New Apparel Contract for Univ. of Hawaii Warriors Football

[kylenotryan]

According to this article in this morning Honolulu Advertiser the University of Hawaii is hoping to get a new apparel contract for its football team.

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbc...mplate=UHsports

Nike's contract with the University of Hawaii football team ends in May. Does this mean new uniforms, or a new sponsor, or nothing at all? I personally like what we have right now, but wouldn't be against bringing back the green jerseys or an all white combo (but with the kapa band on the thigh) like what they wore in the Sugar Bowl (even though we lost).

The change over from Reebok to Nike didn't bring much of a change to the uniforms aside from removing the green jersey and introducing the silver/white/silver combo (thankfully no awful piping). Reebok didn't have much of a presence for fan apparel at UH, but Nike did a full spread for the fans including shirts, shorts, polos, jackets, sweaters, hats, jerseys (replica and authentic) etc.

Maybe Nike will stay, maybe not. There are already "several interested parties." Let's see what happens.

[oz615]

Adidas and Under Armour are the front runners.

[chuckymack]

According to this article in this morning Honolulu Advertiser the University of Hawaii is hoping to get a new apparel contract for its football team.

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbc...mplate=UHsports

Nike's contract with the University of Hawaii football team ends in May. Does this mean new uniforms, or a new sponsor, or nothing at all? I personally like what we have right now, but wouldn't be against bringing back the green jerseys or an all white combo (but with the kapa band on the thigh) like what they wore in the Sugar Bowl (even though we lost).

The change over from Reebok to Nike didn't bring much of a change to the uniforms aside from removing the green jersey and introducing the silver/white/silver combo (thankfully no awful piping). Reebok didn't have much of a presence for fan apparel at UH, but Nike did a full spread for the fans including shirts, shorts, polos, jackets, sweaters, hats, jerseys (replica and authentic) etc.

Maybe Nike will stay, maybe not. There are already "several interested parties." Let's see what happens.

Start praying that Under Armor doesn't get the contract. Now.

[oddball]

Adidas and Under Armour are the front runners.

Which is interesting becuase Reebok is under the Adidas umbrella.

[BRice16]

But other than Boston College, adidas has elected not to use the Reebok brand in college. They're pretty upfront about that. BC kept the Reebok vector because of the proximity to Reebok's headquarters.

[gingerbreadmann]

But other than Boston College, adidas has elected not to use the Reebok brand in college. They're pretty upfront about that. BC kept the Reebok vector because of the proximity to Reebok's headquarters.

I'm glad, too. I like Reebok, I live right near their HQ. But the bottom line is, as long as you don't have Nike, your unis are generally safe.

[PhilliesPhan1325]

I'm glad, too. I like Reebok, I live right near their HQ. But the bottom line is, as long as you don't have Nike, your unis are generally safe.

Unless of course you have Under Armor. With the exception of Auburn look what they've done to their teams. I hope Hawaii's uniforms don't change that much though because I really like their current stuff.

[STL FANATIC]

Nike may experiment and fail, but I'd rather have them as a college than any of the other options.

You're always gonna get good designers even if we don't always like the designs, but most importantly, you're ALWAYS going to get quality.

That's high quality uniforms, high quality practice gear, EVERYTHING. That's a big thing for recruits.

And design wise, I've never been impressed by Adidas or Under Armor. The only times they'd impressive is when they really don't do anything. There is something to be said for that simplicity, but not always.

Generally, NIKE is best for a program.

That said, I generally prefer the adidas brand for my personal purchases. I despise Reebok (I realize it's under the Adidas umbrella) for their quality of fan apparel. I desperately want/need (want because I'd like one without the side stripe and need because my old ones are getting pretty small on me) a new Rams jersey, but I refuse to buy one until Reebok accurately makes the should stripes the correct size. It's ridiculous that they can't do so. The white stripe is no where near the size of the gold one...but I digress...

[Joshawaggie]

Nike may experiment and fail, but I'd rather have them as a college than any of the other options.

You're always gonna get good designers even if we don't always like the designs, but most importantly, you're ALWAYS going to get quality.

That's high quality uniforms, high quality practice gear, EVERYTHING. That's a big thing for recruits.

And design wise, I've never been impressed by Adidas or Under Armor. The only times they'd impressive is when they really don't do anything. There is something to be said for that simplicity, but not always.

Generally, NIKE is best for a program.

That said, I generally prefer the adidas brand for my personal purchases. I despise Reebok (I realize it's under the Adidas umbrella) for their quality of fan apparel. I desperately want/need (want because I'd like one without the side stripe and need because my old ones are getting pretty small on me) a new Rams jersey, but I refuse to buy one until Reebok accurately makes the should stripes the correct size. It's ridiculous that they can't do so. The white stripe is no where near the size of the gold one...but I digress...

Agreed, Nike may turn out a few clunkers in jersey design, but the overall presence in fan apparell greatly outweighs that. They have so many more options, and obviously that plays a semi big role for some recruits, as Nike=big time.

[footballfiji]

According to this article in this morning Honolulu Advertiser the University of Hawaii is hoping to get a new apparel contract for its football team.

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbc...mplate=UHsports

Nike's contract with the University of Hawaii football team ends in May. Does this mean new uniforms, or a new sponsor, or nothing at all? I personally like what we have right now, but wouldn't be against bringing back the green jerseys or an all white combo (but with the kapa band on the thigh) like what they wore in the Sugar Bowl (even though we lost).

The change over from Reebok to Nike didn't bring much of a change to the uniforms aside from removing the green jersey and introducing the silver/white/silver combo (thankfully no awful piping). Reebok didn't have much of a presence for fan apparel at UH, but Nike did a full spread for the fans including shirts, shorts, polos, jackets, sweaters, hats, jerseys (replica and authentic) etc.

Maybe Nike will stay, maybe not. There are already "several interested parties." Let's see what happens.

Start praying that Under Armor doesn't get the contract. Now.

Why? In most cases, Under Armour is more likely to try new things or keep old ones. The pretty much left the Auburn jerseys untouched when they took over. USF's jerseys are pretty basic as well.

[slapshot]

The reason Nike supplies most teams is that the company is big enough to throw money at everyone. Nike also tends to go after the frontrunners to earn itself more publicity.

Nike does not always equal good design. For every case where Nike has only slapped its swoosh on an existing design, it has come up with god-awful monstrosities such as Oregon, Oregon State and West Virginia. Nike was the first to add unecessary piping a a design element (Miami-FL). You are very unlikely to find an understated design produced by Nike, unless it was always that way (Penn State, Texas).

[Gothamite]

In college football, that's the case.

In soccer, Nike has consistently been the best (and most restrained) of the major houses.

[bigwalk]

According to this article in this morning Honolulu Advertiser the University of Hawaii is hoping to get a new apparel contract for its football team.

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbc...mplate=UHsports

Nike's contract with the University of Hawaii football team ends in May. Does this mean new uniforms, or a new sponsor, or nothing at all? I personally like what we have right now, but wouldn't be against bringing back the green jerseys or an all white combo (but with the kapa band on the thigh) like what they wore in the Sugar Bowl (even though we lost).

The change over from Reebok to Nike didn't bring much of a change to the uniforms aside from removing the green jersey and introducing the silver/white/silver combo (thankfully no awful piping). Reebok didn't have much of a presence for fan apparel at UH, but Nike did a full spread for the fans including shirts, shorts, polos, jackets, sweaters, hats, jerseys (replica and authentic) etc.

Maybe Nike will stay, maybe not. There are already "several interested parties." Let's see what happens.

Start praying that Under Armor doesn't get the contract. Now.

Why? In most cases, Under Armour is more likely to try new things or keep old ones. The pretty much left the Auburn jerseys untouched when they took over. USF's jerseys are pretty basic as well.

Have the new USF jerseys been released yet? I ask because I'm a USF grad student and I haven't heard anything...

[Billy B]

From UniWatch:

[STL FANATIC]

The reason Nike supplies most teams is that the company is big enough to throw money at everyone. Nike also tends to go after the frontrunners to earn itself more publicity.

Nike does not always equal good design. For every case where Nike has only slapped its swoosh on an existing design, it has come up with god-awful monstrosities such as Oregon, Oregon State and West Virginia. Nike was the first to add unecessary piping a a design element (Miami-FL). You are very unlikely to find an understated design produced by Nike, unless it was always that way (Penn State, Texas).

Maybe you believe most of thier original designs with piping are monstrosities (Oregon and Oregon State I'll give you, WVU is niether here nor there IMO), but they've also come up with plenty of good designs.

Just because they don't feature traditional shoulder or sleeve stripes does not mean they're awful.

Save a simple design decision here or there that could easily be fixed and isn't noticiable to most (actually that's the stuff that eats at me generally), I think they came up with a really nice like for my U of Illinois.

I think they took what Virginia Tech had and improved it with piping.

In a case where they did go with a new but still traditional feeling look, they were successful with USC.

Save the bibs (which weren't THAT bad looking, they just weren't practical), Nike's done a variety of nice looks for BYU over the years.

There's all kinds of examples of good designs by Nike and they get more flak than they deserve really.

[Sodboy13]

Save a simple design decision here or there that could easily be fixed and isn't noticiable to most (actually that's the stuff that eats at me generally), I think they came up with a really nice like for my U of Illinois.

They did. In 1998. The Holcombe/Kittner-era football unis, and the pre-Elite men's hoops unis (several details of which actually originated on the women's basketball unis) were simple, distinctive, and classic.

Today, what both teams are wearing amounts to little more than overdesigned crap.