2011-2012 NCAA Football Uniform Thread

[BigMac12]

In other ASU news, apparently the BFBS rumor is true: http://arizonasports.com/category/asu-fb-articles/20110131/Will-ASU-football-have-black-uniforms-in-2011/

Yuck! As a Sun Devil fan, the black jersey better be a 1-season fad.

[Brave-Bird 08]

just make sure the Sun Devils fall down 31-0 at halftime to the biggest opponent they play...

...and theyll never don black again.

[tvko]

Black goes well with their colors, read: USC's basketball uniforms.

[IceCap]

Lets just take a look at ESPN's Top 10 Recruiting classes this year...

1. Florida State - Traditional Uniforms

2. Alabama - Traditional Uniforms

3. Auburn - Traditional Uniforms

4. USC - Traditional Uniforms

5. Texas - Traditional Uniforms

6. Georgia - Traditional Uniforms

7. Ohio State - Traditional Uniforms

8. Clemson - Traditional Uniforms

9. Notre Dame - Traditional Uniforms

10. LSU - Traditional Uniforms

Bam. Discussion over.

I love this list. So much.

Of course winning and tradition comes before the uniforms, but if it comes down to two schools with very similar pedigrees, the details start to matter a lot more, and I would guess that most recruits would like to be a part of a team that looks like they play in this millennium instead of being stuck in the past.

Ok. Please. Let this go. No recruit serious about their future playing football is going to base their choice of school on uniforms. A recruit may think Oregon's clown suits were "hot" and "awesome," but they're not going to Oregon if an other school, even one with boring, traditional uniforms, offers them a better ride/better exposure.

Even in cases where everything else is equal and uniforms do factor in, even a little bit, not every one is going to go with the modern look. For every recruit that wants to play for Oregon or TCU because of their "hot" Nike looks there are recruits who want to wear the uniforms of the all-time great programs like Notre Dame or Alabama. Simply put, modern uniforms do not increase recruitment, and bigmike's list should be all the proof you need.

As someone who works with recruits for TCU and Texas, I can tell you almost every single one of them prefer the "hot" nike looks, but it's not like any 2 schools are identical besides the uniforms. Way too many variables to pin it on that alone, but the uniforms certainly get recruits to notice a school like Oregon or TCU that they may not have thought about otherwise.

I'm not denying that out-there looks can help TCU and Oregon get noticed. I'm just saying that no series recruit is going to base his final decision on the uniforms. Do they help a school get noticed? Sure. Are they the deciding factor for any recruit who's serious about his future in football? No. Just look at that Top 10 recruiting list. Every single team wears traditional looks. So I have to question the validity of "our new hot look attracts recruits" claim spouted by the Nike guinea pig schools.

[gdu]

Lets just take a look at ESPN's Top 10 Recruiting classes this year...

1. Florida State - Traditional Uniforms

2. Alabama - Traditional Uniforms

3. Auburn - Traditional Uniforms

4. USC - Traditional Uniforms

5. Texas - Traditional Uniforms

6. Georgia - Traditional Uniforms

7. Ohio State - Traditional Uniforms

8. Clemson - Traditional Uniforms

9. Notre Dame - Traditional Uniforms

10. LSU - Traditional Uniforms

Bam. Discussion over.

I love this list. So much.

Of course winning and tradition comes before the uniforms, but if it comes down to two schools with very similar pedigrees, the details start to matter a lot more, and I would guess that most recruits would like to be a part of a team that looks like they play in this millennium instead of being stuck in the past.

Ok. Please. Let this go. No recruit serious about their future playing football is going to base their choice of school on uniforms. A recruit may think Oregon's clown suits were "hot" and "awesome," but they're not going to Oregon if an other school, even one with boring, traditional uniforms, offers them a better ride/better exposure.

Even in cases where everything else is equal and uniforms do factor in, even a little bit, not every one is going to go with the modern look. For every recruit that wants to play for Oregon or TCU because of their "hot" Nike looks there are recruits who want to wear the uniforms of the all-time great programs like Notre Dame or Alabama. Simply put, modern uniforms do not increase recruitment, and bigmike's list should be all the proof you need.

As someone who works with recruits for TCU and Texas, I can tell you almost every single one of them prefer the "hot" nike looks, but it's not like any 2 schools are identical besides the uniforms. Way too many variables to pin it on that alone, but the uniforms certainly get recruits to notice a school like Oregon or TCU that they may not have thought about otherwise.

I'm not denying that out-there looks can help TCU and Oregon get noticed. I'm just saying that no series recruit is going to base his final decision on the uniforms. Do they help a school get noticed? Sure. Are they the deciding factor for any recruit who's serious about his future in football? No. Just look at that Top 10 recruiting list. Every single team wears traditional looks. So I have to question the validity of "our new hot look attracts recruits" claim spouted by the Nike guinea pig schools.

Those two statements contradict.

The new look absolutely attracts recruits to Oregon and TCU. Kids at Texas, Bama, USC, etc... would LOVE new special nike uniforms. You are implying that because the top 10 recruiting list is full of teams with traditional uniforms, that's what thos kids prefer and I can assure you, in my experience, that is absolutely not the case. It might be if TCU and Texas or Oregon and USC were equal aside from the uniforms but that is nowhere close to the truth.

Of course recruiting rankings are meaningless anyways. The schools with the largest alumni/fan bases get players who are ranked the highest because that's what the folks paying subscriptions want to see. TCU, for example, has NEVER finished with a top 25 recruiting class but have finished in the top 10 the last 3 years in a row (the only team that did so) and 4 of the last 6.

Summary: most kids would prefer special uniforms like Oregon and TCU but would still choose Texas/USC/Florida/Bama/tOSU because of other reasons (bigger stadium, easier path to BCS, more tv games, more NFL players, more prestige, etc...)

[oldschoolvikings]

Kids at Texas, Bama, USC, etc... would LOVE new special nike uniforms.

Summary: most kids would prefer special uniforms like Oregon and TCU but would still choose Texas/USC/Florida/Bama/tOSU because of other reasons (bigger stadium, easier path to BCS, more tv games, more NFL players, more prestige, etc...)

Speaking for the "kids", are we?

I get that this is your opinion.

Summary: I'm not buying it.

[Lights Out]

Um...

As someone who works with recruits for TCU and Texas, I can tell you almost every single one of them prefer the "hot" nike looks, but it's not like any 2 schools are identical besides the uniforms.

...so yeah, I think he knows enough of what he's talking about to "speak for the kids."

[gdu]

Kids at Texas, Bama, USC, etc... would LOVE new special nike uniforms.

Summary: most kids would prefer special uniforms like Oregon and TCU but would still choose Texas/USC/Florida/Bama/tOSU because of other reasons (bigger stadium, easier path to BCS, more tv games, more NFL players, more prestige, etc...)

Speaking for the "kids", are we?

I get that this is your opinion.

Summary: I'm not buying it.

Not my opinion at all. I hate 'em. Just telling you what I hear from these kids (and their families, believe it or not).

[Jahgee]

Since when has Florida State been considered a Traditional Uniform

[Lights Out]

Not only that, but LSU, Clemson, Ohio State, Texas, and Alabama have all worn decidedly untraditional ProCombat rivalry uniforms in the past two seasons.

[knnhrvy16]

Not only that, but LSU, Clemson, Ohio State, Texas, and Alabama have all worn decidedly untraditional ProCombat rivalry uniforms in the past two seasons.

Uhm. WHAT?

None of those look untraditional at all to me. LSU, Ohio State, and Texas were all throwback-inspired, and Clemson and Alabama had very minimal differences than thier normal uniforms. Infact, Alabama's differences were so minimal, that you could barely even notice they were differences. I'm not trying to put you down at all, I'm just lost as to how these pro combats are "untraditional".

[Lights Out]

They all were somewhat major departures from the uniforms they usually wear, so considering the schools, yes, they were untraditional.

[knnhrvy16]

Since when has Florida State been considered a Traditional Uniform

Well, the spear has been on the helmet since the 70's, and the uniform itself has been fairly simple for years. Even with the feather-pattern collar and thier number font, it's still a very simple, clean look. I think that's what people mean.

[knnhrvy16]

They all were somewhat major departures from the uniforms they usually wear, so considering the schools, yes, they were untraditional.

Three out of the five were based on uniforms they had previously worn, though. They were throwback inspired. So technically, they just went back in time for a one-off uniform based on something they HAD worn. They technically really weren't major departures at all. The other two's differences from what they usually worn was VERY minor.

Perhaps we'll agree to disagree, but none of those schools pulled a Boise or Virgina Tech, like what you're making it sound like. Those were major departures.

[IceCap]

Lets just take a look at ESPN's Top 10 Recruiting classes this year...

1. Florida State - Traditional Uniforms

2. Alabama - Traditional Uniforms

3. Auburn - Traditional Uniforms

4. USC - Traditional Uniforms

5. Texas - Traditional Uniforms

6. Georgia - Traditional Uniforms

7. Ohio State - Traditional Uniforms

8. Clemson - Traditional Uniforms

9. Notre Dame - Traditional Uniforms

10. LSU - Traditional Uniforms

Bam. Discussion over.

I love this list. So much.

Of course winning and tradition comes before the uniforms, but if it comes down to two schools with very similar pedigrees, the details start to matter a lot more, and I would guess that most recruits would like to be a part of a team that looks like they play in this millennium instead of being stuck in the past.

Ok. Please. Let this go. No recruit serious about their future playing football is going to base their choice of school on uniforms. A recruit may think Oregon's clown suits were "hot" and "awesome," but they're not going to Oregon if an other school, even one with boring, traditional uniforms, offers them a better ride/better exposure.

Even in cases where everything else is equal and uniforms do factor in, even a little bit, not every one is going to go with the modern look. For every recruit that wants to play for Oregon or TCU because of their "hot" Nike looks there are recruits who want to wear the uniforms of the all-time great programs like Notre Dame or Alabama. Simply put, modern uniforms do not increase recruitment, and bigmike's list should be all the proof you need.

As someone who works with recruits for TCU and Texas, I can tell you almost every single one of them prefer the "hot" nike looks, but it's not like any 2 schools are identical besides the uniforms. Way too many variables to pin it on that alone, but the uniforms certainly get recruits to notice a school like Oregon or TCU that they may not have thought about otherwise.

I'm not denying that out-there looks can help TCU and Oregon get noticed. I'm just saying that no series recruit is going to base his final decision on the uniforms. Do they help a school get noticed? Sure. Are they the deciding factor for any recruit who's serious about his future in football? No. Just look at that Top 10 recruiting list. Every single team wears traditional looks. So I have to question the validity of "our new hot look attracts recruits" claim spouted by the Nike guinea pig schools.

Those two statements contradict.

No, they don't.

The new look absolutely attracts recruits to Oregon and TCU. Kids at Texas, Bama, USC, etc... would LOVE new special nike uniforms. You are implying that because the top 10 recruiting list is full of teams with traditional uniforms, that's what thos kids prefer and I can assure you, in my experience, that is absolutely not the case. It might be if TCU and Texas or Oregon and USC were equal aside from the uniforms but that is nowhere close to the truth.

Of course recruiting rankings are meaningless anyways. The schools with the largest alumni/fan bases get players who are ranked the highest because that's what the folks paying subscriptions want to see. TCU, for example, has NEVER finished with a top 25 recruiting class but have finished in the top 10 the last 3 years in a row (the only team that did so) and 4 of the last 6.

Summary: most kids would prefer special uniforms like Oregon and TCU but would still choose Texas/USC/Florida/Bama/tOSU because of other reasons (bigger stadium, easier path to BCS, more tv games, more NFL players, more prestige, etc...)

No, I'm not implying that the list above means that the kids like traditional uniforms. What I'm saying is that the list proves that new Nike-style uniforms do not increase recruitment.

Lets say you're right, and most recruits love Nike's new stuff. Then it would stand to reason that if the uniforms played as much of a role in recruitment as the Nike guinea pig school supporters claim then Boise, TCU, and Oregon would be among that top 10. They aren't, however. Which means that even if most recruits love the new style uniforms, those uniforms aren't making a difference as far as recruitment goes. Despite what the rabid Nike/TCU/Boise State/Oregon supporters claim.

You said it yourself, there are plenty of legitimate reasons reasons for a recruit to go to a school that don't include the uniforms.

[IceCap]

They all were somewhat major departures from the uniforms they usually wear, so considering the schools, yes, they were untraditional.

Stop it. Now you're just trying to defy reality. All of those schools wore pro combat uniforms that were either marginally different from their regular sets or based off of throwbacks. knnhrvy hit the nail on the head. Stop pretending these schools went with Oregon/Boise State/TCU designs.

[Lights Out]

I never claimed they were like Oregon or Boise or TCU. But it's also undeniable that elements like Alabama's houndstooth numbers or Clemson's toilet seat pants are pretty different from what they usually wear.

[IceCap]

I never claimed they were like Oregon or Boise or TCU. But it's also undeniable that elements like Alabama's houndstooth numbers or Clemson's toilet seat pants are pretty different from what they usually wear.

No, they really don't. They still wore uniforms that were very low-key and downright traditional compared to what "the kids" consider "hot" these days.

Not that the "hot" uniforms matter. In an effort to disprove my point gdu made it. A team may have the most eye-catching "hot" uniforms out there, but no recruit serious about his future playing football is going to go to a school based on a uniform, regardless of how "hot" the uniform may be. They're going to go to the school that offers them the best ride, the most exposure, the best facilities, the biggest stadium, the best pedigree, etc...

The Top 10 list pretty much proves that the "hot" Nike uniforms don't mean much by way of recruitment, so stop claiming they do.

[Lights Out]

Not that the "hot" uniforms matter. In an effort to disprove my point gdu made it. A team may have the most eye-catching "hot" uniforms out there, but no recruit serious about his future playing football is going to go to a school based on a uniform, regardless of how "hot" the uniform may be.

Holy crap. NOBODY IS ARGUING THAT. NOBODY.

Uniforms do have a role, but it's quite limited and minor. I've said as much a million times now. You're overexaggerating my argument.

[IceCap]

Not that the "hot" uniforms matter. In an effort to disprove my point gdu made it. A team may have the most eye-catching "hot" uniforms out there, but no recruit serious about his future playing football is going to go to a school based on a uniform, regardless of how "hot" the uniform may be.

Holy crap. NOBODY IS ARGUING THAT. NOBODY.

Yes, they are. Go back. Read the countless threads that dealt with Oregon's NC uniforms if you want prime examples. It's full of claims that the uniforms increase recruitment. You yourself even made the claim.

Uniforms do have a role, but it's quite limited and minor.

I would say so minor that it's practically non-existent. So please stop bringing up "the progressive designs increase recruitment" argument.