College Football 2012 Season

[TheOldRoman]

Probably as long as it took to find the score bug on the screen, or read the description on the screen graphic coming from the provider. Which is why this whole identify thing is so freggin stupid to talk about.

Right. So every team could just wear solid black head-to-toe with no stripes or logos and white block numbers. It would be okay that everybody looked the same because you could totally just look at the scorebug to see who was playing. Branding is so 2000 anyway.

[TheOldRoman]

Hold on, Nike's corporate colors are not volt/anthracite. Yes those are colors they have made up, but Nike's corporate colors are orange and white, you know, the color of almost every Nike shoe box.

Carry on.

OK, fair enough. But if highlighter yellow and charcoal gray (I feel silly using the Nikespeak) aren't exactly "Corporate colors", they are instantly identifiable as "belonging" to Nike.

Yes. They aren't Nike's corporate colors, but they are colors which are prominently featured in new Nike product lines.

[evanmaldonado]

Says who? I say a strong brand is a brand that is recognizable and unique. I have never heard a story of someone not being able to tell when Oregon is playing. I have heard stories about people not being able to tell when Alabama is playing, because they don't watch college football, and if you don't watch college football, there is no way to tell that Alabama is in those uniforms.

When Oregon wore their green uniforms last year where they looked puke green I had no idea that was Oregon (and that's their actual school color too). When they wore the all white I didn't know either.

Now you've heard a story of someone mixing up Oregon, and I'm a pretty big follower of college football.

How long did it take you to identitfy them?

Probably as long as it took to find the score bug on the screen, or read the description on the screen graphic coming from the provider. Which is why this whole identify thing is so freggin stupid to talk about.

I completely agree, I was just genuinely curious.

Yeah the scorebug helped me out, but it took a while for the damn thing to pop up haha

[tBBP]

Whoooaaa buddy...what the h-e-double-hockey-sticks done happened up in here?

Can everyone please just go outside, get away from the computer (or phone) for a while, breathe into a paper bag a few times...then go play frisbee with the dog or something? This thread's on the verge of cataclysmic implosion......

[wILL-INI]

If you look back at my posts, I conceded that in every single other medium, color is very important. However, I think that college football is becoming the exception.

And I still don't know what makes you think that. If anything, I'd say the color is significantly more important in sports branding/marketing than it is in any other arena. Think about it... no one puts on green and yellow before going to fill their tank at the local BP. No one paints their face red before eating a Red Lobster. No one insists on wearing red, white, and blue while drinking a Pepsi. (Actually, I can't prove any of that, but I'm hoping...) However, the largest majority of college football fans will most likely attend a game in their team's colors. When I was a freshman at Ohio State, my roommate threw away his scarf on the way to our first OSU / Michigan game when he realized it was blue. At many schools, simply shouting the school colors is considered an official school battle cry. These things are not changing

So when the Oregon fans blacked out the stadium, when their team wore black?

[guest23]

If you look back at my posts, I conceded that in every single other medium, color is very important. However, I think that college football is becoming the exception.

And I still don't know what makes you think that. If anything, I'd say the color is significantly more important in sports branding/marketing than it is in any other arena. Think about it... no one puts on green and yellow before going to fill their tank at the local BP. No one paints their face red before eating a Red Lobster. No one insists on wearing red, white, and blue while drinking a Pepsi. (Actually, I can't prove any of that, but I'm hoping...) However, the largest majority of college football fans will most likely attend a game in their team's colors. When I was a freshman at Ohio State, my roommate threw away his scarf on the way to our first OSU / Michigan game when he realized it was blue. At many schools, simply shouting the school colors is considered an official school battle cry. These things are not changing

So when the Oregon fans blacked out the stadium, when their team wore black?

Exactly. Just like the time when oregon played in the national championship game when the team wore volt and gray and the fans wore uh...

[TheOldRoman]

Exactly. Just like the time when oregon played in the national championship game when the team wore volt and gray and the fans wore uh...

But that was totally a mishap. Nike forgot to announce to the fans beforehand what Oregon's new school colors were. It won't happen again. Next time, Nike will put out a press release announcing Oregon's new school colors and make shirts available for $23.99 so fans don't have to suffer the embarrassment of wearing entirely different colors than their team.

[gdu]

If you look back at my posts, I conceded that in every single other medium, color is very important. However, I think that college football is becoming the exception.

And I still don't know what makes you think that. If anything, I'd say the color is significantly more important in sports branding/marketing than it is in any other arena. Think about it... no one puts on green and yellow before going to fill their tank at the local BP. No one paints their face red before eating a Red Lobster. No one insists on wearing red, white, and blue while drinking a Pepsi. (Actually, I can't prove any of that, but I'm hoping...) However, the largest majority of college football fans will most likely attend a game in their team's colors. When I was a freshman at Ohio State, my roommate threw away his scarf on the way to our first OSU / Michigan game when he realized it was blue. At many schools, simply shouting the school colors is considered an official school battle cry. These things are not changing

So when the Oregon fans blacked out the stadium, when their team wore black?

Actually, I think the team actually wore school colors after asking the fans to wear black.

[chuckymack]

If color isn't important to athletic branding, how do you suppose one is able to distinguish between the logos of the Green Bay Packers, Georgia Bulldogs, and the Grambling Tigers?

[gdu]

If color isn't important to athletic branding, how do you suppose one is able to distinguish between the logos of the Green Bay Packers, Georgia Bulldogs, and the Grambling Tigers?

I don't think anyone is saying the color isn't important to branding; just that color isn't as important to oregon's athletic branding as it is to others'.

[CrazyAnna]

If color isn't important to athletic branding, how do you suppose one is able to distinguish between the logos of the Green Bay Packers, Georgia Bulldogs, and the Grambling Tigers?

You're obviously right, but the Oregon Ducks athletic program has proven that shock value can also stand toe-to-toe with tradiitonal school colors and at times, even win. Those arguing about school colors and those about anti-school colors when is comes to branding are actually both correct.

[guest23]

If color isn't important to athletic branding, how do you suppose one is able to distinguish between the logos of the Green Bay Packers, Georgia Bulldogs, and the Grambling Tigers?

You're obviously right, but the Oregon Ducks athletic program has proven that shock value can also stand toe-to-toe with tradiitonal school colors and at times, even win. Those arguing about school colors and those about anti-school colors when is comes to branding are actually both correct.

This is not an equal sides argument. Color is an essential component branding. Being notorious for something and having a reputation is not a brand. This is a tested definition that has been established for a better part of a century.

Oregon has been successful in creating publicity for itself but it has not created a successful brand. Once a brand is established it doesn't have to reinvent itself every two months to remain relevant.

[CrazyAnna]

If color isn't important to athletic branding, how do you suppose one is able to distinguish between the logos of the Green Bay Packers, Georgia Bulldogs, and the Grambling Tigers?

You're obviously right, but the Oregon Ducks athletic program has proven that shock value can also stand toe-to-toe with tradiitonal school colors and at times, even win. Those arguing about school colors and those about anti-school colors when is comes to branding are actually both correct.

This is not an equal sides argument. Color is an essential component branding. Being notorious for something and having a reputation is not a brand. This is a tested definition that has been established for a better part of a century.

Oregon has been successful in creating publicity for itself but it has not created a successful brand. Once a brand is established it doesn't have to reinvent itself every two months to remain relevant.

I believe Oregon's shock value/futuristic uniforms have in fact created a very successful and profitable brand. This new style of anti-traditional school colors put them on the map and is instantly what anyone thinks of when they think of Oregon football. Therefore, that instant recognition is a successful brand. No way around it.

[yh]

If color isn't important to athletic branding, how do you suppose one is able to distinguish between the logos of the Green Bay Packers, Georgia Bulldogs, and the Grambling Tigers?

I don't think anyone is saying the color isn't important to branding; just that color isn't as important to oregon's athletic branding as it is to others'.

Friends, we have a winner. Oregon's eschewing of "traditional school colors" for the uniforms of their marquee sports program has become their tradition. To them, this outlier tradition is the new hallmark. Clearly it's not for most . . . or many, but it's their schtick and their schticking, er, sticking to it.

[guest23]

If color isn't important to athletic branding, how do you suppose one is able to distinguish between the logos of the Green Bay Packers, Georgia Bulldogs, and the Grambling Tigers?

You're obviously right, but the Oregon Ducks athletic program has proven that shock value can also stand toe-to-toe with tradiitonal school colors and at times, even win. Those arguing about school colors and those about anti-school colors when is comes to branding are actually both correct.

This is not an equal sides argument. Color is an essential component branding. Being notorious for something and having a reputation is not a brand. This is a tested definition that has been established for a better part of a century.

Oregon has been successful in creating publicity for itself but it has not created a successful brand. Once a brand is established it doesn't have to reinvent itself every two months to remain relevant.

I believe Oregon's shock value/futuristic uniforms have in fact created a very successful and profitable brand. This new style of anti-traditional school colors put them on the map and is instantly what anyone thinks of when they think of Oregon football. Therefore, that instant recognition is a successful brand. No way around it.

Constant change and instant recognition are not compatible. Your statement is in conflict.

[CrazyAnna]

If color isn't important to athletic branding, how do you suppose one is able to distinguish between the logos of the Green Bay Packers, Georgia Bulldogs, and the Grambling Tigers?

You're obviously right, but the Oregon Ducks athletic program has proven that shock value can also stand toe-to-toe with tradiitonal school colors and at times, even win. Those arguing about school colors and those about anti-school colors when is comes to branding are actually both correct.

This is not an equal sides argument. Color is an essential component branding. Being notorious for something and having a reputation is not a brand. This is a tested definition that has been established for a better part of a century.

Oregon has been successful in creating publicity for itself but it has not created a successful brand. Once a brand is established it doesn't have to reinvent itself every two months to remain relevant.

I believe Oregon's shock value/futuristic uniforms have in fact created a very successful and profitable brand. This new style of anti-traditional school colors put them on the map and is instantly what anyone thinks of when they think of Oregon football. Therefore, that instant recognition is a successful brand. No way around it.

Constant change and instant recognition are not compatible. Your statement is in conflict.

Not at all. Ask 10 random people to close their eyes and picture the Oregon Ducks football uniform. I'm pretty sure at least 9 out of 10 will instantly describe one of their non-school colored over-the-top uniforms. Therefore, and I've already stated this and tired of beating a dead horse, THAT is a brand since it is instantly identified. You are only fighting with yourself over this. In fact, I'm willing to bet that their over-the-top branding is so successful, that when the Baylor basketball team played in those bright neon uniforms, a lot of people either thought it was Oregon or at the very least, Oregon popped into their heads. Can't get a stronger branding ID than that.

To you, I think Oregon is the perfect example of anti-traditional branding.

[Somppi]

winner^

[evanmaldonado]

Not at all. Ask 10 random people to close their eyes and picture the Oregon Ducks football uniform. I'm pretty sure at least 9 out of 10 will instantly describe one of their non-school colored over-the-top uniforms. Therefore, and I've already stated this and tired of beating a dead horse, THAT is a brand since it is instantly identified. You are only fighting with yourself over this. In fact, I'm willing to bet that their over-the-top branding is so successful, that when the Baylor basketball team played in those bright neon uniforms, a lot of people either thought it was Oregon or at the very least, Oregon popped into their heads. Can't get a stronger branding ID than that.

To you, I think Oregon is the perfect example of anti-traditional branding.

Nothing says successful branding like being able to confuse an Adidas uniform for a Nike one... If I could interchange Baylor and Oregon just based on the color neon, how is that successful branding? I may not be the most knowledgable on branding and identity but isn't that the opposite? I'm sorry but Oregon doesn't have any brand. Nike does.

[thespleenenator]

Not at all. Ask 10 random people to close their eyes and picture the Oregon Ducks football uniform. I'm pretty sure at least 9 out of 10 will instantly describe one of their non-school colored over-the-top uniforms. Therefore, and I've already stated this and tired of beating a dead horse, THAT is a brand since it is instantly identified. You are only fighting with yourself over this. In fact, I'm willing to bet that their over-the-top branding is so successful, that when the Baylor basketball team played in those bright neon uniforms, a lot of people either thought it was Oregon or at the very least, Oregon popped into their heads. Can't get a stronger branding ID than that.

To you, I think Oregon is the perfect example of anti-traditional branding.

Nothing says successful branding like being able to confuse an Adidas uniform for a Nike one... If I could interchange Baylor and Oregon just based on the color neon, how is that successful branding? I may not be the most knowledgable on branding and identity but isn't that the opposite? I'm sorry but Oregon doesn't have any brand. Nike does.

You misread the post. She said that people think or Oregon before they think of Baylor in those uniforms. So, even though Baylor is the one wearing neon/volt, Oregon is the first thing that comes to their minds. It would be like people seeing polar bears, and instantly thinking of Coke.

[evanmaldonado]

Not at all. Ask 10 random people to close their eyes and picture the Oregon Ducks football uniform. I'm pretty sure at least 9 out of 10 will instantly describe one of their non-school colored over-the-top uniforms. Therefore, and I've already stated this and tired of beating a dead horse, THAT is a brand since it is instantly identified. You are only fighting with yourself over this. In fact, I'm willing to bet that their over-the-top branding is so successful, that when the Baylor basketball team played in those bright neon uniforms, a lot of people either thought it was Oregon or at the very least, Oregon popped into their heads. Can't get a stronger branding ID than that.

To you, I think Oregon is the perfect example of anti-traditional branding.

Nothing says successful branding like being able to confuse an Adidas uniform for a Nike one... If I could interchange Baylor and Oregon just based on the color neon, how is that successful branding? I may not be the most knowledgable on branding and identity but isn't that the opposite? I'm sorry but Oregon doesn't have any brand. Nike does.

You misread the post. She said that people think or Oregon before they think of Baylor in those uniforms. So, even though Baylor is the one wearing neon/volt, Oregon is the first thing that comes to their minds. It would be like people seeing polar bears, and instantly thinking of Coke.

Ah my mistake. Point retracted then.