Blau

July 20th, 2016 at 8:12 PM ^

I'm talking about the actual Jumpman logo on the jerseys specifically. Any precedent for that for any other college teams? I couldn't find anything for Woodson or Jeter except for a photoshopped version of a jumpman logo on Woodson's jersey during the '97 OSU game where the swoosh should be.

JamieH

July 20th, 2016 at 12:42 PM ^

To my eye it looks less orangey than the stuff we wore last year, which would be very welcome IMO.  I know it is not the popular opinion around here, but I personally thought our uniforms last year just looked wrong.   We looked like West Virginia.  

We'll have to see the uniforms/helmets to know for sure. 

Ghost of Fritz…

July 20th, 2016 at 1:15 PM ^

...whether you like the 2015 'maize' or 2016's 'maize' from Nike.  It is irrelevant. 

It is not about what you prefer.  It is about whether Michigan is using the true version of maize they ahve used for decades (until Adidas arrived), or instead using some form of yellow that is similar to Iowa, W.Va.,, Cal, or the Pitsburg Steelers.

The fact of the matter is that 2015 'maize' just is not Michigan's color and it never was.  Go to the museum at Schembechler hall.  Look at the uniform through the decades.  The true Michigan maize was lighter and less 'orangy' than 2015 'maize.' 

Michigan is Michgan.  Michigan is not the Steelers or West Virginia.  Michigan should wear Michigan maize. 

 

Blue Balls Afire

July 20th, 2016 at 1:20 PM ^

I think you hit the nail on the head in terms of what the issue is, but I respectfully disagree with your interpretation.  I see two issues here:  (1) is there an official Michigan maize and if so what is it; and (2) what is ones individual preference.  As for #1, I think Brian posted on this very blog that research from UM Bentley Library showed the maize to be darker and closer to the orangey-tint than had been used in the middle adidas years.  Regardless, I've seen UM go through various lighter and darker maize periods.  It happens.  As for #2, it's wholly subjective.  I prefer the darker maize worn last year.

Ghost of Fritz…

July 20th, 2016 at 1:39 PM ^

2015 'maize' over the lighter maize that Michigan used for 50+ years.   But the fact is that it very different from the maize that was used until Adidas arrived with all sorts of highlighter yellow and then darker/'orangy' hues. 

On the first issue, go to Schembechler Hall to see the uniform throught he decades.  There was comparatively little variation for 50+ years until Adidas arrived.  So that was always the true Michigan maize.  It was always much lighter and more 'faded' than the hues of yellow that other schools use.  It was disticntive and not at all a subtle variation on the Iowa/Cal/W.Va. darker hues of yellow.

The 'cardinal' red that Stanford uses is different from the red hue that Nebraska uses.  Would it make sense for for Nebraska to just adopt the darker Stanford red just because 'hey, we decieded that is what we prefer'?  I would say that makes no sense. 

Schools develop branding tied up in distictive color hues over many decades.  It make no sense to throw away that brand equity/identity on a whim by shifting colors just becasue a few people say 'hey, looks good to me!'

 

 

Blue Balls Afire

July 20th, 2016 at 1:46 PM ^

Excellent.  Thank you.  To my eye, on my monitor, the official maize more closely resembles the picture of Deveon Smith from last year that someone posted earlier in this thread than the other shades.

Ghost of Fritz…

July 20th, 2016 at 2:11 PM ^

On my monitor the 'official' maize depicted on the University 'style guide' web page does indeed look darker than the maize hues used on the uniforms for 5 plus decades before Adidas. 

However...

1.  Maybe the current style guide at some point shifted hues.  In other words, when was that hue adopted as part of the 'style guide'?  When did this style guide come into existence?  Does the current style guide match any analog from prior decades?

2.  It can sometimes be hard to judge a hue when it is not actually on a uniform or a helmet, and under natural lighting conditions, etc. 

3.  Maybe the current style guide is actually wrong.  At least on my monitor the style guide colors are way different than anything ever seen on any Michigan athletic uniform (except perhaps 2015 'maize' and even that did not match the style guide 'maize').  The style guide blue looks much lighter than the blue that we have seen on Michigan uniforms over the decades.  So which is wrong?  The style guide as it renders on a laptop?  Or the darker blue used on all Mchigan uniforms as they appear on an October Saturday since forever? 

4.  Finally, the "LSA orange" depicted in the style guide is WAY off.  Total fail.  Derp.  A likely communist plot.  I blame Adidas and D. Brandon.  What an embarassment.   Proves the style guide is BUNK!

Quail2theVict0r

July 20th, 2016 at 1:24 PM ^

I don't really care but I feel a lot more comfortable wearing the yellow of last year than the yellow of the previous 15 years. That darker yellow made a great color for clothing and the ligher stuff of yesteryear made you look like a highlighter. The deeper yellow also looked better on TV imo. It "popped" a bit more. 

stephenrjking

July 20th, 2016 at 12:49 PM ^

I'm right with you on the color maize, and I've written extensively about it. I hate the new darker version. 

I wish it were different, but the images (particularly of the blue shirts) appear to have the Iowa yellow in them. I'm pessimistic. 

Maizen

July 20th, 2016 at 1:11 PM ^

Exactly. It used to be you turn on a Michigan game and those bright maize and blue uni's popped of the TV screen. Last year it looked like some dull mustard. It didn't match the field, what the band wore, or what Michigan had traditionally wore over 100 years. It looked awful.

Mr. Yost

July 20th, 2016 at 12:56 PM ^

Harbaugh likes the orangey...it's what he wore, just like the white pants. I doubt that goes anywhere unless NIKE has made Michigan it's own color (which I can totally see them "trademarking" a Michigan Maize).

I use trademark loosely. I just mean a Nike maize that is "designed" specifically for all Michigan gear. I doubt our shade will match any other NIKE school.

Maizen

July 20th, 2016 at 1:08 PM ^

That's not true. The transition to a darker maize under Adidas began before Harbaugh even got here. Adidas completely messed it up like they did most things and the result was some form of "maize" Michigan had never worn in their 135 year history.

 

stephenrjking

July 20th, 2016 at 1:15 PM ^

Prudent readers will recall that Dave Brandon (remember him?) was specifically quoted about altering the color of maize several years ago, and this is what he meant. Brian (who likes the darker color) lauded the choice.

Note that the uniforms last year matched the helmets, which were actually changed the year before despite the uniforms maintaining the same color.

Yo_Blue

July 20th, 2016 at 2:27 PM ^

Does anyone really think Harbaugh sits down with a color swatch book and selects a shade of yellow?  Please!  I don't think he even selected the white pants last year.  I'm sure someone did a mockup and showed it to him for his approval to which he probably said, "Yeah, whatever."

Blue Balls Afire

July 20th, 2016 at 1:15 PM ^

I think you are mistaken.  I've watched michigan football for decades and have seen the shade of maize vary from time to time, from lighter to darker to back again.  Therefore, I can definitevely say I have seen the darker maize the team wore last year previously within the last 135 years.  In fact, the only shade of maize i haven't seen was the highlighter yellow adidas threw out in the early and middle years of their regime.  That shade of bright yellow/green nonsense I had never seen before and hope to never see again.

Blue Balls Afire

July 20th, 2016 at 12:52 PM ^

Not to beat a dead horse, but I've watched last years games between UM vs MN and Iowa vs MN specifically so I could see the various shades of yellow on one screen.  Even with the darker shade of maize that Michigan went to last year, it is nowhere near (relatively speaking, of course) the yellow used by MN and Iowa.  Michigan's is still a different, lighter shade than what Iowa and MN wear, again even though Michigan went with a darker shade of maize last year.  

stephenrjking

July 20th, 2016 at 1:18 PM ^

Minnesota does not and has never worn a color of yellow that is the same as Iowa. Now, their pants are a bit lighter than their numbers, but if you look closely at pics from that Minnesota-Iowa game you will see that the "M" on the side of the Minnesota helmets is way, way darker than the logo and numbers worn by Iowa players. 

Michigan's maize is still lighter than Minnesota's "gold," but it is closer now. It does very much resemble Iowa's yellow. And this has not been the case in over 30 years.

Ghost of Fritz…

July 20th, 2016 at 1:21 PM ^

While it is true that the 2015 version of 'maize' was not EXACTLY the same as Iowa or Cal, etc.

But is was very far off the mark for the shade of true maize the Michigan had used sincce before WWII up until the weird variants of the last 10 years. 

And 2015 'maize' is a lot closer to Iowa'Cal/W.Va. that the true Michigan maize used for 50+ years.

Go to Schembechler Hall see the uniforms through the decades.