Interesting article by Pick Six Previews. They surveyed 100 non-committed D1 recruits about college football uniforms:
The debate here is just how much of that intangible brand one should attribute to the uniform. One way would be to simply ask the recruits themselves—so we did. We surveyed 100 FBS football recruits, most of the respondents were either sophomores or juniors in high school. None of the recruits were committed to a school. We avoided seniors because they are deep into the recruiting process and their answers may be heavily swayed by the sales pitches of coaches. The goal of this survey is to gauge how well schools are positioning themselves in the minds of recruits before perceptions may be altered by relationships with coaches, official visits, and the rest of the "sales" process. Of course, recruiting begins prior to senior year, but this at least limits some of those recruiting influences. Note: survey was taken prior to National Signing Day for seniors (before the juniors became the primary focus).
The results were both surprising and not surprising.
For what it's worth, Virginia Tech was listed in as receiving votes in the best uniforms category.
Read the full article here: http://picksixpreviews.com/fashion-wars.html
Comments
Maybe its important to recruits, I can understand that.
I can't understand the stripes. #AllMaroonEverything #OrangeAccents
I get a kick out of Maryland's presence on both lists.
Me, too.
Because I'm quite confident that they should only be on one of them. Just ahead of Barnum and Bailey.
"If you look good, you feel good. If you feel good, you play good. If you play good, they pay good."
"It's not how you feel, it's how you look...and you look mahvelous!" Saturday Night Live already covered this.
The "worst" list is a joke. Most of them are storied programs that have maintained a clean, consistent look. And the others are mid-majors that are probably just happy to have actual uniforms.
Some are worthy of the distinction. Maryland, for instance.
Oh for sure. And Wyoming is the absolute worst:
Actually I dig this a bit, there isn't much to it. They have a very unique color palette, so they're going to look a little weird and quite different. It's no O&M but it'll do.
It's just not an appealing color scheme. The design isn't awful, just rather bland. But the colors and the "WYO" just kinda don't work for me.
Yeah, their color scheme makes me think of underwear...
I think there is a lot of potential with this color scheme but they need Nike to revamp the branding. I don't think it's necessarily bland, just not creatively implemented.
Some other things that share the yellow and brown:
Yellow and brown hognose snake (they could change their mascot to this)
Brown and yellow marshbird (they shouldn't change their mascot to this)
Brown and yellow giant swallowtail butterfly (they also shouldn't change their mascot to this)
Brown and yellow hornet (they should change their mascot to this immediately)
So your solution is to change the mascot?
Well I mean their mascot is the cowboys and cowgirls. Changing their mascot certainly wouldn't hurt
That is like saying Tech's uniforms would look better if the mascot was something other than the Hokie.
I mean I see your point but...that wasn't really where I was trying to go. I was looking for a natural parallel to their color scheme and found a bunch of stuff that would match. Can you imagine how the uniforms would look if they were patterned after a hornet? That would be pretty sweet. Plus, Cowboys are dumb, go Redskins.
You did have some awesome alternatives, HTTR!
Wait a skinny New York minnit here, what kinda horse don't like cowboys and cowgirls?
As much as I agree with your "Go Redskins" comment, I have to interject some information here. The logo for Wyoming (not just the University, but for everything in the state) is the "Bucking Horse and Rider." It's related to some unrideable horse at the state's annual Rodeo. It's very important to keep all of that in mind, because they take it very seriously (source: dated a girl from Wyoming that went to Grad School at Tech).
Here's some more info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bucking_Horse_and_Rider
And their mascot? Pistol Pete, a cowboy. Source: brother in law was pistol pete for a couple years when he was at wyoming.
Damn! It'll be impossible to get them to change their names now!
Although, I'd have a mascot that's more on the horse side than on the cowboy side.
What's wrong with Wyoming's unis? I kinda dig them. They're not putrid like say, Maryland, or even one of their rivals, Boise State.
They are pretty bland but I think they got he worst because of their color scheme. Too much brown.
And GT with their screen-printed Russell Athletic jerseys
What part of
was unclear?
But they have honeycomb helmets! HONEYCOMB! lol
Ohhh I see. Joke's on me and Paul Johnson
I agree outside of Maryland. Their uni's are garbage. I can't believe people like looking at the wild patterns and combinations they keep churning out.
They leaked the new unis for Murland this year...
I'm on phone driving kids to school so can't do in depth research. However I'm almost positive every school on worst list but Bama and maybe PSU has worn alternate uniforms.
put down the damn phone, fireman, gosh.
(it's funny if you've read fireman's rants on people using the phone while driving)
Couldn't agree more. This is insane! Maybe it's just me, but at that age, the mere thought of wearing one of those classics jerseys would excite me. That historical look is everything I'm about.
Anyone else see uclas 270 million dollar deal?
And how the Hokies are probably gonna have the worst P5 deal within three years...
But... but Nike ALWAYS underpays because of their power....
Seriously, that quote pissed me off. Just own up to signing a bad deal. UVa is getting twice the money from Nike that we do. Twice. And their deal doesn't even cover all sports, because arguably their most successful sport, baseball, is covered by Rawlings.
I'm a fan of the USC/UCLA game where both teams wear their actual colors. Most stylish yearly game,
My 2 cents is it excites recruits to have the latest, greatest equipment and uniforms.
Which is why Bama is ranked where they are. No wonder they do so poorly every year, someone should tell them to get with the times.
The survey was trying to figure out how uniforms affect the brand of a program, not the success of the team.
That may be the title, but the verbiage seemed to about how the branding of uniforms affect recruiting, ergo success in at least one area that can lead to others. They certainly did not discuss jersey sales.
I don't think so, especially since the data shows that the uniform ratings have little to no correlation to recruiting ranking. They don't need to talk about jersey sales.
It may that the conclusion you draw is that it does not have an effect, but its hard to say the article is not about the effect of uniforms on recruiting.
It takes a step to go from brand power to recruiting but it takes a leap to go from that to wins and losses.
I think there is a fairly well documented relationship between winning and losing and recruiting (see all the TKP tangents on the value of stars in recruiting). The article appears to be discussing the relationship with uniforms and brand power as it relates to recruiting - really a creative off season topic - more so than wins and loses. I do not think there is a substantial relationship, especially in relation to win-loss record, favorite teams growing up, or personal relationships, even after reading the article, but that seems to be the nature of the debate it is trying to foster. I think the leap it explores, but I am not willing to make, is the leap from uni's to brand power as it relates to the step between recruiting and wins-loses.
Want to know how to improve the brand of a program? It's simple win games. Who really knew about VT before the 95 Sugar Bowl? Even Oregon, the ultimate player in the uniform wasn't just noticed because of their uniforms, they were also winning games, and had a crazy effective offense that was fun to watch. Too many teams try to imitate Oregon, but it's never as effective because Oregon did it first so different/flashy uniforms are more the norm, and people forget that a large part of their success came because they were also winning games.
Actually its even simpler to improve the brand. You don't need to win games. You can't necessarily control that. You can, however, give money. That correlates to brand increase really well.
Yes clearly one example of a perennial top-5 program who could probably wear anything they wanted and still win an NC stretches across the entire college landscape to prove a point.
Let's forget about TCU, Baylor, and yes even UMD and how they've been impacted. That sounds about right.
I'm going to assume the three who liked OSU the best where the same three who liked Michigan the least and throw that out as bias. I can see liking OSU football, but their uni's are hardly exceptional.
If that were the case then they would probably have thrown them out. Ohio state has had a number of alternate uniforms recently that have been pretty sharp.
I would never have considered their uniforms the best, and thought only a homer would, but if you like them that much it kinda proves me wrong. The Michigan uni's are not good, but I would not have called them the worst either. I just thought it was an odd coincidence that each had three votes.
My least favorite part of the Michigan uniforms are the helmet stickers
Maybe the buckeye leaves on the helmet stickers remind them of another type of plant? I don't want to be too "blunt" about it.
This tells me that while uniforms can be a great tool to improve the brand of a university, which Virginia Tech has done, it is not crucial to having a strong one.
Basically... some programs can overcome having 'boring' uniforms if the coaching situation is perfect. But it never hurts to be high on the 'best dressed' list when it comes to recruiting. You never know who you might be able to sway just by having cooler uniforms in the recruit's eye.
[not that we care] but where did LOLUVA fall in this?
Pretty sure this survey was for fbs teams.
oh burn
#hoossucking
Depending on how you read that, it's a question, or an answer.
Or both. Illuminati.
Programs were only considered if they had achieved a certain degree of relevance, like Bowling Green and Wyoming
No votes either way.
...Which was equal to the number of fans at their spring game...
I hope the VT logo never changes again, and by change, I'm referring to drastic like the TV logo we once had. Our square root one logo is easily recognizable brand, that doesn't require us being gimmicky. I grew up down the road from UMD. They went through about five different logos in just the 90's alone. Hell, when the crash dummy helmets came out, most of twitter couldn't recognize the school. Even Oregon sticks with their elongated O logo.
This thread is worthless without cheerleader pics.
Happy?
This type of effort (uniform combos, fashion, etc) isn't directed to Alumni. That's not their audience. It's directed at the recruits who like to be in style with the latest fashion. That's who it is (and should be) directed towards. If, say, the current trend was to do all old-school style uniforms since that's what the new generation of recruits like then i'm all for that. As it's not, we should all be on board with whatever styles the new recruits want.
Sure - Alumni "pay" the program - so some people argue that they should have a say since they are paying. Well if that's the case then you can pay to see a losing program since we don't get the recruits we want since we're still stuck in a backwards mentality.
Everybody seems to have alternative uniforms now. I doubt their is a quantifiable advantage to any particular uniform. I personally think it's fun for one or two big games a year. Otherwise, I like to see brand recognition. During the draft this year, I watched a highlight of an ACC player that was playing the hokies and did not immediately recognize my own team. That's a problem in my opinion.
No SEC teams on the 'best-looking' list.
I think the uniforms may get some attention, but I don't see where it seals the deal for any players.
Yeah, I agree, the notion that a player will choose one school over another based on uniform is a bit overrated, unless the uniforms are all-out putrid and have no historical significance, like those clown-outfits that UMD sports. Basically, players are more influenced by the quality of the school/program, coaches, winning, and ability to play sooner instead of later.
But if you're not inherently a big name school and / or located in the SEC that you're at a distinct disadvatage in the first place. The reason the SEC isn't on that list is because they have basically every single other benefit going for them, not to mention a lot of them have shady recruiting practices.
Look at the schools with recent success - ones who haven't traditionally been a power. You'll note that they're mainly in the camp of these sleek uniforms. We need to get with that or we risk being left behind completely - we have no tradition nor would we have new uniforms - and that's a scary thought.