Washington State Rebranding

[slapshot]

Anybody have a PDF of the new stuff? I now that there was one for ASU. Thanks in advance...

There doesn't appear to be anything updated online yet.

[Trevis Meseroll]

Anybody have a PDF of the new stuff? I now that there was one for ASU. Thanks in advance...

There doesn't appear to be anything updated online yet.

Okay i'll be looking for it, you happen to see it can you send it my way please...

[knnhrvy16]

I LOVE the new football home and aways, the alternate not so much. It's just the dark grey pants, really. Had the grey jersey been paired with red pants, it'd be great.

Overall, it's really not a bad set/"rebrand". It's much, much better than ASU's. I actually quite like it, I just wish there was a red pair of football pants rather than a dark grey.

[ram29jackson]

That really is an ugly shade of gray. And having more than one shade of gray is just silly.

I liked the pants thet had last year or year before with diferent/ 2 tone greys.

grey is a good hard working man's, retro sports color as long as not abused...the grey jersey may be pushing it though

[BrandMooreArt]

Glad they didn't go with black.

I love this quote from WSU AD Bill Moos. From The Olympian:

?Our athletes wanted black (for the alternative football uniforms),? Moos said. ?I said, ?We?re not quite good enough to wear black yet, OK? We?re going to be.? ?

you make fun but i think thats a great example of color perception and meaning. he, and many others, view black as a color of elite status.

care to give any non new zealand related examples?

i wont be teaching a color theory class. if anyone wants to learn more about colors, heres a start: http://www.sensationalcolor.com/color-messages-meanings/color-meaning-symbolism-psychology/all-about-the-color-black.html

[DrJack]

StuckeyDuck, you are completely correct that Nike's product is driven by athlete preference. That being said, I don't think Nike (or the athletic department) necessarily seeks the opinions of student-athletes majoring in apparel design or who have the best fashion sense on the team. My gripe (that will likely remain unresolved until the end of time) is that what attracts an average 20 year-old is based on fads and trends as opposed to what will withstand the test of time. If institutions are truly trying to develop a "brand identity," wouldn't it make sense to develop something that will be consistent for longer than three years? (Unless your brand is "what's hot, right now" which Oregon's is.)

I know my opinion's not "right," but it's definitely mine. I'd love to continue this discussion.

I don't disagree with you. While I know Nike seeks the input of student athletes in their uniform designs, I imagine its pretty minimal focus group-type stuff. Nike does all the designing. 100%. Nike wouldn't ever put that in the hands of the student athlete. Nike's designs are aimed at that demographic though, absolutely. As far as "brand identity" in collegiate sports is concerned, I think people here overrate the importance of the actual jerseys (shocker, I know.) I think brand identity is mostly about a recognizable logo, followed by collegiate "atmosphere" stuff - marching bands, chants, fight songs, mascots, stadiums/arenas, etc. Jerseys get updated to stay with current fashion in order to keep people buying new ones. I own one Blazer jersey. I just bought my first Timbers jersey. I own three Ducks football jerseys, a Ducks basketball jersey, and Ducks basketball shorts (not from the same uniform). Blazer jerseys haven't been updated since I was in high school, but the Ducks jerseys are constantly being updated. So I keep buying. Logos and such need not change because they are used to embellish clothes that change every year. Every year Nike (or any company) can trot out new jackets and t-shirts and sweatpants and hats, all with the exact same logo on them. That is brand identity. That is where the consistency is most apparent. If fans ever said, "man, I already have a shirt with that Cougar head on it, what do I need another for?" then I'm sure we'd see a lot more logos changing. But that doesn't happen. Fans just buy a different shirt.

If "tradition" is a big part of your school's brand then keeping consistent jersey's matters a bit. If it isn't, then aren't jerseys the BEST way to keep up with the times? You can't change the logo every 3 years. You can't build a new stadium every 3 years. You probably shouldn't fire your coach every three years. You CAN get new uniforms.

I'm not really sure where I was going with that rant, but I think my point is that there is nothing wrong with following fads and trends. Clothes do it every season. Sports jerseys only do it every few years (at the most, some never do - Penn St.) Here on this site, we tend to think of a "brand" as logos and jerseys. I don't think that is really the case in the real world. Jerseys don't have a ton of influence on the "brand".

[WSU151]

but this isnt that ground breaking..theyve changed their uni's a few times the last decade but no one ever notices...which i find strange because they are ranked around 37 last year in apparel sales on the CLC.

they must admit a ton of students for that to happen ?

Nah, it's just the alumni are extremely loyal. WSU was #1 in the country alumni donations (to schools, not athletic departments) for quite a while, though I don't know if that was based on public schools or for all schools. Plus the school has three branches...Yeah, they have a ton of alumni, but a ton of alumni with open checkbooks.

Remember, there's a WSU flag flying on College Gameday every Saturday. No other school can say that.

And seriously, good post, Stuckey. I may see eye-to-eye with you, but it's good stuff.

[Red Wolf]

I know, and I completely agree. The problem is the kids have bought into it.

I do know that at Georgia after our mediocrity as of late, we've made a point to stick to only our standard jerseys and we'd have to earn the right to wear black again.

I figured it was because of the time Alabama beat the tar out of Georgia in their black jerseys and getting beat by Florida while wearing the black pants and helmets.

[evanaho]

but this isnt that ground breaking..theyve changed their uni's a few times the last decade but no one ever notices...which i find strange because they are ranked around 37 last year in apparel sales on the CLC.

they must admit a ton of students for that to happen ?

37? Wow!

WSU's annual enrollment is around 26,000 (all campuses) which puts them right around 60th in Division 1 school sizes (bigger than Oklahoma and Akron, smaller than Kentucky and Central Michigan). The school does have a repuation for a very loyal alumni following in terms of annual giving, but that could be skewed because Microsoft #2 Paul Allen is a Coug.

I really hope WSU can eventually find a consistent jersey scheme. In the past twelve years I believe we've overhauled our jerseys four (maybe five) times. That's not establishing a brand, if you ask me.

[BrandMooreArt]

StuckeyDuck, you are completely correct that Nike's product is driven by athlete preference. That being said, I don't think Nike (or the athletic department) necessarily seeks the opinions of student-athletes majoring in apparel design or who have the best fashion sense on the team. My gripe (that will likely remain unresolved until the end of time) is that what attracts an average 20 year-old is based on fads and trends as opposed to what will withstand the test of time. If institutions are truly trying to develop a "brand identity," wouldn't it make sense to develop something that will be consistent for longer than three years? (Unless your brand is "what's hot, right now" which Oregon's is.)

I know my opinion's not "right," but it's definitely mine. I'd love to continue this discussion.

I don't disagree with you. While I know Nike seeks the input of student athletes in their uniform designs, I imagine its pretty minimal focus group-type stuff. Nike does all the designing. 100%. Nike wouldn't ever put that in the hands of the student athlete. Nike's designs are aimed at that demographic though, absolutely. As far as "brand identity" in collegiate sports is concerned, I think people here overrate the importance of the actual jerseys (shocker, I know.) I think brand identity is mostly about a recognizable logo, followed by collegiate "atmosphere" stuff - marching bands, chants, fight songs, mascots, stadiums/arenas, etc. Jerseys get updated to stay with current fashion in order to keep people buying new ones. I own one Blazer jersey. I just bought my first Timbers jersey. I own three Ducks football jerseys, a Ducks basketball jersey, and Ducks basketball shorts (not from the same uniform). Blazer jerseys haven't been updated since I was in high school, but the Ducks jerseys are constantly being updated. So I keep buying. Logos and such need not change because they are used to embellish clothes that change every year. Every year Nike (or any company) can trot out new jackets and t-shirts and sweatpants and hats, all with the exact same logo on them. That is brand identity. That is where the consistency is most apparent. If fans ever said, "man, I already have a shirt with that Cougar head on it, what do I need another for?" then I'm sure we'd see a lot more logos changing. But that doesn't happen. Fans just buy a different shirt.

If "tradition" is a big part of your school's brand then keeping consistent jersey's matters a bit. If it isn't, then aren't jerseys the BEST way to keep up with the times? You can't change the logo every 3 years. You can't build a new stadium every 3 years. You probably shouldn't fire your coach every three years. You CAN get new uniforms.

I'm not really sure where I was going with that rant, but I think my point is that there is nothing wrong with following fads and trends. Clothes do it every season. Sports jerseys only do it every few years (at the most, some never do - Penn St.) Here on this site, we tend to think of a "brand" as logos and jerseys. I don't think that is really the case in the real world. Jerseys don't have a ton of influence on the "brand".

another good post SD.

"brand consistency dosnt have to be consistently the same. why not consistently different or consistently exciting?" - david airey

Oregon has plenty of identifiable constants in their uniforms. the color palette (as broad as it may be), the logo, jersey wings, number font. what they've been doing the last few years is just changing colors and using textures. the uni template remains really simple and constant. no stripes or piping or two-tone jerseys etc.

i do believe jerseys have an effect on brand though. (what the audience perceives the school/team to be. the "gut feeling" perception of value)

[evanaho]

If fans ever said, "man, I already have a shirt with that Cougar head on it, what do I need another for?" then I'm sure we'd see a lot more logos changing. But that doesn't happen. Fans just buy a different shirt.

If "tradition" is a big part of your school's brand then keeping consistent jersey's matters a bit. If it isn't, then aren't jerseys the BEST way to keep up with the times? You can't change the logo every 3 years. You can't build a new stadium every 3 years. You probably shouldn't fire your coach every three years. You CAN get new uniforms.

I'm not really sure where I was going with that rant, but I think my point is that there is nothing wrong with following fads and trends. Clothes do it every season. Sports jerseys only do it every few years (at the most, some never do - Penn St.) Here on this site, we tend to think of a "brand" as logos and jerseys. I don't think that is really the case in the real world. Jerseys don't have a ton of influence on the "brand".

I'll concede it's cheaper to change jerseys than it is to change a stadium, the school's logo, or coach. Also, you're probably right that a brand is less tied to uniforms than I make it out to be. You're also right that there is nothing wrong with following fads or trends.

Personally, I'm not a trendy guy. When I buy a suit, I want it to be a classic style that won't look un-fashionable down the road. I'd love to buy a jersey and have it still be current in four years. I like to be able to immediately recognize the teams on the field.

I can't refute any of your points Stuckey, but it seems my taste in uniforms is polar opposite from yours. Agree to disagree?

[WSU151]

If fans ever said, "man, I already have a shirt with that Cougar head on it, what do I need another for?" then I'm sure we'd see a lot more logos changing. But that doesn't happen. Fans just buy a different shirt.

If "tradition" is a big part of your school's brand then keeping consistent jersey's matters a bit. If it isn't, then aren't jerseys the BEST way to keep up with the times? You can't change the logo every 3 years. You can't build a new stadium every 3 years. You probably shouldn't fire your coach every three years. You CAN get new uniforms.

I'm not really sure where I was going with that rant, but I think my point is that there is nothing wrong with following fads and trends. Clothes do it every season. Sports jerseys only do it every few years (at the most, some never do - Penn St.) Here on this site, we tend to think of a "brand" as logos and jerseys. I don't think that is really the case in the real world. Jerseys don't have a ton of influence on the "brand".

I'll concede it's cheaper to change jerseys than it is to change a stadium, the school's logo, or coach. Also, you're probably right that a brand is less tied to uniforms than I make it out to be. You're also right that there is nothing wrong with following fads or trends.

Personally, I'm not a trendy guy. When I buy a suit, I want it to be a classic style that won't look un-fashionable down the road. I'd love to buy a jersey and have it still be current in four years. I like to be able to immediately recognize the teams on the field.

I can't refute any of your points Stuckey, but it seems my taste in uniforms is polar opposite from yours. Agree to disagree?

This.

[IceCap]

If "tradition" is a big part of your school's brand then keeping consistent jersey's matters a bit.

A bit? It matters a ton.

If it isn't, then aren't jerseys the BEST way to keep up with the times?

You know what's an easy way to stay "with the times" for a sports team or an athletic program? Winning. Win, and no one will care if you aren't wearing the latest line of Nike uniforms. Auburn's the national champs (had to, sorry ). You think the fact that they wear "boring" traditional uniforms will hinder their program? No. Winning the National Title will do more for them then wearing a modern Nike (or even Under Armour) uniform set would ever do. Winning gets you noticed more so then your clothing does. I hate the Raiders, but Al Davis has a point.

I'm not really sure where I was going with that rant, but I think my point is that there is nothing wrong with following fads and trends.

Trends are dependent on what the public thinks, and anyone who's paid attention to pop culture trends knows the public is fickle. So if your programming is going to forego the standard pattern of picking one look and building a tradition around it so that it becomes meaningful in favour of always following trends you HAVE to constantly change your look to keep up with what the public thinks is "cool" and "in." If that's the direction you want your program to go, that's cool. I'm just telling you it's going to lead to a lack of brand identity in the long run because you're always going to be changing your look.

If you want to constantly go out and buy a whole new wardrobe each time fashion trends change, you're free to do it. Me? I'll stick to the timeless classic stuff that always seems to stay in style.

If fans ever said, "man, I already have a shirt with that Cougar head on it, what do I need another for?" then I'm sure we'd see a lot more logos changing. But that doesn't happen. Fans just buy a different shirt.

If "tradition" is a big part of your school's brand then keeping consistent jersey's matters a bit. If it isn't, then aren't jerseys the BEST way to keep up with the times? You can't change the logo every 3 years. You can't build a new stadium every 3 years. You probably shouldn't fire your coach every three years. You CAN get new uniforms.

I'm not really sure where I was going with that rant, but I think my point is that there is nothing wrong with following fads and trends. Clothes do it every season. Sports jerseys only do it every few years (at the most, some never do - Penn St.) Here on this site, we tend to think of a "brand" as logos and jerseys. I don't think that is really the case in the real world. Jerseys don't have a ton of influence on the "brand".

I'll concede it's cheaper to change jerseys than it is to change a stadium, the school's logo, or coach. Also, you're probably right that a brand is less tied to uniforms than I make it out to be. You're also right that there is nothing wrong with following fads or trends.

Personally, I'm not a trendy guy. When I buy a suit, I want it to be a classic style that won't look un-fashionable down the road. I'd love to buy a jersey and have it still be current in four years. I like to be able to immediately recognize the teams on the field.

I can't refute any of your points Stuckey, but it seems my taste in uniforms is polar opposite from yours. Agree to disagree?

This.

Indeed. Thirded.

[ram29jackson]

these scHools are just falling for the Nike sales pitches and giving in to the student athletes stupid requests for a different uni.

Nebraska- Penn State- Notre Dame- USC- Alabama -Oklahoma- UCLA- Stanford-to a degree

Ohio State-to a degree, Michigan- to a degree( what they did to the white jersey was pointless )

dont feel the need to alter anything every 2-3-5 years

[ram29jackson]

but this isnt that ground breaking..theyve changed their uni's a few times the last decade but no one ever notices...which i find strange because they are ranked around 37 last year in apparel sales on the CLC.

they must admit a ton of students for that to happen ?

37? Wow!

WSU's annual enrollment is around 26,000 (all campuses) which puts them right around 60th in Division 1 school sizes (bigger than Oklahoma and Akron, smaller than Kentucky and Central Michigan). The school does have a repuation for a very loyal alumni following in terms of annual giving, but that could be skewed because Microsoft #2 Paul Allen is a Coug.

I really hope WSU can eventually find a consistent jersey scheme. In the past twelve years I believe we've overhauled our jerseys four (maybe five) times. That's not establishing a brand, if you ask me.

with all this backing and profit..then why does WSU suck at sports? its either bad Admins,

or the run the squeakiest clean program...? haha

[IceCap]

As for WSU's new identity, I have the same feelings for it that I have for ASU's. I like the primary home/road set, I don't care for the alternate and the unnecessary additional colour (the dark grey in this case). I'm happy they kept the home/road helmet and the cougar logo.

[aawagner011]

I know, and I completely agree. The problem is the kids have bought into it.

I do know that at Georgia after our mediocrity as of late, we've made a point to stick to only our standard jerseys and we'd have to earn the right to wear black again.

I figured it was because of the time Alabama beat the tar out of Georgia in their black jerseys and getting beat by Florida while wearing the black pants and helmets.

You're right, I meant it in the sense that we've been playing mediocre football lately and the last two uniform stunts had us embarrassed. The athletic department said no black for a while and if we did it again, we'd have to earn the right to do so.

[rmackman]

By rebrand, I figured Washington State's new logo would be of an older woman.

[Bmac]

these scHools are just falling for the Nike sales pitches and giving in to the student athletes stupid requests for a different uni.

Nebraska- Penn State- Notre Dame- USC- Alabama -Oklahoma- UCLA- Stanford-to a degree

Ohio State-to a degree, Michigan- to a degree( what they did to the white jersey was pointless )

dont feel the need to alter anything every 2-3-5 years

Nebraska, Notre Dame, UCLA, and Michigan are all Adidas, so blaming any of their uniform problems on Nike doesn't work.

[JohnnySeoul]

Nebraska, Notre Dame, UCLA, and Michigan are all Adidas, so blaming any of their uniform problems on Nike doesn't work.

At least not on this website.