UCLA's new Techfit x Primeknit uniformz

Submitted by amaizenblue402 on

I know I have been anti-apparel, but I just wanted to share what we would possibly have to put up with had we extended our contract with adidas.  So glad we signed with Nike!

Here's UCLA's new Uniformz! 

Set the trends, then break the mold. @UCLAFootball's new TECHFIT x #Primeknit uniform. #BruinRevolution #teamadidas pic.twitter.com/WnLONVrjGi

— adidas Football US (@adidasFballUS) July 9, 2015

tlo2485

July 9th, 2015 at 5:27 PM ^

They will be left pretty much with Miami, nebraska, texas a&m, and Wisconsin in football and indiana, kansas, ucla, and louisville in basketball (some do represent well in both)

 

 

 

Edit: and whatever you consider arizona state, mississippi state, and nc state... hurray

 

University; 2014-2015 Contract Value
Michigan**; $8,200,000
UCLA; $7,500,000
Kansas; $6,375,000
Louisville; $5,680,000
Tennessee**; $5,550,000
Nebraska; $4,050,000
Indiana; $3,795,000
Wisconsin; $3,500,000
North Carolina State; $3,025,000
Cincinnati; $2,625,000

Wolverine Devotee

July 9th, 2015 at 4:47 PM ^

These are fucking awful. UCLA fans are extremely angry on twitter. I haven't seen one that likes it.

Bruins Nation has gone off the deep end.

 

Why ruin an iconic look? Because adidas.

Maize and Blue…

July 9th, 2015 at 5:02 PM ^

WD you better be the first to jump down their  sh*t.  Recall the platinum series for basketball or Sparty dressed like Baylor.  Maybe you already forgot TCU's new uniforms for this year that remind me of Zubaz with a player wearing the number 4G.

http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/04/11/tcu-new-uniforms-horned-f…

Gentleman Squirrels

July 9th, 2015 at 4:51 PM ^

Does adidas not understand color coordination? If you want something to stand out you don't mix it with a whole bunch of other background crap. Louisville's poster was even more likely to induce a seizure. 

Also, I like UCLA's original uniform and their different numbers are very cool. Why are they trying to change this? If it ain't broke, break it. Ugh.

M Gulo Gulo

July 9th, 2015 at 4:51 PM ^

Remeber we haven't seen our uniforms this season...I hope it's not something similar. All this stuff was designed last year (aka before we chose to sign with Nike) so adidas could potentially give our beloved maize and blue a similar pattern... Here's hoping they dont though...especially cuz everyone would take it as them giving us a giant middle finger...not that they might anyway as im sure they are a tad sore about us switching

 

El Jeffe

July 9th, 2015 at 4:52 PM ^

My Lord there are a lot of things happening on those jersies. The helmet and pants seem okay.

I still fail to understand the purpose of the seizure-inducing wallpaper underlying these team announcements. 

Don

July 9th, 2015 at 4:54 PM ^

has no ass whatsoever. How is that dorky stretch shirt going to stay down on a normal human? it's gonna ride up unless it's safety-pinned to the pants.

rob f

July 9th, 2015 at 6:36 PM ^

Not sure where you're coming from there, WD, but if that question is about me downvoting and speaking up against the glut of apparel threads, then yes, I wear that crown proudly.

I've been extremely consistant , IMO, in my disdain for the constant barrage of Nike vs. Adidas vs. UA .  I'm a Michigan fan; I don't worship Nike or any other corporate entity.  I don't get statements like "Michigan and Nike are made for each other like peanut butter and jelly"  (or what ever it was word-for-word you posted a day or 2 ago).    I also don't understand many of the same people who get up-in-arms about the possiblilty of advertising in The Big House, or giant Kraft Macaroni noodles inside the gates, or corporate Rawk anthems blasting away while our MMB sits idle, getting so aroused over a clothing manufacturer (not to mention one with a LOT of dirty laundry of its own).

Yet I do understand that the athletes have a preference.  So yeah, there might be some small gain in recruiting as a result  (I think more in hoops than in football where any gain at all will likely be negligible) .  But in the end, if any student-athlete lets apparel brands be the tipping point/deciding factor, well, they probably don't deserve a Michigan education anyway. 

Did you miss my declaration several weeks ago (and the follow-up posts I've made since then) declaring myself the "Voltron is Handsome" of apparel threads?

 

 

rob f

July 9th, 2015 at 11:59 PM ^

Yes, essentially he did speak about that subject. TBH, though, I didn't spend/waste too much time reading the breakdown of all the details of the deal. My impression of the way Jim Hackett operates is that he is very thorough and thoughtful as a businessman, looking at both the short- and long-term implications of his decisions without obsessing over them. I trust everything about the man. Therefore, I was willing to trust his apparel decision regardless of which provider he chose. OTOH, there is waaaay too much obsession among some MGoBloggers over apparel. Some seem at times even worse than WD. Me? I prefer to care much more how Michigan Football performs than what logo is on their uniforms.

drjaws

July 9th, 2015 at 5:14 PM ^

I mean, those are really terrible.  But as a Cal alum, I find it awesome FUcla will look like they got run over multiple times by a semi truck.  Roll on you Bears. 

And Go Blue.

mgochacho

July 9th, 2015 at 5:24 PM ^

At least they come with a very slimming waistline.

Also gloves say Ula (c apparently got lost somewhere)

Adidas bruined another classic uni (yes, I went there. Wordplay ftw)

MGoblu8

July 9th, 2015 at 5:32 PM ^

I don't like the crazy zig-zag lines, but they're not that bad. At least they didn't eff up the helmet like some schools. We've all seen way worse.