2011-2012 NCAA Football Uniform Thread

[TFoA]

Arkansas Stats new uniform.

I REALLY hope that's not piping. If so, that looks absolutely ridiculous. Way to go adidas.

[IceCap]

For the last time, uniforms do not help "tremendously with recruiting." You yourself said that recruits, even if they love the Nike stuff, will opt for other schools because of the prestige or opportunities those other programs offer. No one serious about their future playing football will base their final decision on the uniforms.

C'mon, man. Surely you're more intelligent than that post makes it seem. Not sure how many ways to say it. Of course recruits don't make their final decision based on uniforms. But uniforms absolutely get recruits to look at schools they otherwise wouldn't have (like Oregon and TCU) and then they take a visit and who knows what will happen from there.

You're the one who said the Nike uniforms help "tremendously" with recruiting. The role uniforms play in the recruitment process isn't "tremendous." Pick your words more closely next time chief.

As for uniforms helping schools get noticed, I disagree. Winning gets you noticed. TCU's Nike uniforms aren't the secret to their success. Nike's mix and match duck winged clown suits, some combos devoid of school colours, aren't the reason Oregon played in their first National Championship game. Winning gets programs noticed. Not the uniforms.

And BTW, way to change the subject from the point of my post. Just bc you don't like the uniforms doesn't mean nike is "pushing them on" Oregon. Oregon loves them because recruits love them. Period.

Sorry. It's just when you said something so obviously inane like uniforms help "tremendously" in recruitment it commands my full attention. On to your main point.

Winning, not uniforms, get you noticed. Winning, not uniforms, get you recruits. Know what else helps? World class facilities. If Phil Knight just wanted to see Oregon's athletic program succeed he could pay for better facilities. He could help pay for top tier coaching staffs and athletic directors.

He could do all the things needed to get Oregon up to the level they need to be at to compete for a national title, and thus get recruits, without the clown suit uniforms. Yet he pushes the clown suite uniforms, turning Oregon football into walking, football playing guinea pigs/advertisements.

So seeing as winning, prestige (which a program gets from winning), and facilities ultimately get you recruits why the Nike clown suits?

I'll say this, the duck wing design is easily the best look Oregon's had since they started as Nike's guinea pigs. The problem is that there's to many combos, and to many of those combos are devoid of school colours. Limit the options to that each combo features green and gold and you have a futuristic yet pleasing look.

No more carbon. No more black. No more highlighter yellow.

I am an attorney so I am paid to use the right words.

An attorney? Stop the f'ing thread, you just won

The uniforms help tremendously in recruiting. You can't sign that 4 star kid if he doesn't even care about your program enough to come take look. If the uniforms give him enough of a reason to come visit(and trust me, they do), then you can show off the other stuff you wouldn't have had a chance to otherwise. You (incorrectly) assume that just because a school like Oregon or TCU has top tier facilities, recruits would come and visit.

And you accuse me of changing the subject

I don't assume that facilities lead to recruitment. I assume that winning leads to recruitment. You want to sign that 4 star kid? Your school's uniforms aren't going to catch his attention, a winning program will. Winning, not the uniforms, are what get your school noticed. TCU would still have won the Rose Bowl if they wearing "boring", traditional uniforms. Oregon would still have come within a field goal and a questionable call of winning the National Title had they worn their "boring" throwbacks all season.

It's on-field success that gets a recruit to notice TCU or Oregon, at which point the school can use their top notch facilities and top tier coaching staffs to rope 'em in.

See, you're almost there. Something does get these schools noticed by the recruits, but it's not the uniforms. It's on-field success.

The rest of your post is the same BS you spouted earlier.

You're arguing that a recruit, a kid serious about his future playing football, will consider a program due to a flashy new uniform.

I'm arguing that a recruit, a kid serious about his future playing football, will consider a program due to on-field success of the program.

I'll let the good people playing along at home judge which one of us is spouting BS.

We don't disagree; you are just trying to have an argument while only using about 4-5 brain cells.

Oh we disagree, but only on a single, yet vital point. We both agree that something is needed to get that 4 star recruit to consider a lesser known program. You seem to think uniforms are that something. I think it's on-field success.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other, really

Even worse, you are pretending I think stuff you are too smart to think I actually think.

I just can't believe that someone is actually putting forth the argument that someone would make a vital choice on their career path based on clothing.

UWO offered me one of the most well-rounded history programs in southern Ontario. I wasn't saying to myself "well the program's good, but I really wish the school colours weren't purple and white."

I played college football. I work with CFB recruits on a daily basis. I work with equipment staff. I work with recruiters and coaches. What is it that you do that would give you a better idea of the role uniforms play in recruitment than me?

If BigDmo and Kevin W have proven anything it's that team bias can cloud your judgment. Your TCU avatar indicates you're a TCU alum, or at the very least a fan of the program. TCU is also right up there when it comes to experimental Nike looks.

As for your credentials, well I'll be honest. It's the oldest internet argument trick in the book. "I do X therefore I know more about Y then you do."

Fact is all your experience in the field means exactly nothing when your conclusions are so devoid of common sense. Winning attracts recruits. Winning is going to get a recruit to notice a lesser known program. I don't have to be on the front lines of university football recruitment to figure that out. Kids who are serious about their futures playing football will sign with a program that wins, a program that offers them the most exposure and the best chance of on-field success.

The notion that uniforms factor into it is inane. Yeah, flashy new uniforms might make a kid aware of a program he was previously unaware of, but he's not even going to give them the slightest bit of consideration if they don't win.

Oregon's National Title run and TCU's Rose Bowl win helped those programs attract potential recruits, not the new Nike uniforms they were wearing.

[DrJack]

OMG I want to jump into this argument so bad, but I'm so tired of saying the same thing over and over and not getting anywhere. Maybe someday soon I'll give it another shot. Ugh, IceCap, you're so far stuck in the mud you can't see your way out. Not every college recruit thinks the same way. And I'd venture to guess that you and college recruits are a lot further apart in your thinking than you know.

[Kevin W.]

Ugh, IceCap, you're so far stuck in the mud you can't see your way out. Not every college recruit thinks the same way. And I'd venture to guess that you and college recruits are a lot further apart in your thinking than you know.

You do realize that those three statements can be applied to your side of the argument just as easily, right?

[mania]

OMG I want to jump into this argument so bad, but I'm so tired of saying the same thing over and over and not getting anywhere. Maybe someday soon I'll give it another shot. Ugh, IceCap, you're so far stuck in the mud you can't see your way out. Not every college recruit thinks the same way. And I'd venture to guess that you and college recruits are a lot further apart in your thinking than you know.

Let me ask you something. Out of everyone that Oregon recruits this next year, what percentage will choose the school because it just went to the National Title game? And what percentage will choose the school because they want to look like walking highlighters?

[Thad]

Not exactly a uniform, but App is putting down new turf and this is how it's going to look. Biggest change in my eyes? The SoCon logo is not at the 25s. It's a requirement of the conference for it to be there...could it be a sign of things to come? (Sorry for the link, the picture is massive)

New Turf at Kidd Brewer Stadium

[Bmac]

I think we need to separate 'getting noticed' and 'getting recruits'. Do uniforms actually get recruits? Probably not. Do uniforms get programs noticed by recruits? Absolutely. I think that is what it comes down to.

[IceCap]

I think we need to separate 'getting noticed' and 'getting recruits'. Do uniforms actually get recruits? Probably not. Do uniforms get programs noticed by recruits? Absolutely. I think that is what it comes down to.

Do uniforms get a program noticed? They probably raise awareness of the program. If the program doesn't win/doesn't offer the recruit the best chance at winning, it's not even going to be considered.

Common sense. It's a hell of a thing

[Bmac]

I think we need to separate 'getting noticed' and 'getting recruits'. Do uniforms actually get recruits? Probably not. Do uniforms get programs noticed by recruits? Absolutely. I think that is what it comes down to.

Do uniforms get a program noticed? They probably raise awareness of the program. If the program doesn't win/doesn't offer the recruit the best chance at winning, it's not even going to be considered.

Common sense. It's a hell of a thing

Generally, yes, that is correct. But that is exactly why we have to separate the two. Being noticed because of uniforms usually doesn't lead to the recruit seriously considering the program. But that doesn't mean they don't get noticed.

[gdu]

I am an attorney so I am paid to use the right words.

An attorney? Stop the f'ing thread, you just won

The uniforms help tremendously in recruiting. You can't sign that 4 star kid if he doesn't even care about your program enough to come take look. If the uniforms give him enough of a reason to come visit(and trust me, they do), then you can show off the other stuff you wouldn't have had a chance to otherwise. You (incorrectly) assume that just because a school like Oregon or TCU has top tier facilities, recruits would come and visit.

And you accuse me of changing the subject

I don't assume that facilities lead to recruitment. I assume that winning leads to recruitment. You want to sign that 4 star kid? Your school's uniforms aren't going to catch his attention, a winning program will. Winning, not the uniforms, are what get your school noticed. TCU would still have won the Rose Bowl if they wearing "boring", traditional uniforms. Oregon would still have come within a field goal and a questionable call of winning the National Title had they worn their "boring" throwbacks all season.

It's on-field success that gets a recruit to notice TCU or Oregon, at which point the school can use their top notch facilities and top tier coaching staffs to rope 'em in.

See, you're almost there. Something does get these schools noticed by the recruits, but it's not the uniforms. It's on-field success.

The rest of your post is the same BS you spouted earlier.

You're arguing that a recruit, a kid serious about his future playing football, will consider a program due to a flashy new uniform.

I'm arguing that a recruit, a kid serious about his future playing football, will consider a program due to on-field success of the program.

I'll let the good people playing along at home judge which one of us is spouting BS.

We don't disagree; you are just trying to have an argument while only using about 4-5 brain cells.

Oh we disagree, but only on a single, yet vital point. We both agree that something is needed to get that 4 star recruit to consider a lesser known program. You seem to think uniforms are that something. I think it's on-field success.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other, really

Even worse, you are pretending I think stuff you are too smart to think I actually think.

I just can't believe that someone is actually putting forth the argument that someone would make a vital choice on their career path based on clothing. UWO offered me one of the most well-rounded history programs in southern Ontario. I wasn't saying to myself "well the program's good, but I really wish the school colours weren't purple and white."

I played college football. I work with CFB recruits on a daily basis. I work with equipment staff. I work with recruiters and coaches. What is it that you do that would give you a better idea of the role uniforms play in recruitment than me?

If BigDmo and Kevin W have proven anything it's that team bias can cloud your judgment. Your TCU avatar indicates you're a TCU alum, or at the very least a fan of the program. TCU is also right up there when it comes to experimental Nike looks.

As for your credentials, well I'll be honest. It's the oldest internet argument trick in the book. "I do X therefore I know more about Y then you do."

Fact is all your experience in the field means exactly nothing when your conclusions are so devoid of common sense. Winning attracts recruits. Winning is going to get a recruit to notice a lesser known program. I don't have to be on the front lines of university football recruitment to figure that out. Kids who are serious about their futures playing football will sign with a program that wins, a program that offers them the most exposure and the best chance of on-field success.

The notion that uniforms factor into it is inane. Yeah, flashy new uniforms might make a kid aware of a program he was previously unaware of, but he's not even going to give them the slightest bit of consideration if they don't win.

Oregon's National Title run and TCU's Rose Bowl win helped those programs attract potential recruits, not the new Nike uniforms they were wearing.

re: the bolded sentence: I never said anything that could even reasonably be twisted into that statement. Again, quit making stuff up and go with what I am actually saying. I also never said anything even remotely close to "uniforms are the only thing kids consider when choosing schools" which you would have to believe I said/thought to post some of the stuff you have.

You clearly don't spend time around recruits. That's ok. You're certainly entitled to your opinion. But, for what it's worth, I had the exact same opinion as you...until I started working with these kids. Logic and common sense aren't strong points for 17 year old athletes. Once you realize that, maybe you can move past that mental roadblock.

And since you are so fond of talking about "common sense": unlike you, most here realize uniforms and wins are not mutually exclusive. A kid can look at a program because of both uniforms and wins that he wouldn't have looked at without the uniforms. Oregon's recruiting got better once they started using crazy uniforms. Plenty of recruits went there that had offers from programs with MUCH better winning traditions. How do you factor that into your argument?

[tBBP]

Arkansas Stats new uniform.

I REALLY hope that's not piping. If so, that looks absolutely ridiculous. Way to go adidas.

Is it wrong that the first thing that came to mind when I saw these was the Thong Song?

Like, seriously, adidas...like the good man TFoA said, you can't be serious if you think THAT look is going to catch on. (On another note...who told the Crying Wolves that baseball numbers on a basketball jersey over top of thong-piped biker shorts makes for a good football uniform?)

[DC in Da House w/o a Doubt]

ADIDAS always makes putrid uniforms... I'm surprised that Arkansas State design doesn't have 3 stripes on it somewhere. Cause god knows they haven't beaten that to death.

[IceCap]

Even worse, you are pretending I think stuff you are too smart to think I actually think.

I just can't believe that someone is actually putting forth the argument that someone would make a vital choice on their career path based on clothing.

re: the bolded sentence: I never said anything that could even reasonably be twisted into that statement. Again, quit making stuff up and go with what I am actually saying.

Oh I am. You said....

Funny that you characterize it as "pushing Nike's experimental designs on the program" rather than what the team thinks it is: giving them program something it loves and helping out tremendously with recruiting (which is the lifeblood of any football program).

Seems pretty clear you were indicating that recruits are influenced by uniforms, which was my criticism of your position. I'm not making anything up. You said it yourself.

I also never said anything even remotely close to "uniforms are the only thing kids consider when choosing schools" which you would have to believe I said/thought to post some of the stuff you have.

Never said you believed uniforms were the only factor recruits considered. In fact I stated, many times, that your position and my position were very close. We both believe that something helps these lesser known programs (TCU, Oregon) attract recruits that would otherwise pass them over. The question is what is that something. You're stating it's the uniforms, I'm going with winning.

bruschimania said it best. What's more likely? That the recruits singing with Oregon are doing so because that program just played in, and almost won, the National Championship game, or because they like the highlighter yellow uniforms? I'd wager they'd do just as well recruitment-wise if they wore nothing but throwbacks for the entirety of last season.

You clearly don't spend time around recruits. That's ok. You're certainly entitled to your opinion. But, for what it's worth, I had the exact same opinion as you...until I started working with these kids. Logic and common sense aren't strong points for 17 year old athletes. Once you realize that, maybe you can move past that mental roadblock.

17 year old kids aren't the brightest around, but if there's one thing common to all people, of any age, race, or gender, it's the drive to succeed in whatever it is you're doing. For these kids football isn't a game, it's their chosen career path, their future livelihoods. Choosing a university program is a vital step on that career path. Anyone who lets clothing factor into a decision that big, even in the slightest, is a moron.

And since you are so fond of talking about "common sense": unlike you, most here realize uniforms and wins are not mutually exclusive.

No, I'm smart enough to realize that uniforms do not factor into on-field performance.

A kid can look at a program because of both uniforms and wins that he wouldn't have looked at without the uniforms.

Wins, meaningful ones especially, equal exposure for the program. Exposure means more recruits will be aware of the program and thus be willing to give it a look over.

TCU won the Rose Bowl. That's going to increase the number of recruits giving their program a chance, and thus increase the quality of the recruits they sign. This would have happened regardless of the uniforms TCU wore this season.

Oregon's recruiting got better once they started using crazy uniforms. Plenty of recruits went there that had offers from programs with MUCH better winning traditions. How do you factor that into your argument?

Oregon decided to get their crap together is what happened. They made the decision that they wanted to be a major player in American collegiate football, in all likelihood spurred by the generous donations of alum Phil Knight. In order to do this they upgraded their facilities, hired top tier coaching staffs, and looked for athletic directors who were on board with the "make our program matter" plan. This, slowly but surely, eventually resulted in wins. And more wins. And still more wins until the point where they are now considered one of, if not the, top rising programs in the country.

All of this, the renewed commitment to building an elite program, the upgrading of facilities, the hiring of top tier coaching staffs and athletic directors, all of this lay the foundation for Oregon's rise to prominence and thus their rise in recruitment.

Also, it all could have been done without the crazy Nike uniforms. The Nike experimental phase started around the same time because, shockingly enough, it was the same time that Nike owner and UO alum Phil Knight started donating vast amounts of money to kickstart the program.

[gdu]

Even worse, you are pretending I think stuff you are too smart to think I actually think.

I just can't believe that someone is actually putting forth the argument that someone would make a vital choice on their career path based on clothing.

re: the bolded sentence: I never said anything that could even reasonably be twisted into that statement. Again, quit making stuff up and go with what I am actually saying.

Oh I am. You said....

Funny that you characterize it as "pushing Nike's experimental designs on the program" rather than what the team thinks it is: giving them program something it loves and helping out tremendously with recruiting (which is the lifeblood of any football program).

Seems pretty clear you were indicating that recruits are influenced by uniforms, which was my criticism of your position. I'm not making anything up. You said it yourself.

I also never said anything even remotely close to "uniforms are the only thing kids consider when choosing schools" which you would have to believe I said/thought to post some of the stuff you have.

Never said you believed uniforms were the only factor recruits considered. In fact I stated, many times, that your position and my position were very close. We both believe that something helps these lesser known programs (TCU, Oregon) attract recruits that would otherwise pass them over. The question is what is that something. You're stating it's the uniforms, I'm going with winning.

bruschimania said it best. What's more likely? That the recruits singing with Oregon are doing so because that program just played in, and almost won, the National Championship game, or because they like the highlighter yellow uniforms? I'd wager they'd do just as well recruitment-wise if they wore nothing but throwbacks for the entirety of last season.

You clearly don't spend time around recruits. That's ok. You're certainly entitled to your opinion. But, for what it's worth, I had the exact same opinion as you...until I started working with these kids. Logic and common sense aren't strong points for 17 year old athletes. Once you realize that, maybe you can move past that mental roadblock.

17 year old kids aren't the brightest around, but if there's one thing common to all people, of any age, race, or gender, it's the drive to succeed in whatever it is you're doing. For these kids football isn't a game, it's their chosen career path, their future livelihoods. Choosing a university program is a vital step on that career path. Anyone who lets clothing factor into a decision that big, even in the slightest, is a moron.

And since you are so fond of talking about "common sense": unlike you, most here realize uniforms and wins are not mutually exclusive.

No, I'm smart enough to realize that uniforms do not factor into on-field performance.

A kid can look at a program because of both uniforms and wins that he wouldn't have looked at without the uniforms.

Wins, meaningful ones especially, equal exposure for the program. Exposure means more recruits will be aware of the program and thus be willing to give it a look over.

TCU won the Rose Bowl. That's going to increase the number of recruits giving their program a chance, and thus increase the quality of the recruits they sign. This would have happened regardless of the uniforms TCU wore this season.

Oregon's recruiting got better once they started using crazy uniforms. Plenty of recruits went there that had offers from programs with MUCH better winning traditions. How do you factor that into your argument?

Oregon decided to get their crap together is what happened. They made the decision that they wanted to be a major player in American collegiate football, in all likelihood spurred by the generous donations of alum Phil Knight. In order to do this they upgraded their facilities, hired top tier coaching staffs, and looked for athletic directors who were on board with the "make our program matter" plan. This, slowly but surely, eventually resulted in wins. And more wins. And still more wins until the point where they are now considered one of, if not the, top rising programs in the country.

All of this, the renewed commitment to building an elite program, the upgrading of facilities, the hiring of top tier coaching staffs and athletic directors, all of this lay the foundation for Oregon's rise to prominence and thus their rise in recruitment.

Also, it all could have been done without the crazy Nike uniforms. The Nike experimental phase started around the same time because, shockingly enough, it was the same time that Nike owner and UO alum Phil Knight started donating vast amounts of money to kickstart the program.

I could talk about this forver (and would love to, frankly), but you keep making stuff up and putting words in my mouth that simply don't reflect what I actually said or thought. You are no wordsmith. "Helping out tremendously" absolutely does not mean the same thing as "making a vitale choice based on" despite what you said above.

The real problem is that you don't understand the difference between something that would make a recruit look at a school and something that would make a recruit actually choose to attend a school. And even if you did understand that, you are vastly oversimplifying the things that recruits consider in making that decision, which go well beyond "winning." Recruits also consider academics, proximity to family, tv coverage, wehere family went, position coaches, facilities, draft status of recent grads, bowl games, depth charts, who will pay the most, etc... Why did 4-star QB Casey Pachall go to TCU when he had offers to play QB for Florida, Notre Dame, Michigan and Nebraska?

In the interest of everyone else on the board I am going to stop talking about this in this thread and try to stick to uniform talk only. If you want to keep it going via PMs, I'd be glad to.

[oldschoolvikings]

Why did Casey Pachall go to TCU when he had offers to play QB for Florida, Notre Dame and Nebraska?

Um... for the uniforms?

[BigDmo]

Not feeling the App St field design. I think black endzones w/ yellow text and white outline would've looked really sharp

[Kevin W.]

Not exactly a uniform, but App is putting down new turf and this is how it's going to look. Biggest change in my eyes? The SoCon logo is not at the 25s. It's a requirement of the conference for it to be there...could it be a sign of things to come? (Sorry for the link, the picture is massive)

New Turf at Kidd Brewer Stadium

I bet that the logos just aren't included in the image. They'll be on the real thing.

[wyopokes2]

Not exactly a uniform, but App is putting down new turf and this is how it's going to look. Biggest change in my eyes? The SoCon logo is not at the 25s. It's a requirement of the conference for it to be there...could it be a sign of things to come? (Sorry for the link, the picture is massive)

New Turf at Kidd Brewer Stadium

I bet that the logos just aren't included in the image. They'll be on the real thing.

Is that really the actual design? For one it looks like somebody wrote out Mountaineers with the brush tool in Paint. Second, the quality of the logos are terrible.

[Cola]

Not exactly a uniform, but App is putting down new turf and this is how it's going to look. Biggest change in my eyes? The SoCon logo is not at the 25s. It's a requirement of the conference for it to be there...could it be a sign of things to come? (Sorry for the link, the picture is massive)

New Turf at Kidd Brewer Stadium

I bet that the logos just aren't included in the image. They'll be on the real thing.

Is that really the actual design? For one it looks like somebody wrote out Mountaineers with the brush tool in Paint. Second, the quality of the logos are terrible.

Yeah I seriously doubt the authenticity of that field design. If so, someone needs to be fired.

[hornedfrogboy41]

Now I love traditional jerseys as much as the next guy, but I love everything about Oregons jerseys. The black, the carbon, the fact that every game, no matter how much someone hates or likes them, we all can't wait to see what they trot out in every week

In the end that's all they want. It's fantastic marketing. , even when we lose Nike has a campaign for us going

Complete with merchandise:

http://spiritduck.uoduckstore.com/Black_Nike_Game_Changers_Tee_p/7505.htm

And sweet free posters you can pick up

How can I get one of those posters?