DAB: Alternate FB Uni Plan Forthcoming

Submitted by MGoShoe on May 17th, 2012 at 6:41 AM

Per a Kyle Meinke A2.com piece, the football team will again (unsurprisingly) wear alternate unis this season.

DAB quotes:

"For football last year, we probably did a little bit more than we’ll do going forward in terms of variety, but we’re going to from time to time do some special things," he said Wednesday after the third and final day of the Big Ten spring meetings.

"The coaches like it and the student-athletes like it and the recruits are enamored by it. So why wouldn’t we?”

"I think what we’re going to do is lay it out and say, game by game, 'Here’s what we’re going to do. If we’re going to make any changes, here’s what they are,' and it will kind of end all the speculation. We’re in the midst of all of that.”

Expect a rollout/announcement sometime this summer.

Commence meltdown... now.

[Edit: Let's get those creative juices flowing! Let's see your serious and/or snarky alternate uni concepts below. Best entries get moderated to 5 because the moderation here does not go to 11.]

Comments

Two Hearted Ale

May 17th, 2012 at 8:40 AM ^

1. Traditional home
2. Under the lights
3. Rams horn road
4. Plain white road (which was actually worn at the same time as the rams horn roads)
5. Bumble bee road
6. Sugar Bowl road

I didn't realize how bad it was until I wrote them all down. Three or four uniforms will be far less schizophrenic than last year's mess. I didn't even consider the helmets, of which there were three. They wore helmet numbers with grey facemasks for UTL and the Sugar Bowl, no numbers for WMU, San Diego State and EMU, and numbers with blue facemasks for the Big Ten season. In total there were seven distinct uniform combinations last year.

chally

May 17th, 2012 at 9:35 AM ^

I'm pretty sure the "ram's horn" jersey referenced above is the 2010 away jerseys that were worn by some players because the 2011 fitted jerseys were too stretchy and tore too easily.  The "ram's horn" is the ugly yellow side-panels/piping.

Two Hearted Ale

May 17th, 2012 at 10:41 AM ^

Plan white road

 

Traditional home without helmet numbers

 

Under the lights

 

Bumble bee road

 

Traditional home with helmet numbers

 

Sugar Bowl

 

The Sugar Bowl uniforms minus patches are my favorite road uniforms.  The stripes essentially replace the numbers on the plain white roads and piping was deleted.  If they would loose the maize around the numbers I think it would look really nice and somewhat traditional but I subscribe to the less is more philosophy of uniform design.

colin

May 17th, 2012 at 10:54 AM ^

the piping around the numbers is by far the worst thing about that jersey.  but i don't know why they couldn't just be plain all the way (nothing on the shoulders either) with blue numbering.  every single non-trad design just looks like it's trying way too hard.

Rage

May 17th, 2012 at 7:09 AM ^

I've always thought that If you needed synchronized dancing in your music video to sell your brand, no one really thinks you're an "artist".  Likewise, if you need gimmicks to get media attention, then you're saying you're brand is not that strong.    

weasel3216

May 17th, 2012 at 7:20 AM ^

But wouldn't you agree that the Michigan and B1G brand have been tarnished over the last few years.  Michigan brand is obviously on the rise due to the great job Hoke and the staff are doing, but the B1G as a whole are using alternate uniforms.  Like Brandon said, the student-athletes are the ones that enjoy them.  To be honest they are the ones that matter, without them there is no Michigan brand, it doesn't matter what you think, i think or anyone (outside of large boosters) thinks except the student athletes.  

Don't get me wrong i hate all of the alternate uniforms, i wish we had two uniforms, with an occasional UTL type occasion with an alternate.  But the point i was making is that if Michigan can use alternates to regain the respect of the football world then eventually the product on the field will outweight whatever stupid alternate uniform the team is wearing.  

Rage

May 17th, 2012 at 7:43 AM ^

"if Michigan can use alternates to regain the respect of the football world then eventually the product on the field"

Michigan's brand HAS been tarnished the last several years, but if you think wearing a gimmick uniform will gain the respect of others in the football community, then I feel you don't understand what the Michigan brand is(don't mean to sound like a condescending A-hole).  Only winning on the field, good academics and our student-athletes staying out of trouble will restore our reputation.   To me, Michigan was always about: Winged helmets, no advertising in the stadium, no piped in "arena" music, and no gimmicks.  We had tradition and the respect of everyone.  By 2016, Brandon will have made "The Noid" our official mascot and going to the Big House will be like going to a Piston's game.  Even though I love the Pistons, that makes me sad...

weasel3216

May 17th, 2012 at 12:02 PM ^

No i understand the Michigan Brand (also not trying to sound like an ass) but the point i am making is a uniform doesn't matter for the Brand.  The Brand is much more than that.  The Brand should be about what Michigan football is all about and that is The Team and winning the B1G Championship.  A uniform is a part of the appearance of the Brand, it won't define the Brand but it will appeal people/players to the Brand.

I think everyone is mostly on the same page when it comes to this, but the disagreement is arising from the idea if Michigan should following suit and continue to shell out these alternate uniforms to bring more appeal.  Again, the appeal doesn't help or hurt the Michigan Brand, that is set in stone, but the appeal can attract more to teh Brand.

Sorry if this makes no sense.

 

 

Lionsfan

May 17th, 2012 at 7:53 AM ^

Winning will get the respect of the Football world. If Chip Kelly left Oregon last year for the pros, and Oregon dropped off the face of the earth, nobody would care what they wore. For all this talk about future recruits and how much the players like it, it's really irrelevant. Players want to go somewhere that wins

Oaktown Wolverine

May 17th, 2012 at 11:32 AM ^

Yes, but winning, in combination with sweet uniforms does work for Oregon. I know people that don't even follow college football, that watch Oregon games on ocassion just to see what they are wearing. More viewership (ratings) = more money for the school and the league. I'm not trying to suggest we should be Oregon, but having some veriety in the uniforms can be a good thing. 

wolverine1987

May 17th, 2012 at 8:44 AM ^

This is where DB, yourself, and other commentators go wrong. The athletes and coaches on the team today are caretakers of the Michigan Brand, they are not the most important part of the Brand. In fact, all students and faculty, all alumni, ex-players and fans comprise the brand, and the brand is also about the reputation of the university and teams. This idea that if the athletes like it everything is fine is completely wrong.

Aequitas

May 17th, 2012 at 10:21 AM ^

Snark can be fun.  But you either missed or ignored his point that UM does not belong to DB, nor any single current collection of players.  Their likes and dislikes are not as relevant as the need for Michigan to maintain it's identity and ties to generations of not just 'football', but Michigan Football.

"Caretakers" is a tremendous description of everyone associated with Michigan, and should especially apply to those actually making the decisions.  There is a difference between the change and innovations brought by a man like Canham, and the current "me too!"  approach.

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

May 17th, 2012 at 10:35 AM ^

But the point i was making is that if Michigan can use alternates to regain the respect of the football world

If there are people that don't respect us because we don't wear alternate jerseys, 1, fuck those people, and 2, why would their opinions ever matter?

Baldbill

May 17th, 2012 at 7:58 AM ^

lots of these kinds of arguments were heard way back when the Mens Basketball team changed from the 70'-80's look shorts to the much longer shorts. If the kids playing and being recruited like what they are seeing, is such a bad thing to concede some issues to them? Michigan has plenty of other traditions to stand firm on.

 

 

RickH

May 17th, 2012 at 2:09 PM ^

Except it's not just longer shorts, it's a multitude of things.  We now have in tons of piped-in music, which is fine as long as the songs are original (Enter Sandman at VT), and advertising on the scoreboards.  To add, we are changing our uniform constantly and it just doesn't look good.  Oregon's own "tradition" is their ever-changing uniforms and now everybody is trying to copy them but the Michigans and Marylands of the country aren't even doing it well as the uniforms are just plain ugly.  I'm just waiting on a mascot to appear to make me feel like I'm at a NBA/NFL/minor league baseball game (and those game day experiences suck).

Dave Brandon is chipping away at our tradition slowly but surely.  Yes, we most definitely needed to modernize aspects of Michigan but not gimicky things like unoriginal rock music, advertising, too many uniforms to count, and/or a mascot.  I'm tired of people saying that the players like the uniforms because I'm starting to think that either they have extremely bad fashion sense or they're blind.  There should of been no bumblebee uniform against Michigan State and no bowl uniform against Virginia Tech (though the latter does look good, it shouldn't of happened).  We should of had ONE special uniform this year which was the ugly-but-not-as-ugly-as-bumblee-unis against Notre Dame as it was a special occassion that will never happen again (it being the first night game, not other night games).

Tone down the maize from highlighter yellow, keep those home jerseys the same, and change our road jerseys to the Sugar Bowl uniforms without the outlining of the numbers.  After that, keep everything the damn same and stop changing the fucking uniforms.

Mgodiscgolfer

May 17th, 2012 at 7:16 AM ^

seems to be a fashion show going on these days. Why are we having to change the uniforms? Who or what is behind this fashion trend. I know in these days of cheesy doritos taco shells at Taco Bell that nothing is sacred and everything can be better with a little imagination but I don't think this is about being better as it is about just being different. Plain is clearly out and extraordinary is in but some things like our helmets must remain unchanged. 

DirkMcGurk

May 17th, 2012 at 7:29 AM ^

We are in an era were teams wear more then one uniform. The young kids like it and since the young kids are the ones being recruited that is who we are looking to appease with them. Sorry if you get bent over a uni but it sells to recruits. The players and recruits Loved the ones from last year. Heck I liked them as well. Sometimes you need to take off the we are better then you because we wear the same uniform. We are Michigan forgodsakes and any uniform we were is great.

Two Hearted Ale

May 17th, 2012 at 8:21 AM ^

Michigan has changed the road uniforms every two or three years anyway. When it comes to road uniforms there is nothing historicle at all. Home uniforms haven't changed since Tom Harmon was playing. I wsh Michigan would just use a white version of the home uniform (the 2011 Northwestern game unis were close) but that doesn't seem likely.

USC and Alabama haven't really changed either uniform ever. There was a time when Alabama and Penn State had what were considered ugly, old fashioned uniforms. Now they are cool. Michigan has always updated for the times...at least on the road. If I had to guess I'd say going forward there will be four uniforms, three of which we'll see on a somewhat regular basis. 1) Traditional home 2) regular road 3) alternate road 4) home night game.

Maize Judicata

May 17th, 2012 at 7:34 AM ^

Basically, it all comes down to a money grab for DB. You create a couple new jerseys a year and then put them for sale in the Mden. Charge $120 a jersey and make a huge profit. Yay, corporate America at it's finest.

ND Sux

May 17th, 2012 at 8:01 AM ^

Well you can CHOOSE to buy the new uni or not, right?  That is what I LOVE about America.  While we're at it, I want the M athletic department make money because it pays for shit like stadium renovations, new scoreboards, and also supports non-revenue generating sports. 

It gets really OLD reading all the hatred of profit on this board.  Buy it or don't buy it.  Better yet, go tell your boss you want your pay cut by 50%, so the company doesn't need as much profit.  Sheesh.  Third idea...move to fucking CUBA. 

thisisme08

May 17th, 2012 at 8:19 AM ^

While yes you can choose to not buy something or not comment on something if you dont like it lets be real here. 

Who did teached you about the Michigan tradition? Your father (mom)? Your Grandpa (grandma)? They told you about stories of Wangler to Carter, Hello Heisman, The Trip, Bo/Yost/Canham etc.  and most importantly how those Wings on our helmets came over with Crisler. 

Now we have all made fun of how garish these uniforms make us look ie something you would find at Wal Mart, now imagine your a 10 year old kid who just likes Michigan and you just have to have a UTL jersey, your 10 its OK to make stupid decisions.  You think this stuff is alright, you do not necessarily have someone to tell you about all of the above tradition. 

Next thing you know your 30 have 3 kids and you continue to purchase the above crap for all your kids, trading looking "cool and hip" for the flavor of the week jersey and you never bother growing that tradition/fandom with your own kids and next thing you know we go from being of the more knowledgable fanbases in terms of knowing our own history to suddenly being just an excuse to get drunk on Saturday.

That is why we dont need more jerseys, 1 a year MAYBE but when DB starts throwing around jersey roadmaps we may as well go full Ducks and change the wings to chrome.