Jump to content

College Football 2014 Season


buckeye

Recommended Posts

What's with the hate for Nike? Hate the school for wanting a redesign. Or hate the kids coming out of high school that want the new flashy stuff. Or hate the coaches for whining to schools about not having the flashy stuff that attracts kids these days. But don't hate Nike. The schools have 90% of the say at the end of the day when it comes to design. Nike's designers I think are extremely talented. I have a friend that worked for Nike and he said that while they sling ideas towards the schools, it ultimately rests in their hands.

yea in the end the schools get whatever they sign off on and can have as much input as they want. but Nike has created this "box" for CFB uniform design and rarely break out of it. they didnt even do it with FSU, but to their credit what they did inside of their own template-design was impressive. so many of their NFL and college rebrands look like catalog orders. overall they are doing a decent job on the finished product, something the casual fan will like, but the recycled ideas and BS speeches they give to sell the design is absolutely laughable. it shows a real lack of what makes design interesting and good - ideas. (you cant fill in a mesh panel and say "this is reflective of this schools stadium" then do the same damn thing for someone else and have a different reasoning behind it)

it appears they spend 18 months developing the worst number font they can, with a slightly modified typeface for logos, and filling in panels and blocks on the uniforms with various colors. in doing so, they are setting a lot of schools/teams up for identity failure because the number one thing your brand identity has to be is different from the competition. people are not getting that so much with Nike any more

i know of a designer or two that has worked with Nike and adidas and there is no doubt some real talent there in both places. i think Nike's biggest problem might be Todd Van Horne

I will say it again as before the schools take blame for accepting the design that Nike has created.

However, Nike created the design I am seeing so Nike does not get a pass just because the school accepted it .

I believe also the school may ask them to do this or that which may hinder the design so they do not get all of the blame but most of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 8.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

If Nike's to blame for anything it's that they created this current market for new, flashy, recruit-friendly uniform designs -- not to mention the idea of clubs having an entire multi-component, mix-and-match wardrobe.

That's all on them.

As for the rest of it, they're culpable, but their clients don't have to say yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Their Oklahomaesque look was their best.

ncf_u_mcfadden_275.jpg

But what do I know

I don't know, I'd think being so "Oklahomaesque" would be viewed as a problem for a program with ambitions to stand out on its own.

Oklahoma and Alabama, even. Looks way too similar for a divisional foe, especially one as accomplished as the 'Tide.

UyDgMWP.jpg

5th in NAT. TITLES  |  2nd in CONF. TITLES  |  5th in HEISMAN |  7th in DRAFTS |  8th in ALL-AMER  |  7th in WINS  |  4th in BOWLS |  1st in SELLOUTS  |  1st GAMEDAY SIGN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

over the last 5 years or so nike's design efforts seem to be: design a template (speed machine) and a few variants of that template that they want to heavily market. They then develop a few features/embellishments (sublimated numbers) that are utilized to give the impression of customization. At that point, they've effectively created the design box at which the designers are forced to work within to achieve the signature modern nike look. In the end what they've created is a paint by number system that can be sold to each client as a unique design effort but ends up being very derivative.and has a short shelf life.

The only nike clients that really seem to get a truly unique design are the clients that either force their current/traditional/throwback designs like the traditional college powers. The only real redesign exception that I can think of an acutally unique out of the box is the vikings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

over the last 5 years or so nike's design efforts seem to be: design a template (speed machine) and a few variants of that template that they want to heavily market. They then develop a few features/embellishments (sublimated numbers) that are utilized to give the impression of customization. At that point, they've effectively created the design box at which the designers are forced to work within to achieve the signature modern nike look. In the end what they've created is a paint by number system that can be sold to each client as a unique design effort but ends up being very derivative.and has a short shelf life.

The only nike clients that really seem to get a truly unique design are the clients that either force their current/traditional/throwback designs like the traditional college powers. The only real redesign exception that I can think of an acutally unique out of the box is the vikings.

Isn't that what every manufacturer does? They just do it worse imo. Russell designs terrible templates with a few stock numbers. Adidas designs templates that you can hardly customize, barely put stripes on. UA templates get a little crazy on the pants but their template is pretty good as far as flexibility.

Still think Nike has easily released the best stuff the past few years, but i agree with some that their PC stuff was better than most of their rebrands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the real problem is the people that are allowed to say yes to the designs that Nike / UA / Adidas / Russell gives them. Because, I see it as they have more power because they decide if they want their schools to wear this gaudy stuff. And I think they need people that have a better eye for design. It seems that they get shown a few prototypes and say yes to the one they think will look cool and appeal to younger audiences. They should really be asking for more sensible designs and choose between those, rather than stuff that's been horribly made lately.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Nike's to blame for anything it's that they created this current market for new, flashy, recruit-friendly uniform designs -- not to mention the idea of clubs having an entire multi-component, mix-and-match wardrobe.

That's all on them.

As for the rest of it, they're culpable, but their clients don't have to say yes.

I know we've had this discussion over and over... who's to blame, the manufacturer or the client, blah blah. And I've said this before, but I'll say it again. YES, we know the school has the right/ability/responsibility to say no to any design that doesn't work. But in a real world situation, think about it. You hire this major corporation, supposedly the best in the world, to handle this for you. You TRUST them to do this right. And they ARE the experts, right? If Nike (THE name in uniform design) comes to an AD and his coaches (who are obviously NOT experts in the aesthetics of sports design) and tells them this is what you need is the school really to blame for believing and trusting them?

The analogy I've used before... let's say you hire someone to handle your wardrobe, pay them a ton of money because everyone says they're the best. And then they dress you in a lime green tux, and tell you its the next big thing, you're ahead of the curve (lighter, faster, the kids will love it). YES, ultimately its your own damn fault for leaving the house like that. But can you honestly say the "expert" is totally without blame.

Nike has created their own mythology... they've made a world where something is an awesome design just because they say so. And, sure, you can say that's their job, to perpetuate their own brand. But shouldn't their number one concern be to meet the needs of their clients? Why is that so crazy? Part of me feels like giving all the blame for bad design on the schools is like saying a nice looking woman who gets harrassed is "asking for it"... why can't they trust Nikadidasarmor to just give them their best?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Nike's to blame for anything it's that they created this current market for new, flashy, recruit-friendly uniform designs -- not to mention the idea of clubs having an entire multi-component, mix-and-match wardrobe.

That's all on them.

As for the rest of it, they're culpable, but their clients don't have to say yes.

I know we've had this discussion over and over... who's to blame, the manufacturer or the client, blah blah. And I've said this before, but I'll say it again. YES, we know the school has the right/ability/responsibility to say no to any design that doesn't work. But in a real world situation, think about it. You hire this major corporation, supposedly the best in the world, to handle this for you. You TRUST them to do this right. And they ARE the experts, right? If Nike (THE name in uniform design) comes to an AD and his coaches (who are obviously NOT experts in the aesthetics of sports design) and tells them this is what you need is the school really to blame for believing and trusting them?

The analogy I've used before... let's say you hire someone to handle your wardrobe, pay them a ton of money because everyone says they're the best. And then they dress you in a lime green tux, and tell you its the next big thing, you're ahead of the curve (lighter, faster, the kids will love it). YES, ultimately its your own damn fault for leaving the house like that. But can you honestly say the "expert" is totally without blame.

Nike has created their own mythology... they've made a world where something is an awesome design just because they say so. And, sure, you can say that's their job, to perpetuate their own brand. But shouldn't their number one concern be to meet the needs of their clients? Why is that so crazy? Part of me feels like giving all the blame for bad design on the schools is like saying a nice looking woman who gets harrassed is "asking for it"... why can't they trust Nikadidasarmor to just give them their best?

That doesn't address the big difference here. Are you paying the wardrobe consultant to pick out stuff you like or stuff other people will like.

Most of these uniform choices by Nike are driven by what 17/18 year old boys will like, not what school administrators, coaches or fans (let alone unaffiliated uniform/design fans like us) think. Now, I think Nike and the schools may be able to do a better job of addressing all of those people, but who knows what designs they came up with that the school chose these over?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

over the last 5 years or so nike's design efforts seem to be: design a template (speed machine) and a few variants of that template that they want to heavily market. They then develop a few features/embellishments (sublimated numbers) that are utilized to give the impression of customization. At that point, they've effectively created the design box at which the designers are forced to work within to achieve the signature modern nike look. In the end what they've created is a paint by number system that can be sold to each client as a unique design effort but ends up being very derivative.and has a short shelf life.

The only nike clients that really seem to get a truly unique design are the clients that either force their current/traditional/throwback designs like the traditional college powers. The only real redesign exception that I can think of an acutally unique out of the box is the vikings.

Isn't that what every manufacturer does? They just do it worse imo. Russell designs terrible templates with a few stock numbers. Adidas designs templates that you can hardly customize, barely put stripes on. UA templates get a little crazy on the pants but their template is pretty good as far as flexibility.

Still think Nike has easily released the best stuff the past few years, but i agree with some that their PC stuff was better than most of their rebrands.

Correct nike basically created the template first strategy that all of the other suppliers rely upon today. They are just the best at branding that strategy as unique.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Nike's to blame for anything it's that they created this current market for new, flashy, recruit-friendly uniform designs -- not to mention the idea of clubs having an entire multi-component, mix-and-match wardrobe.

That's all on them.

As for the rest of it, they're culpable, but their clients don't have to say yes.

I know we've had this discussion over and over... who's to blame, the manufacturer or the client, blah blah. And I've said this before, but I'll say it again. YES, we know the school has the right/ability/responsibility to say no to any design that doesn't work. But in a real world situation, think about it. You hire this major corporation, supposedly the best in the world, to handle this for you. You TRUST them to do this right. And they ARE the experts, right? If Nike (THE name in uniform design) comes to an AD and his coaches (who are obviously NOT experts in the aesthetics of sports design) and tells them this is what you need is the school really to blame for believing and trusting them?

The analogy I've used before... let's say you hire someone to handle your wardrobe, pay them a ton of money because everyone says they're the best. And then they dress you in a lime green tux, and tell you its the next big thing, you're ahead of the curve (lighter, faster, the kids will love it). YES, ultimately its your own damn fault for leaving the house like that. But can you honestly say the "expert" is totally without blame.

Nike has created their own mythology... they've made a world where something is an awesome design just because they say so. And, sure, you can say that's their job, to perpetuate their own brand. But shouldn't their number one concern be to meet the needs of their clients? Why is that so crazy? Part of me feels like giving all the blame for bad design on the schools is like saying a nice looking woman who gets harrassed is "asking for it"... why can't they trust Nikadidasarmor to just give them their best?

Nice try on placing the blame on Nike and not the client. I don't give a rat's behind whether it's the next hottest thing, or whatever someone tells you, the client has the FINAL say so, and it is the CLIENT'S fault if they look stupid. If someone tells you that looking stupid is the next hippest thing and you do it, don't blame the person for your lack of intelligence in being able to think and figure out something looks stupid. The client is responsible for how they look, and that's where it begins and ends. You hire a firm to design something for you, if you don't like it, you don't have to accept it. There is something called an "out clause". The biggest problem in college sports, is you have unimportant people making important decisions and that is the biggest problem in life also.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell you what, outside of Navy's one off, that helmet design is overrated.

Agreed. That helmet design makes no sense for ODU. What Navy did made sense as it was made to resemble a hat worn with an officers dress blues. This just looks like a straight rip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.