Jump to content

College Football Uniforms - 2017 Season


buckeye

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
6 hours ago, radchad said:

Note that the Cal-UA brand update appears to mean the death of the "front-facing bear": cal-logo.jpg

 

And this font and wordmark set:  7066_california_golden_bears-wordmark-2013.png

 


Overall, I'm really pleased with this update so far, although I haven't warmed up to the Sather Stripe yet.

 

Glad they're getting rid of the Crying Ursine. 

 

That logo looks like he's yawning tears. 

UyDgMWP.jpg

5th in NAT. TITLES  |  2nd in CONF. TITLES  |  5th in HEISMAN |  7th in DRAFTS |  8th in ALL-AMER  |  7th in WINS  |  4th in BOWLS |  1st in SELLOUTS  |  1st GAMEDAY SIGN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, 4_tattoos said:

Potentially dumb question. Is Cal Berkley the flagship school of the University of California System?

Not a dumb question. Yes, Cal is the first school in the California system, being founded in 1868.

Kristopher Bazen
Kris Bazen Creative
www.www.krisbazen.com

Twitter: @krisbazen

Dribbble: dribbble.com/krisbazen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, 4_tattoos said:

Potentially dumb question. Is Cal Berkley the flagship school of the University of California System?

When the private College of California in Oakland, and a new state land-grant institution, the Agricultural, Mining and Mechanical Arts College established the "College of California" in 1868, its first location was in Oakland.

Berkeley campus was established in 1873.

 

The University of California system was established in 1919 with starting a Los Angeles campus aka UCLA. They didn't split in terms of leadership and administration until 1952.

 

They are both seen as flagships.

 

And, it's UC Berkeley (for the university) or Cal (for athletics). Not "Cal Berkeley", as noted by another poster showing the disclaimer.

http://www.berkeley.edu/about/history-discoveries

Link to comment
Share on other sites

whats funny is the Nike rebrand happened, what 5 years ago? and that now-old type and logo already looks really dated. the new Cal marks and type like someone said before, feel like they could have been done in the 60's yet are so beautifully crafted and precise in their linework, weight, proportion. . theres no flaw that catches my eye- i could nitpick and say the C on the new alt logo might be a bit heavy for my taste, but i dont think Cal will have to ever change these marks again. Nike has done some really good work over the last 2.5 years, but UA might be the ones to watch now. 

 

GRAPHIC ARTIST

BEHANCE  /  MEDIUM  /  DRIBBBLE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, BrandMooreArt said:

whats funny is the Nike rebrand happened, what 5 years ago? and that now-old type and logo already looks really dated. the new Cal marks and type like someone said before, feel like they could have been done in the 60's yet are so beautifully crafted and precise in their linework, weight, proportion. . theres no flaw that catches my eye- i could nitpick and say the C on the new alt logo might be a bit heavy for my taste, but i dont think Cal will have to ever change these marks again. Nike has done some really good work over the last 2.5 years, but UA might be the ones to watch now. 

 

This UA Cal update now has me more intrigued about the UCLA update.  For $230M, UA has to be doing something that the majority will love.  

Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, BrandMooreArt said:

whats funny is the Nike rebrand happened, what 5 years ago? and that now-old type and logo already looks really dated. the new Cal marks and type like someone said before, feel like they could have been done in the 60's yet are so beautifully crafted and precise in their linework, weight, proportion. . theres no flaw that catches my eye- i could nitpick and say the C on the new alt logo might be a bit heavy for my taste, but i dont think Cal will have to ever change these marks again. Nike has done some really good work over the last 2.5 years, but UA might be the ones to watch now. 

While historically accurate, another reason that the weight of the C makes sense in the secondary logo's context is that The C had to have a substantial weight to offset the weight of the bear... I couldn't imagine the C getting too much thinner than how it currently is without looking a little less sturdy. At the very least, there is a standardized C, because in doing the research, there were instances amongst different sports where the block C was much heavier than others, and altogether inconsistent in its structuring.

 

The Sather font carries some of the key characteristics from this iteration of the block c, but is weighted so that works in numerous contexts.

 

If you notice on campus, there is currently a lot of equity in the Block C, as you can see it on Tightwad Hill and also the bleachers in Memorial Stadium... I get producing brand assets for merchandising purposes, but, and no disrespect, what was produced really got away from what the brand is all about when you consider it holistically.

Kristopher Bazen
Kris Bazen Creative
www.www.krisbazen.com

Twitter: @krisbazen

Dribbble: dribbble.com/krisbazen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WSU151 said:

 

This UA Cal update now has me more intrigued about the UCLA update.  For $230M, UA has to be doing something that the majority will love.  

Really doubt UCLA does anything too drastic from their current set since their uniforms and marks haven't changed all that much in the past 20-30 years.  About the only things we should look forward to are how the shoulder loops and numbers look on UA's template.  They'll likely be a vast improvement over Adidas' uniforms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, BrandMooreArt said:

whats funny is the Nike rebrand happened, what 5 years ago? and that now-old type and logo already looks really dated. the new Cal marks and type like someone said before, feel like they could have been done in the 60's yet are so beautifully crafted and precise in their linework, weight, proportion. . theres no flaw that catches my eye- i could nitpick and say the C on the new alt logo might be a bit heavy for my taste, but i dont think Cal will have to ever change these marks again. Nike has done some really good work over the last 2.5 years, but UA might be the ones to watch now. 

A broken clock is right twice a day is how the saying goes right? I'd have to see more from UA before I put them on he watch list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Webfooter said:

Really doubt UCLA does anything too drastic from their current set since their uniforms and marks haven't changed all that much in the past 20-30 years.  About the only things we should look forward to are how the shoulder loops and numbers look on UA's template.  They'll likely be a vast improvement over Adidas' uniforms.

 

the athletics program is in dire need of a brand unification project...considering the school's brand is a top 10 or top 5 college property globally their overall identity is horrible. Sure football and hoops have classic uniforms in general but they are in dire need of refinement...across the board you have navy, multiple shades of light blue, royal, tan, metallic gold, yellow using a hodgepodge of unrelated logos and marks...templates are an issue for sure but they have a lot of work to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently the Wolverines will wear an alternate uniform at least once during the 2017 season. An all-maize uniform seems likely IMO, but there are multiple options that I could realistically see them going with. And I wouldn't be surprised to see the so-called "Michigan pattern" that Nike created implemented into the uniform in some subtle way, possibly in the numbers or sleeve caps.

IMG_4694.thumb.JPG.8d185b88cf4aee5ddd2de817672925f7.JPGIMG_4695.JPG.b0a123c1d80ee4e3af5104fe53442c6b.JPG

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/college/university-michigan/2017/06/02/michigan-will-wear-alternate-uniform-next-season/102449788/

IPTMMN0.png?1

RhlTL5V.png?1

8CBx12E.png?1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michigan's all whites on the road just look stupid. Screw whatever sense of nostalgia Harbaugh is trying to recreate based on his playing days, the maize pants are VASTLY superior. 

UyDgMWP.jpg

5th in NAT. TITLES  |  2nd in CONF. TITLES  |  5th in HEISMAN |  7th in DRAFTS |  8th in ALL-AMER  |  7th in WINS  |  4th in BOWLS |  1st in SELLOUTS  |  1st GAMEDAY SIGN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To each his own, I guess.  I love this look;

 

B9324973320Z.1_20161127222122_000_GACGI6

 

Although Adidas did it better.  (Strange thing to say, I know, but in this one isolated case, it's definitely true. The sleeve stripe was better defined in the Adidas version,  and the numbers down on the sleeve was a superior look for this particular design.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, pianoknight said:

Michigan's all whites on the road just look stupid. Screw whatever sense of nostalgia Harbaugh is trying to recreate based on his playing days, the maize pants are VASTLY superior. 

I HATE Michigan with a burning passion, but I agree with you. The maize pants area far superior to the white pants. 

spacer.png

jCMXRTJ.png.c7b9b888fd36f93c327929ec580f08dc.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.