BOTH Legacy Uniforms, 3 different helmets confirmed for NCAA 13

Submitted by Wolverine Devotee on July 5th, 2012 at 11:30 AM

So many great new updates to Michigan this year. This is probably going to be the most authentic Michigan in any NCAA game.

As seen in this screenshot from the player ratings vid on Youtube, Michigan's current block M logo Dave Brandon has been really pushing has replaced the old Split M logo that has been on the game since it's inception in 1993.

I was working on the All-80s Michigan team on Teambuilder when I noticed that the new scoreboards have been added and stadium lights on top of the boxes have been added.

I became curious once I saw the stadium updated, so I went over to uniforms and sure enough, everything has been updated and new things have been added. Here is the numberless helmet that Michigan used from 1995-September 24 2011

Legacy helmets

Current helmets with numbers.

Under the Lights Legacy jersey (Didn't include the pants because the only difference between them and the regular pants is the adidas logo and no block M on the hip).

Road Legacy uniforms

Road Legacy white pants

 

Comments

htm11

July 5th, 2012 at 11:45 AM ^

When I looked they had the UTL pants also. If only they put in the Sugar Bowl unis instead of those god awful ones we wore agaist MSU...

maizenbluenc

July 5th, 2012 at 1:50 PM ^

with the maize pants.

For me the bright yellow compression shirts with the blue VICTORS VALLIANT lettering, and the white pants completely ruined the road legacy uniform. Both of those were gone for the Sugar Bowl, and the maize stripes as well.

When I first saw the "clown" unis, my first thought was maize pants and plain blue compression shirt, and then we have something paletable.

Agree, Sugar Bowl was an improvement.

 

Wolverine0056

July 5th, 2012 at 11:48 AM ^

Pretty cool seeing the different helmets and jerseys. I will be getting this game, but not for these reasons alone. I need something to feed my football hunger and hopefully this will satisfy. 

Ziff72

July 5th, 2012 at 12:22 PM ^

As much shit as EA takes you have to give them a little credit as they respond to the most minute details.  

That screeen shot where they have the lights on top of the press box is only seen in the intro for like 1 second.   Yet if they screw that detail up they get hammered on the message boards for not getting it.    Has to take a thick skin to work on the NCAA franchise due to the passion college football brings out in its fans.   Can you imagine the amount of complaints they get from 120+ schools about their stadiums, intros, jerseys? 

This finally opens up the long photoshopped possibility of wearing the home blue jersey and the white pants for those that liked it.

I will be exercising my right as a "get off my lawn traditionalist" to never use the alternate jerseys or pants and pretend D. Brandon doesn't exist in my virtual world.  In my blue ray universe Bo is still my coach and we chew up yards on the ground and attack with a smothering d.

 

 

goblu

July 5th, 2012 at 1:04 PM ^

The problem I had with the retro uniforms were the stripes. I thought the white pants looked good, I wouldn't mind seeing them again.

Wolverine Devotee

July 5th, 2012 at 2:14 PM ^

The demo sucks, I hated it. 

Michigan's roster is really screwed up. If you go on the player ratings video on youtube, you can find Michigan's I pieced it together by position groups.

QB #16   
QB #7   
QB #8     

HB #28
HB #2
HB #38
HB #5

FB #33

WR #12
WR #10
WR #26
WR #17
WR #83
WR #27
WR #85

TE #89
TE #45
TE #42

LT #77
LT #70
LT #71

LG #57
LG #69

C #52
C #56

RG #65
RG #61
RG #64

RT #75
RT #58

LE #88
LE #55
LE #93

DT #73
DT #76
DT #54
DT #98     Really EA? #98? Go slap yourself with a trout.

RE #57
RE #67
RE #53

LOLB #90
LOLB #4

MLB #25
MLB #27
MLB #50

ROLB #44
ROLB #7

CB #8
CB #18
CB #5
CB #6
CB #37

SS #32
SS #3
SS #14

FS #30
FS #23
FS #35

K #34

P #43

 

03 Blue 07

July 5th, 2012 at 2:26 PM ^

One thing that seems noticeable from the screen shots is the difference in maize on the helmets. The "new" helmet/normal helmet seems to have a darker maize, while the two throwback helmets seem to have a lighter, less gold-ish maize. 

BigSmooth33

July 5th, 2012 at 2:58 PM ^

Pretty pumped for the game... 

 

Got my online dynasty dorks all lined up with me for this year's release.

 

For any of you out there looking to find a good sim-style online dynasty check this out and feel free to sign up.  I think a few of you guys may have joined with me last year over here. 

 

Just go here and sign up if you are looking.

http://forums.traditionsportsonline.com/threads/new-member-applications-new-members-start-here.1162/

Ziff72

July 5th, 2012 at 3:45 PM ^

It's a lock if someone puts up an NCAA  thread 25% of the comments will be the game sucks work on super LB's.   I realize all games have problems but do the people that complain about the game actually play it or are they like Brian who haven't played it since 2007 and is scared away each year by from what I have seen a pretty cranky reviewer.   The online league I played in had plenty of variety in playing styles and the user vs user games had a good balance between defensive 10-7 type games and 52-48 shootouts.   Some teams had tough running games while others passed a lot.  

I don't understand the whole realism thing anyways.   I want a game that is fun and that creates continuous challenge, because there is no way to beat it.   Stopping "money plays"  and "cheats" are much more important than making sure LB's make interceptions at a .4% rate just as they do in real life.

One more thing that you have to take into serious consideration.   The people that complain about the game the most probably sucked balls at it.

Challenge with their user name and id from the people that complained about the game set to commence in 3....2....1

go16blue

July 5th, 2012 at 6:34 PM ^

I just finished an undefeated season on hiesman difficulty in dynasty mode in '12, and have never lost an online game. Each game is pretty good, but the NCAA series as a whole is shit, and I wont be buying '13. 

I think it does a pretty good job of being entertaining, challenging, and stopping "money plays," but the fact is that the gameplay hardly changes year to year. The biggest improvement from last year to this year is that WRs and CBs have to look for the ball now... seriously? That should be a minor change, and one of many. I swear, FIFA has a better collision engine than NCAA does. How about adding realistic gang tackling? How about a realistic tackling engine altogether, that includes arm tackles, etc? How about CBs and WRs jockying for position, pushing each other, etc? How about blocking (both individual matchups and schemes) that make sense? How about DBs that commit to covering one WR at a time? And yes, how about LBs that can't jump 10 feet with perfect reactions?

Also I wish they would allow for more intelligent fans to get more detailed into the game, differentiating between SDEs and WDEs, commiting practice time to specific schemes instead of being able to switch between the 3-3-5, 4-3, 4-2-5, etc at will, and all that. But that's another discussion altogether.

Ziff72

July 5th, 2012 at 8:05 PM ^

I don't get your rationale of not liking a game you have seemed to have spent quite a bit of time mastering.

That said you have some pretty good points.  I do like your in depth game thoughts.   I'm not sure how marketable it is, but I like your thoughts on practicing a defense and not being able to switch to other d's.  I always thought a scouting package for upcoming games would be nice where you could track their most run plays and see how they play defense.

The thing you have to remember is that each guy has his own thoughts on what they would like to see.  The trick is making it easy enough to play so that people can enjoy playing quickly but making it hard enough for people not to get bored.   If they made the passing really realistic, guys would never complete a pass early on and they would drop it.

If you read the forums most guys seemed to be worried about not getting facemask details right so maybe they are marketing to their consumer we're just not the core demographic.

 

 

 

 

ThadMattasagoblin

July 5th, 2012 at 4:35 PM ^

How can you call the jerseys we wore against MSU's legacy?  Did people actually buy that crap?  Brandon also said that there would be no more legacy uniforms after ND.  oops

goblu

July 5th, 2012 at 4:36 PM ^

Or maybe you're a majority stakeholder in EA. Anyway, It's the best electronic football game out there and it's better every year but there are certain parts of the game play they could tweak. If 25% of the board is commenting on the "super LB" or corner's that can cover 3 wr's maybe the complaint is valid. It doesn't mean the game sucks or user's are not good at the game. Ziff72 rant to commence in 3..2..1

Ziff72

July 5th, 2012 at 8:14 PM ^

Yes they have things that they could tweak that would make the game better but it's always a trade off based on abilities.   

As for the Super LB's, we don't know all the issues.   Maybe they tweaked the LB's because the offense was too easy and they wanted to make it more of a challenge, but didn't have the right AI tweak figured out so they went with super lb's.  

Sure the Super Lb's were unrealistic, but could you score?  If guys were scoring 50pts a game I think they need more super lb's to make it more realistic not less.   If nobody could score than I would have a big problem with super lb's.

I'm not a shreholder though I still regret not buying a bunch in 1992 when I wrote a paper on them giving their stock a buy recomendation for my stocks class .   It's not like buying Microsoft but I'd have made a ton of dough.   I just think people need to understand they are producing a game that has variable players and variable user abilities  making it tough to be realistic for everybody. 

Mr. Rager

July 5th, 2012 at 4:40 PM ^

Thank you very much for posting. I would like to add the fact that EA always implements "new" items (e.g., uniforms, stadium upgrades) into the following year's game. So this isnt anything other than just confirming they did what they have done previously.