?
site doesn't host pictures. once it's posted somewhere you can copy and paste into your comment or copy the picture url and click the little picture on the editor
Can you purchase retail the compression shirts with the "Victors Valiant" or the block M on the sleeves? No matter what you think of the uniforms, having a set of those would make some super cool workout wear.
I believe this is what you are looking for:
*Shirt not guaranteed to maintain bulging-deltoid shape when you wear it.
Too cool, thanks. I have been looking for M branded compression wear for the longest time.
been wondering that too
Has anybody gotten a clear, concise answer from anybody connected to the team, about how this year's Tech-Fit jerseys became such disasters?
Wherein players were (apparently) begging to be allowed to wear last year's jerseys so that opponents wouldn't have such an easy time grabbing fistfuls of our brandnew2011TechFit jerseys?
That seems like the biggest "jersey story" of the year. And while it sounds like adidas-bashing (and maybe it is), I'd just like to know how it all came about. My guess is that adidas came up with something that was light and stretchy and strong and that on all kinds of dimensions, it was a high-performing jersey design. Except one: all those nice qualitites also made it easy for opponents to grab.
Anyway, that seems like a good outline for a story. I wish somebody would report on that one.
...Section 1 is right on the mark. The tech fit jerseys were a disaster from a practical standpoint. From a visual standpoint, they were actually a significant improvement on the yellow piping monstrosity that's been worn over the past few years.
It's likely that if they had proven out, the MSU "clowniform" and even this Sugar Bowl uniform may never have seen the light of day.
My guess is that the Sugar Bowl uniform is their attempt to come up with an away uniform that actually looks good (the yellow piping and clowniform unis simply do not pass the "look good test" IME).
So to Brian's complaint, consistency is fine if the consistency involves a quality product. It seems to me that this latest iteration of the away jersey at least looks good. I'm in favor of them adopting it as the new standard.
Time will tell.
Was Brandon the one responsible for ending the lights at Domino's Farms too?
Looking stupid should not be acceptable for road games either. Those horrible uniforms for the MSU game were just....no!
I could have dealt with this for one game.
um...cough....cough....(now really pulling on collar)
I like the all whites a lot and wish we'd bust those out for a roadie.
Now in full sprint from the angry mob.
Guess I had better keep up so I am not the one that mob catches first! To me put this jersey with the white pants(perhaps some nebraska type stripes) minus the M on the chest and Michigan on the back and you got a winner.
The helmets are what is iconic about Michigan's unfiroms. Putting numbers on them is dumb, whether it's been done before or not.
Adding a few stripes or tubing to the jersey isn't a big deal, IMO. I'd rather they didn't do it personally, but as long as we avoid some monstrosity (@MSU this year), I have no problem with it. The Sugar Bowl uni's look fine.
NOW TAKE THE DAMN NUMBERS OF THE DAMN HELMETS!
What's interesting about this is that Penn State had numbers on their helmets for at least a decade, if not more...
What makes them THEM is that their uniforms (helmets, jersey, etc.) are plain and haven't significantly changed. They've mostly stuck to an extremely basic look, even numbers don't ruin that because it's a small part of the overall look they've maintained.
Michigan HAS changed far more significantly over time, so they don't have the same identity issue that Brian is complaining about.
The 'brand' is the winged helmet. IMO, the numbers distract from that.
in the big ten had them at one point or another in the 50's-70's.
I have nothing but good memories of the UTL uniform.
They could have been wearing huge clown shoe cleats for all I care after that experience. It's good to be 10-2 and just bitch about uniforms.
The jerseys from the msu game wouldn't have been so bad if they wore the pants in the concept instead of the white.
the home uni is the best uni in all of football. the away uni is an after-thought. the away uni should be the only uni that gets changed. the uni for UTL was a poor attempt for a throwback style. whenever the michigan uni is brought up the first image is always the winged helmet. when anyone thinks of michigan athletics, the winged helmet is what is thought of, not the jersey nor the pants.
to be really creative and stir up a bee's nest, they should have maize away jerseys and blue pants. basically the home uni reversed. now that would cause an uproar, but would probably look pretty cool.
the old englis D is the greatest sports logo in baseball, and the winged wheel is the greatest sports logo in hockey.
winged wheel------winged helmet, is there a connection?
on a double post.
- not really a problem, but for lack of a better word - is the helmet.
The helmet is never going to change and that's a good thing. But when it comes to away jersies, its hard to find a good fit with the helmet.
I'd say all-white would look good with the Sugar Bowl jersey, but with the winged helmet, it would end up looking like away team in a college All-Star game. Perhaps white pants with light maize trim? I tried tinkering with blue pants, but it ends up looking horrible.
Personally, I think the Mike Hart jersey above looks the best out of all of away jersey examples.
Monkeying with the uniformz seems excessive and marketing slap-happy. I agree with that. But you've got a ways to go to convince me it is worthy of this much angst and teeth-gnashing.
David Brandon is who he is: a guy with a corporate background, who seems to be happiest when he has something new to fuss about with. A hospital capital campaign, facilities upgrades, a new Division I team, etc.. He may be fresh out of big projects, so he turns to fashion design.
Soon enough, something else will come along to distract him (hopefully not a mascot?).
I'm pretty confident that Michigan will still be awesome at the end of it.
On the one hand, I think these new jerseys are sweet, and would love for them to become the new road jerseys (our road jerseys have looked pretty bad for quite a while now). On the other hand, I don't want DB to get any more bad ideas than he already has. If it were up to me, I would make these the road jerseys and call it a day, having at most one special jersey every couple of years.
These are nearly identical to what ND wore 'Under the Lights' against us (obviously minus the block M on upper the left chest)
and on the field ND's jerseys were a good look in my opinion. I would like to see the chest block M moved to the back ( like this years home) and plain blue under sleeves.
Here's something to think about: Has anybody else noticed there is not a single uniform in the Michigan Athletic Department that does not have a Block M somewhere on it? In the last two years, that's been something that's immediately changed across the board.
The home white hockey jerseys added a Block M to the beginning of the MICHIGAN on the front. The maize alternates had Block M's placed on the shoulders without the crossed hockey stick Block M logo Hockey has traditionally used. Both normal home and away football jerseys got Block M's inserted above the players' names. UTL had the M on the front, the MSU had the M on the upper chest, and the Sugar Bowl jerseys have them there as well.
When we're talking about branding, doesn't get more ostentatious than that. Especially with the University's branding and wordmark folk strongly encouraging a move away from predominant use of the University Seal in favor of the Block M.