adidas Maize vs. Nike Maize

Submitted by Wolverine Devotee on

I originally posted this on the mainpage in the comments and I saw a few different opinions on this when I thought most want the old Maize back so I figure I'd make a discussion out of it on the board.

Yesterday, I went on Wayback Machine to the MDen site from 2007 and found the Nike version of a Maize Michigan shirt and compred it with the adidas version. Tweeted it out & got a lot of feedback for a late night post.

 

I like both but I wouldn't mind having the Nike Maize back (assuming Nike is brought back, which I really do see happening since Hackett is actually surveying the athletes who have been screaming for Nike).

 

MGoBoard
Football
wolverine devotee's quest for equipment completion

M-Dog

March 26th, 2015 at 7:57 PM ^

I chased five kids off my lawn this week alone and yet I prefer the Addidas maize.  

The Addidas maize really "pops" against the blue helmet and jersey, especially at night.  It is a great and unique color combination.   

I was in Rome and saw a guy from the back with a golf shirt that was blue and the "Addidas maize".  I could tell just by the tint of the maize that it was a Michigan golf shirt.  I yelled "Go Blue" and sure enough the golf shirt had a big block M on it.  He smiled and gave me a thnubs up.

Those colors are unique to Michigan.  I don't want to look like yet another Navy or Toledo or WVU or Cal.  I like looking like Michigan.

Joined: 07/06/2008

MGoPoints: 256963

Wolverine Devotee

March 25th, 2015 at 10:50 PM ^

I will always side with this version of the Third jersey as the best Michigan Hockey jersey. And it was originally Nike's design, too, but they let Michigan wear it for the first three years with adidas.

Although I preferred adidas' non-shiny version of the design texture.

Joined: 06/29/2009

MGoPoints: 31528

Qmatic

March 25th, 2015 at 10:47 PM ^

My biggest knock is that the Athletic Department can not seem to find consitency with their maize. I think it looked ridiculous this year having the helmets be a noticably darker shade of maize than the jerseys and pants. Like really, how hard is it to have it all match?

If they want the darker, more traditional maize, than they need to keep that across the board. Based on how all of the clothing for the past 8 years have been more on the highlighter side of things, I think it would create a lot of difference in the student section.

I know I'm in the overwhelming minority, but Adidas Sun>Nike Maize (but Nike design trumps Adidas every day of the week)

Joined: 01/09/2013

MGoPoints: 32583

swan flu

March 26th, 2015 at 10:57 AM ^

I am in the field of matching colors for plastics. Matching colors between two different plastic resins, even if they are both polypropylene for example, is hard enough. Trying to match paint to textile to whatever material is used for the numbers... All probably* from different suppliers using different sub suppliers, is exceedingly challenging. My guess is nike has better control over their supply chain than Adidas.

Joined: 08/16/2010

MGoPoints: 9374

UMfan21

March 25th, 2015 at 10:46 PM ^

I swear there was an article circulating about 3 years ago saying Adidas was slowly moving us away from the harsh "highlighter yellow" and more towards what is shown as Nike maize.

Joined: 09/28/2009

MGoPoints: 51217

OccaM

March 25th, 2015 at 10:58 PM ^

I believe our colors are still "Maize and Blue," not "Adidas Highlighter Sun and Blue."

However...

It seems like the change to "highlighter" Maize began under Nike...

The Fab Five jerseys were pretty close. 

Joined: 11/10/2014

MGoPoints: 9158

maceo_blastin'

March 26th, 2015 at 12:40 AM ^

to me, the fab five era maize will always be the quintessential michigan maize. those jerseys just looked so fly on the tv.

my brother and i have heated arguments about the state of the maize. he thinks the adidas maize bball jerseys are more 'hip' whereas i see them as a downright recruiting detriment. michigan merch sold so well during the fab five era and i think you can chalk it up to their being cultural harbingers but also the maize was jiving back then. the adidas maize to me is unwearable in social situations. 

Joined: 12/15/2013

MGoPoints: 463

LSAClassOf2000

March 25th, 2015 at 10:56 PM ^

I am at a point where the Nike stuff - what remains of it in the closet - fits again and I have admittedly dragged some of it out as the weather has warmed. Of course, given years and wear, there is not much which is in gameday shape but whatever. As bright as the Adidas maize looks on television (especially after my wife has decided to eff with the brightness and contrast), I do still prefer the more subdued but much more noble Nike version. If that came back, it's definitely not a bad change at all.

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 130561

gord

March 25th, 2015 at 10:57 PM ^

Nike used yellow too...I have plenty of items to prove it.

I'm guessing someone approves the colors and Nike or Adidas doesn't choose them.  There were some rumblings about how Nike had a patent on "Maize" and I have yet to see any proof of this.  It's pretty easy to search for every single patent or trademark ever issued online.

http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html

Joined: 11/02/2013

MGoPoints: 8104

MGoCombs

March 26th, 2015 at 11:08 AM ^

Not a lawyer, but my girlfriend is and we did stay at a Holiday Inn Express one time. Anyway, yes it would be a trademark. You can't Patent or Copyright a color as associated with a brand. A Patent is for an invention and a Copyright is well, for copy, like a book or other piece of art. It seems to me perfectly reasonable that Michigan could trademark maize, but I'm just not so sure about Nike being able to (lawyer please). Michigan or at least the NCAA has a registered trademark on the word "MICHIGAN" in block collegiate font for apparel purposes and the block M. Michigan maize, even as it changes, is synonymous with the brand the same way Tiffany blue or T-Mobile pink--all legal trademarks. The color, name, etc. isn't synonymous with Nike, so I'm not sure where they would have grounds to file, and it would be meaningless anyway since they don't have a right to produce anything Michigan, in the colors maize and blue, unless there is expressed consent. I would love to see them try to sue Adidas for using a color for a team that Nike no longer holds a contract for and can't legally produce. You can't just hold marks hostage like that. tl;dr: I'm calling b.s. on the Nike trademark rumor, but open to being proved otherwise since I actually have little idea what I'm talking about.

Joined: 08/13/2009

MGoPoints: 3849

Avant's Hands

March 25th, 2015 at 10:59 PM ^

I think this is way overblown. I have three student t-shirts that are bright yellow (03, 04, 06) and all three have a swoosh on them. Michigan has worn highlighter yellow since before Adidas was involved. Showing one shirt that was more maize does not prove anything.

Personally, I find the whole argument kind of dumb. My Adidas clothes have held up just as well as my Nike clothes did. If the athletes really like one more than the other then I'm not going to care which brand they wear. But I don't get everyone constantly being up in arms about Adidas making horrible concepts/alternates when Nike does the exact same thing and Under Armor brings you whatever the hell Maryland wears. 

Joined: 10/22/2011

MGoPoints: 9271

M-Dog

March 26th, 2015 at 8:12 PM ^

It's a myth that we were some kind of golden mustard-y yellow under Nike, or even before then.

I first laid eyes on a Michgian uniform in real-life in 1982.  My impression was "man that yellow is bright."

Our maize has always been bright yellow.  It has never been a deep yellow. 

A recent video of Durkin was shot in front of Tom Harmon's 1940 uniform.  The maize on Harmon's uni was bright yellow.  It looked nothing like the mustard-y yellow shown by WD above.

 

Joined: 07/06/2008

MGoPoints: 256963