Ali G Bomaye

December 18th, 2012 at 12:49 PM ^

How about two games (Alabama)?  How about three, four, five games (2011 ND, MSU, Sugar Bowl)?  At what point do we no longer have the most recognizable and powerful brand in college football?

I usually consider myself pretty progressive on uniform design (for instance, I really like Oregon's assortment), so I don't classify myself as an "old codger."  But it feels like we're cashing in our tradition to sell a few one-off jerseys.

Kramer

December 18th, 2012 at 1:01 PM ^

I'm not sure we do now, or did years ago (have the most recognizable and powerful brand in college football).  Similar to how many fans can't imagine a recruit every wanting to go to another school over THIS IS MICHIGAN FERGODSAKES (TM), many people on this blog wear rose colored (or maize as it may be) glasses when it comes to our uniforms and the overall brand.  There are many schools that have history and prestige simlar to Michigan.  Notre Dame, Alabama, USC, Texas to name the most prominate.  I agree the winged helmet is likely the most famous helmet, but our uniforms are no more recognizable than Penn States or Notre Dames.  Everybody needs to relax on the uniform hatred. 

DirkMcGurk

December 18th, 2012 at 6:41 PM ^

I don't think most people understand branding. Our branding is the Winged Helmet, the block M and the colors Maize & Blue. The real issue is these "fans" just want to use "tradition" as another means to say we are better then you. Real fans don't need anything other then Wins and could careless what the teams wear.

wolverine1987

December 18th, 2012 at 4:48 PM ^

Those teams you mentioend are largely absent the entire new uniform trend.  And it does not matter one bit whether we have ther #1 or the #10 most recognizable brand in college football--its a very very strong brand and brand name, so messing with it, like if we are any pne of the other 100 schools out there, is dumb.

j.o.s.e maizenblue

December 18th, 2012 at 1:10 PM ^

I agree with you totally... I understand a lot of it is to get the players excited and this "new era" of marketing college athletics ... however, as the post above suggest, is changing the unitforms worth getting lost in all of the "noise"? For someone in there mid-20's I tend to side on tradition and nothing is more recognizable than the block M, maize and blue and of course the winged helmet. Why fix something that isnt broke?!

 

Kramer

December 18th, 2012 at 2:09 PM ^

when talking about uniforms, i specifcally mentioned penn state and notre dame.  penn state added names to the back of their jersey's this year, which in my opinion is a much bigger change than a one or two off unique jersey per year.  Notre dame has changed theirs more than we have.

 

I get not liking the uniforms, i just don't get the massive OMG freakouts that come with them.  I watch football and cheer on michigan for the actual games, players and plays.  Fashion doesn't play a big role in my fandom.

pkatz

December 18th, 2012 at 1:14 PM ^

For the most part, I like Dave Brandon and what he has overseen in his tenure as AD, but cannot believe that which he has wrought unto the UM brand imagery, most noteworthy being  our uniforms - these are beyond ugly and bear no relevance whatsoever to the historical Michigan brand.

 

/offmysoapbox

JeepinBen

December 18th, 2012 at 11:52 AM ^

They're Matte, not shiny. And in general, these look like shit. It's the Bama uniform, with some colors flopped. WHYYYYYYYYY

Anybody got the number for Ann Arbor Torch and Pitchfork?

JeepinBen

December 18th, 2012 at 12:57 PM ^

I don't understand this at all. Dave Brandon has been so about the "BRAND" in so many ways. The split M is gone. The Block M is everywhere. Every AD twitter account has the same avatar, Block M with their sport.

He's been extremely uniform, everywhere except for the damn football uniforms!!

This is tradition, history, those uniforms and helmets ARE michigan football. And that he has no qualms about selling to adidas on a semi-weekly basis.

I did the counting below. This is the EIGTH jersey Michigan will have worn in our last 25 football games. We've had a new look every THREE games. Ridiculous.

Skapanza

December 18th, 2012 at 12:36 PM ^

I always hoped we could do better than "at least our helmet is not a shitstain". The issue is, people already own our traditional jerseys, and the only time they buy new ones is when there is a new player they can get. Well, new players come along too slowly, but Adidas can crap one of these jerseys out in a second and DB can sell a stack of them for fat profit even if it looks terrible. People want to be part of the fan experience and for a lot of them it means buying a horrible jersey they have a 50ish% of always relating to a defeat.

 

Does anyone look at the jersey they bought for the Alabama game and think "Man, this jersey not only looks great, but it reminds me of our awesome game against 'Bama!"

johnvand

December 18th, 2012 at 12:02 PM ^

Hmmmmm.  Conflicted.

Like the Matte paint.

Can tolerate the white w/blue shoulder look.

Can't stand the way the numbers look.

EDIT: Also think they should have done blue pants.

JeepinBen

December 18th, 2012 at 12:07 PM ^

If we're the home team, we should wear blue jerseys with maize numbers. Maize pants. And the most Iconic helmet in college sports.

If we're the road team, we should wear white jerseys, maize pants, and the most Iconic helmet in college sports.

Why is that so hard?

johnvand

December 18th, 2012 at 1:03 PM ^

Oh, I agree, there's no reason to touch them other than using modern materials and such.

But if you're gonna screw with them, at least make them look semi nice.  Maize pants with white jerseys with maize numbers, a strip of blue on the shoulders, and blue helments is just... imbalanced.  Yes, it would look like Toledo or WVU, but aren't we already nearly there?

In summary: