Jump to content

BRice16

Members
  • Posts

    1,964
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by BRice16

  1. 5 hours ago, tBBP said:

    Is that a specially-designed UA logo for Maryland or has UA updated their logo and I just hadn't noticed until now?

    It's the original Under Armour logo, which they've started using again on some throwback gear. 

  2. On 11/17/2020 at 1:46 PM, guest23 said:

     

    Assuming that nike actually sent the school a physical prototype and not a digital mockup. Also it requires approvers know or care enough about accuracy to get the proportions correct.

     

    All Nike "contract" schools (Swoosh patch instead of embroidered Swoosh) get physical samples of all on-field uniforms in every sport. Nike "partner" schools get digital proofs.  

  3. On 5/18/2020 at 9:58 AM, JTernup said:

    Agreed, SCAR is definitely not going Jordan, I would bet my life on it. As you mentioned, in football at least the Jordan branding is saved for elite programs and Jordan's alma mater. They have also given out Jordan branding for one of three reasons, Jordan affiliation (UNC), as a reward for long time Nike schools that have had a lot of success (UF, OU), or to sweeten the deal for a blue blood program making the jump to Nike (Michigan). SCAR definitively does not fit into any of those categories. 

     

    Not only that but it sure seems like Nike and Jordan have decided to use the Jordan branding on one school per conference, I'd bet given how they have handled it that each of the Jordan schools have some language in their contracts that states they will be the only Jordan outfitted school in their respective conferences. 

     

    If you take a look at the fine print of the Florida and Oklahoma contracts (you may have to do a little digging but both are public record and online), it's written in there that each will be the only school in the SEC and Big12 respectively to wear the Jordan brand during the duration of the contracts. Other schools are permitted to order Jordan apparel for postseason gift packages and a coach wearing Jordan shoes and apparel does not put them in violation of a Nike contract, but no other school in each of those conferences will have Jordan as their primary provider.  

  4. On 3/20/2018 at 8:55 PM, ShinyHubCaps said:

    I didn't see this mentioned but am seriously curious.  Did Kansas State have the foresight to bring their home uniforms to Charlotte, or did they have to send back for them?  The only way they would be the home team is if the 16-seed beat the 1-seed, which previously had never happened in 33+ years of the format.  I didn't see the entire game; was this mentioned on the telecast?

     

    The NCAA requires teams to bring both sets regardless. When I worked with a program over a decade ago, there was no chance that we would wear our white uniforms in a Final Four situation as the low seed overall, but we had to bring them with us (and to the administrative meeting) in case something happened to the higher seed's white uniforms or something like that. 

     

    The NCAA applies the patches either on-site at the arena or at the host hotel. 

  5. 3 hours ago, Cardsblues02 said:

    Tennessee needs to experiment a bit IMHO. They don’t have a classic look if you ask me. Obviously the checkerboard is here to stay. But I would like to see a couple of different helmets. Maybe a few alternate unis. Incorporate that awesome powder blue somehow. 

     

    With the exception of 6 games wearing gray and one in black, Tennessee has worn basically the same uniforms for every game since the 1930s. How is that not a "classic look?"

  6. On 7/8/2017 at 8:46 AM, dont care said:

    This is wrong, a logo on the front was never an option for the NFL because they don't want anything competeing with "the shield" it was either logo on the sleeve or no deal. It would take a mammoth of a contract for the NFL to compromise their logo, atleast when Goodel is commish.

     

    My information on this came directly from someone that was involved in the negotiations. As valuable as the real estate is on the front, the value of two logos over one was higher to Nike. This was long before the financial terms were agreed upon. 

  7. On 6/30/2017 at 10:42 AM, BJ Sands said:

    I'd almost bet the maker's mark moves to the front when the next supplier contract is signed. Happening in the NBA, MLB and really surprised adidas didn't find a way to sneak their logo onto the front of NHL jerseys.

     

    Nike was given the option of one logo on the front only or a logo on each sleeve. They elected to keep the sleeves. 

  8. 2 hours ago, dont care said:

    Adidas will have replicas too, just fanatics has first dibs on special jerseys like say a rookie goes off and has a hat trick, then fanatics has the rights and ability to make that players jerseys.

     

    No, they will not. 

  9. 14 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

     

    They don't wear retail helmets on the field. 

     

    His point is that if they have been discontinued at retail, then it's likely there is a change coming on the field. 

  10. On 1/18/2017 at 6:49 AM, orangefaniniowa said:

     

    That's news to me.  It appears Florida was the only one IIRC (along with Michigan).  It would really make my day if the Gators do go to the Jordan brand beginning in '17.  Let's hope they do the next few months, with new football jerseys with the Jumpman added to it.

     

    Florida plays Michigan opening week next season, could be the first Jordan vs. Jordan meeting (let's keep fingers crossed).

     

    My information comes from a Nike school's equipment manager. Several schools got Jordan gear this year, but it was at the discretion of the coaches/equipment guys that place the orders, not a direction from Nike.

     

    You'll see this again when the NCAA basketball tournament rolls around. Nike contract teams receive new on-court gear as part of Nike's postseason line, but they can order new travel gear for the teams out of a Nike postseason catalog that will include options from Jordan. It's always been that way. 

  11. On 12/29/2016 at 9:41 PM, See Red said:

    I'm not sure this is all that newsworthy but Florida got a bunch of Jordan brand gear in advance of their bowl game this year so that had some people in team circles wondering if Florida would be switching to Jordan brand full-time but I guess they will not be.  Whether they do or don't, I think the uniforms need some kind of refresh.

     

    Jordan warmups were available to all of the contract Nike schools for bowl gear this year. Most went with standard Nike, but several selected Jordan. Nothing to read into there. 

  12. On 12/11/2016 at 6:05 PM, guest23 said:

     

    To add, I think a patch, helmet decal, or equivalent gesture would be a perfectly fine tribute. The graphic says it all..."look at us and how much we care" brought to you by "T/swoosh". Nowhere is there any messaging of any sort vehicle for outreach/volunteerism/call to action. Not even a half-assed portion of the proceeds excuse is mentioned. This move doesn't even meet the minimum standards to be called slacktivism.

     

    Well, I can tell you the response from people locally, you know, the ones actually affected by the fires, was overwhelmingly positive. In fact, the idea to wear the uniforms came from those affected by the fires as a way to continue to bring awareness to disaster relief.

     

    The school and the team have made many "calls to action" for volunteering and donations, including busloads of student-athletes going up to Gatlinburg with supplies and spending numerous hours serving the community there. UT was active in local fundraisers for the victims as well. 

     

    But, by all means, make a judgment based on one graphic without having any idea on the rest of the story. 

  13. The NFL's contracts with the apparel companies has always specified logo placement on the sleeves, dating back to when they first inserted the language in the 1990s. The current deal with Nike also has the logo only on the sleeve of all sideline gear, rather than the front. 

     

    The difference with football is that there are currently two logos on the jersey, where in other sports there is just one (or, in the NBA's case, none). So the debate would be, is one logo on the front more valuable than two logos? I would say that in football, the sleeve placement is more valuable because in the average photo of a play, you can see many sleeves, but may not see the front/chest of more than one player. I think Nike would choose two logos per jersey over one, regardless of placement. 

  14. On 11/9/2016 at 6:04 PM, hawk36 said:

    I'm so tired of this blah, blah, blah regarding elements of a special use uniform. Let's be honest, "we are creating this different uniform to make money since we hope you will buy this in addition to the purple one you already have."

     

    Except they aren't selling these, so...

  15. 21 hours ago, DustDevil61 said:

     

    Keep in mind: You're probably working as an intern.

     

    Nope. I spent the last two years working in a school's communications office and not one of our accounts was handled by anyone other than a full-time staff member. I can't think of a school that has an intern or student handle its social media accounts. 

     

    Certainly, there are other job responsibilities in addition to social media, but nobody is leaving social media to interns anymore. 

  16. Fanatics is already doing this with the NFL "Pro Line" jerseys that they sell on their site. 

     

    The NHL replica jerseys will be the same as the current replicas in terms of how close they are to the on-ice product. 

     

    I'm surprised that adidas is giving up this space completely. Under Armour is doing a split deal with Fanatics for MLB that will still have the UA branding on the Fanatics-made replicas. Even though they have the supply chain already in place with the Reebok products, hockey jerseys are a big-margin product like NFL and NBA jerseys, so I'm not surprised at the deal they made, just surprised adidas didn't keep a piece of it. 

  17. 2 hours ago, TheOldRoman said:

    Speaking of Next Level Talk, has a message board taken its place? I was on Jersey Talk (or something like that), then followed the mass to NLT when that shut down, but then I forgot about that site and it was gone when I visited again.

     

    I don't know, but man I miss that place. The buy/sell/trade forum was awesome, but I LOVED seeing people's new pickups. 

  18. 23 minutes ago, Bmac said:

    The following information was passed on to me almost a year ago, and I'm really not supposed to share it. I also have no way of confirming it, other than trusting the word of someone in retail who has always given me accurate information. I was told...

     

    The Diamondbacks recent rebrand was outsourced to Under Armour by Major League Baseball. While Majestic still technically produced their uniforms, UA was hired to help design them.

     

    Take that as you will.

     

    The sublimation technique used on the new Arizona uniforms came from Under Armour. Not sure if they actually designed them, but they had a hand in those disasters.

  19. 6 hours ago, Thomas said:

    Sounds horrible, i doubt they can do as good a job as Majestic does.

    Where will they find the people to do those authentic jerseys that are being sold to fans now, that are exacly the same as the players use.

    I fear there will be differences from what the players wear to what the fans can buy.

     

    I'm almost certain that this deal will end the tradition of the fan authentic jerseys being the exact same product as what's on the field. 

     

    If I had to speculate, it will be similar to the current Nike NFL setup where the on-field and authentics use the exact same materials, but the on-field jerseys are manufactured in the USA and the retail jerseys will be mass-produced overseas. We'll see, I know some teams were concerned about that. 

  20. 6 hours ago, sc49erfan15 said:

    I've posted about this before (years ago, so it's not like an "ahem, this has been covered before" topic) and I can't find it anyway, so...

     

    I always heard the reason for this switch was a legibility issue. The very thick numbers and drop shadow combined to make numbers like 8s and 6s illegible (especially from each other) from a distance. This is the same reason the Jacksonville Jaguars switched fonts after the 1997 preseason (interestingly, the number font the Jaguars were originally switching from is the same "thick" font as the early 1996 49ers font, just without a drop shadow. The Jaguars wore it from 1995-96; in 1995 on Wilson/Staff jerseys and in 1996 on Nike).

     

    I can't find any sources to back this legibility claim up, but this is always what I heard. Take it for what it's worth, but I remember this vividly.

     

    My source on the manufacturer/contractor change is a person that worked at Wilson at the time. The custom font was a chnage Reebok made when they took over, but couldn't get implemented until the ACO set came through. 

     

     

    1 hour ago, TheOldRoman said:

     

    Maybe not that season, but their jerseys had Wilson logos the season before. So I would assume the Wilson-produced jerseys originally had Wilson branding, but it was taken off and covered with Reebok logos.

     

    It's possible, since the Wilson logo was a patch (Would have been the W/S patch) and the Reebok vector was a direct sew, but I haven't seen evidence of that on gamers from that era. There was a guy on the old Next Level Talk forum that had 4 or 5 of the 50th anniversary gamers, I think all of them from before the change. I know that Wilson did the embroidery of the Reebok logo in their factory before they were shipped to the 49ers, so no one would have ever seen them with the Wilson logo, other than samples for the team. 

  21. 44 minutes ago, WSU151 said:

    I'm wondering if the unique stitching on some of the uniforms (e.g, Cardinals, Phillies) will be changed.  

     

    It'd be interesting to know just how much it took for Majestic to say "We can't match that offer by UA and Fanatics."

     

    It's bigger than just saying that. It's MLB consolidating the on-and off-field apparel contracts currently held by every company not named New Era.

     

    That put Majestic at a decided disadvantage to Under Armour, who already produces a wide line of performance products and can easily fill the roles and spaces once held by Nike, adidas and others. Fanatics has the ability to take the blank products produced by UA, house them at its distribution facilities, and customize/ship them in one day. It takes the middle man out of the equation for Fanatics. They've been working on this for a couple of years and almost did this same deal with UA and the NBA. This is Fanatics' end game, to control every element of a league's apparel marketing and distribution, even for products not sold through their outlets. This is also a huge shot to Lids, who did much of the distribution work for Majestic. 

  22. 12 hours ago, TheOldRoman said:

     

    That makes sense, but at least from the pictures posted, the players with the thicker font are all wearing Reebok. I wonder if they ripped off the Wilson logos and sewed the Reebok logos on.

     

    No, they never had Wilson logos on them. Wilson was just the manufacturer, they put the Reebok logos on all the on-field products the 49ers wore. 

     

    Wilson would go on to manufacture some of the Adidas on-field NFL jerseys for the Bucs, Patroits and the 49ers (again) and all of the Logo Athletic on-field jerseys at their Nashville-area factory.  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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