2011-2012 NCAA Football Uniform Thread

[BigDmo]

So Gary Patterson thinks the team needs 4 helmets and 4 sets of uniforms to stay competitive? Do you and your buddy Gary really think the 4 distinct looks are good for TCU branding?

And yeah, Oregon has a ton of uniforms, but they get bashed and ridiculed by outsiders for having so many combinations.

I think Oregon proved that branding has absolutely nothing to do with success this year. Sure we lost the national championship, but hey, we made it, AND we wore 13 different uniform combos OMG!!!!!

Our brand is crazy and different uniforms. And we're just as successful with multiple uniforms as we would be with your generic block font 2 set uniforms.

Same for TCU. Look who won the Rose Bowl over a 'traditional' uniformed team.

Say all you want about crappy branding, but branding =/= success. And Oregon really couldn't care about the ridicule for the uniforms. We just went 12-1 and had the best season in school history.

[gdu]

So wait, this isn't a replacement, this is an addition?

That is a -load of unis, wow.

I'm not sure.

Does 4 uniforms sets mean:

these 3 and a new pro combat?

these 3 and an old pro combat?

the 3 from this year, 2 from last year, PC from 2009 and PC from 2010?

the 3 from this year, 2 from last year, 3 from 2008 and the 3 PCs?

From the AD's note, I'd say C is your answer. Maybe D. The AD considers all 3 of the new unis as a "new set".

I think 3 standard uniforms and 1 special is EXCELLENT for TCU branding.

So do I, but I don't think that's what TCU is doing.

I'm not as sure. I know the team sold the 2007-2009 uniforms at a garage sale last weekend, but rotating in the 2009 jerseys doesn't make much sense since they look so similar to these anyways.

I hope these are a replacement (not bc I like them better, but I don't like the idea of wearing that many looks). I hated the mixing and matching of the PC helmet and pants with the standard uniforms last season. I don't like the idea anyways (those uniforms should be stand alone) and aesthetically it looks bad when the prints don't match (2009 PC helmet with 2010 PC jersey vs. Air Force) and when there is nothing else that matches that stuff in the standard uniform. I also, hate the idea of multiple standard helmets. Didn't work for Baylor, or anyone else that has done it.

3 uniforms (purple, white, black) + 1 special big time game or bowl game uniform is perfect IMO. Anything more is just too much.

[gdu]

So Gary Patterson thinks the team needs 4 helmets and 4 sets of uniforms to stay competitive? Do you and your buddy Gary really think the 4 distinct looks are good for TCU branding?

And yeah, Oregon has a ton of uniforms, but they get bashed and ridiculed by outsiders for having so many combinations.

I think Oregon proved that branding has absolutely nothing to do with success this year. Sure we lost the national championship, but hey, we made it, AND we wore 13 different uniform combos OMG!!!!!

Our brand is crazy and different uniforms. And we're just as successful with multiple uniforms as we would be with your generic block font 2 set uniforms.

Same for TCU. Look who won the Rose Bowl over a 'traditional' uniformed team.

Say all you want about crappy branding, but branding =/= success. And Oregon really couldn't care about the ridicule for the uniforms. We just went 12-1 and had the best season in school history.

You're right; buying players did. Sorry, I couldn't resist.

[WSU151]

So Gary Patterson thinks the team needs 4 helmets and 4 sets of uniforms to stay competitive? Do you and your buddy Gary really think the 4 distinct looks are good for TCU branding?

And yeah, Oregon has a ton of uniforms, but they get bashed and ridiculed by outsiders for having so many combinations.

I think Oregon proved that branding has absolutely nothing to do with success this year. Sure we lost the national championship, but hey, we made it, AND we wore 13 different uniform combos OMG!!!!!

Our brand is crazy and different uniforms. And we're just as successful with multiple uniforms as we would be with your generic block font 2 set uniforms.

Same for TCU. Look who won the Rose Bowl over a 'traditional' uniformed team.

Say all you want about crappy branding, but branding =/= success. And Oregon really couldn't care about the ridicule for the uniforms. We just went 12-1 and had the best season in school history.

I don't know...apparently, if you only had generic uniforms, you wouldn't get the recruits, so therefore, you wouldn't be as successful.

Conversely, if you're Washington State, you can have multiple uniforms, multiple helmets, and still suck.

[Lights Out]

You're right; buying players did.

They're officially a "real" AQ program now!

[ltjets21]

Oregon does it, but they do it smart.........TCU HAVING MORE THAN 1 PURPLE JERSEY IS REDICULOUS

[BigDmo]

Oregon does it, but they do it smart.........TCU HAVING MORE THAN 1 PURPLE JERSEY IS REDICULOUS

Well we have 2, now 3 different white uniforms lol

[WSU151]

I hope these are a replacement (not bc I like them better, but I don't like the idea of wearing that many looks). I hated the mixing and matching of the PC helmet and pants with the standard uniforms last season. I don't like the idea anyways (those uniforms should be stand alone) and aesthetically it looks bad when the prints don't match (2009 PC helmet with 2010 PC jersey vs. Air Force) and when there is nothing else that matches that stuff in the standard uniform. I also, hate the idea of multiple standard helmets. Didn't work for Baylor, or anyone else that has done it.

3 uniforms (purple, white, black) + 1 special big time game or bowl game uniform is perfect IMO. Anything more is just too much.

You're preachin' to the choir. I was all for this change when I saw it and thought it'd be a full replacement...then I read the AD note and his comment that this new set is an additional option.

[gdu]

Oregon does it, but they do it smart.........TCU HAVING MORE THAN 1 PURPLE JERSEY IS REDICULOUS

Oregon wore more than 1 white uniform this season.

[gdu]

I hope these are a replacement (not bc I like them better, but I don't like the idea of wearing that many looks). I hated the mixing and matching of the PC helmet and pants with the standard uniforms last season. I don't like the idea anyways (those uniforms should be stand alone) and aesthetically it looks bad when the prints don't match (2009 PC helmet with 2010 PC jersey vs. Air Force) and when there is nothing else that matches that stuff in the standard uniform. I also, hate the idea of multiple standard helmets. Didn't work for Baylor, or anyone else that has done it.

3 uniforms (purple, white, black) + 1 special big time game or bowl game uniform is perfect IMO. Anything more is just too much.

You're preachin' to the choir. I was all for this change when I saw it and thought it'd be a full replacement...then I read the AD note and his comment that this new set is an additional option.

Don't get too upset yet. I will be surprised if we wear the 2010 or 2009 uniforms again. We didn't even bust out the 2009 triangle uniforms for the last home game before the stadium was demolished even though we went for a retro look (purple tops, white pants).

I suspect these will be the new uniforms, there will be another special uniform and we will mix in PC stuff from the past (which I don't like).

[tBBP]

I think a lot of y'all are confusing "branding" for what most if not all of this stuff really is, once you cut through the clutter and, in some cases, the accompanying amounts of utter BS: advertising. That's what's going on here--with TCU now, with Oregon the past couple years, with the funky-colored fields--all that is advertising. Anyone who's taken a course in it will tell you the primary objective of advertising is not to sell product (that'd be marketing--but we'll save that discussion for another time); but rather, to raise awareness--to let you know that a certain something is out there. Think abnout every annoying poster, commercial, or jingle you've seen or heard. Sticks out in your brain, doesn't it? But what do you notice about the more prominent ones (chiefly the Geico and Allstate commercials)? They ain't tryna sell you nothing-they're just using those to reinforce their existence in your brains. That, to me, is what all these types of attention gimmicks are--"look-at-me" devices. And for better or worse, it's working.

Now, to be sure, a strong brand identity can also prove as a successful "advertisement", if one wants to split hairs that way...but what we've been seeing in the college sports world is by and large advertising. And it isn't even so much advertising the programs themselves as it is the manufacturers themselves. Why else do you think they've been tripping all over each other trying to design distinguishable "template" uniforms the past couple years? When you see (insert team) in (insert specific template), you'll know that team is outfitted by (insert manufacturer). That's what it basically breaks down to. (Now, sure, in the interest of fairness, the "color-by-number" game does prove cost-effective to the various outfitters...but that's besides the point here.)

WSU151 made a great sticking point upthread...that most of the more established programs in the college sports landscape either don't, or don't need to to participate in these attention gimmicks (well, some have, but not nearly to the scale we're seeing with some of these smaller-name schools recently). Why? Because the history and legacy of success already exists, and was built up over time. If I was to effort a guess, I'd say that in this day and age of increased media awareness combined with ever-decreasing patience, programs won't really wanna wait and build up awareness by establishing success between the lines...they'd much rather get their names out there NOW...and these types of things are what they do to do it. Think about it: aside from a scant few people, who the hell ever heard of Eastern Washington prior to them turning their field into a virtual inferno? Did anyone even care about the University of Central Arkansas before the purple-and-gray field thing came up? Why is it that we're talking about TCU right now? Why did the U of Oregon get so much notoriety last season around these parts, and particularly right before the 'ship game? Just think about it.

To sum this post up, I'm well aware that students/alumni/fans of these programs are most likely to defend them to the death--and that's okay, since after all they are either students, alumni, or fans, and as such are likely to have a strong attachment to their school/favorite program. Some can be objective about their views/opinions, some can't...and some have no clue what that word even means. But that's just what it is in regards to all this, as far as I can see.

[gdu]

I think a lot of y'all are confusing "branding" for what most if not all of this stuff really is, once you cut through the clutter and, in some cases, the accompanying amounts of utter BS: advertising. That's what's going on here--with TCU now, with Oregon the past couple years, with the funky-colored fields--all that is advertising. Anyone who's taken a course in it will tell you the primary objective of advertising is not to sell product (that'd be marketing--but we'll save that discussion for another time); but rather, to raise awareness--to let you know that a certain something is out there. Think abnout every annoying poster, commercial, or jingle you've seen or heard. Sticks out in your brain, doesn't it? But what do you notice about the more prominent ones (chiefly the Geico and Allstate commercials)? They ain't tryna sell you nothing-they're just using those to reinforce their existence in your brains. That, to me, is what all these types of attention gimmicks are--"look-at-me" devices. And for better or worse, it's working.

Now, to be sure, a strong brand identity can also prove as a successful "advertisement", if one wants to split hairs that way...but what we've been seeing in the college sports world is by and large advertising. And it isn't even so much advertising the programs themselves as it is the manufacturers themselves. Why else do you think they've been tripping all over each other trying to design distinguishable "template" uniforms the past couple years? When you see (insert team) in (insert specific template), you'll know that team is outfitted by (insert manufacturer). That's what it basically breaks down to. (Now, sure, in the interest of fairness, the "color-by-number" game does prove cost-effective to the various outfitters...but that's besides the point here.)

WSU151 made a great sticking point upthread...that most of the more established programs in the college sports landscape either don't, or don't need to to participate in these attention gimmicks (well, some have, but not nearly to the scale we're seeing with some of these smaller-name schools recently). Why? Because the history and legacy of success already exists, and was built up over time. If I was to effort a guess, I'd say that in this day and age of increased media awareness combined with ever-decreasing patience, programs won't really wanna wait and build up awareness by establishing success between the lines...they'd much rather get their names out there NOW...and these types of things are what they do to do it. Think about it: aside from a scant few people, who the hell ever heard of Eastern Washington prior to them turning their field into a virtual inferno? Did anyone even care about the University of Central Arkansas before the purple-and-gray field thing came up? Why is it that we're talking about TCU right now? Why did the U of Oregon get so much notoriety last season around these parts, and particularly right before the 'ship game? Just think about it.

To sum this post up, I'm well aware that students/alumni/fans of these programs are most likely to defend them to the death--and that's okay, since after all they are either students, alumni, or fans, and as such are likely to have a strong attachment to their school/favorite program. Some can be objective about their views/opinions, some can't...and some have no clue what that word even means. But that's just what it is in regards to all this, as far as I can see.

Some good points to be sure, but it is unfair to lump TCU, who just won the Rose Bowl, and Oregon, who just played in the BCS championship game, with Eastern Washington and Central Arkansas, who have crazy colored fields and nothing else I can think of.

[WSU151]

I hope these are a replacement (not bc I like them better, but I don't like the idea of wearing that many looks). I hated the mixing and matching of the PC helmet and pants with the standard uniforms last season. I don't like the idea anyways (those uniforms should be stand alone) and aesthetically it looks bad when the prints don't match (2009 PC helmet with 2010 PC jersey vs. Air Force) and when there is nothing else that matches that stuff in the standard uniform. I also, hate the idea of multiple standard helmets. Didn't work for Baylor, or anyone else that has done it.

3 uniforms (purple, white, black) + 1 special big time game or bowl game uniform is perfect IMO. Anything more is just too much.

You're preachin' to the choir. I was all for this change when I saw it and thought it'd be a full replacement...then I read the AD note and his comment that this new set is an additional option.

Don't get too upset yet. I will be surprised if we wear the 2010 or 2009 uniforms again. We didn't even bust out the 2009 triangle uniforms for the last home game before the stadium was demolished even though we went for a retro look (purple tops, white pants).

I suspect these will be the new uniforms, there will be another special uniform and we will mix in PC stuff from the past (which I don't like).

Bring back this logo for one game FTW:

If I was to effort a guess, I'd say that in this day and age of increased media awareness combined with ever-decreasing patience, programs won't really wanna wait and build up awareness by establishing success between the lines...they'd much rather get their names out there NOW...and these types of things are what they do to do it. Think about it: aside from a scant few people, who the hell ever heard of Eastern Washington prior to them turning their field into a virtual inferno? Did anyone even care about the University of Central Arkansas before the purple-and-gray field thing came up? Why is it that we're talking about TCU right now? Why did the U of Oregon get so much notoriety last season around these parts, and particularly right before the 'ship game? Just think about it.

To sum this post up, I'm well aware that students/alumni/fans of these programs are most likely to defend them to the death--and that's okay, since after all they are either students, alumni, or fans, and as such are likely to have a strong attachment to their school/favorite program. Some can be objective about their views/opinions, some can't...and some have no clue what that word even means. But that's just what it is in regards to all this, as far as I can see.

Good stuff, Buc.

[gdu]

I hope these are a replacement (not bc I like them better, but I don't like the idea of wearing that many looks). I hated the mixing and matching of the PC helmet and pants with the standard uniforms last season. I don't like the idea anyways (those uniforms should be stand alone) and aesthetically it looks bad when the prints don't match (2009 PC helmet with 2010 PC jersey vs. Air Force) and when there is nothing else that matches that stuff in the standard uniform. I also, hate the idea of multiple standard helmets. Didn't work for Baylor, or anyone else that has done it.

3 uniforms (purple, white, black) + 1 special big time game or bowl game uniform is perfect IMO. Anything more is just too much.

You're preachin' to the choir. I was all for this change when I saw it and thought it'd be a full replacement...then I read the AD note and his comment that this new set is an additional option.

Don't get too upset yet. I will be surprised if we wear the 2010 or 2009 uniforms again. We didn't even bust out the 2009 triangle uniforms for the last home game before the stadium was demolished even though we went for a retro look (purple tops, white pants).

I suspect these will be the new uniforms, there will be another special uniform and we will mix in PC stuff from the past (which I don't like).

Bring back this logo for one game FTW:

Nike made some shirts with it a few years back, and I know all the greeks would love it, but I don't see it happening. It's associated with a lot of losing (though so is the arched TCU with no Frog) among other reasons.

[WSU151]

Agh crap...the stenciled logo, with big T top, little C and U underneath the cross of the T.

[a2b05]

Speaking of new and tweaked uniforms for next season, Penn State is getting new uniforms!!!!!!!!

It was rumored for a while but I guess it is now official. Ladies and gentlemen, I introduce to you, the new 2011 Penn State uniforms!

Basically looking like this:

(those were quick PS done by someone else.

[gdu]

Speaking of new and tweaked uniforms for next season, Penn State is getting new uniforms!!!!!!!!

It was rumored for a while but I guess it is now official. Ladies and gentlemen, I introduce to you, the new 2011 Penn State uniforms!

Basically looking like this:

(those were quick PS done by someone else.

Yeah, read about those awhile back. And I thought the old ones looked like practice jersies.

[Lights Out]

They made an already boring, bland, imagination-free set ten times worse. They look like a low-budget Pop Warner team from the '60s now.

At least the contrasting collars added some visual interest. This is just sartorial wallpaper.

[GriffinM6]

PSU didn't change a thing.They could've atleast made the sleeve cuffs and the collars different colors.

[gdu]

PSU didn't change a thing.They could've atleast made the sleeve cuffs and the collars different colors.

huh?