THOSE MARYLAND UNIFORMS

[fuzzy510]

Couple of items that I didn't see noted here, and I'm not sure if they were mentioned on the broadcast or not (I was at the game tonight), but up top are the cleats that were worn with the uniforms, and on the bottom is a close-up promo photo which shows the numbers, which are sublimated with the flag design (which UA has actually been calling Baltiflage on some of their apparel).

[DomTheAthlete29]

I turned that game off cause I could not stand to watch this cluster look, total downgrade.. IMO. But the white turtle helmet looks pretty slick..

[lahaye7]

I can agree with the first three, but not the last one

there is yet to be a uniform lacking in school colors that looks good

1st picture: My favorite Uniform ever

2nd picture: Not a bad looking set

3rd picture: My new favorite jersey

4th picture: One of the best sets ever by Oregon:

[lahaye7]

that might have caused this forum to implode...but you are right

I like the helmets. My main beef with the jerseys is that they should have switched the sides of the jersey patterns from the helmets to better replicate that flag look. That way it looks less "Two Face" and more broken-up like the actual flag.

[keynote]

What if they were divided on the y-axis instead of the x-axis? Or vice versa? I've never taken a cartesian approach to football helmets.

Another way to fix this would be to split the helmet into quadrants. So, on one side, you'd see Calvert on the back "half" and Crossland on the front "half"; on the other side, you'd see Crossland on the back and Calvert on the front. The downside is that it would start to look a little pinwheel-ish.

[keynote]

Many people are talking about how they shoulda switch the shoulder patterns to better mimic the flag so I mocked that up:

Either way I think they're pretty hideous, but at least players wont look like they're from two different teams.

Thanks for the mock up.

Now that I've seen it, I can see why UA went with the "Two Face" look over the more accurate alternative shown here. I think it looks more coordinated to have a Calvert side and a Crossland side than to alternate, even if that's what the actual flag does. The "Two Face" version still clearly affiliates the team with the state flag and colors, and I think switching the shoulder panels ends up sacrificing cohesion for accuracy's sake, when that level of accuracy isn't really required.

I do agree, though, that it's kinda trippy to see such a completely asymmetric design on a uni/helmet combo.

[Thad]

A quick Photoshop flip of the helmets...taken from mr.baseball's screen shots..thanks.

The haters are still gonna hate...but it does look a better IMHO.

Now that would make this an amazing set. Nice work.

I'm not totally against this idea. Every school is looking for that distinctive look (for good and bad, bad press is better than no press at all) - Oregon with the wings, all the *insert color here* outs, The U w/ the U all over the place, Alabama and Penn State w/ their simplicity, and now UMD with their flag uniforms. I bet they sell a ton of stuff with the flag theme over the course of the season now.

[DPV713]

Thank You, Maryland, for ending the "What if herpes designed college football uniforms?" bar fight forever #Fugly

Twitter is a beautiful thing.

[Drew22]

I saw at Dick's Sporting Goods that UA is selling hooded sweatshirts with the beforementioned Balitiflag pattern in the hood.

Here are more examples.

http://www.dickssportinggoods.com/product/index.jsp?productId=11683496&cp=4413874.4413878

[keynote]

I saw at Dick's Sporting Goods that UA is selling hooded sweatshirts with the beforementioned Balitiflag pattern in the hood.

Here are more examples.

http://www.dickssportinggoods.com/product/index.jsp?productId=11683496&cp=4413874.4413878

Good find. Wow, the pattern actually works nicely in a subtle one-tone colorway, even in non-MD colors. Again, I like it a lot more than the tortoise shell pattern, and as someone who grew up in MD, I'm all for FFFS (Flag For Flag's Sake).

BTW, they're apparently calling it "Baltiflage" (Baltimore+camouflage), not "Baltiflag." I made the same mistake when I first read it, too.

[leopard88]

This place blew up just as I expected.

I like the helmets. My main beef with the jerseys is that they should have switched the sides of the jersey patterns from the helmets to better replicate that flag look. That way it looks less "Two Face" and more broken-up like the actual flag.

Many people are talking about how they shoulda switch the shoulder patterns to better mimic the flag so I mocked that up:

Either way I think they're pretty hideous, but at least players wont look like they're from two different teams.

I agree with GFB (and the others who have echoed this sentiment.

As for the mockups, I like this one better than gueman's because the placement of the patterns mimics the actual flag when facing the player. I have attached an image of the flag for comparison.

EDIT: I have just noticed one thing that bothers me. The patterns on the helmet and jersey run perpendicular to one another when you look at the player (see the picture below the mockup). The helmets replicate the flag pattern when you look at the sides, but the jerseys replicate it when you have an aerial view. I wonder how the set would look if the jersey also replicated the flag when viewed from the side (i.e., by rotating the patterns 90 degrees).

Hopefully this makes some sense.

[southpawstu19]

i find it quite interesting that maryland is one of the few, if not the only, team that incorporates its state's flag and its colors into their uniforms. (i realize this is probably because of the uniqueness of the flag itself, but still i feel another state school would maybe try to do something similar to pay homage to their home state)

[Shmee]

...love these.

[lahaye7]

after sobering up from last night, these sorta remind me of the 2005? 2006? Canes, Gators, Hokies that had the off color gauntlet on one sleeve (wasn't too bad IMO) These Terps unis are fine as a one time thing. Maybe if they picked one side and ran with it, it might work.

[IceCap]

Are school colors really "old traditions", though? I mean, should Michigan trot out in green to be different? Maybe USC should augment their look with some baby blue? How would Florida State look in blue?

Uniforms are identifiers. If the colors of those didn't really matter, teams would never choose team colors, and every game would be black-and-white.

College football uniforms have really gone off the deep end these days. (Well, ok, college football in general went off the deep end years ago, but I digress.) For an average twelve-game season, a team needs multiple "combinations"? Sure, you could argue that they'd use them over multiple seasons... but I think we know that's not true, either.

These are... well, they're certainly creative. But I'm not going to say they're a good uniform. Maryland's flag is one of the best around, but it doesn't really translate well here at all--especially not as two halves of a helmet.

Thank you!

And to BrandMooreArt's question, when I see volt I think Nike, not the University of Oregon Ducks. That's the precedent I don't like to see, manufacturers creating uniforms to promote themselves over the teams the uniforms are supposed to be for.

it's called WINNING.

A team has to be able to win on the big stage to claim that.

Boise 2008 - Choke

Boise 2009 - Choke

Ohio State 2010 - Choke

Auburn 2011 - Choke

LSU 2011 - Choke

Again, I agree. Between the list Kevin provided and the "traditions don't change champions do" sign, I would say arrogance and chocking us more of an Oregon tradition then winning.

The Ducks are winless in volt, just for the record.

As for Maryland's flag uniforms? Using the flag pattern the way they did in their standard set was brilliant. This? It's to much. It looks like something that would get shot down from the Concepts section.

hate Oregon because its not your taste? fine by me, not everyone is supposed to like it. hate them for doing something new thats actually fairly well designed? thats dangerous to creativity.

We're talking about sports uniforms, not modern art. Something that's "creative" and that "pushes the envelope" isn't neccecarily good design.

[GMW79]

Since this is the official Maryland thread, let me just say I love these crazy things. They have a "warpaint" kind of feel to them. Symmetry is not always necessary.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

I'm glad that college football is having fun with itself. No one would ever have predicted that college football design could ever get so wacky, but here we are.

[JohnnySeoul]

Since this is the official Maryland thread, let me just say I love these crazy things. They have a "warpaint" kind of feel to them. Symmetry is not always necessary.

I can see the "warpiant" look, but they are the Terps....not some sort of warrior. If the helmet had one side fading into the other, to me that would've been a better look. This uniform has "1990's" screaming all over it. It was as if Maryland and UA all sat around and said, "Hey, remember when MLB did that Turn Ahead the Clock gimmic? Let's make our uniform look like one of those jerseys."

[Sport]

Since this is the official Maryland thread, let me just say I love these crazy things. They have a "warpaint" kind of feel to them. Symmetry is not always necessary.

I can see the "warpiant" look, but they are the Terps....not some sort of warrior. If the helmet had one side fading into the other, to me that would've been a better look. This uniform has "1990's" screaming all over it. It was as if Maryland and UA all sat around and said, "Hey, remember when MLB did that Turn Ahead the Clock gimmic? Let's make our uniform look like one of those jerseys."

It does kinda remind me of a shirt that Garth Brooks would've worn at his height.

I can't decide if I like them or not. I like the idea of them, but after watching a lot of that game, I found them distracting and clownish. They looked like jesters. It was over the top.

[MattMilone]

The NCAA shouldn't say anything about this.

Yes, they should. If the NCAA doesn't draw a line then no one will and Phil Knight and Kevin Plank will continue to run roughshod.

And why is that such a bad thing? Is it about those two somehow unfairly giving a team they like an advantage? Is that the concern? College football is inherently unfair and bias toward schools that make more money. Texas, Alabama, USC, Penn State are teams that will always have great CFB programs not just because of traditional uniforms or branding but also because they are massive universities, with billions in donations that also happen to be in states that tend to produce great high school recruits.

So if tiny lil Maryland who can't land a single recruit because they are in a garbage state from a high school football perspective and historically have not spent money (which they have much less of when compared to Texas, for example) on football finds some random alumni who happens to run a massive sports manufacturing company who wants to impregnate the scene with zany jerseys to draw in recruits . . . . good for them.

College football isn't fair. Each team doesn't have a NCAA cap room on how much they can spend to create a good brand / program / team.

So why should we limit schools who's only viable option is to be zany? Why not tell Texas to spend less money every year? Tell Alabama to move their campus away from all those juicy southeastern HS recruits?

Because it's not about what's right for college football. Phil Knight and whoever the ass from UA aren't any more dangerous to the integrity of college football as Ohio State hooking up players with benefits that Ohio could never give.

The NCAA has much, much more to worry about before locking down teams getting short-term attention for plastering their state flag haphazardly around their jersey. And to be honest, I think it's silly to force teams to stop doing anything to their jersey if it helps their program. Maryland's dumb helmet is a lot better than taking half the team on a free cruise, isn't it?