College Football Uniforms - 2015 Season

[gmoore1203]

Michigan debating leaving Adidas for Nike or Under Armor: http://www.freep.com/story/sports/college/university-michigan/wolverines/2015/04/02/michigan-jim-hackett/70814464/

I don't think this is April Fool's Day... it was posted technically on April 2.

I really hope they return to Nike but going to UA would still be 5 notches above Adidas.

I was decently supportive of adidas since they tend to do well with "traditional" looks like Nebraska or Michigan. Our normal uniforms are near perfect with maybe a small gripe for the way the TechFit template stretches some players' sleeve stripes. But that's relatively minor and you'll have those little inconveniences with any supplier.

That being said, however, adidas' track record of horrific alternate uniform design is really pushing me to prefer Nike or UA. Most of what they churn out looks like a kid who downloaded a Fraser Davidson concept and hacked it up in Paint. There are like 2 bad ass elements in each adidas concept, but they never overcome the 17 other things that are blatantly stupid about the design.

So, since my school rocks a traditional design I see nothing that motivates me to stick with adidas. Nike or UA (heck, Russell!) could just as easily design the classic stripe look and they'd certainly offer more compelling alternates. adidas' alternates have such a flamboyant, metrosexual douchbaggery about them. It's almost like they got their start designing soccer uniforms or something.

There is typically only one thing that motivates athletic departments and that is $$$. Those who make the decisions really couldn't care less about uniform design. As long as the most $$$ possible is coming in then they are happy.

Spot on. $$$ from the supplier is even more important as department budgets are hitting higher and higher levels. The revenue streams are more and more important, especially to cover the unplanned costs of coach buyouts, season ticket shortfalls etc. It's almost as if these athletic departments are being run like for profit business now.

that definitely is the most important attribute to an apparel deal, but if the manufacturer is not giving you what you want that will make them want to change, and i believe that michigan does want to change because they don't wear their tech fit templates because they don't like the fits of them.

[TheOldRoman]

Spot on. $$$ from the supplier is even more important as department budgets are hitting higher and higher levels. The revenue streams are more and more important, especially to cover the unplanned costs of coach buyouts, season ticket shortfalls etc. It's almost as if these athletic departments are being run like for profit business now.

Which makes it even more ridiculous that every freaking school, down to FCS teams, has alternate helmets. They're running short on money buy they'll still spend another $100,000 or so on helmets to be worn once (or even multiple times). I could understand (but not agree with) Oregon doing such, but how can :censored:ing Eastern Washington justify such spending?

[guest23]

From what I've read many schools are either getting incremental donations specifically for said helmets (doesn't hit the overall budget) or they auction off (or resell) the helmets to recover a chunk of the costs.

[TheOldRoman]

Selling the helmets would be reasonable, provided they get all the money back they spent. But how realistic is that for smaller schools? I don't mean to pick on Eastern Washington, but they were the first small school to come to mind. Does EWU have a large number of fans willing to drop $500 for a helmet?

[OnWis97]

Selling the helmets would be reasonable, provided they get all the money back they spent. But how realistic is that for smaller schools? I don't mean to pick on Eastern Washington, but they were the first small school to come to mind. Does EWU have a large number of fans willing to drop $500 for a helmet?

Throw in the mini-helmets and ... no.

I tend to doubt even big programs make money (at least directly) on multiple helmets. I have a white Wisconsin helmet in my office...I am not going out to get a red one now that they wear two. And I doubt too many Oregon fans have a closet full of $30 mini helmets. I'd think that each additional helmet would bring smaller sales than the last.

So why all the helmets? Extra money thrown in by the manufacturer so we can talk about the manufacturer? To attract recruits?

[mbannon92]

Stanford is making another change. It was already noted here that they are going with the tree in the S logo instead of just the block S, but they also have new athletics wordmarks.

The top serif on the "L" looks really bad with the right side missing...should match the top of the "I". It also bugs me that the corners on the rounded letters aren't more consistent with the block S. Other than that it's decent.

[guest23]

Selling the helmets would be reasonable, provided they get all the money back they spent. But how realistic is that for smaller schools? I don't mean to pick on Eastern Washington, but they were the first small school to come to mind. Does EWU have a large number of fans willing to drop $500 for a helmet?

Throw in the mini-helmets and ... no.

I tend to doubt even big programs make money (at least directly) on multiple helmets. I have a white Wisconsin helmet in my office...I am not going out to get a red one now that they wear two. And I doubt too many Oregon fans have a closet full of $30 mini helmets. I'd think that each additional helmet would bring smaller sales than the last.

So why all the helmets? Extra money thrown in by the manufacturer so we can talk about the manufacturer? To attract recruits?

It most definitely is a football recruiting expense and nothing more. Nike's ability to bring football uniform fashion through their uniform innovations via the ducks created the perceived need that other programs must offer similar uniforms (including helmets) to appear big time and attract recruits. What was once an afterthought has now become a a running story via the press and nike created a fashion frenzy of consumption for themselves and hgi. This is no different of a strategy that they use for other product categories that they dominate: find a lucrative category with little or slow product development, invest heavily in a new and bold design, market the hell out of it, win market share for being the hot new product, reap profits, repeat.

[tajmccall]

Stanford is making another change. It was already noted here that they are going with the tree in the S logo instead of just the block S, but they also have new athletics wordmarks.

Woof, that A is A-trocious.

[cajunaggie08]

It's almost as if these athletic departments are being run like for profit business now.

They always were. There's a reason the Ivy league (which pretty much invented the sport) got out. There's just more money than ever before being brought in. The more money they bring in, the more they have to spend to keep the non-profit status. These new-build projects are multi-year financial commitments and not hitting your projected budgets can put a program in a tough position. You take all the money you can from the uniform suppliers to ensure you pay off that 3 story jacuzzi water therapy station. the tv money is great too.

[guest23]

It's almost as if these athletic departments are being run like for profit business now.

They always were. There's a reason the Ivy league (which pretty much invented the sport) got out. There's just more money than ever before being brought in. The more money they bring in, the more they have to spend to keep the non-profit status. These new-build projects are multi-year financial commitments and not hitting your projected budgets can put a program in a tough position. You take all the money you can from the uniform suppliers to ensure you pay off that 3 story jacuzzi water therapy station. the tv money is great too.

Hey don't forget that you gotta pay those 7 figure salaries to the AD's as well...something about spending money to make money then you have to make even more to justify the endless spending.

[tajmccall]

It's almost as if these athletic departments are being run like for profit business now.

They always were. There's a reason the Ivy league (which pretty much invented the sport) got out. There's just more money than ever before being brought in. The more money they bring in, the more they have to spend to keep the non-profit status. These new-build projects are multi-year financial commitments and not hitting your projected budgets can put a program in a tough position. You take all the money you can from the uniform suppliers to ensure you pay off that 3 story jacuzzi water therapy station. the tv money is great too.

Hey don't forget that you gotta pay those 7 figure salaries to the AD's as well...something about spending money to make money then you have to make even more to justify the endless spending.

BUT THERE ISN'T ENOUGH MONEY TO PAY THE STUDENTS GUYS. THEY AREN'T WORKING, THEY ARE STUDENT-ATHLETES.

John Oliver murders the NCAA arguement.

[TheOldRoman]

Woof, that A is A-trocious.

As is the S, T, N, F, R, D, I, N, and L.

[krunyan]

Woof, that A is A-trocious.

As is the S, T, N, F, R, D, I, N, and L.

Was thinking that exact same thing.

[hailstateunis]

Woof, that A is A-trocious.

As is the S, T, N, F, R, D, I, N, and L.

But the C is okay?

[Cujo]

Well, there's this, which the university dropped a couple months ago:

Just as long as they don't touch the golden helmet.

[CLEstones]

The ONLY issue with the new Standford font is that there are inconsistent serifs. Had the serifs all been tapers or all been squared off, the font would be fantastic.

Not sure why people just hate on custom fonts. The second a team or school comes out with a proprietary font, they freak out.

[TheOldRoman]

Woof, that A is A-trocious.

As is the S, T, N, F, R, D, I, N, and L.

But the C is okay?

Yes. The C and the O are normal. This is just like the new Browns' script. A complete time capsule of the mid teens, and something which will look horribly dated in under five years. You expect it from the Browns, because they want to "make a splash" and are going to go with whatever designers tell them is hip, but it's surprising to see it from a school, particularly one with an image of academics and tradition, not being cutting edge at sports.

The ONLY issue with the new Standford font is that there are inconsistent serifs. Had the serifs all been tapers or all been squared off, the font would be fantastic.

Not sure why people just hate on custom fonts. The second a team or school comes out with a proprietary font, they freak out.

I'm pretty sure this is a strawman. Nobody hates custom fonts in general. For jersey numbers? I generally prefer block fonts for teams, but it depends on the overall look and image. For wordmarks? The only "standard block font" I can think of was the past Browns' wordmark, and that was horrible. Their '80s - early '00s wordmark was their best (including the new crap), but that's not saying much. I don't wholesale dislike custom letter fonts for teams, but I hate when they're overly contrived and overly "now" at the expense of soon being dated. And that's what Stanford and the Browns did. The '00s fonts that look very '00s (Texans, Cardinals, Falcons) are only really bad in that they all look so similar. The teens fonts are just bad in general.

[CLEstones]

I'm pretty sure this is a strawman. Nobody hates custom fonts in general. For jersey numbers? I generally prefer block fonts for teams, but it depends on the overall look and image. For wordmarks? The only "standard block font" I can think of was the past Browns' wordmark, and that was horrible. Their '80s - early '00s wordmark was their best (including the new crap), but that's not saying much. I don't wholesale dislike custom letter fonts for teams, but I hate when they're overly contrived and overly "now" at the expense of soon being dated. And that's what Stanford and the Browns did. The '00s fonts that look very '00s (Texans, Cardinals, Falcons) are only really bad in that they all look so similar. The teens fonts are just bad in general.

Every time a new uniform come out with some sort of custom font or proprietary font, people :censored: themselves. I understand disliking some of the more exotic ones. But Stanford took a basic block font and added a little bit of their own zest to it.

To be honest, I think the trend of proprietary fonts its one of the best trends to come in the last 10-15 years.

[FiddySicks]

Woof, that A is A-trocious.

As is the S, T, N, F, R, D, I, N, and L.

Yeah I don't really like that new font much, either. But Stanford has never really seemed to have a single font that's really "theirs", so I see what they were trying to do.

It kinda bugs me that the S in their new font doesn't match their S primary mark, but I can't see a full word mark in that font looking good, either.

[pianoknight]

The S and O are blocky, but the rest of the letters have slanted serifs. The style of the custom font isn't bad, IMO. It's actually decent but the non-serif, non-slant style of the S and O clash terribly with the rest of the set. And Bucfan nailed it - the S logo and the S in the wordmark are totally different styles.

Concept - 7/10

Execution - 4/10