Bowl Mania: Uniform Edition

[thespleenenator]

Yes, many times. The main thing everyone always says is "It threw away all of Oregon's tradition!". You know what? Yes, it did. It tried to throw away decades and decades of futility and losing. Years of underachieving, empty seats and fired coaches. Bowl games? HA! We would be happy with 4 wins most years. We had Dan Fouts at QB and we still sucked. If there was any team in the country that needed to have their tradtion scrapped, it was Oregon. And you know what? It worked. Oregon has had one, I repeat, ONE losing season since 1999, and that was a 5-6 year in 2004. A 5-6 would've been considered a success in the 80s. Oregon threw out there tradtion because they barely had any to begin with. I think the first thing people thought of when they looked at our uniforms were the old Green Bay Packers, not the Oregon ducks. Now, we have an identity all our own...

Great start out of the blocks...

...Everyone always talks about "Oh look, they're copying Oregon!". No, you can try to copy Oregon, but you can't be Oregon. Nobody can. ASU? Please. Oregon uses 4 helmets, jerseys and pants halfway through the season. Wyoming? Mashing templates together and slightly recoloring helmets is no where near the same as Oregon. Oklahoma State? 3 helmets is pathetic. And they look more like Oregon State than Oklahoma State with some of their combos...

you clipped the fifth hurdle with your knee...

Oregon has an identity of it's own, and nobody, I repeat NOBODY, has a stronger identity in all of sports. No one.

and then fell flat on your face. It's a strong identity, and it's getting stronger each year, but it's in no way the strongest identity in sports. Cowboys, Yankees, Harlem Globetrotters, Manchester United, etc. These sports brands are all global (and iconic), which is what Oregon will never be. When your brand is only marketed to a domestic audience (as college football is), then your brand will never be truly global. When your brand revolves around constant change, your brand will never be iconic.

An Iconic identity is not the same as a strong identity. Take Penn State. They're uniforms are instantly recognizable as Penn State, and they have a very iconic uniform. But thats only because they've been wearing it for a very long time. If Penn State were a fairly recent university, then nobody would recognize their uniforms because their identity is very weak. Oregon's current uniforms have been in use for 3 years, and everyone still recognizes them. Oregon will never be iconic because we'll never keep the same uniform for more than 5 years, but they will have a very strong identity none the less. No other sports team in the world can say that.

[Kevin W.]

How is changing the identity every few years a strong identity? I don't follow.

[tj4eck]

3 things in life are guaranteed: death, taxes and people bitching about the Oregon Duck jerseys.

Seriously enough with the bickering, if you don't like it cool. I'm not here to force an opinion down your throat.

If you do like it, ! thats awesome. Cool, good for you.

Listen, if we cut out half of the blah blah blah, bull about the Ducks jerseys, this forum would lose half of the pages in these discussion threads.

It's getting old and frankly, I'm sick of it.

[thespleenenator]

How is changing the identity every few years a strong identity? I don't follow.

Because almost everyone can recognize Oregon's uniforms. Almost, everyone.

[bigwalk]

Hasn't OK St worn something like one combination that might be mistaken for Oregon State? If two schools have the same colors, it's not ridiculous to expect that they might, at some point, not look totally dissimilar. And I owned one of those Harrington era jerseys...pretty sure they (or, at least, the replicas) were a really, really dark green...not black.

And, dude...I realize you're a senior in high school (or something), but, for the love of God, learn SOMETHING about homophones.

[cshookemHORNS]

Oregon is telling their fans to wear yellow for the Rose Bowl.

[TheOldRoman]

Oregon has an identity of it's own, and nobody, I repeat NOBODY, has a stronger identity in all of sports. No one.

No. Having no identity isn't an identity. "Whoah! We're so CRAZY that you gotta tune in to see what we'll wear next!" isn't an identity, especially when a bunch of schools are doing BFBS and now GFGS, and other schools are coming out with garish crap as crazy as Oregon. A strong identity means a look is instantly recognizable to be for that team. Texas' home uni is instantly recognizable, as it Michigan's. "It's gonna be wild" isn't enough of a visual identifier to make Oregon's unis instantly recognizable.

[Bmac]

Oregon has an identity of it's own, and nobody, I repeat NOBODY, has a stronger identity in all of sports. No one.

No. Having no identity isn't an identity. "Whoah! We're so CRAZY that you gotta tune in to see what we'll wear next!" isn't an identity, especially when a bunch of schools are doing BFBS and now GFGS, and other schools are coming out with garish crap as crazy as Oregon. A strong identity means a look is instantly recognizable to be for that team. Texas' home uni is instantly recognizable, as it Michigan's. "It's gonna be wild" isn't enough of a visual identifier to make Oregon's unis instantly recognizable.

Wearing a different uni combo every game does not equal having no identity. If you can't tell it's Oregon you have a problem. Belotti Bold numbers, O logo, wings on the shoulders, there are plenty of elements that are always present. And again, if you can't tell that it's Oregon just because they're not wearing strictly green and yellow, you're way behind. I'm not saying you have to like it, but you can't pretend it doesn't exist.

[knnhrvy16]

On the subject of special uniform patches/treatment for the Rose Bowl, just some more past favorites of mine to show you all:

Illinois - 1984 vs. UCLA

Michigan State - 1988 vs. USC

USC - 1996 vs. Northwestern (probably my favorite, such a simple yet striking patch)

I really would love to see teams bring back customized patches like the above. Each fit the team individually, and added a neat element to the aura of each bowl. I think especially in this age, teams could whip out some really neat patch designs. Not that the simple Rose Bowl logo is bad (I think it looks sharp and classic on the jersey), but the customized patches really embraced the whole aura of the bowl in a way that the simple bowl logo may not.

[guest23]

How is changing the identity every few years a strong identity? I don't follow.

Because almost everyone can recognize Oregon's uniforms. Almost, everyone.

until they change next year and have a 98 new combinations to choose from

[TheOldRoman]

Oregon has an identity of it's own, and nobody, I repeat NOBODY, has a stronger identity in all of sports. No one.

No. Having no identity isn't an identity. "Whoah! We're so CRAZY that you gotta tune in to see what we'll wear next!" isn't an identity, especially when a bunch of schools are doing BFBS and now GFGS, and other schools are coming out with garish crap as crazy as Oregon. A strong identity means a look is instantly recognizable to be for that team. Texas' home uni is instantly recognizable, as it Michigan's. "It's gonna be wild" isn't enough of a visual identifier to make Oregon's unis instantly recognizable.

Wearing a different uni combo every game does not equal having no identity. If you can't tell it's Oregon you have a problem. Belotti Bold numbers, O logo, wings on the shoulders, there are plenty of elements that are always present. And again, if you can't tell that it's Oregon just because they're not wearing strictly green and yellow, you're way behind. I'm not saying you have to like it, but you can't pretend it doesn't exist.

The wings have been around for about three years. Same with the current number font. Both of them will be changed shortly, as the uniforms must "always evolve!" Those temporary elements which happen to be on their uniforms don't make an identity.

[guest23]

On the subject of special uniform patches/treatment for the Rose Bowl, just some more past favorites of mine to show you all:

Illinois - 1984 vs. UCLA

Michigan State - 1988 vs. USC

USC - 1996 vs. Northwestern (probably my favorite, such a simple yet striking patch)

I really would love to see teams bring back customized patches like the above. Each fit the team individually, and added a neat element to the aura of each bowl. I think especially in this age, teams could whip out some really neat patch designs. Not that the simple Rose Bowl logo is bad (I think it looks sharp and classic on the jersey), but the customized patches really embraced the whole aura of the bowl in a way that the simple bowl logo may not.

I agree...I miss the custom patches but what I think ruined that tradition was the bcs affiliation where it seems like most of bcs bowls went with boring standardized circular white patches.

[thespleenenator]

Oregon has an identity of it's own, and nobody, I repeat NOBODY, has a stronger identity in all of sports. No one.

No. Having no identity isn't an identity. "Whoah! We're so CRAZY that you gotta tune in to see what we'll wear next!" isn't an identity, especially when a bunch of schools are doing BFBS and now GFGS, and other schools are coming out with garish crap as crazy as Oregon. A strong identity means a look is instantly recognizable to be for that team. Texas' home uni is instantly recognizable, as it Michigan's. "It's gonna be wild" isn't enough of a visual identifier to make Oregon's unis instantly recognizable.

Wearing a different uni combo every game does not equal having no identity. If you can't tell it's Oregon you have a problem. Belotti Bold numbers, O logo, wings on the shoulders, there are plenty of elements that are always present. And again, if you can't tell that it's Oregon just because they're not wearing strictly green and yellow, you're way behind. I'm not saying you have to like it, but you can't pretend it doesn't exist.

The wings have been around for about three years. Same with the current number font. Both of them will be changed shortly, as the uniforms must "always evolve!" Those temporary elements which happen to be on their uniforms don't make an identity.

Yes, they will change. And people will still recognize them instantly as Oregon. If you can constantly change your uniform, and people STILL instantly recognize you, that is an Identity. And really, who knows if Oregon will change out of these unis. We've had a lot of success in them, and I wouldn't be surprised if we change the colors, but don't change the pattern. The Puddles jersey is the only jersey I could imagine us switching to.

In terms of how good an overall indentity is, to really make a fair judgement, you have to judge it in a vaccum. If you could take someone who knows absolutely nothing about college athletics, and tell them to "Pick out Alabama's uniform". Do you think you could do it? No, of course not. Now, if someone did the same with Oregon, or Hawaii, or Texas, I think they probabley pick them out. Oregon has very progressive colors and design, and the dull green and bright yellow provide a perfect metaphor for the almost bipolar weather in the state. Texas's burnt orange, Longhorn logo, and overall praticallity absolutely scream Texas. Hawaii's uniform are tropical, exaoctic, and feature tribal and palm tree patterns. Unmistakabley Hawaii. Can Michigan say that? Can Alabama say that? Can Penn State say that? Can USC say that? No, they can't.

[thefridge15]

Oregon has an identity of it's own, and nobody, I repeat NOBODY, has a stronger identity in all of sports. No one.

No. Having no identity isn't an identity. "Whoah! We're so CRAZY that you gotta tune in to see what we'll wear next!" isn't an identity, especially when a bunch of schools are doing BFBS and now GFGS, and other schools are coming out with garish crap as crazy as Oregon. A strong identity means a look is instantly recognizable to be for that team. Texas' home uni is instantly recognizable, as it Michigan's. "It's gonna be wild" isn't enough of a visual identifier to make Oregon's unis instantly recognizable.

Wearing a different uni combo every game does not equal having no identity. If you can't tell it's Oregon you have a problem. Belotti Bold numbers, O logo, wings on the shoulders, there are plenty of elements that are always present. And again, if you can't tell that it's Oregon just because they're not wearing strictly green and yellow, you're way behind. I'm not saying you have to like it, but you can't pretend it doesn't exist.

The wings have been around for about three years. Same with the current number font. Both of them will be changed shortly, as the uniforms must "always evolve!" Those temporary elements which happen to be on their uniforms don't make an identity.

Yes, they will change. And people will still recognize them instantly as Oregon. If you can constantly change your uniform, and people STILL instantly recognize you, that is an Identity. And really, who knows if Oregon will change out of these unis. We've had a lot of success in them, and I wouldn't be surprised if we change the colors, but don't change the pattern. The Puddles jersey is the only jersey I could imagine us switching to.

In terms of how good an overall indentity is, to really make a fair judgement, you have to judge it in a vaccum. If you could take someone who knows absolutely nothing about college athletics, and tell them to "Pick out Alabama's uniform". Do you think you could do it? No, of course not. Now, if someone did the same with Oregon, or Hawaii, or Texas, I think they probabley pick them out. Oregon has very progressive colors and design, and the dull green and bright yellow provide a perfect metaphor for the almost bipolar weather in the state. Texas's burnt orange, Longhorn logo, and overall praticallity absolutely scream Texas. Hawaii's uniform are tropical, exaoctic, and feature tribal and palm tree patterns. Unmistakabley Hawaii. Can Michigan say that? Can Alabama say that? Can Penn State say that? Can USC say that? No, they can't.

When I see the colors dull green and bright yellow I don't immediately relate to unpredictable weather, and when I think of unpredictable weather I don't immediately relate to Oregon.

[thespleenenator]

Oregon has an identity of it's own, and nobody, I repeat NOBODY, has a stronger identity in all of sports. No one.

No. Having no identity isn't an identity. "Whoah! We're so CRAZY that you gotta tune in to see what we'll wear next!" isn't an identity, especially when a bunch of schools are doing BFBS and now GFGS, and other schools are coming out with garish crap as crazy as Oregon. A strong identity means a look is instantly recognizable to be for that team. Texas' home uni is instantly recognizable, as it Michigan's. "It's gonna be wild" isn't enough of a visual identifier to make Oregon's unis instantly recognizable.

Wearing a different uni combo every game does not equal having no identity. If you can't tell it's Oregon you have a problem. Belotti Bold numbers, O logo, wings on the shoulders, there are plenty of elements that are always present. And again, if you can't tell that it's Oregon just because they're not wearing strictly green and yellow, you're way behind. I'm not saying you have to like it, but you can't pretend it doesn't exist.

The wings have been around for about three years. Same with the current number font. Both of them will be changed shortly, as the uniforms must "always evolve!" Those temporary elements which happen to be on their uniforms don't make an identity.

Yes, they will change. And people will still recognize them instantly as Oregon. If you can constantly change your uniform, and people STILL instantly recognize you, that is an Identity. And really, who knows if Oregon will change out of these unis. We've had a lot of success in them, and I wouldn't be surprised if we change the colors, but don't change the pattern. The Puddles jersey is the only jersey I could imagine us switching to.

In terms of how good an overall indentity is, to really make a fair judgement, you have to judge it in a vaccum. If you could take someone who knows absolutely nothing about college athletics, and tell them to "Pick out Alabama's uniform". Do you think you could do it? No, of course not. Now, if someone did the same with Oregon, or Hawaii, or Texas, I think they probabley pick them out. Oregon has very progressive colors and design, and the dull green and bright yellow provide a perfect metaphor for the almost bipolar weather in the state. Texas's burnt orange, Longhorn logo, and overall praticallity absolutely scream Texas. Hawaii's uniform are tropical, exaoctic, and feature tribal and palm tree patterns. Unmistakabley Hawaii. Can Michigan say that? Can Alabama say that? Can Penn State say that? Can USC say that? No, they can't.

When I see the colors dull green and bright yellow I don't immediately relate to unpredictable weather, and when I think of unpredictable weather I don't immediately relate to Oregon.

Okay, the weather part might be because I live here, but the green and yellow are very foresty/nature like colors, and the grey is like a rain cloud, which people do associate with Oregon.

[andrewharrington]

Yes, many times. The main thing everyone always says is "It threw away all of Oregon's tradition!". You know what? Yes, it did. It tried to throw away decades and decades of futility and losing. Years of underachieving, empty seats and fired coaches. Bowl games? HA! We would be happy with 4 wins most years. We had Dan Fouts at QB and we still sucked. If there was any team in the country that needed to have their tradtion scrapped, it was Oregon. And you know what? It worked. Oregon has had one, I repeat, ONE losing season since 1999, and that was a 5-6 year in 2004. A 5-6 would've been considered a success in the 80s. Oregon threw out there tradtion because they barely had any to begin with. I think the first thing people thought of when they looked at our uniforms were the old Green Bay Packers, not the Oregon ducks. Now, we have an identity all our own...

Great start out of the blocks...

...Everyone always talks about "Oh look, they're copying Oregon!". No, you can try to copy Oregon, but you can't be Oregon. Nobody can. ASU? Please. Oregon uses 4 helmets, jerseys and pants halfway through the season. Wyoming? Mashing templates together and slightly recoloring helmets is no where near the same as Oregon. Oklahoma State? 3 helmets is pathetic. And they look more like Oregon State than Oklahoma State with some of their combos...

you clipped the fifth hurdle with your knee...

Oregon has an identity of it's own, and nobody, I repeat NOBODY, has a stronger identity in all of sports. No one.

and then fell flat on your face. It's a strong identity, and it's getting stronger each year, but it's in no way the strongest identity in sports. Cowboys, Yankees, Harlem Globetrotters, Manchester United, etc. These sports brands are all global (and iconic), which is what Oregon will never be. When your brand is only marketed to a domestic audience (as college football is), then your brand will never be truly global. When your brand revolves around constant change, your brand will never be iconic.

An Iconic identity is not the same as a strong identity. Take Penn State. They're uniforms are instantly recognizable as Penn State, and they have a very iconic uniform. But thats only because they've been wearing it for a very long time. If Penn State were a fairly recent university, then nobody would recognize their uniforms because their identity is very weak. Oregon's current uniforms have been in use for 3 years, and everyone still recognizes them. Oregon will never be iconic because we'll never keep the same uniform for more than 5 years, but they will have a very strong identity none the less. No other sports team in the world can say that.

Many club and national soccer teams change uniforms every couple years. They have much stronger identities than Oregon does.

It's true that an iconic identity is not the same as a strong identity, but they very often go hand in hand, and they definitely support one another. Your hypothetical theories don't work here because context and tradition are part of an identity. There is no 'if Penn State were a fairly recent university' because they are not, and their identity has been built over decades into one of the strongest and most iconic in college football. Penn State football is built upon timeless elements that transcend trendiness and speak to people of all ages. Their identity is true to the game of football and instantly recognizable as Penn State. Penn State's identity is what other identities strive to be one day, including Oregon. If the only reason Penn State has a strong identity is because they've used it for so long, then, using your logic, the only reason Oregon has a strong identity is because they've been successful since they adopted it. If they had sucked the last decade, their identity would be a failed experiment like so many others, but, these things go hand in hand.

You may have missed the part where I agreed with you that Oregon has a strong identity, but you are blinded by your bias in thinking that they have the strongest identity in all of sports, which is the only portion of your dissertation I vehemently disagreed with. The identity is about more than the uniforms, and Oregon doesn't have a whole lot of recognition value beyond that. Think of other great identities: they have more allure than just the uniforms. Michigan has the Big House and the M Club Banner. Ohio State has the Horseshoe. Notre Dame has the Golden Dome and Touchdown Jesus. Clemson has Howard's Rock. Penn State has the White Out. Oregon doesn't have that 'identity beyond the identity' that makes a good identity great. They may get there some day, but they are not there yet.

[Kevin W.]

Can Michigan say that?

Nobody else in the FBS wears the winged helmet. Everyone knows the winged helmet is Michigan.

Can Alabama say that?

Nobody else in the FBS wears numbers on the side of their helmet. Everyone knows the numbered helmet is Alabama.

Even people unfamiliar with college football know these things. They are that iconic.

[andrewharrington]

In terms of how good an overall indentity is, to really make a fair judgement, you have to judge it in a vaccum. If you could take someone who knows absolutely nothing about college athletics, and tell them to "Pick out Alabama's uniform". Do you think you could do it? No, of course not...

I don't now what marketing class you're taking, but judging a brand in a vacuum is absolutely not a good idea. Again, context plays a big part of every brand, and if you're judging a college football brand in a vacuum, you're ignoring the specificity of your core audience, which is college football fans and high school recruits. Alabama's identity is much stronger than Oregon's regardless of how it tests in a vacuum.

[oldschoolvikings]

In terms of how good an overall indentity is, to really make a fair judgement, you have to judge it in a vaccum. If you could take someone who knows absolutely nothing about college athletics, and tell them to "Pick out Alabama's uniform". Do you think you could do it? No, of course not...

I don't now what marketing class you're taking, but judging a brand in a vacuum is absolutely not a good idea. Again, context plays a big part of every brand, and if you're judging a college football brand in a vacuum, you're ignoring the specificity of your core audience, which is college football fans and high school recruits. Alabama's identity is much stronger than Oregon's regardless of how it tests in a vacuum.

I'm going with "none".

[guest23]

Oregon has an identity of it's own, and nobody, I repeat NOBODY, has a stronger identity in all of sports. No one.

No. Having no identity isn't an identity. "Whoah! We're so CRAZY that you gotta tune in to see what we'll wear next!" isn't an identity, especially when a bunch of schools are doing BFBS and now GFGS, and other schools are coming out with garish crap as crazy as Oregon. A strong identity means a look is instantly recognizable to be for that team. Texas' home uni is instantly recognizable, as it Michigan's. "It's gonna be wild" isn't enough of a visual identifier to make Oregon's unis instantly recognizable.

Wearing a different uni combo every game does not equal having no identity. If you can't tell it's Oregon you have a problem. Belotti Bold numbers, O logo, wings on the shoulders, there are plenty of elements that are always present. And again, if you can't tell that it's Oregon just because they're not wearing strictly green and yellow, you're way behind. I'm not saying you have to like it, but you can't pretend it doesn't exist.

The wings have been around for about three years. Same with the current number font. Both of them will be changed shortly, as the uniforms must "always evolve!" Those temporary elements which happen to be on their uniforms don't make an identity.

Yes, they will change. And people will still recognize them instantly as Oregon. If you can constantly change your uniform, and people STILL instantly recognize you, that is an Identity. And really, who knows if Oregon will change out of these unis. We've had a lot of success in them, and I wouldn't be surprised if we change the colors, but don't change the pattern. The Puddles jersey is the only jersey I could imagine us switching to.

In terms of how good an overall indentity is, to really make a fair judgement, you have to judge it in a vaccum. If you could take someone who knows absolutely nothing about college athletics, and tell them to "Pick out Alabama's uniform". Do you think you could do it? No, of course not. Now, if someone did the same with Oregon, or Hawaii, or Texas, I think they probabley pick them out. Oregon has very progressive colors and design, and the dull green and bright yellow provide a perfect metaphor for the almost bipolar weather in the state. Texas's burnt orange, Longhorn logo, and overall praticallity absolutely scream Texas. Hawaii's uniform are tropical, exaoctic, and feature tribal and palm tree patterns. Unmistakabley Hawaii. Can Michigan say that? Can Alabama say that? Can Penn State say that? Can USC say that? No, they can't.

When I see the colors dull green and bright yellow I don't immediately relate to unpredictable weather, and when I think of unpredictable weather I don't immediately relate to Oregon.

Okay, the weather part might be because I live here, but the green and yellow are very foresty/nature like colors, and the grey is like a rain cloud, which people do associate with Oregon.

well they barely wear dull green so how could that be iconic and as a matter of fact the shade of green has changed with every nike set they've had...in addition the busted out a kelly green jersey with black helmet and pants...how is that instantly recognizable?..what about when they wear carbon helmet/black jersey/charcoal pants?..was that combo instantly recognizable or northwestern rain forest like?

the only thing immediately recognizable or remotely iconic since the "o" redesign is the green helmet...it's an amazingly unique and bold helmet color...the bright yellow "o" (looks like oakley btw) pops off the green perfectly...the worst thing is that they've marginalized that helmet this year by wearing it sparingly and slapping a white decal on it...lame.