Imagine this lineup with variations of purple.
Now try not to puke on your desk.
Imagine this lineup with variations of purple.
Now try not to puke on your desk.
Kill it with fire!
TOM BRADY IS SPONSORED BY UNDERARMOUR I WILL BUY ALL THE ARMOUR I CAN HAZ
But if you really want to burn something into your memory...
I am just going to think of it as 11 fans of Grimace taking their positions for every play in Evanston. Imagine if they played Maryland...it would be Grimace tackling Birdie The Early Bird.
As long as they don't let them go all Maryland on the uniforms then this should be beneficial to NU
From the people who brought you this:
What could possibly go wrong???
You inspired me to do an image search for "what could possibly go wrong." Thank you for that.
Do people like or dislike this trend in uniforms along age groups? In other words, do young people like these - and old people dislike them?
I'm 42 and I completely hate some of the kits I've seen in the NCAA and NFL in the past few years.
My guess is that at least some people 20 and under do. They are, of course, objectively wrong in this.
I'm in my early 20s and I completely hate 90% of the uniformz. I like the ones that actually stick to actual uniforms worn by that team in the past. No, not "based on" those uniforms, or "combining elements" of those uniforms. Actual throwbacks. Even if they're heinously ugly, I'm ok with them if they actualy look like old uniforms (for instance, the Steelers' throwbacks for this year are godawfully ugly, but they can pull out a black-and-white team picture from the 1930s and the uniform looks basically the same).
Agreed. I'm 20, and I dislike a lot of the new uniforms coming up. I don't mind it as much for schools that don't have as much tradition, but if you have had the same (or very similar) uniform for 50 years, why change now? I also am not really a fan of the throwbacks, although some of them can work. Just play the damn game without changing uniforms every time.
Traditional uniforms are the best no doubt about it. I personally have always kinda liked Penn State's white on white look and I hate when when we ware crazy versions of old uniforms. On the other hand I think that Oregon has really done a nice job with the new uniform every week approach, although some of them are hit and miss. I really think that new uniforms are not universally "bad" or "good" to any particular generation but are hit or miss for each group.
I am 25 and I couldnt agree with you more except that I like have these uniformz on the schools that lack tradition.
Personally I liked what Maryland and ASU were doing, I mean hell the only thing ASU has going for it is its *scenary* so whats not to loose with some slick all black evil looking uniforms. Yet, there is also a downside to constantly changing your uniforms as you can never build an identity which is how I feel about MSU and their ever shifting color pallete. I graduated from CMU and I can tell you that this is the problem they have; every year we unveil new uniforms with different shades of maroon and gold/yellow so the crowd looks like ass as we have 45 different shades going on.
However, I draw the line at any of the power schools like Mich, Ohio, Florida, Texas, PSU, USC etc. when I see those uniforms I immediately know who and what they are. I see visions of past Rose Bowl wins, 4th quarter comebacks etc. Am I really going to remember that we wore alternate jerseys @ the Sugar Bowl in 50 years? probably not, especially if we keep our current rate up.
I'm 23 and I don't really care what uniform look like but I want them kept to one color and one white per season. Then again I am crotchety beyond my years.
I think this is the best Northwestern Jersey set In my lifetime.
I love the alternative black style that they rock out from time to time...not too keen on the all purple, but overall, I like Northwestern's color scheme
The black ones are the best
Whatever UA does, I would bank on the fact the shoulder stripes you see there will be included. After all, they're called Northwestern Stripes, as that particular combination was invented and first used on Northwestern football uniforms decades ago. UA has incorporated them into various promotional teasers for the new uniforms, and it seems safe to say that's in the cards.
All in all, they're probably going to throw some matte helmets into the mix, maybe a few alternate jerseys, but it likely won't be anything overtly space-age or Oregon-esque. Northwestern is still a pretty traditional, buttoned-up place, even if they're small-market.
For schools with no tradition...I think it's fun. It speaks to the young people and is light and interesting. But when schools of tradition or in tradition rich areas/conferences/etc. get involved --- then I have a problem.
For example, I LOVED the UTL jerseys...because they went BACK in history. I HATED the MSU jerseys...not because they looked bad, but because they really had nothing to do with anything. MSU too with their random gold.
I don't like this move by Northwestern because I think of NW as prestigous. An academic institution and they should always have an Ivy League feel to them.
For me, Illinois can do a little bit...Purdue can get a little wacky. I love what Minnesota has done with both football and basketball. But that's it, everyone else has to stay the same. Quit the Pro Combat garbage Ohio, you bring in too much money to be Nike's bitch.
But for Maryland and Oregon? I love it. For starters...it makes sense, Under Armour was started at Maryland and Nike in Oregon. So pimp those schools out...along with any other schools in the state.
Carolina could wear Jordan Brand everything and I wouldn't say a thing. I don't care if it's swimming & diving.
Schools like Arizona St., UCF, USF, Oregon St....go for it. Walk up to Nike, Adidas, UA, Russell, whomever and bend over and take it. You have no history, you need exposure, you have a young alumni base. Even schools like Louisville and NC St. may be able to join this list.
But for the Northwesterns and Indianas...I'm sorry, I don't care if you're 0-12. Show some pride and be who you are. Keep the old school/traditional look.
...oh and Boise St. I love the blue field, however...it's not fair because everyone else can't/won't do it. Lose it.
I really liked those Maryland uniforms, but it probably has something to do with being from the state (we have an irrationally high love for our flag). I also think it's cool that they are trying use the look in more sports. The Maryland/Hopkins lacrosse game two weekends ago had a cool combo of uniforms. Maryland was wearing the ultra-modern graphics everywhere UA ones with pads having the same idea whereas Hopkins was sporting retro looking brown pads (look more like old leather) throw back jerseys and even had decals on the helmets to make them look like the old bucket helmets they used in the 70s and 80s right down to a decal for where the laces used to be on the back of the helmets.
Back on top, the modern/futuristic uniforms work for teams that don't really have a tradition or have a tradition of pushing the envelope, classics work well for schools that have that classic tradition.
The thoughts of a 23 year old.
I am hating Adidas more and more these days. Why is our deal SO LONG?! Like the Packers did with the new Nike uniforms can't we just say 'Nike NO we will not wear that, keep the shit the same!'? I don't know why I have this unwavering love for Nike.
I love those Duke jerseys.
The pattern is actually pretty inconspicuous. On TV, it looks like solid white and solid blue. You don't really notice it unless there's a close up of a player. It doesn't stick out like a sore thumb, it's a cool little ornamentation on the uniforms that is a nod to the architecture of the campus (which most people probably don't realize). It's great.
Kentucky, Baylor.. they're all ugly.
Anyone remember the Kentucky denim, or the ones with those weird stripey claw mark things on the shorts?
I know the guy who designed those backgrounds. Even he thinks they're not very cool on a jersey.
DB Is going to stay with adidas as long as he is at Michigan, in the contract it states that Adidas has to keep Michigan as it's #1 branded college.
What does "#1 branded" mean? I think I remember hearing something about Michigan must be the highest paid school in the Adidas stable... but from a branding standpoint I see a lot of Notre Dame stuff in the Adidas TV commercials but no Michigan.
I believe the stipulation is that we must be the highest-paid school, period. If a Nike school signs for more money, we get a raise.
Naw, the Nike contracts don't have any bearing on Michigan's Adidas contract. It's if another Adidas school gets a raise, Michigan can demand the same contract stipulations. If my memory is right, Texas (Nike) makes more than any other school in the country.
yes; more here:
Given what UA was able to accomplish in MD using more "subdued" colors, I can hardly imagine the purple nightmare the NW uniforms will be in the next couple of years. Not that their purple and black unis of the past were anything other than ugly.
UA did a good job with the Temple jerseys last year. Maryland was an atrocity but it's possible they go more conservative such as TU.
Am I the only one that actually really likes modern jerseys?
Yes, you are alone. There can be only one.
We must protect this house (full of the other team's fans)
UnderArmour's inferior shoes alone should see us to victory over NU, players and performance notwithstanding.
They didn't F with their jerseys
When I read the title I thought of Click and Clack on Car Talk on NPR at first...
Not too worried about NW's jerseys. I only have strong feelings for the traditional jerseys of college football being changed- don't think NW quite fits the bill for that...
I told you they could really go.
Does anyone think we will eventually switch back to Nike or make a move to under armor??
I don't think UA has the cash, and Nike might not be willing to top whatever the new Adidas offer might be. OTOH maybe Nike really misses us and will outbid Adidas this time.
Not bad for a 1996 upstart entering a field dominated by a few select multinational corporations. Reading the wiki page, its funny to see that their first real PR was a picture of Jeff George, of all people, wearing an UA mock.
Nike makes a better product. I hope we go back to Nike with the stipulation that we must play 90% of all games during the deal in our standard jerseys.
EDIT- sorry this was supposed to bea response to JustinGoBlue's post above.
My freshman year at NU we had official sponsorships with both Adidas and Under Armour. For reasons unknown to me we then dropped Under Armour and went Adidas only. Now it sounds like its UA only. I always heard rumors that NU was disappointed that we couldn't get the same caliber deal for gear as more well known programs. I will say that Mich always had better Nike stuff than we ever had Adidas stuff. It wasn't even close. Lastly, endorsements matter a lot in recruiting. Every recruit I ever hosted at some point during the trip, wanted to see exactly what we were issued and how much stuff we got.
I've read about coaches saying that Nike is a recruiting advantage because it's what the kids want. A guy I played with in highschool ended up signing with Penn State, but visited a number of colleges. He would mention that coaches at UA or Adidas schools would downplay the gear aspect as much as possible and that players at those schools complained about not having Nike.
We're going back to Nike eventually. I have no problems with UA and Nike designing new unis, some I really like others not so much. I really just want to see the regular helmets again.