98.8% OT: Annual ESPN Uni Watch (all teams - including Michigan)
I know, some of you are first thinking "UNIFORMZ HAVE TO BE OT"...and I believe they are unless it's something a team is wearing for a game when they're playing us.
However, this is annual tradition - we usually open on Satuday and my guess this usually falls before OT season ends.
It's also a composite of all UNIFORMZ in the country - which is WAAAAY better than a bunch of individual threads.
We're also the most UNIFORMZ obsessed fan base in the country - which is weird when you consider how traditional we are.
But it does include Michigan - and the video especially highlights Michigan.
It also includes teams on our schedule with UNIFORMZ. I've tagged this "Uni Watch '15" for anyone that needs to reference it later in the year.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13513118/2015-uni-watch-…
Per ESPN, "Nearly 80 of the 128 FBS teams have made some sort of uni adjustment this season (and that's not counting all the blackout, whiteout, camouflage, and other uniforms that will likely be unveiled throughout the season). As usual, we've prepared a comprehensive team-by-team rundown, organized by conference. If a team isn't listed here, it means it hasn't announced any changes for this year, at least that we're aware of."
August 28th, 2015 at 5:41 AM ^
Watch me nae nae.
edit: the mustang on the SMU helmet is a flag now. That's pretty badass.
August 28th, 2015 at 8:35 AM ^
WD made ESPN! Well done young man!
August 28th, 2015 at 5:44 AM ^
Alternate uniforms would be a lot cooler if anyone could show restraint and actaully use them rarely. I'm thinking of when Louisville used to do blackouts for big time games back in their Big East heyday. When everyone in the world has 1-2 alternates a year it's just boring
August 28th, 2015 at 5:53 AM ^
But we're getting old.
Plus, it's about money and they sell replicas like hotcakes...then they can turn around and auction their game worn jerseys or helmets to donors and make back all the money they spent on the UNIFORMZ plus some.
Add in the recruiting and buzz factor and it's just too juicy to pass up for most athletic departments.
Uniforms are expensive just on their own...so if you can just get back to net even, it's something to think about - not to mention everything else I mentioned above.
Blame the Ducks.
August 28th, 2015 at 6:51 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
August 28th, 2015 at 7:03 AM ^
August 28th, 2015 at 7:30 AM ^
August 28th, 2015 at 8:05 AM ^
I hope no kid has ever committed because of uniforms, what are you talking about?
There's a middle ground between "no impact" and "committment" - and I personally would say UNIFORMZ for most recruits lands in that middle ground. It's just buzz, hype, style, etc. - but it's not going to lead to a committment (as far as I know).
But did anyone say it would? I wouldn't even want a kid who committed because of uniforms, probably not the brightest star in the sky if you know what I mean.
August 28th, 2015 at 8:09 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
August 28th, 2015 at 4:21 PM ^
D1, Associate AD.
You really want to go there?
Resumes? Dick measuring? C'mon.
August 28th, 2015 at 4:55 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
August 28th, 2015 at 8:10 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
August 28th, 2015 at 8:10 AM ^
I said that is a factor...one of many.
And it does make a dent in the revune of a football program - the football program doesn't get the budget of the entire athletics department (obviously).
Go look up how many football programs actually MAKE money on their own, then come back to me. If you can basically have free uniforms because you're selling them for what you paid for them...yes, that helps your budget. Many programs lose money, but help the profile of the university, increase enrollment, create sponsor opportunities, create donor opporunities for the athletics department, etc. - and that's how it's worth it and balances out. But if you just look at a programs budget, dollar for dollar, not paying for uniforms because you're making your money right back may be beneficial.
You're jaded because this is a Michigan fan site...and no, Michigan football does not need any revenue from any alternate jersey. But again, I mentioned that as one factor of a few and there were many others that I didn't mention...your response is like I said it was the sole reason (in additional to being factually incorrect).
But when you're looking up how many football programs make money, take a look at the OP where it says 80 teams in the country have alternates...not just Michigan and some of the big progams with big budgets.
August 28th, 2015 at 8:11 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
August 28th, 2015 at 4:22 PM ^
What the hell, can you read? I specifically said that the last time and you went and argued the same point.
We're talking about a football budget, not revenue for an athletics department. Am I taking crazy pills?
/WillFerrell
August 28th, 2015 at 4:58 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
August 28th, 2015 at 9:06 PM ^
It's never been what we're talking about. There are a lot of things that fall to the football program - that's not the point Charlie Brown.
August 28th, 2015 at 5:48 AM ^
After actually reading some of the article...it's actually pretty interesting to see them all. Way better than searching or even having a usual thread because they do a good job of showing the before and after.
Teams change so damn much, you have no idea what they're changing from. It's a long article, but it's definitely +1 informative if you're like me and you don't search for all of this stuff.
August 28th, 2015 at 5:49 AM ^
It's kind of like those hockey games in football stadium things in that it's starting to get old. Also, it's hard to have an identity if you wear 8 different uniforms all year. At least with us, we aren't doing a one game money grab. It's a traditional uniform for all away games.
August 28th, 2015 at 5:50 AM ^
Thanks for posting it was an interesting clip...nice that they highlighted Michigan too.
I'm an old fogey I sort of like traditional unchanging uniforms....it is the look and feel of a school to me. But we the way uniforms are changing at light speed now this is definitely the minority view.
August 28th, 2015 at 6:13 AM ^
August 28th, 2015 at 7:33 AM ^
Those uniforms they're wearing against Army, on the other hand - those look terrible. You think the academies get tired of teams busting out these usually terrible "patriotic" jerseys when they come to town?
August 28th, 2015 at 6:59 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
August 28th, 2015 at 7:03 AM ^
Amazing.
August 28th, 2015 at 7:24 AM ^
Except he didn't learn anything from Dave Brandon! BRAND OVER EVERYTHING! How can WD not have his logo as his avatar on twitter? Huge missed opportunity.
August 28th, 2015 at 8:10 AM ^
I had never noticed this, but apparently OSU had little Buckeye leaves over the nameplates, one for each national championship. They ditched that this year and just put the word "Buckeyes" up there. I dislike OSU with a passion, but have to say I think that is (was) kind of cool. So: Is it just me or is that insanely stupid in the year where you'd get to add to the leaves?
I can imagine a bunch of players saying in January, "Yeah man, and every Buckeye forever will remember this whenever they look right above their name." And then they ditch it? Man, I would have been using that ALL THE TIME if I were a coach. "Fellas, see these? These are the glory of your predecessors, marked here for all to remember for the rest of time." Blah blah. Maybe little stories about each time they won it, and then implore the current team to "add their story." Etc, etc. Seemed like it had the potential to be gold, Jerry! Gold!
If this would have been something similar on the UM uniform, I would be majorly ticked off. On the other hand... "This change approved by David Brandon."
August 28th, 2015 at 8:13 AM ^
Didn't know/care what they meant...just thought it was decoration I guess.
However, I agree...very stupid to get rid of it after you win a national championship.
August 28th, 2015 at 8:44 AM ^
August 28th, 2015 at 4:23 PM ^
Ah well...
August 28th, 2015 at 8:26 AM ^
August 28th, 2015 at 8:13 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
August 28th, 2015 at 8:21 AM ^
...with a "Yosemite Sam" look... Hmmmm... Don't like cartoon characters on helmets.
That said, the Irish will intimidate.
August 28th, 2015 at 8:29 AM ^
that they haven't put a giant gold cross on their uniforms means they've either shown the smallest amount of restraint, or more likely, haven't thought of it yet
August 28th, 2015 at 8:21 AM ^
I will say that I was a little miffed that North Carolina didn't really go all the way with argyle, including argyle socks and some very sensible Johnston & Murphy shoes to complete the uniform. That would have been stylish, although maybe bad for football. Can you find wingtip cleats, or perhaps a nice loafer with some spikes? That's a good question.
August 28th, 2015 at 8:22 AM ^
Blue and Joe's helmet design is in there linked under "the Wolverines used to award merit decals." Someone should tell ESPN that it's a photoshop and we haven't done that since the early 90s.
August 28th, 2015 at 8:23 AM ^
August 28th, 2015 at 8:27 AM ^
I assume it won't be long until everyone goes the Premier League route and changes home, away and third uniforms every year. There is a large selection of devoted fans who will snap it up.
August 28th, 2015 at 8:29 AM ^
August 28th, 2015 at 8:45 AM ^
On the topic of uniforms, I find it strange how Wisconsin, which has a great program and tradition, has arugably the worst helmet in D1 football. It is like an 8th grader put clip art on the side of the helmet and Barry Alverez shrugged his shoulders and said, "sure, why not."
Of all the schools with the riff-raff on the helmets, why doesn't Wisconsin give it a try?
August 28th, 2015 at 9:10 AM ^
August 28th, 2015 at 12:12 PM ^
August 28th, 2015 at 9:05 AM ^
EMU home jerseys look pretty sick the others not so much.
August 28th, 2015 at 9:45 AM ^
UniWatch embeded a WD Tweet about the Block M logo being removed from the pants. Too bad it was before the Logo.
August 28th, 2015 at 1:45 PM ^
And the sad thing is WD was wrong in that tweet--the Ms on the pants showed up in 1994, not 1993.
August 28th, 2015 at 2:10 PM ^
No, you're wrong.
Ms first appeared on the pants in 1993-
They were made bigger in 1994.
August 28th, 2015 at 7:18 PM ^
A tiny M on the side of the pants that was barely visible versus the large M on the front of the pants, which is what was removed this season.
Not the same thing.
But, cool, man.
August 28th, 2015 at 10:05 AM ^
I don't know why I read uniform threads. Just painful. But reading the ESPN piece helps me see several things.
- One is that I am MOSTLY a traditionalist. All the gimmcry and patches and foo fah is too much for my eyes.
- However, I think I see where I can deal with innovation. I really personally like a clean, sparse look, with a few subtle enhancements or decorations. What this means is that I don't mind modern fabrics, and modern fonts for names and numbers. What I don't like is when a uniform is too busy, too cluttered, too jarring. A simple, classic, yet modern streamlined look is what I will almost always gravitate towards.
August 28th, 2015 at 11:37 AM ^
August 28th, 2015 at 11:44 AM ^
No reason not to mooch off the Bears following in Illinois.
Dark blue could come very close to black.
August 28th, 2015 at 12:24 PM ^
that's the smallest strike zone I have ever seen. Kind of Ricky Henderson in his stance too.