Hideous Adidas post season unis on NC St right now
/said by no one ever
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
In all seriousness, I DO love the money they give the university.
Signed, beavus
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
the glorious Nike Platinum series? I can't stand Nike and have no problem with Adidas. All of the school companies put out their fair share of ugly junk.
Nebraska was also wearing them today against Penn St, and they did not look good on them either
Michigan will be wearing them, too:
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/03/adidass-hideous-tournament-uniforms-wil…
I love that the link is to "adidass".
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
swim trunks.
Hopefully we can drop in on some gnarly waves against Illinois tomorrow. They'll never see the everybody's going surfing gameplan coming.
Swim trunks?
I surf and I have maybe heard them called swim trunks once.
Also, I have never seen anyone wear boardshorts as ugly as those things.
March 11th, 2015 at 10:06 PM ^
Maybe why they're called swim trunks?
March 11th, 2015 at 10:06 PM ^
...you wear boardshorts.
Swim trunks are what a lot of people in the midwest call "bathing suits" or "swim suits" that you swim in, especially kids. They usually have the lining in them and they're generally shorter than board shorts.
isn't that special.
I call board shorts and bathing suits "swim trunks". Woopty doo!
March 11th, 2015 at 10:08 PM ^
...but the maize is so much better than the navy.
I wish Adidas could come out with better "scheme" jerseys for these tournaments. These have all been awful.
Their alternate NBA jerseys are just as bad...
Take away the fanny-pack stripe and they'd be great.
I love the return of the big bad Michigan Block M.
As color schemes go, NC State's isn't the worst for this particular general pattern from Adidas, but like many other things, it would not have been my personal choice for the Wolfpack if I had a dog in the fight. That being said, Pitt really has not been doing much of anything until just now when they actually decided to attempt pressure in transition.
My eyes!
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
better if the players did not have to tuck in their jerseys when wearing these uniforms.
March 11th, 2015 at 10:24 PM ^
March 11th, 2015 at 10:01 PM ^
1989: On Jan. 7, the N.C. State basketball team takes the court wearing one-piece unitards, which are so embarrassing that the players wear shorts over them. The bodysuits are worn one more time and then scrapped, with Wolfpack coach Jim Valvano tactfully explaining, "The players complained that the unitards just weren't as comfortable as they think they could be."http://www.backingthepack.com/2007/08/wolfpack-uniform-one-hit-wonders…
March 11th, 2015 at 11:13 PM ^
March 11th, 2015 at 10:10 PM ^
Let me start a thread about hideous unis but not post a pic of said unis.
It just like my thread about beautiful naked Russian women.
March 11th, 2015 at 11:05 PM ^
Let's stop with the Adidas sucks stuff because a) please go look at the Nike pro-combat garbage and b) so long as UofM is getting paid more than any other college, Schlissel/Hackett/the Associate VP of Uniformz is not going to turn down free money because people on the internet think a swoosh looks better.
That said, we should have the courage to tell them we are going to wear our normal ass stripe/"Wolverinez"-free (and non-formulaic) uniforms for the most important and publicized games of the year. IIRC several Adidas schools resisted the ridiculous nickname trend last year, and I assume did not get their sponsorship money reduced for doing so.
I'm no expert but aren't there implicit benefits to choosing the right outfitter beyond cash? There have been allusions to adidas schools not being able to pull in elite basketball players due to the shoe deal. Younger kids prefer the Nike swag, etc.
Not sure a couple mil extra per year is worth it in the long run.
March 12th, 2015 at 10:03 AM ^
The allusions are based upon the idea that the majority of elite college basketball prospects play for AAU teams sponsored by Nike, which is by far, the biggest sponsor. Adidas has a much smaller presence on the AAU circuit. Coaches for schools with clothing deals with Adidas claim to find it almost impossible to make inroads with propsects playing for AAU teams sponsored by Nike and these AAU coaches of Nike-sponsored teams steer their kids to Nike schools. Pitino has been the most out-spoken critic of the system.
Isn't this Brandon logic? Trash everything that makes Michigan Michigan, as long as you make a buck?
It always comes down to two things.
1) Look over here! Nike makes some bad stuff too!
This is not a reason to stick with Adidas. So you found an example of Nike making something ugly. Congratulations. And so what? Let's look at their overall body of work. Nike is clearly better.
2) But the money!!
This is not a pro-Adidas argument it's a pro money argument.
Firstly, how do we know nike won't offer us a sweet deal comparable to Adidas?
Secondly, as the poster above me pointed out, this is Brandon-esquire decision making. Money isn't everything.
Nike apparel will sell better overall which will mitigate any difference in what they pay the school.
Since Michigan had been with Adidas, I have bought a grand total of ONE piece of apparel, and that because it was on clearance at dunhmas and I needed a spring jacket anyways.
The Adidas stuff sucks so is rather just wear the mike Michigan things I already have.
Apparel sales will go up, recruits like Nike, also something about "leaders and best". Ring a bell? Adidas is mediocre. Not a good association for the school.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
March 12th, 2015 at 12:13 PM ^
Firstly, how do we know nike won't offer us a sweet deal comparable to Adidas?
They won't. Adidas pays us about double what Nike pays any of its schools. Adidas and Under Armour will overpay to break into the college sports market. Nike doesn't see a need. (Conversely, Nike will grossly overpay to get into the European soccer market.)
Nike apparel will sell better overall which will mitigate any difference in what they pay the school.No, the difference is far too great. Schools only get a small cut of the royalties from merchandise sales - around 5%. For us to make up $4 million in royalties, we'd have to sell about $80 million more merchandise. No school sells anywhere near that much.
March 12th, 2015 at 12:21 PM ^
Could you be any more of a Nike fanboy? Good grief dude. It honestly sounds like you're more loyal to Nike than to U-M.
I own both Nike and Adidas U-M merchandise and there's not that big of a difference. I don't really care which brand it is, but it's been demonstrated that Nike won't spend as much on licensing contracts as Adidas/UA will, so I'm fine with Adidas.
The thing with uniforms..... it is very important for a winning program, to, look the part..... and Adidas has made amateurish looking football uniforms... the color is off, too...
nike football uniforms, notably osu and msu, look far better than our adidas ones... and it just happened to correspond with our terrible decade...
March 12th, 2015 at 12:17 PM ^
Yes, this is the issue. Both Nike and Adidas have lots of terrible uniform ideas, but we aren't forced to go along with them. We just have to tell them "No" when they propose them. It's possible. Alabama football (Nike) and Indiana basketball (Adidas) are evidence of this.
already bought the entire kit.
Have no problem with addidas. I own a lot of addidas apparel in general. I am 6' 8' 320#, and this stuff is true to size(aside from the shoes). My 2 teenage sons love this stuff, and they are RECRUITING age.