BigRedBuster Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 The yellow shoulder stripes were kinda a big deal in 2009. How odd. Our shoulder stripes haven't been moving in a good direction in recent years, including this year. I like this look: Two stripes, low, straight. No stripes on the pants. Don't like these nearly vertical but not quite shoulder stripes, and the wide triple stripes on the pants. Just a question. What is up with some people not liking the stripes on the pants? I think the double stripe looks awesome and it ties the pants in with the color of the jersey. I think plain white pants look like cheap practice pants. Quote Link to comment
Red Five Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 Pants rankings: double thin stripes > no stripe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one thick stripe Quote Link to comment
Landlord Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 This is complaining just to complain. I remember the 2009 stripes. I thought there were cream colored (ya know, scarlet and cream). I have no clue what you are talking about in 2010. As for the "super ultra mega extreme" tight uniforms, everyone is like that. It is done for a reason, so that you can not get held. Can you talk more about the bad quality? Do our uniforms not breath as well as Nike/UA? Do they tear easier? It's really not. In 2009, the shoulder stripes were a pretty wide discussion on here, and if they were trying to be cream, they did a very poor job because some players' stripes were more yellow than others, and everything else on the uniform was pure white, creating some ugly contrast. In 2010, everyone was excited that the uniforms had been updated slightly as a 'throwback' to this era: Except they weren't, it was just another odd fit. It was kind of cool, though. I'm not making stuff up about the tight uniforms either. Adidas came up with a new 'Tech-Fit' jersey in 2010, and Cincinnati was the first to wear it (link here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWPQPvgpMpI?t=93 ). The next year they gave them to us, which is what resulted in the wavy uneven shoulder stripes all season (not just after contact), because the uniforms were trying to stretch such a long ways. Plenty of people griped about this as well, and a professional designer that had a uniform design blog critiqued the fit of our jerseys because of that very reason. Quote Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 Wait....there is actually a "uniform designer blog critique"? Quote Link to comment
Red Five Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 I wasn't here in 2009, but do recall other boards discussion and noticing it with my own eyes. As far as 2010, I had never heard of the "crooked stripes". It doesn't seem to bother me in the least. Football jerseys get twisted. Meh. Quote Link to comment
Landlord Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 I wasn't here in 2009, but do recall other boards discussion and noticing it with my own eyes. As far as 2010, I had never heard of the "crooked stripes". It doesn't seem to bother me in the least. Football jerseys get twisted. Meh. 2010 was the vertical stripes - 2011 was the wavy/crooked stripes. Keep up! Quote Link to comment
cg_8 Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 Wait....there is actually a "uniform designer blog critique"? There's also Uni-Watch. http://www.uni-watch.com/ They have a column on ESPN now and then... Quote Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 Why do I have a vision of a group of men sitting around acting like the show Fashion Police. Quote Link to comment
ColoradoHusk Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 Wait....there is actually a "uniform designer blog critique"? There's also Uni-Watch. http://www.uni-watch.com/ They have a column on ESPN now and then... Uni-watch is one of my first stops on the interweb each morning. I am a total uniform dork. Quote Link to comment
STL Husker Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 Why do I have a vision of a group of men sitting around acting like the show Fashion Police. I see way too many people in jorts and starter jackets at the game to be complaining about the level of whiteness of the shoulder stripes. 1 Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 Pretty good article on Hail Varsity on this subject: Adidas spent more than $50 million on its top 10 schools last year compared to $37 million for Nike, and that creates some interesting juxtapositions while also illustrating a key point. Michigan received double what its archrival Ohio State got last season. Is Michigan twice as valuable? It was to Adidas. Indiana, based on the strength of its basketball program primarily, made more than Nike’s big basketball bet, Kentucky, which has made four Final Fours in the past five years. Under Armour, the hot new brand on the scene, fits right between the two but only had six really big contracts last year if you include Notre Dame’s reported figure. (Hawaii was Under Armour’s seventh-most valuable team, getting $440,000 last year). Overall, Under Armour spent about $4.1 million per school on Notre Dame, Auburn, Maryland, South Carolina, Utah and South Florida (but just $3.17 million on average last year for the last five). Nike was at $3.7 million for its top 10 and Adidas was at just over $5 million per team. Taking price out of it for a second, if you had to choose one of these team “portfolios” based solely on their potential returns, which one are you picking? My guess is not many are saying Adidas, which is at least partially the source of some of the grousing about Nebraska’s current supplier – it doesn’t seem like a company that’s gaining traction. Quite the opposite and when so much of the discussion around college football centers on a program’s appeal to recruits, that’s a problem. Better to be on the side of the “smart money.” 1 Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 And, according to the article, we were the #6 Adidas contract this year. Two of the teams ahead of us (Michigan and Tennessee) are going to Nike. Two of the other teams ahead of us are Kansas and Louisville (basketball schools). Three of the four teams directly behind us are Indiana, North Carolina State and Cincinnati. Not exactly elite football company. Quote Link to comment
ColoradoHusk Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 And, according to the article, we were the #6 Adidas contract this year. Two of the teams ahead of us (Michigan and Tennessee) are going to Nike. Two of the other teams ahead of us are Kansas and Louisville (basketball schools). Three of the four teams directly behind us are Indiana, North Carolina State and Cincinnati. Not exactly elite football company. I wonder where Wisconsin is on that list. They had a very strong 2014-2015 in football and basketball. Quote Link to comment
Red Five Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 I wasn't here in 2009, but do recall other boards discussion and noticing it with my own eyes. As far as 2010, I had never heard of the "crooked stripes". It doesn't seem to bother me in the least. Football jerseys get twisted. Meh. 2010 was the vertical stripes - 2011 was the wavy/crooked stripes. Keep up! So what is wrong with 2010 again? The stripes are too vertical? Seriously? Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 And, according to the article, we were the #6 Adidas contract this year. Two of the teams ahead of us (Michigan and Tennessee) are going to Nike. Two of the other teams ahead of us are Kansas and Louisville (basketball schools). Three of the four teams directly behind us are Indiana, North Carolina State and Cincinnati. Not exactly elite football company. I wonder where Wisconsin is on that list. They had a very strong 2014-2015 in football and basketball. Wisconsin was #8 Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.