College Football 2012 Season

[thespleenenator]

South Dakota State has updated their look after the switch from Nike to UA:

Before:

After:

Major downgrade of course.

Downgrade of the century. They had a great look, and they replaced it with a high school uniform.

Their previous set was plain and it needs some striping and I really like the new better than the old. I am curious what happened to you spleen, you and me used to have the same taste.

1. Seriously, not every single uniform in football needs stripes. Some look just fine without them.

2. Spleen shouldn't have to explain himself; tastes change. It happens.

1. I understand stripes are not always needed if you are a high school football team.

2. I know tastes change, look at my signature and you see how I feel about my favorite sports uniform company.

No, they aren't always needed, period. Their lack of stripes is what separated them from SJSU. Now, they both look like jumbled messes of piping and color, that have no intent whatsoever. it's generic.

[gdu]

I don't mind some striping but these are just weird. Pants stripes don't look like they are from the same set as the sleeve stripes. I also don't like vertical sleeve stripes. Lastly, the shirts all have 3 colors and the pants only have 2.

[DomTheAthlete29]

South Dakota State has updated their look after the switch from Nike to UA:

Before:

After:

Major downgrade of course.

Downgrade of the century. They had a great look, and they replaced it with a high school uniform.

Their previous set was plain and it needs some striping and I really like the new better than the old. I am curious what happened to you spleen, you and me used to have the same taste.

I agree with nuordr that the South Dakota State Uniform is actually an upgrade.

I agree that it's an upgrade as well. I think to make the majority of the CCSLC community happy, we ought to have every team go conservative with no striping of any sort on helmet, jersey or pants and just go with plain block numbers. I think that would make the majority of the people here happy... Just sharing my thoughts, and I know I'm not established around here, but it bugs me that it seems every uniform change from plain to some piping/striping is a majority rule downgrade around here.

I personally feel like it is a lateral movement, both designs aren't really inspired or unique. One is really plain, while the other has no rhyme or reason to the striping.

And it shouldn't bug you that a lot of people like traditional uniforms. They do have a right to voice their opinion! I feel like we have a good balance of taste around here however. Just like in any situations you have the extremists and then the people that scatter out somewhere in the middle.

[TimEOBrien]

I don't mind some striping but these are just weird. Pants stripes don't look like they are from the same set as the sleeve stripes. I also don't like vertical sleeve stripes. Lastly, the shirts all have 3 colors and the pants only have 2.

Yeah, very ill conceived and just sloppy. If UA put half the effort into team like this that they did with NU, Auburn and Maryland (for better or worse) they would be much more respected than they currently are.

[nuordr]

South Dakota State has updated their look after the switch from Nike to UA:

Before:

After:

Major downgrade of course.

Downgrade of the century. They had a great look, and they replaced it with a high school uniform.

Their previous set was plain and it needs some striping and I really like the new better than the old. I am curious what happened to you spleen, you and me used to have the same taste.

1. Seriously, not every single uniform in football needs stripes. Some look just fine without them.

2. Spleen shouldn't have to explain himself; tastes change. It happens.

1. I understand stripes are not always needed if you are a high school football team.

2. I know tastes change, look at my signature and you see how I feel about my favorite sports uniform company.

No, they aren't always needed, period. Their lack of stripes is what separated them from SJSU. Now, they both look like jumbled messes of piping and color, that have no intent whatsoever. it's generic.

SJSU:

The colors are the same, but they do not look alike as you described. Now if SJSU had striping on the pants, then I would agree with you. Even the colors on the numbers are different.

[capitalcanuck]

South Dakota ST's new unis looks like it came from the UA team builder

[thespleenenator]

South Dakota State has updated their look after the switch from Nike to UA:

Before:

After:

Major downgrade of course.

Downgrade of the century. They had a great look, and they replaced it with a high school uniform.

Their previous set was plain and it needs some striping and I really like the new better than the old. I am curious what happened to you spleen, you and me used to have the same taste.

1. Seriously, not every single uniform in football needs stripes. Some look just fine without them.

2. Spleen shouldn't have to explain himself; tastes change. It happens.

1. I understand stripes are not always needed if you are a high school football team.

2. I know tastes change, look at my signature and you see how I feel about my favorite sports uniform company.

No, they aren't always needed, period. Their lack of stripes is what separated them from SJSU. Now, they both look like jumbled messes of piping and color, that have no intent whatsoever. it's generic.

SJSU:

The colors are the same, but they do not look alike as you described. Now if SJSU had striping on the pants, then I would agree with you. Even the colors on the numbers are different.

First of all, those aren't SJSU's uniforms anymore. Secondly, I know they literally don't look alike, but they are now both generic random piping designs. It looks sloppy, and like a high school team.

[nuordr]

South Dakota State has updated their look after the switch from Nike to UA:

Before:

After:

Major downgrade of course.

Downgrade of the century. They had a great look, and they replaced it with a high school uniform.

Their previous set was plain and it needs some striping and I really like the new better than the old. I am curious what happened to you spleen, you and me used to have the same taste.

1. Seriously, not every single uniform in football needs stripes. Some look just fine without them.

2. Spleen shouldn't have to explain himself; tastes change. It happens.

1. I understand stripes are not always needed if you are a high school football team.

2. I know tastes change, look at my signature and you see how I feel about my favorite sports uniform company.

No, they aren't always needed, period. Their lack of stripes is what separated them from SJSU. Now, they both look like jumbled messes of piping and color, that have no intent whatsoever. it's generic.

SJSU:

The colors are the same, but they do not look alike as you described. Now if SJSU had striping on the pants, then I would agree with you. Even the colors on the numbers are different.

First of all, those aren't SJSU's uniforms anymore. Secondly, I know they literally don't look alike, but they are now both generic random piping designs. It looks sloppy, and like a high school team.

I changed to the current uniforms and now I understand what you are saying.

[djam2410]

South Dakota State has updated their look after the switch from Nike to UA:

Before:

After:

Major downgrade of course.

Downgrade of the century. They had a great look, and they replaced it with a high school uniform.

Their previous set was plain and it needs some striping and I really like the new better than the old. I am curious what happened to you spleen, you and me used to have the same taste.

1. Seriously, not every single uniform in football needs stripes. Some look just fine without them.

2. Spleen shouldn't have to explain himself; tastes change. It happens.

1. I understand stripes are not always needed if you are a high school football team.

2. I know tastes change, look at my signature and you see how I feel about my favorite sports uniform company.

No, they aren't always needed, period. Their lack of stripes is what separated them from SJSU. Now, they both look like jumbled messes of piping and color, that have no intent whatsoever. it's generic.

SJSU:

The colors are the same, but they do not look alike as you described. Now if SJSU had striping on the pants, then I would agree with you. Even the colors on the numbers are different.

First of all, those aren't SJSU's uniforms anymore. Secondly, I know they literally don't look alike, but they are now both generic random piping designs. It looks sloppy, and like a high school team.

I changed to the current uniforms and now I understand what you are saying.

i would see that as a real problem if they played in the same division and same teams every year;

[Equinox]

South Dakota State has updated their look after the switch from Nike to UA:

Before:

After:

Major downgrade of course.

Downgrade of the century. They had a great look, and they replaced it with a high school uniform.

Their previous set was plain and it needs some striping and I really like the new better than the old. I am curious what happened to you spleen, you and me used to have the same taste.

1. Seriously, not every single uniform in football needs stripes. Some look just fine without them.

2. Spleen shouldn't have to explain himself; tastes change. It happens.

1. I understand stripes are not always needed if you are a high school football team.

2. I know tastes change, look at my signature and you see how I feel about my favorite sports uniform company.

No, they aren't always needed, period. Their lack of stripes is what separated them from SJSU. Now, they both look like jumbled messes of piping and color, that have no intent whatsoever. it's generic.

SJSU:

The colors are the same, but they do not look alike as you described. Now if SJSU had striping on the pants, then I would agree with you. Even the colors on the numbers are different.

First of all, those aren't SJSU's uniforms anymore. Secondly, I know they literally don't look alike, but they are now both generic random piping designs. It looks sloppy, and like a high school team.

I changed to the current uniforms and now I understand what you are saying.

i would see that as a real problem if they played in the same division and same teams every year;

Exactly. SJSU and SDU aren't going to be crossing paths anytime soon.

[TalktoChuck]

Exactly. SJSU and SDU aren't going to be crossing paths anytime soon.

It doesn't matter if they play each other or not. The point of college sports (and college uniforms) is to market the school to future students so the school can make more money. It's incredibly hard to market yourself when you look like another school. These uniforms miss that objective completely, and they don't look good either.

That's why the looks of Oregon and Alabama work so well. They are on the opposite sides of design, but they both accomplish the main goal of the uniform. When you see those uniforms, you automatically know what school it is.

[thespleenenator]

South Dakota State has updated their look after the switch from Nike to UA:

Before:

After:

Major downgrade of course.

Downgrade of the century. They had a great look, and they replaced it with a high school uniform.

Their previous set was plain and it needs some striping and I really like the new better than the old. I am curious what happened to you spleen, you and me used to have the same taste.

1. Seriously, not every single uniform in football needs stripes. Some look just fine without them.

2. Spleen shouldn't have to explain himself; tastes change. It happens.

1. I understand stripes are not always needed if you are a high school football team.

2. I know tastes change, look at my signature and you see how I feel about my favorite sports uniform company.

No, they aren't always needed, period. Their lack of stripes is what separated them from SJSU. Now, they both look like jumbled messes of piping and color, that have no intent whatsoever. it's generic.

SJSU:

The colors are the same, but they do not look alike as you described. Now if SJSU had striping on the pants, then I would agree with you. Even the colors on the numbers are different.

First of all, those aren't SJSU's uniforms anymore. Secondly, I know they literally don't look alike, but they are now both generic random piping designs. It looks sloppy, and like a high school team.

I changed to the current uniforms and now I understand what you are saying.

i would see that as a real problem if they played in the same division and same teams every year;

It's not so much a question of being able to identify the other team, as much as it is building an identity that is fully your own. The clean look was what South Dakota State had to themselves. No other Yellow and Blue team looked like them.

[Equinox]

Exactly. SJSU and SDU aren't going to be crossing paths anytime soon.

It doesn't matter if they play each other or not. The point of college sports (and college uniforms) is to market the school to future students so the school can make more money. It's incredibly hard to market yourself when you look like another school. These uniforms miss that objective completely, and they don't look good either.

That's why the looks of Oregon and Alabama work so well. They are on the opposite sides of design, but they both accomplish the main goal of the uniform. When you see those uniforms, you automatically know what school it is.

There are close to 250 Division 1 (FCS and FBS) schools. Some schools are going to end up looking similar. It's a problem when it's teams like Texas A&M and Mississippi State, they look really similar and they're in the same division.

[thespleenenator]

Exactly. SJSU and SDU aren't going to be crossing paths anytime soon.

It doesn't matter if they play each other or not. The point of college sports (and college uniforms) is to market the school to future students so the school can make more money. It's incredibly hard to market yourself when you look like another school. These uniforms miss that objective completely, and they don't look good either.

That's why the looks of Oregon and Alabama work so well. They are on the opposite sides of design, but they both accomplish the main goal of the uniform. When you see those uniforms, you automatically know what school it is.

There are close to 250 Division 1 (FCS and FBS) schools. Some schools are going to end up looking similar. It's a problem when it's teams like Texas A&M and Mississippi State, they look really similar and they're in the same division.

Yes, and that was a case of bad branding by Adidas. The uniforms themselves, IMO, looked good, but it turned out terribly.

EDIT: Also, you have to consider that TexasA&M and Mississippi State are well established schools, with at least some national profile. SDSU does not have a national profile, so they need all the help they can get.

[Fifty8_Black O]

Exactly. SJSU and SDU aren't going to be crossing paths anytime soon.

It doesn't matter if they play each other or not. The point of college sports (and college uniforms) is to market the school to future students so the school can make more money. It's incredibly hard to market yourself when you look like another school. These uniforms miss that objective completely, and they don't look good either.

That's why the looks of Oregon and Alabama work so well. They are on the opposite sides of design, but they both accomplish the main goal of the uniform. When you see those uniforms, you automatically know what school it is.

Wouldn't it be great if the main point of college sports was to be an integral part of higher education and to focus on the development of student-athletes. Oh well, a boy can dream.

[ONUV]

a whole page on south dakota state and san jose state?

[Lights Out]

Downgrade of the century. They had a great look, and they replaced it with a high school uniform.

Nah... more like they had a low-budget high school program's uniforms, and then they replaced them with a slightly higher-budget high school program's uniforms. I mean, South Dakota's new uniforms aren't that great, but the old ones weren't exactly brilliantly-designed either. Those were the most bog-standard uniforms you could possibly get.

[nuordr]

a whole page on south dakota state and san jose state?

I was thinking the same thing after my last post, yet we cannot discriminate against the smaller schools.

[djam2410]

Exactly. SJSU and SDU aren't going to be crossing paths anytime soon.

It doesn't matter if they play each other or not. The point of college sports (and college uniforms) is to market the school to future students so the school can make more money. It's incredibly hard to market yourself when you look like another school. These uniforms miss that objective completely, and they don't look good either.

That's why the looks of Oregon and Alabama work so well. They are on the opposite sides of design, but they both accomplish the main goal of the uniform. When you see those uniforms, you automatically know what school it is.

There are close to 250 Division 1 (FCS and FBS) schools. Some schools are going to end up looking similar. It's a problem when it's teams like Texas A&M and Mississippi State, they look really similar and they're in the same division.

Yes, and that was a case of bad branding by Adidas. The uniforms themselves, IMO, looked good, but it turned out terribly.

EDIT: Also, you have to consider that TexasA&M and Mississippi State are well established schools, with at least some national profile. SDSU does not have a national profile, so they need all the help they can get.

im sure a great majority of the guys that sjsu goes after wnt even know who sdsu is or care ;

"hey coach btw some fcx team up north has the same jerseys as you so im not going to attend here anymore"

i dont see that conversation taking place, especially considering they might not target the same niche of recruits

[waltere]

South Dakota ST's new unis looks like it came from the UA team builder

Probably because it did