Sorry, I Wasn't Paying Attention, Did You Say Something?

Screen shot 2011-08-22 at 8.42.37 PM.png

You know what’s really great about college football uni design these days?


.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.

Exactly.

Design considerations aside — and the design is pretty brutal — when the coach begins his remarks at the unveiling event by parroting the uniform manufacturer’s slogan (yes, those were literally the first words out of his mouth), you’ve pretty much abandoned any pretense of this being anything other than a corporate masturbation session, a retailing showcase, and a sham.

But me, I don’t cover retailing showcases. I cover uniforms. As soon as Maryland unveils a football uniform, I’ll be glad to write about it. If they’re determined to serve as corporate mannequins for costumes being marketed to children, that’s certainly their prerogative, but I’m not particularly interested. Let’s move on.

+ + + + +

guthrie.png

Collector’s Corner

By Brinke Guthrie

This baseball uni is from the 1940s, it has the requisite stirrups, so Paul should bid on it. Or maybe this 1960s Mets pennant will do [both way overpriced, alas — PL].

But of course eBay is full of things that can appeal to all sorts of tastes, not just Paul’s. For example:

• Remember these 1970s NFL posters? I had a ton of ’em, and each one had multiple thumb-tack holes in each corner from being moved around.

• Reader Dave Rivitz contributed several items, including this 1950s Otto Graham-signed game program, and this set of NFL figures. That auction’s over, but I thought the figures were so cool that you needed to see ’em anyway.

• Nice-looking 1970s Jets sweater. Not Rex’s size, though.

• Here’s an entire display board of 1970s NFL helmet pencil sharpeners!

• Here’s another helmet display board, this time from the 1960s, promoting Kessler Whiskey.

Seen something on eBay that you think would make good Collector’s Corner fodder? Send your submissions here.

+ + + + +

Stirrups Club reminder: Robert Marshall has a new set of stirrups for sale. For details, look here.

+ + + + +

Uni Watch News Ticker: The Braves have finally started wearing their Ernie Johnson memorial patch. … Ten of the 12 teams in the WNBA are getting a new uniform sponsor. … The group looking to save historic Hinchliffe Stadium in Paterson, N.J., which I wrote about last summer, has received a grant (from Dave Rakowski). … The Padres retired Trevor Hoffman’s number on Sunday, and the ceremony included the team’s previous number retirees wearing throwback jerseys, plus Mat Latos wore a Hoffman tribute jersey. … Marvel Comics has done a lot of sports crossover promotions lately, but I didn’t realize they’d been working with the NFL way back in 1970 (nice find by Ronnie Poore). … Ho-hum, another flag-draped uniform. But here’s the weird part: That’s the jersey for the Orangeville Americans — who play in Orangeville, Ontario. “The team is full of American college hockey prospects,” says Will Leslie — hence the name. … Lots of great ballpark scale models on display here (from Joe Dotzman). … Can’t get enough of those stadium models? Check out the miniature Big A that this 16-year-old made (from Jeremiah Allen). … Still more about the stitching on Michael Vick’s shoulders: David Pealing points out that I Ticker-linked to this photo back in 2009, so this stitching pattern is nothing new for the Eagles. … Austin Gillis reports that his alma mater, Oglethorpe University, wore very interesting basketball uniforms in 1968-69. Dig the contrast-color sleeves, one with a star and one with an “O.” … Good piece on history’s silliest military uniforms (thanks, Brinke). … No photos, but an interesting note from Ken Guckenberger, who writes: “I lucked into first-row seats near the visiting on-deck circle at Coors Field yesterday, and we noticed many of Dodgers had huge repair patches on their pants. Two-thirds of the batters had patches at least two-by-three inches. They looked like a barnstorming team from the ’30!” … This is pretty good — a taxonomy of wrestler names! (From James McNamara.) … We may have covered this before, but just in case: 1954 was the Orioles’ first year (at least at the MLB level), so their uniforms had to be airbrushed into existence for that year’s baseball cards. But why did Bowman add an apostrophe to the insignia? Very odd (major thanks to Scott Little). … In a related item, Old Navy doesn’t know how to use an apostrophe (from Jonathon Binet). … New football uniforms for Western Carolina (from Greg McLamb). … Ryan Burns reports that Ole Miss has a really nice ticket design this year. … Tons of helmet variations on display at Arizona State’s practice the other day. “Some players had no decals, some had ‘fork’ decals down the middle, and it looks like at least one player even had the old Sparky decal on the black helmet,” says Joe Albano. … Georgia Tech is having an informal competition to see who gets to wear No. 9. For details, scroll down to the third item on this page (big thanks to Mike Rich). … EA Sports is shipping NHL 12 without Winnipeg Jets uniforms. “The NHL series has always delayed the release of the third jerseys until they all are announced officially, but this is unprecedented,” says Tim E. O’Brien. “I wonder if the Jets’ uniforms will look like this. Either that or Thrashers uniforms.” … Speaking of video games, Brett Paci appears to have spotted a Madden error: The stripe on the Bills’ helmet is straight, instead of getting wider toward the back. … Two notable things in this shot from last night’s Giants game: The Jints wore their road pants at home, and Eli Manning was wearing an old-style jersey with the red triangle at the base of the collar (the super-stretchies don’t have the triangle). I’ve asked Joe Skiba about both of these — will advise. … “My wife works for the U.S. Embassy here in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, so this is home for the next couple years,” says Matthew Algeo. “Joe Biden came to visit on Monday, and he was wearing a cap with the Vice Presidential seal. It was adjustable, not fitted. He gave one to the Mongolian prime minister, Sukhbaatar Batbold, who wore it pretty much all day.” … I’m not sure anyone needs another article about shorts no longer being short, although at least this one is reasonably well written. … The most pathetic sports site on the web (and I should know, because they’ve plagiarized from me several times) is making a weak stab at some semblance of respectability. … New uniforms for the 49ers’ cheerleaders (from Scott Winters). … Two new masks in the works for Ilya Bryzgalov — this one and this one (from Matt Pesotski). … Teebz did a nice little write-up on the story behind Gordie Howe holding a “President” jersey. … Martin Luther King is unquestionably the greatest American of my lifetime, and we should all be proud that he’s now represented on the National Mall. But this wise-ass critique of the new MLK Memorial isn’t just entertaining — it’s also a really sharp piece of design criticism. Too bad the guy who runs this here uniform site didn’t apply that approach to the Maryland costumes instead of just taking his ball and going home, right? … RIP, Jerry. You and Mike were the best of the best.

Programming note: I’ll be busy running to the mall to pick up some Terps merch doing some reporting for other projects today, so Phil will have the keys to the car. I know for a fact that he loves the new Maryland costumes, so be sure to tell him what you think of them. It’ll make his day! See you tomorrow.

 

220 comments to Sorry, I Wasn’t Paying Attention, Did You Say Something?

  • Fred | August 23, 2011 at 7:25 am |

    It doesn’t matter what the coach said, the uniform itself is enough to just walk away from the unveiling. What a disaster. But I’ll still make a list of why it sucks because I like lists.

    1. Black top
    2. Yellow pants with the black top
    3. Two toned shoulder stripes
    4. Black-to-red shoulders
    5. THREE colors on the pants (yellow pants, red belt, black buckle)
    6. Red side stripe seems to have been put in at the last minute

    Only positive I can take from it is the yellow/black checker on the helmet but uh that’s probably all. Bet they’re glad to be the Oregon of the east huh?

    • Simply Moono | August 23, 2011 at 7:41 am |

      Weren’t Maryland’s original colors black and gold before they added red? So it would make sense to have a black top because they’ve had black longer than red.

      But overall, the costumes suck more than a toothless hooker, although I did like the white helmet a lot, but that’s about it.

      • Geen | August 23, 2011 at 7:58 am |

        They were. Black and gold for Lord Baltimore, but red and white for Lord Calvert. See the Maryland flag for more details.

      • Frank from Bmore | August 23, 2011 at 8:35 am |

        As in the fight song for UMD, “Wave High the Black and Gold”

      • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 9:00 am |

        As moose pointed out over the weekend, it’s become clear that athletic departments now are more concerned with—and feel more allegiance to—their uni-supplier and 19-year-old student athletes (cough-cough) than they do their alumni.

        Also, this business of “I’ll just put a stripe here for no other reason that because I want to” and having multiple jereys and pants and sometimes three helmets…just suggest an atmosphere of self-indulgence and excess permeating college football.

        And then things like the U of Miami situation come along and prove it.

        • R.S. Rogers | August 23, 2011 at 9:54 am |

          I’ll just put a stripe here for no other reason that because I want to

          This is the one criticism of the Maryland unis I can’t take seriously as criticism. The decorative coloring of elements on the latest generation of football jerseys is no different than, say, contrast-color stitching on ballcap eyeholes, or contrast-color raglan sleeves on baseball jerseys, or even changing the color of ballcap bills or squatchees. Nobody here criticizes the many high school or college baseball squads that employ those decorative techniques, for no better reason than that baseball unis have included the random coloring of those bits of the uniform for many decades. It’s old, we’re used to it, so we accept it. But there is in principle no difference at all between that and the contrast-color paneling we’re seeing lately in football jerseys.

          Plus, the classic stripes most of us long for in football uniforms were just as random as the stripes we’re seeing today. Again, the only difference being that we’re used to the old style of random decorative coloring, and we’re not used to the new styles.

    • Joe Hilseberg | August 23, 2011 at 8:23 am |

      Ahhh…the good old days when Maryland’s Uni’s were respectable

      http://espn.go.com/p...

      • Frank from Bmore | August 23, 2011 at 8:36 am |

        WWFD, “What Would Fridge Do?”

      • Bernard | August 23, 2011 at 8:50 am |

        My condolences, Joe. What a fucking train wreck.

        I wonder which combo they’ll break out for the WVU game…

      • Bernard | August 23, 2011 at 8:55 am |

        Seriously, how bad is the black helmet/yellow jersey/white pants look?! Good lord…

      • LarryB | August 23, 2011 at 1:19 pm |

        Who was this team in 1968?

        http://img.photobuck...

    • Dumb Guy | August 23, 2011 at 9:11 am |

      The white/gray helmet looks like a Crash-Test Turtle!!

    • Teamo | August 23, 2011 at 9:54 am |

      Under Fridge, Maryland had a good set of unis, primarily red with yellow and black added. The Terps script on the side of the helmet was classy. Now they have freakin’ turtle helmets? I thought the XFL folded! And no logo on the black? Looks like mutant Browns helmets (sorry Browns fans). With wanting to change unis, was hoping Edsall would stay reserved as the UConn unis were. But I guess Plank had too much creative influence. What a walking nightmare. All hail Under Armour.

    • Jeremiah | August 23, 2011 at 11:16 am |

      I guess the only thing one can say about those unis is: “Oregon, it’s your move.”

    • BoJo | August 23, 2011 at 12:55 pm |

      Color scheme brings flashbacks of the Vancouver Canucks “V” jersey from the 1970s

    • Frankie | August 23, 2011 at 2:42 pm |

      Things I like about Maryland’s new uniforms…

      1 – The white shell pattern helmet

      2 – …

      • Joe Hilseberg | August 23, 2011 at 3:27 pm |

        That wasn’t an earthquake, it was God sending us his opinion of the new Maryland football uniforms

  • Bas | August 23, 2011 at 7:36 am |

    Pardon my French…these look like Shit.

  • The Jeff | August 23, 2011 at 7:40 am |

    I’d like to say something about how Maryland’s new unis aren’t really that bad and annoy everyone… but I just can’t do it. Those things are horrible.

    As for the NHL game without proper Jets uniforms… EA did the same thing with the Texans in Madden in 2001. The game had an expansion draft and put the Texans in the league for the 2002 season, but the uniforms were as plain as possible. I’d guess that the Jets in the NHL will just have solid white and solid navy jerseys with the released primary logo on the front. If we’re lucky, the real thing will get patched in via download later.

    • Phil Hecken | August 23, 2011 at 9:00 am |

      “If we’re lucky, the real thing will get patched in via download later.”

      ~~~

      yes, i think i might have to hang myself otherwise

    • Tim E. O'B | August 23, 2011 at 9:07 am |

      They’ll fur sur be downloadable (just like all the thirds) soon after they’re announced, but I kinda can’t wait to see what they do in the meantime.

      And Phil, I know you’re a hardcore g4mer, but please just wait until the patch comes out. Cartman didn’t wait and that didn’t work out well for him – http://www.southpark...

      • Ry Co 40 | August 23, 2011 at 9:45 am |

        video games AND south park references…

  • Muzz | August 23, 2011 at 7:44 am |

    Fox Sports has an article today listing Oregon as one of the top 15 uniforms in college football.

    • Jeff P | August 23, 2011 at 8:04 am |

      So their sports division has about as much credibility as their news channel?

      Actually, while I hate the fact that so much of their wardrobe lacks team colors, I really do like the general design. The wing is fun, and a nice piece of visual interest for a modern sleeveless uniform. And it’s not nearly as goofy as the diamond plate was. Kill the black and gray and the mix and match aspect, which I realize are significant portions of their identity, and the design is sound.

      • The Jeff | August 23, 2011 at 8:09 am |

        The mix-n-match thing will fade out in a another couple years if they don’t get a redesign. I figure at some point they’ll settle in on 3 to 4 combinations they like and it won’t really be an issue anymore.

        …or Nike will change them in 2013 and the narrowing down process will start all over

    • Lloyd Davis | August 23, 2011 at 2:46 pm |

      That’d be even funnier if it said Fox Sports has an article today listing Oregon as having the top 15 uniforms in college football.

  • Dave R | August 23, 2011 at 7:45 am |

    Well, if Phil loves the new Maryland look, I guess it’s settled. ;)

    • Phil Hecken | August 23, 2011 at 12:22 pm |

      those unis are the shit

      • JEDI54 | August 23, 2011 at 2:32 pm |

        I just hope they wear the black on black all the time.

  • Bas | August 23, 2011 at 7:46 am |

    these look like a 2 yo kid was given 4 crayons and told to fill in the Official Maryland Football coloring Book… then a hungover Under Armor design team member, who had no ideas the morning of the pitch meeting, found the book under a pile of dirty underoos and thought, hey this might work.

  • Frank from Bmore | August 23, 2011 at 7:58 am |

    Tons of debate over at the Terps FB page, and as expected age determines whether you think these are the greatest unis ever or the sign of the apocalypse. Personally, i think my Terps and UA tried too hard. i will miss the script logo on the helmet and wish they would have atleast put an M on there. The white turtle shell helmet is a cool alternate. The unis and pants are a train wreck. I know UA wants to use UMD to make in roads in CFB, not sure if this will make programs want to switch, but it seems the kids like them.

  • Geen | August 23, 2011 at 7:59 am |

    I can’t believe there was a professional wrestler named The Mormon Giant.

  • Chris T | August 23, 2011 at 8:19 am |

    Re: Michael Vick’s shoulder stitching – I don’t have a picture handy, but the Bears linemen have had similar stitching on-and-off for years.

  • Super Jump Johnny Fishbone Man | August 23, 2011 at 8:33 am |

    RE: the wrestling taxonomy…
    Two words: Chief Jay Strongbow

    (or did I just miss his name)

    PS: Nick Bockwinkle anyone???

    • The Jeff | August 23, 2011 at 8:36 am |

      Two words: Chief Jay Strongbow

      …that’s 3 words

      • Super Jump Johnny Fishbone Man | August 23, 2011 at 9:07 am |

        Listen Brother, when I get you in the ring at the Pukesville Civic Center on August 31st in a two falls, winner-take-all cage match, and release the “Fishbone Flop” on your sorry ass, you won’t be able to even COUNT to three!! (remember, no hiiting the face or pulling hair though).

    • Ed Hughes | August 23, 2011 at 1:05 pm |

      Strongbow is in the upper left corner of the diagram, associated with (IIRC) the Native American node.

  • Fred | August 23, 2011 at 8:37 am |

    This is probably covered but I caught a glimpse of the LLWS at the gym and noticed that a lot of the kids were wearing pajamas pants. If this is the style the kids are wearing these days, then undoubtedly, it’s going to be what the future generations will determine to be the cool outfit. Looks like the short, tight pants with socks are going to be nonexistent in 20-30 years and then make a great comeback 50-60 years down the road.

  • Smitty | August 23, 2011 at 8:37 am |

    Here’s a link to the press release (see sub-link for photo gallery) about the new Maryland uniforms:

    http://www.umterps.c...

    Clearly, I’m in the minority here, but I like both helmets (though I agree with Frank that having something on the sides would have been nice) and several of the combinations, including red over white, white over red, white over gold, and white over black. And I actually like the gradient numbers.

    As for the others, some pretty rough ones. And the backs of the pants — ouch.

    Then again, I like all of them more than I like Athletic Director Kevin Anderson’s blazer.

  • BSmile | August 23, 2011 at 8:41 am |

    Those Orioles jerseys actually have the apostrophe…that wasn’t just from the Bowman art dept. Why in the world the apostrophe is there is really the fault of the team and bad grammar.

    • Joe Hilseberg | August 23, 2011 at 8:47 am |

      Are you sure about them really having it in 54?

      http://parkwaypastim...

      http://parkwaypastim...

      • The Jeff | August 23, 2011 at 8:54 am |

        Dressed to the Nines shows black lettering for 1954, and orange lettering for ’55 with no apostrophe.

        I’d like to see an actual photo to prove/disprove the apostrophe.

        • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 9:17 am |

          So would I.
          Those cards are, as we know, an artist creating “Orioles” out of Browns photos after the franchise’s off-season move to Baltimore.

          Similar situation to this Kansas City A’s hat, which existed nowhere but on the 1955 Topps cards..
          http://2.bp.blogspot...

          Same with this SF Giants hat…
          http://2.bp.blogspot...

        • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 9:18 am |

          oops…
          Giants hat…
          http://www.google.co...

        • Scott Little | August 23, 2011 at 10:10 am |

          Ricko,

          Agreed, it’s artist work, but, the artist had to have SOMETHING to look at when he was making those Orioles jerseys. Did he have a prototype jersey available to him? Pictures of the prototype jersey? I don’t really believe it’s the fault of Bowman artists, because an apostrophe was not added to any other teams jersey, and basically the entire Bowman set that year has artists touching up the jerseys…

        • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 10:21 am |

          You’re applying 2011 standards and mindest to 1954.
          My guess is the artist made an excess puncuation error, and very likely he’d finished them all so no correction was deemed worth the trouble…if it even were noticed.

          The mythical Giants hat is based on the Seals’ hats, of course. The “KC” hat has the look of being created out of thin air, or is some kind of fabrication based on the Moncarchs and/or Blues hats through the years. On the other hand, the A’s might have at least discussed the possibility of a “KC” because otherwise Topps could have simply continued the “A” hats on cards.

          What the hell, maybe Topps thought it would boost sales in Kansas City?

        • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 10:22 am |

          Also, I think virtually that entire Bowman set is colorized. So, yeah, there’s retouching on everything.

    • Lloyd Davis | August 23, 2011 at 3:03 pm |

      It’d be nice to have some supporting visual evidence.

      I thought the design on the cards might’ve been based on the International League Orioles, but couldn’t find a picture of the ’53 team.

      Or, the birds perched on the bat might’ve been pinched from the Cardinals’ uni, with a bit of imagination (and little spelling ability) devoted to coming up with the script.

  • Geeman | August 23, 2011 at 8:52 am |

    Maryland just transferred to the Arena Football League. Those may be the worst uniforms I have ever seen. Maryland has abandoned all pretense of being a college football team.

    Look who won the national championship the last few seasons and look at what they were wearing. They looked like a college footbal team then, and they looked like one 50 years ago.

  • R.S. Rogers | August 23, 2011 at 8:53 am |

    OK, so I don’t like the Terps football unis at all. But I like them a heck of a lot more than, and prefer them in every detail to, anything Oregon has worn lately.

    • Geeman | August 23, 2011 at 8:59 am |

      Guess who Maryland tried to copy?

      • Tim E. O'B | August 23, 2011 at 9:09 am |

        Correction: Guess who UA tried to copy?

  • War Damn Eagle | August 23, 2011 at 8:58 am |

    Those Maryland unis are too busy. They crammed about 20 different elements on that uni. I’m no fan of Oregon’s unis, but at least they focus on 1 or 2 crazy things and that’s it (i.e., the wings on the shoulder and the funky numbers and the different helmet colors). But the pants are plain, and they don’t multiple colors on any 1 uni.

    http://mantoos.com/w...

    Maryland’s unis have tortoise shell helmets, tortoise shell sleeves, multiple colors on each jersey, and too many stripes running all over the place.

    http://assets.sbnati...

    They just tried too damn hard.

    • Geeman | August 23, 2011 at 9:15 am |

      If only everyone at least tried to look as good as Auburn, Alabama, UCLA, Ohio State, etc., college football would look so much better.

      I can’t put my finger on it, but putting these kids in these silly costumes, believe it or not, is part of the problem in college football. Throw in artificial turf and you might as well just play the game in a TV studio, or have a simulated video game for that matter and skip the real game altogether.

      • Geeman | August 23, 2011 at 9:16 am |

        And Notre Dame, of course. Gosh, Notre Dame looks good on that grass field in the fall.

  • Geeman | August 23, 2011 at 8:58 am |

    The article on shorts length is good. I wouldn’t go back to 1970s and 1980s shorts, but the trend needs to swing back to normal. Just one of many things that’s wrong with sports uniforms these days. I’m sure there’s a very long, bagggy set of Maryland shorts from Under Armour out there somewhere that goes down to the ankle.

    • Cort McMurray | August 23, 2011 at 10:08 am |

      I couldn’t get past her description of Stefan Edberg as “toe headed”. I think she meant “towheaded”, tow, of course, being short strands of flax, and “towheaded” meaning people with fine, blonde hair. I’m not all that big a tennis fan, but I am certain that ol’ Stefan did not have toes on his head.

  • Michael Emody | August 23, 2011 at 9:06 am |
    • R.S. Rogers | August 23, 2011 at 10:02 am |

      Please let this be a UW lead entry/interview someday!

      • moose | August 23, 2011 at 2:21 pm |

        wouldn’t these be great strat-o-matic stadiums?

  • War Damn Eagle | August 23, 2011 at 9:07 am |

    Not a fan of that tortoise shell helmet. Really? Tortoise shell on the helmet, the shoulders, AND the numbers? Overkill.

    http://www.baltimore...

    • David | August 23, 2011 at 9:38 am |

      AND on the butt

      http://www.washingto...

    • Chris Holder | August 23, 2011 at 9:42 am |

      You know, I liked the frog-skin helmet that TCU had recently, and would have actually been ok with them keeping it. I think the way it was done was… well, it’s hard to say *tasteful*, but it didn’t look bad.

      But Maryland, my Maryland… oh how you disappoint me so. Those uniforms, aside from maybe the red jersey/white pant combo, are just absolutely horrible. You’ve really accomplished something when you make Oregon’s unis seem to be tame or at least “not so bad” in comparison.

    • R.S. Rogers | August 23, 2011 at 10:06 am |

      I don’t mind the turtle shell pattern in the numbers. I’m down with subtle details like that. It’s the gradient that I mind. It’s just bad design – not in the ugly/pretty subjective sense, but in the objective sense of achieving or not achieving the fundamental functional purpose of design – to apply a color treatment to uniform numbers that reduces legibility. Legibility is the whole point of the numbers! If you don’t want them to be easy to read, just don’t have them at all! And then explain to the NCAA why you’re violating the rules of the game; I’m sure your marketing department can come up with suitably plausible bullshit about sportsmanship and taking the “I” out of “team” or whatnot.

  • Tim E. O'B | August 23, 2011 at 9:15 am |

    Without the Oregons of the world, we wouldn’t appreciate the Penn States or Alabamas as much as we do. So, to Under Armour, I say thank you.

    Thank you for not doing this to my team.
    Thank you for making 11 other ACC teams have at least one game (over the next few seasons) as the best dressed on the field.
    Thank you for making Boise State seem reasonable.
    Thank you for making purple uniforms not look like such a terrible idea (though Paul should say that, I’m down with the PURP).
    And did I mention thank you for not doing this to my team?

  • Kevin | August 23, 2011 at 9:24 am |

    Wow Georgia and Maryland football lay to uniform turds within a week of each other. I thought the Georgia was terrible but the Marykland uniform makes Georgia look good by comparison.

    • corndog | August 23, 2011 at 2:22 pm |

      At least Georgia’s will only be for one game, thank god.

  • Steve Naismith | August 23, 2011 at 9:28 am |

    I HATE the University of Maryland. I HATE Under Armour and Nike for unveiling these increasingly bizarre uniform sets. I HATE this latest creation by UA with retina-scorching colors and unnecessarily random trim.

    But Paul, please – don’t pretend like you wouldn’t love covering this if (big IF here) UA had introduced a classic, throwback, Penn State or Alabama look for UMD yesterday. Corporate advertising isn’t leaving high-level athletics any time soon, so your protest is ill-advised.

    • Paul Lukas | August 23, 2011 at 9:32 am |

      You’re missing the point. If it was a classic, throwback look, it wouldn’t be glorifying Under Armour and therefore wouldn’t be a piece of corporate promotion. It also wouldn’t be a cynical attempt to sell superhero/video-game costumes to children.

      As for this:

      Corporate advertising isn’t leaving high-level athletics any time soon, so your protest is ill-advised.

      “Ill-advised”? How, exactly? This is like the classic “If rape is inevitable, relax and enjoy it” line. I prefer to call bullshit for what it is: bullshit.

      Gotta run, kids — see you tomorrow.

      • Ry Co 40 | August 23, 2011 at 9:53 am |

        and that’s a walk-off, game winning RBI, if you’re scoring at home kids…

        • Steve Naismith | August 23, 2011 at 10:32 am |

          Uhhhh – OK Big Papi, thanks for your take on the scoring. I’ll think of it as a fielder’s choice grounder, but whatever.

          Of COURSE the whole unveiling event is bullshit, no one is contesting that – but this is the era we live in. Do you really think that 5, 10, 30 years from now we WON’T see these sort of events? Are you going to be protesting all such uniforms into the future? Claiming UMD didn’t unveil a football uniform reeks of pretentiousness just as much as the whole UMD event reeks of corporate grandstanding – I could see your nose pointing in the air as I read that sentence.

        • Ry Co 40 | August 23, 2011 at 10:55 am |

          nonetheless…

        • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 11:10 am |

          Well, yeah, who really gives a shit that Kim Kardashian got married on Saturday?

          Doesn’t mean some of us shouldn’t keep pointing out that it is unbelievably stupid what a big deal was made of it.

        • J-Dub | August 23, 2011 at 3:24 pm |

          …and we certainly hope you are ;-)

        • J-Dub | August 23, 2011 at 3:25 pm |

          DOH! The above comment was meant to be a segue from the “scoring at home” comment, and looks terribly out of place now. Apologies.

      • Jason | August 23, 2011 at 10:10 am |

        Yes, “ill-advised” is exactly like “blame-the-rape-victim.” Next up: Under Armour is exactly like Hitler.

        • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 10:26 am |

          Ah, more intellectual insight by going to an extreme.

          Okay, let’s try this, heading the other direction on the severity scale to get at a basic concept: If your next door neighbor steals your newspaper every morning should you should simply let him continue to do it just because that’s just the way it is?

        • Jason | August 23, 2011 at 10:51 am |

          Ricko, I’m really sorry to have criticized Paul. Clearly, you’re pretty upset about it.

          Paul took a criticism of his analysis and compared it to rape-blaming. And somehow I’m going to an extreme by pointing out how hysterical — in the literal sense of the word — he is.

          I don’t know how to make it any more plain: I’m not trying to offer “intellectual insight” or “deep analysis” about anything that’s so superficially absurd.

        • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 11:05 am |

          Yeah, that’s why I mentioned the newspaper boosting thing. Seemed to make the point with a little less drama.

          Hell, there even are Nike ads here. Doesn’t keep Paul from skewering ‘em if he chooses to do so.

          I mean, who’s the attention whore, the one who doesn’t change his opinion based on your patronage, or the one who advertises with you even if you say bad things about them?

          This, of course, is a general discussion that had gone on for, literally, almost a century it seems.

  • John | August 23, 2011 at 9:30 am |

    When I first read the Maryland post I though it was Paul overreacting again concerning corporate douchebaggery…until I watched the video. Wow, that was sickening. Without even discussing the actual uniforms (which are nauseating), that is everything that is wrong with college football. Quit glorifying the whole mess. Just unveil your damn uniform and don’t do the whole pimp daddy side show. What a disaster!

  • ScottyM | August 23, 2011 at 9:33 am |

    Lol, Paul!

    Under Armour, you’re a joke.

    And congratulations to the University of Maryland for selling out and playing along with the silliness that has captured the fancy of collegiate athletics administrators.

    It’s a unique era. Mad money from multiple directions preying upon institutions’ funding fears.

    Relish it. It won’t last forever. Change is coming, folks. This nonsense, from the obscene (Miami, UNC, Auburn, OSU, etc.) to the inane (Oregon, Maryland, ASU), won’t last forever.

    • Geeman | August 23, 2011 at 9:35 am |

      ScottyM, please tell me it’s true. I want my college football back.

  • Dwight | August 23, 2011 at 9:39 am |

    As a Mizzou fan, I’m proud to say Mizzou no longer has the worst looking unis in the country. Thanks Maryland!

  • Geeman | August 23, 2011 at 9:52 am |

    I’m not sure I understand why these schools are catering to the fruity bubble-gum tastes of teenagers when it’s so clear that such tastes are not usually associated with winning programs.

    Didn’t the Steelers and Packers play in the Super Bowl last year? Didn’t Auburn and Alabama win the last two national championships? Don’t the Yankees sell the most jerseys in baseball? I mean, come on, folks, get a clue. Look respectable, play respectable.

    • Chris Holder | August 23, 2011 at 10:27 am |

      I think that’s why the schools/teams that usually do this nonsense are ones that don’t have much tradition of actually, you know… winning. What 5* prospect wants to go play for Maryland? Not many. But if you let his peers design your uniform, and there’s the off-chance he actually likes it, well, 18 year olds are dumb enough to sometimes choose a school based on them having a “cool” jersey. So I would assume these schools think they have nothing to lose. If changing the jerseys brings in a few good players they might not have otherwise got… well, then why not?

  • Rob S | August 23, 2011 at 9:53 am |

    Wow, Doctor Doom looks out of place among those Marvel heroes, considering he’s not fighting them. Unusual stuff there…

    … but at least it’s not NFL Superpro.

    • B-Rich | August 23, 2011 at 10:51 am |

      Yeah, why throw in a super-villain with all the super-heroes? I guess that at that point (1970), he’s one of Marvels’ most iconic characters… who else could you have put at that spot? I mean Wolverine and Luke Cage/Power Man were not even invented yet… maybe Namor or the Vision….

      It was great seeing this again for the 1st time in almost 40 years. I have a vague memory of a family friend having that program (as the scanned program was from a New Orleans game, probably THE SAME ONE)and him showing it to me around 1973-74… cool stuff.

      • BoilerWes | August 23, 2011 at 4:16 pm |

        I also enjoyed this, and it made me look for my old copy of the book More Than a Game, in which the “Beware the Linebacker” story appeared. I always thought The Hulk and Dick Butkus were a great combo!

  • Roger | August 23, 2011 at 9:58 am |

    It’s good to see that the 9ers don’t discriminate against muffin tops …

    http://www.iconsport...

  • Jason | August 23, 2011 at 9:58 am |

    I love the outrage over corporate promotion on a website that has about 7 advertisements on its banner, including a link inviting sports fans to “search the top betting websites.”

    Carry on with the comical — and hypocritical — ragegasm.

    • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 10:12 am |

      Isn’t that a little like saying political commercials are out of place in a news broadcast?

    • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 10:14 am |

      Or did you just think that would make you look really insightful?

      • Jason | August 23, 2011 at 10:25 am |

        Only if that news broadcast was an editorial rant calling for a ban on political commercials, Ricko. In which case, it would be pretty comical.

        And LMAO at your passive-aggressive second comment. Yes: I’m trying to be “really insightful” on a sports-uniform blog whose writer becomes cursing-mad over color combinations. Because it needs deep analysis. Or something.

        • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 10:33 am |

          You think that his, which is an internet publication, having ads someone has deep meaning?

          Or prohibits the publisher/editor from offering comment and criticism?

          I think a clear difference is that the ad content here does NOT determine the editorial content. Whereas the uni suppliers just as clearly ARE determining content for the schools.

          Dig an inch deeper, go beyond the readily discernable. Discovering the first layer on an onion is nothing.

        • Jason | August 23, 2011 at 10:41 am |

          No. I don’t think it has deep meaning. I think it’s comical that “corporate influence” makes somebody sputtering mad when he hawks internet gambling sites, credit cards, etc.

          LMAO about peeling back the onion on site about sports uniforms. Sorry I got you riled up.

        • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 10:50 am |

          Oh, good, was hoping you’d appreaciate the onion reference. :)

          Which means I am again obligated to mention my favorite Onion headline of all time…
          WHEELCHAIR ATHLETE FAKES RECOVERY
          TO GET OUT OF PRACTICE

      • Jason | August 23, 2011 at 10:32 am |

        While we’re talking about “insightful”-ness, let’s take a look at your earlier comment:

        ——-
        As moose pointed out over the weekend, it’s become clear that athletic departments now are more concerned with—and feel more allegiance to—their uni-supplier and 19-year-old student athletes (cough-cough) than they do their alumni.
        ——-

        You’re aware that Under Armour’s founder, Kevin Plank, played football for the University of Maryland, right?

        As for this:

        ——-
        Also, this business of “I’ll just put a stripe here for no other reason that because I want to” and having multiple jereys and pants and sometimes three helmets…just suggest an atmosphere of self-indulgence and excess permeating college football.

        And then things like the U of Miami situation come along and prove it.
        ——–

        I don’t even know how to debate somebody who draws parallels between: (1) random uniform striping; and (2) paying hookers and strippers to service college athletes.

        • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 10:42 am |

          Ah, the Rush Limbaugh approach. Pick apart a speech line by line and snipe. Never mind the overall thought.

          I was talking about an atmosphere of self-indulence and excess, a prevalent attitude. It shows in these designs and the multiplicity of uniforms and, yes, in the Miami situation. The fact that you don’t get that overall sense, or see how the two could at all relate, only shows that you’re reading one page at a time.

          Oh, well, as long as one alumnus was involved that invalidates my point. How could I have overlooked that?

        • Geeman | August 23, 2011 at 10:56 am |

          Yes, Jason, you are missing the big picture. I had similiar comments above. Look at the pictures of the prancing football players with the spotlight on them introducing the corporate clothing and you will see why it’s a perfect example of how college football has gotten turned upside down. There is a clear link in all of this.

        • Jason | August 23, 2011 at 11:10 am |

          Ricko, you fail at context. You’re doubling down on comparing graphic design to sex scandals and such, when schools like Ohio State and USC — with their glorious, classic garb — get busted for colossal violations.

          I mean, really: you’re making uniform stripes some sort of metaphor for a lunatic ponzi-scheme booster in south Florida.

          It’s absurd; and no amount of ad hominem, call-the-criticism-Limbaugh nonsense changes the ridiculousness of your comment.

          Anyway, sorry you got your feelings hurt on the internet. I’m out.

        • Matt | August 23, 2011 at 11:14 am |

          Give it a rest Jason. You’re only embarrassing yourself. Either you’re unable to get the points that are being made or you’re pretending you’re not getting them. Not sure which is worse.

        • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 11:15 am |

          I’m saying in design and with the players and boosters the overall attitude seem to be the same, “I can do this just because I want to do it.”

          You can’t see that parallel?

          Fine, stick with the tired and trite, “But you have ads on you’re website, so that makes you a hypocrite.”

          Bet no one’s ever made such an observation before.

    • Ry Co 40 | August 23, 2011 at 10:58 am |

      what do you think keeps this site free? if we had to pay to log on, would you post thoughts of “i can’t believe we pay for your opinions!”

      • Jason | August 23, 2011 at 11:11 am |

        No. I wouldn’t. Unless the proprietor wrote articles complaining about pay-per-view sporting events.

        Carry on.

        • Obbs | August 23, 2011 at 11:44 am |

          Hey, you said you were out, but now you’re back. And I’m sure you’ll still be here until you get the last word in. Have a nice long day reading the comments here at Uni Watch!

    • Fred | August 23, 2011 at 11:42 am |

      Ah Jason, I was like you once (only about a couple months ago) and I’ve learned something about this website that should help you out here. People here are SERIOUS about uniforms and colors matching. Let them be, take it with a grain of salt when they go on a rant about how Majestic, Nike, UA, Reebok are trashing uniforms. We each have a reason to be here. I like to stay abreast of uniform leaks and I mostly lurk around the comment section because there are some posters here who provide great insights about why certain uniforms and logos don’t work. I’ve learned a great deal about uniforms and am still learning how to filter out some of the things Paul and some people say. After all, fanatics need to take the charge (Paul running this website) and even

      People here take logos, uniforms, old stadiums personally. An attack on an uniform that is deemed awesome by Uni Watch (did I say this right? or is it uniwatch, uni-watch, Uni-watch, Uni-Watch? Uniwatch?)is a direct attack on them. Just let it go and you’ll enjoy this website and the people. They’re mostly harmless. :)

      • M-DOGG | August 23, 2011 at 1:09 pm |

        Yes, excellent advice. I too come to this site to keep updated on uniform changes – and have learned to keep a large grain of salt nearby when I visit. It is ironic Paul spends so much energy ranting against major companies constantly changing uniforms – when a lot of his audience comes here to find out about the changes.

        If uniforms never, ever changed (which, let’s face it, many people on this site would prefer) why would this site exist? Unless, of course, I am underestimating the number of stirrups fetishists out there.

        • moose | August 23, 2011 at 2:41 pm |

          there may be a lot of people here that are a bit provincial in their approach, but nobody here wants things to never change, that’s absurd. and paul isn’t railing a change, he quite often likes new looks. what he is taking issue with is how/why some of these things are happening. i find it amazing that people can read the same thing and get such completely different interpretations when to me it seems so obvious what he is saying. i’m not saying you have to have the same world view he has, but you have to at the very least understand what he is trying to say, which is not even remotely change is bad.

          and for the record, you are are underestimating.

        • M-DOGG | August 23, 2011 at 3:07 pm |

          “what he is taking issue with is how/why some of these things are happening.”

          Everyone knows why they are happening – for the same reason any uniform changes have ever happened. Money. Let’s stop pretending there was a magical time when major college and pro sports weren’t all about money. Yes, there’s more money now and yes the logo stuff is more overt, but there’s a tendency here to romanticize a past that never existed.

          And as far as people not liking change, come on. I’ve read this site for years and there’s no question a high percentage of the sentiment expressed here is old=good new=bad. Nothing wrong with that necessarily, but own it, at least.

      • hugh.c.mcbride | August 23, 2011 at 2:20 pm |

        Hey, waitaminute there. You mean to tell me that folks who come to a site whose tagline is “the obsessive study of athletics aesthetics” actually get, well, obsessive about issues related to athletics aesthetics?

        Well, color me gobsmacked. (Just make sure that the color is timeless, traditional, & not purple.)

        And *then* you’re going to try to tell me that folks who agree with what the founder of this site writes might take umbrage with those who don’t agree with what he writes?

        Well, there’s clearly *no* way this whole Internet fad is gonna catch on if people who disagree with each other actually express those disagreements in print.

      • Will S | August 23, 2011 at 2:36 pm |

        Very well put, guys. While old pictures of baseball cards and stirrups are cool, I would not keep coming back to this site if it weren’t for the coverage of new uniforms. I read to hear the opinion of a uniform design “expert,” but it seems like a lot of the time Paul and Phil will call something crap without saying why, and then everybody acts shocked when someone disagrees. Are the new uniforms busy? Yes. Is the tortoise shell a little overplayed? Yes. But what’s wrong with that? Maryland gets its colors from the state flag, which is one of the most unique flags in the world. It doesn’t resemble anything else. Why should the football uniforms try to resemble everyone else? What’s wrong with using all four of the colors that they have on their palate? It’s bold to be sure, but I say that’s okay. I see the UA references too, but to be fair, 99% of the uniform is Maryland’s, and the other 2 square inches are the UA logo. I like it being mixed up. I go to Notre Dame, home of the second most plain uniforms in college football, behind only PSU, and I know that heads would roll if we ever tried to change the blue and gold. I love those old-school uniforms. At the same time, though, one of the moments that the student body gets most excited about is the one time every year that the Irish come out of the tunnel in their green alternates. It’s exciting. Those Maryland players prancing around are excited to be repping the Terps, and if they like those new unis, I’d say that the odds are that they’ll play better. Isn’t a coach’s job to get the most out of his players? If this is doing that, what’s the problem?

        • Ry Co 40 | August 23, 2011 at 3:27 pm |

          i call bullshit on that. paul and phil always state why they hate a design element. and if they don’t, then it’s usually obvious. and i’m sure neither one of them would call themselves design “experts”

  • Ry Co 40 | August 23, 2011 at 10:04 am |

    hey, let’s hire a kid fresh out of the art institute and strat throwing jersey ideas at him! see what he comes up with!

  • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 10:05 am |

    Fittingly enough, from Fox Sports…
    http://msn.foxsports...

    • Kyle Allebach | August 23, 2011 at 11:06 am |

      Really? Oregon’s shitty little Nat’l losership combo? C’mon, there are better Oregon combos out there.

      • Geeman | August 23, 2011 at 11:44 am |

        The school colors are green and yellow. They should wear them.

  • Michael M | August 23, 2011 at 10:19 am |

    Maryland uniforms…my goodness..you guys have already said all that I’d have to say other than it’s days like this I am truly proud to be an Ole Miss fan. Our look today is virtually unchanged from our look fifty years ago.

    On the MLK Memorial article…this is the funniest thing I’ve read in a long time: “…it’s not like a dead liberal hero’s memory can catch Communist cooties from a sculptor.”

  • Kyle Allebach | August 23, 2011 at 10:46 am |

    The Chief’s (or at least Matt Cassel), are still wearing the AFL heritage patches.

    • Kyle Allebach | August 23, 2011 at 10:47 am |

      Wow. I think Old Navy’s grammar snafu rubbed off on me.

      • Shane | August 23, 2011 at 1:49 pm |

        Joe, who own the Chiefs?

        • moose | August 23, 2011 at 2:45 pm |

          ooooowns, oooooowns.

    • Brad | August 23, 2011 at 1:22 pm |

      Not the AFL heritage patch, but the Lamar Hunt memorial patch worn since 2007. It is a permanent fixture on the Chiefs jerseys.

      • Rob S | August 23, 2011 at 7:25 pm |

        Oh, good GOD! Not another one! Look, yes, George Halas was a revered figure for the Bears, and Al Lerner was important to the revival of the Browns (ignoring the fact that he was a key player in the old Browns leaving!), and certainly Lamar Hunt was important to the Chiefs and the AFL, but what the hell is with NFL teams memorializing owners on their uniforms in perpetuity? Why not just give each of them the title “Eternal Owner Of The Franchise” while we’re at it?

        Uniform memorials should be limited to one year. Leave the permanent memorials for the venues.

  • AnthonyTX | August 23, 2011 at 11:22 am |

    But here’s the weird part: That’s the jersey for the Orangeville Americans — who play in Orangeville, Ontario. “The team is full of American college hockey prospects,” says Will Leslie — hence the name.

    Of course, Canada is still part of North America. So the name “Americans” isn’t that much of a misnomer, since Canadians can be considered North Americans.
    Although they generally don’t call themselves that.

    • R.S. Rogers | August 23, 2011 at 12:13 pm |

      True, and in fact I’ve been chastised by Canadians for using the word “American” to refer to US nationals exclusively. But while some Rupertslanders do embrace the name “American,” or at any rate bristle at being excluded from it, you don’t see a lot of Canuckistanis wrapping themselves in the US flag or the Statue of Liberty.

      • Lloyd Davis | August 23, 2011 at 3:33 pm |

        Far as this Canadian’s concerned, Los Estadounidenses can have an exclusive on “American.” I’ve never understood Canadians who have a problem with it. I feel confident in labelling them a bunch of pompous, joyless pedants who should have a tarte au sucre thrown at them. Or better yet, a tourtière. Or locked in a room and forced to listen to an endless loop of Terry Jacks’ “Seasons in the Sun.”

        A further data point about those Orangeville Americans. They play in an outlaw league called the Greater Metro Junior A Hockey League. Another team in that league, the Shelburne Red Wings, had an all-Russian roster a year or so ago.

        Oddly enough, the town of Orangeville is named after Orange Lawrence, a Connecticut-born miller who set up shop in the area.

        There’s also a Junior A team, playing in a Hockey Canada-accredited league, called the Orangeville Flyers. Dale Hawerchuk, who played for Philadelphia at the end of his career, owned them for a while. They used to be the Crushers, as in Stone Crushers. If memory serves, there are a lot of quarries up that way.

        Hawerchuk’s franchise folded, but another team moved in and adopted the name.

        Based on all that, I don’t see the Orangeville Americans lasting long.

  • iLO | August 23, 2011 at 11:23 am |

    What was wrong with these again?

    http://cache4.asset-...

    • iLO | August 23, 2011 at 11:24 am |

      Maybe a bit too much like UGA?

  • Josh | August 23, 2011 at 11:38 am |

    UMD doesn’t get any credit for having a historical connection to UnderArmour?

    Had some random team unveiled uniforms by some random apparel line and “parroted” their slogan, that would be a little different than the UMD coach using the UA slogan. But UA has used UMD for marketing for quite some time, featuring the team very prominently in their commercials going back years. As a UMD alum, I can attest that UnderArmour (a massive international brand) is a real point of pride for the state of Maryland, the city of Baltimore, and the University of Maryland.

    The connection is deeper than corporate. Your assessment (and subsequent dismissal) is flawed.

    • snowdan | August 23, 2011 at 1:31 pm |

      But what right does that give them to trash the uniforms?

    • Geeman | August 23, 2011 at 1:33 pm |

      Historical? Since when — 2003? 1996? Eight or fifteen years of tradition and history? Meh.

      • Josh | August 23, 2011 at 4:10 pm |

        I will give it to you that the connection has not been around for long, but it’s been around for basically as long as UA has been around as a company. It’s not like UA was founded in the 30’s and UMD is jumping on some giant corporate bandwagon.

  • Meg | August 23, 2011 at 11:44 am |

    Is it possible that Plank pulled his both his UMD Alumni, booster, & Sponsor cards at the same time,on these designs? Edsall said he was looking for tradition. What was wrong with the Terps script? That IS Maryland. The Diamondback Terrapin is the State reptile and unlike all the tigers/warriors/wildcats/insert common team name here, there’s no other College or University that has the Terrapin as a mascot. Not to mention that the colors are the State Flag. I don’t mind the all black or the red top/white pants combo as much as those horrible all red or all gold uni’s.

  • Le Cracquere | August 23, 2011 at 11:44 am |

    I’m appalled at some of the choices on that linked “silliest military uniform” article. The Queen’s Life Guards? The Italian po-po rocking CAPES?! Leaving aside that police aren’t even the military, this author has got her “worst” seriously mixed up with her “awesomest.”

    A list of truly silly military attire should be topped by countries who default to baggy, styleless camouflage gear, whether in the field or on a base. Used to be, half the fun in being a soldier was looking dashing in one’s uni. Put dashingness back on the table, dammit … and elaborate facial hair while we’re at it. My inner Zouave demands it!

    • Lloyd Davis | August 23, 2011 at 3:39 pm |

      One of the silliest was when Canada sent soldiers to Afghanistan – equipped with green camouflage.

  • El Jefe | August 23, 2011 at 11:55 am |

    At least people won’t confuse the Maryland uniforms with North Carolina State unis at a distance, or any other team for that matter. I give them credit for using their full color pallete. I wish the turtle shell helmets were red instead of white. I do not like the gradient look on the numbers. Having the Mflag logo on the black helmet would have looked good. Other than that, I think they look great.

    • Rob S | August 23, 2011 at 7:33 pm |

      “At least people won’t confuse the Maryland uniforms with North Carolina State unis at a distancefrom space

      Fixed.

  • Jeff Rinker | August 23, 2011 at 12:08 pm |

    Still looking for a photo – but what the heck was going on with Giants punter Steve Weatherford’s pants/socks/Leggs last night? Looked ridiculous…

    • Rob H. | August 23, 2011 at 1:14 pm |
      • J-Dub | August 23, 2011 at 3:39 pm |

        Same look he used to rock with the Jets

  • Kek | August 23, 2011 at 12:16 pm |

    To paraphrase the great Silky Johnston: What can I say about those Maryland uniforms that hasn’t already been said about Afghanistan?

    • Chris Holder | August 23, 2011 at 12:55 pm |

      “Bombed out, and depleted!” :)

  • Paul lukas | August 23, 2011 at 12:25 pm |

    Checkingin on m phone…

    The “relax and enjoy it” it comment was not meant to equate uniform bs and rape; it was meant to respond to the notion that “this is just the way things are so get used to it and stop complaining,” which is what had been implied by the comment to which I was responding.

    As for ads on this site: classic straw man argument. As I have stated many times over the years, I’m not opposed to advertising and marketing — jet opposed to them where they don’t belong. A media outlet that gives away it’s content for free needs advertising — otherwise it will fold. There’s a big diff between that and the corporate nonsense I routinely decry.

    I realize facts are Incomvenient things to grapple with, but they’re facts whether you like them or not.

    • Jason | August 23, 2011 at 3:01 pm |

      Paul, you responded to a critique of your outrageous post by equating it to an insanely offensive critique of rape. It was inappropriate, and completely over the top. The reasonable response would be to say “bad analogy,” and be done with it–not deny what you plainly typed.

      I realize facts are Incomvenient things to grapple with, but they’re facts whether you like them or not.

      As for the ads: fine; who cares. It’s simply funny to see a commercial entity throw a fit over the way another entity markets itself.

      But when you howl about glorifying the brand, seemingly oblivious to the deep connection between the school and the brand’s founder, it comes off as ignorant. And that wouldn’t be a first for you w/r/t Maryland athletics. When the basketball team debuted black unis last year, you lumped them in as “black-for-black’s sake” — and had to be corrected by multiple readers about basic facts, like: Maryland’s colors mirror its flag; black is one of those colors; Len Bias used to rock black unis (and gold, and red, and white) all the way back in 1983.

      When you write a petulant screed like the current one, after a track record of ignorance regarding the subject of your rant, you should expect to get called on it.

      • Bernard | August 23, 2011 at 3:11 pm |

        Jesus, somebody is bored.

      • pflava | August 23, 2011 at 3:51 pm |

        Finally, someone here has the balls to call Paul out on his Maryland-related ignorance!

        • Steve Naismith | August 23, 2011 at 4:59 pm |

          Not ignorance; “they’re facts whether you like them or not”!

          The pomposity coming from this site’s founder and followers is getting old, fast.

      • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 5:44 pm |

        “It’s simply funny to see a commercial entity throw a fit over the way another entity markets itself.”

        What, we should leave such things up the the church, or other non-profit organizations?

        Do you write scathing e-mails to entertainment magazines filled with movie ads because they have the temerity to review those very movies? (Jeez, who do they think they are, anyway, commenting on a film’s viability?)

        Just curious regarding how you’re determining where to draw all this lines, chart these boundaries, for media.

        • Jason | August 23, 2011 at 6:21 pm |

          [Crash]This is hopeless. This is utterly f___ing hopeless.[/Davis]

          You’re taking this WAY too personally, Ricko. We should probably just agree to disagree and call it a day.

        • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 7:29 pm |

          I’m not offened. I’m asking you to explain the platform for your logic in terms other than Uni Watch. Show me that it applies elsewhere.

          That’s a valid request.

  • Jason | August 23, 2011 at 12:31 pm |

    “If it was a classic, throwback look, it wouldn’t be glorifying Under Armour and therefore wouldn’t be a piece of corporate promotion.”

    Please explain the difference in what Nike has done over the past few years with Oregon and the Pro Combat design they’ve done for certain programs? Are you going to say that that’s not “corporate promotion” and something that doesn’t “glorify” the Nike brand?

    • snowdan | August 23, 2011 at 1:35 pm |

      Do you not read this site?

  • AK 44 | August 23, 2011 at 12:40 pm |

    Re: Martin Luther King memorial, it does not look like him at all. I wonder if his family is pleased.

  • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 12:51 pm |

    Enough.

    Some levity.

    Name two great baseball players both born in Dorora, PA and on Nov. 21.

    • JDrive | August 23, 2011 at 1:44 pm |

      Stan Musial and Ken Griffey, Jr.

      • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 2:04 pm |

        Good job.
        Give the man a cee-gar.

  • moose | August 23, 2011 at 12:57 pm |

    hey rick
    last winter i was talking with the old man, who as you know was a tackle for maryland in the 60’s, about how under armour was going to turn marland into under-land like nike turned oregon into nike-gon, about the tail wagging the dog, etc. his reaction, for various reasons, many of which horrified me, was in support of it. so i sent him the link to the unveiling video, i wonder how he is going to feel now that he can see the result. his head is going to ex-plode.

    that said, of all the horror, the white helmet is pretty cool, if only they could have stopped the motif there. pair that with a modern version of this black and gold helmet and pants scarlet and white jersey look, and you’ve got something.

    • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 2:08 pm |

      Let us know what he says.
      Will be interesting.

    • LarryB | August 23, 2011 at 2:11 pm |

      Maryland had some decent looking unis in the early 60’s. Yes I know that era had pretty basic uniforms. The 1950’s had to be the most boring era every for college uniforms. Starting out with plain helmets and a single stripe. Later adding numbers on. The late 1920’s-1939 was probably my favorite era for college football uniforms.

      http://img.photobuck...

      http://img.photobuck...

      http://img.photobuck...

      • moose | August 23, 2011 at 2:59 pm |

        larry~
        i just asked phil for your email to tell you he was on the 68 team, i believe that was his senior year, might have been 69, i forget, he doesn’t talk much about it. and the photos you found are far and away their best look. combine that with the new tetudo helmet, and i think that would be pretty neat-o.

        ricko~
        i will let you know, should be pretty funny, but he might get back to me while i am at work, so i might not hear until late, so i may have to tell you tomorrow. should be funny.

        • LarryB | August 23, 2011 at 4:26 pm |

          Sounds good.Yes Marylaynd had some nice looking uniforms back then.

        • LarryB | August 23, 2011 at 6:05 pm |

          I found 1969 Maryland team photo.

  • Adam | August 23, 2011 at 1:12 pm |

    Are the Maryland jerseys REALLY that bad? And more importantly do they REALLY surprise anybody? The UMD/Under Armour connection exists because Plank played football at Maryland. He has done an insane amount for the school’s athletic program and he is going to use his mega company as a recruiting tool. While Oregon’s jerseys may not be the “nicest” or “typical” college uniforms, they are KNOWN for their connection with Nike, and that is exactly what Maryland wants. I could do without the gradient on the white and red jerseys but the all black look is pretty slick and I absolutely love both helmets. The four colors is a lot but they have always been one to embrace the state flag.

    • scott | August 23, 2011 at 2:11 pm |

      Under Armour also supplies uniforms for a number of minor league baseball teams in the Maryland area, including the Aberdeen IronBirds and York Revolution. In both cases, the uniforms stray far from the traditional.

  • LarryB | August 23, 2011 at 2:03 pm |

    Maryland had some wild unis in the early 30’s

    http://img.photobuck...

    http://img.photobuck...

  • Ry Co 40 | August 23, 2011 at 2:15 pm |

    wow, the new maryland jerseys almost DID end the world!

    • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 2:23 pm |

      I supposed the theory will be that if you drop a big enough turd…

  • Fred | August 23, 2011 at 2:19 pm |

    Earthquake was felt on the east coast. Shall we expect to see patches, tributes and players donning on hats of the Coast Guard since they have so valiantly responded to earthquake victims?

    • Kek | August 23, 2011 at 2:33 pm |

      OUTSTANDING! LMAO!

      • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 2:36 pm |

        My friend in downstate New Jersey (Philadelphia market) said his house shook for 15-20 seconds. More than a little disconcerting, I imagine.

        • J-Dub | August 23, 2011 at 3:42 pm |

          No correlation between the new UMD uniforms and the earthquake? Too soon?

        • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 3:45 pm |

          See RyCo’s comment right above.

        • Fred | August 23, 2011 at 4:18 pm |

          J-Dub, minus ten points for imitating Bill Simmons.

    • Rob H. | August 23, 2011 at 10:47 pm |
  • Darin | August 23, 2011 at 2:28 pm |

    What ever happened to the Uni Tweaks section??? Those were always fun to read!

    • Phil Hecken | August 23, 2011 at 2:38 pm |

      it will be back (i hope!!!) this weekend…just finishing up the final class of the summer this thursday (this one was by far the most intensive)…

      /fucking earthquakes

      • Darin | August 23, 2011 at 2:42 pm |

        Awesome! Btw, I didn’t feel the earthquake here in NJ. I feel ripped off.

  • pflava | August 23, 2011 at 2:29 pm |

    To me, the new Maryland uni’s push Oregon, Boise State, TCU, etc. aside and move straight to the number one spot on the worst dressed list for D1 college football. So congrats, Terps!

    If it weren’t for Virginia Tech wearing those Tron things in last years’ opener, the Terps new costumes might well have been up for consideration as college football’s all time worst uni.

    • pflava | August 23, 2011 at 4:03 pm |

      To be fair, the Terps have had some really good uniforms

      http://thesignalcall...

      And Maryland has the absolute coolest state flag.

  • Kevin W. | August 23, 2011 at 2:50 pm |

    I don’t understand the Maryland uniforms at all. If their intention was to be Under Armour’s Oregon, why do I see nothing but school colors? There’s no BFBS since black is actually one of their colors. Where’s the gray? Where’s the volt?

    I kid, of course. I don’t really care for the uniforms, but they could be so much worse. At least they had the shocking audacity to only use school colors. Phil Knight is probably having a heart attack.

    • Obbs | August 23, 2011 at 3:52 pm |

      Or sticking pins in his Kevin Plank voodoo doll. FWIW, the white unis are fare better than the black ones

  • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 3:12 pm |

    btw, Twins waived Jim Thome.

    Scuttlebutt is that either the White Sox or Indians will claim him. In the case of the Sox would be more to keep the Indians from doing so.

    • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 3:16 pm |

      First move in what I think will be a certain amount of housecleaning (mostly meaning payroll cutting) for the Twins. All the injuries forced them to pay so many minor leaguers the major league minimum that they they’re a tad over budget…and now appear to be unquestionably out of the race.

      Would be good to see Thome finish in Cleveland, seeing as he’s likely to go into HOF wearing their hat.

  • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 3:46 pm |

    So quiet here.
    Has the Eastern Seaboard shut down?

    • Geeman | August 23, 2011 at 3:54 pm |

      We’re all just a little nervous for the aftershocks to come. Felt our tall building here in N.C. wobble.

    • JamesP. | August 23, 2011 at 3:55 pm |

      I think so, Ricko. Earthquake happens on East Coast and the world stops. Earthquake happens on West Coast and people yawn and ask how big it was. Earthquake happens in fly over country and people talk about it two days later after the East and West Coast media pick up on the story…

      • BurghFan | August 23, 2011 at 8:23 pm |

        What would a coating of snow do in most of those West Coast spots where they yawn at earthquakes? People react strongly to phenomena that are out of the ordinary for them wherever they are.

  • walter | August 23, 2011 at 3:54 pm |

    Still in one piece- somehow managed not to feel a thing. As for the Maryland football uniforms, I certainly think they are overdone, but I’m for a team trying to look different. I didn’t care for the fact the five players on the cover of SI’s College Football preview all looked like they played for the same team. *That’s* uncalled for. With a hundred or so BCS teams, there’s certainly room for one who wants to look like a turtle, God bless ‘em.

  • marr | August 23, 2011 at 3:56 pm |

    This is an atrocious attitude on covering new uniforms. I’m sorry they don’t have quaint stripes or a layout from 1960. Look, I’m not saying they are gorgeous, but you need to stop being so dismissive of modern uniform design and stop having a hard-on for traditional (antiquated) designs.

    • Geeman | August 23, 2011 at 4:34 pm |

      Tell that to the Super Bowl teams from last year.

      No, bad is bad, period. Call it ugly when it’s ugly. It’s ugly. Nothing wrong with new, but new ugly doesn’t cut it. You might get tired of your girlfriend and want a new one, but if the new one is ugly you’re not going to get her just because she looks different than the old one.

    • Ricko | August 23, 2011 at 4:36 pm |

      “traditional (antiquated)”

      Those are synonymous?

      That thinking is as narrow as what you’re accusing others of doing when you say they see anything new as bad.

      Can’t spreak for anyone else, but I like (just off the top of my head)…
      Broncos, Seahawks, Cal, West Virginia, Gophers (except for the superfluous white helmet), Miami Hurricanes, most all of Oregon’s combos…

      I love good, well-designed new.
      Hack new I’m not so crazy about.

    • Kek | August 23, 2011 at 4:42 pm |

      I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. While I disagree with some of Paul’s stances on corporations, branding, logo creep, etc I see where he’s coming from. All change isn’t necessarily good to all people. Where I see the game changing and, for the most part, being on board with it (although I am NOT on board with this Maryland set or that Georgia pro combat), Paul (and many UW readers) disagree. That’s fine, that’s what makes the world go round.

      If this where my blog, I would have posted as many photo links as possible and broken down the looks of the uniforms and only the uniforms. I would not talk about any retail showcase or corporatespeak but review the uniforms.

      However, I know how strong Paul’s feelings towards this are and not only would I not expect him to comment on corporate D’baggery, I would feel phony if he DIDN’T.

      I think it’s a hard thing too, with this blog and the ticker concept. What unveilings deserve full post status versus those that just get ticker mention. I think South Florida’s kits are great and they are mixing and matching too. I’m pretty sure this was just a ticker mention. I get that smaller schools aren’t going to get top billing and again I’m reminded that this blog is simply an extension of the ESPN column which no doubt will be thorough in showcasing all the new stuff.

      • marr | August 23, 2011 at 5:24 pm |

        Thank you, you said it better than I did. Something about this site makes me post harsh comments and then feel bad.

    • Simply Moono | August 23, 2011 at 4:55 pm |

      “This is an atrocious attitude on covering new uniforms.”

      Maybe if you were running the show, you can say that, but you can’t, because this is Paul’s site. He called it like he saw it; ugly. Us readers just so happen to agree, and not because it’s “modern”, but because it’s simply ugly.

      Instead of strteotyping all Uni Watchers to be flannel baseball uniform-loving, traditionalist Pedobears, you could ask a logical question as to why we don’t like the new Maryland uniforms.

      For example: I (Gray For Gray’s Sake notwithstanding) loved Oklahoma State’s new football uniforms, especially given the fact that they’re an major upgrade over what they used to wear. I think it’s one of the best “modern” looks in college football right now, if not the best.

      AND WHILE WE’RE ON THE SUBJECT OF UNI-UPGRADES:

      As horrendous as the new Terps costumes are, they are sadly, an upgrade over their Denver Broncoesque design that they previously wore (as an added aside, I also really like that Florida State Pro Combat uni. My “Uniform Guilty Pleasure”, I suppose). This is purely from a design perspective, and nothing related to manufacturer hierarchy. Nike has had their awesome and ugly designs, UnderArmour likewise, and so on.

      My point? If you know what you’re doing (and in today’s one-extreme-or-the-other society, most [but not all] people don’t), you can design a “modern” uniform that looks good.

      And on your “…stop having a hard-on for traditional (antiquated) designs.” comment: as proven by this schematic of the 1934 N.Y Football Giants, just because something is old doesn’t mean that it’s good.

  • JimWa | August 23, 2011 at 4:13 pm |

    ESPN.com headline:

    Crist named Irish starting QB

    Once I re-read it, I was more than a little disappointed.

    • hugh.c.mcbride | August 23, 2011 at 11:17 pm |

      As were Golden Domers across the nation, I’m sure … :-)

  • Anthony | August 23, 2011 at 4:55 pm |

    Agree with your description on Bleacher Report. I used to write a lot there, but after I realized that A) I couldn’t write very well, B) It’s filled with nothing but uberfans and trolls, C) the only articles that get reads are the ones that are sensationalist bullsh*t and that objectify women, and D) anyone can write there. All you need is an e-mail address. I mean, how else could I be floating in the Red Sox top writers list for several months from 2009 to 2010.

    • Anthony | August 23, 2011 at 4:58 pm |

      But, hey, at least they’re not getting paid for their plagiarism.

  • JenInChicago | August 23, 2011 at 5:18 pm |

    According to Rant Sports, the Blackhawks won’t be wearing an alt jersey this year. Thank God….I hated those Black “barber pole”-like alts.

    http://t.co/uTPfzdC

    • Rob S | August 23, 2011 at 8:06 pm |

      A big stripe like that doesn’t make that “barber pole”…

      This is a barber pole jersey.

    • Teebz | August 23, 2011 at 8:47 pm |

      I’ll take them over the god-awful black alternates any day of the week and twice on Sundays. It has colour, and it has history – two things that cannot be denied in a sport where colour matters so much.

  • JimWa | August 23, 2011 at 5:23 pm |

    I’m very happy for these little leaguers. They should be very proud to be playing at the LLWS. Good for them.

    OK. I’m done with it. Can we PLEASE have something BESIDES the LLWS take up 75% of ESPNs broadcasting now?

    • traxel | August 23, 2011 at 9:55 pm |

      Amen.

    • Phil Hecken | August 23, 2011 at 10:32 pm |

      “Can we PLEASE have something BESIDES the LLWS take up 75 0% of ESPNs broadcasting now?”

      (fixed)

      i can’t even watch it anymore…caught highlights the other day…three different kids, all in pajamas, hit three homes runs (one was a back-to-back jack) and every single one of them stood at the plate, watched it for a few seconds, then did some kind of styling bat-flip and strode around the bases in record (long) time

      if i were the coach of the opposition, the third kid up (especially after the back-to-back jobs) would have been wearing one in his ear, and i wouldn’t have hesitated to tell my own kid to charge the mound if there was a retaliatory pitch

      not sure which team it was (maybe venezuela??? i think it was against canuckistan) but it doesn’t matter…that sort of showmanship has NO PLACE in LL period…the coach for that team should be sent back home and the team should have to forfeit its remaining games

      im not talking about youthful exuberance or a quick glance at a long shot and then a sprint around the bases…this was total LOOK AT ME showboating by the team that hit the dingers and incredibly poor sportsmanship…christ, barry bonds wouldn’t have pulled that shit

      this is why I’m so glad PL doesn’t even give the LLWS a ticker mention, much less a column

  • Connie | August 23, 2011 at 5:44 pm |

    I really like “Petrels” as the nickname for good ol’ Oglethorpe U.

  • DenverGregg | August 23, 2011 at 6:01 pm |

    This (probably fake) Gators uni could be the only NCAA concept I find to be uglier than that Maryland mess. Some elements are ok, but overall way too many bumperstickers. However, the Terp turds are still good looking compared to the clown suits worn by the Atlanta Falcons.

    • The Jeff | August 23, 2011 at 7:34 pm |

      That fake Gators uni is awesome.

      • Simply Moono | August 23, 2011 at 8:09 pm |

        “That fake Gators uni is awesomeful.”

        (Fixed)

        • Simply Moono | August 23, 2011 at 8:10 pm |

          Sans the ‘e’ after ‘aw’, that is.

  • daveclt | August 23, 2011 at 8:53 pm |

    This is a few days late, but has anyone commented on the fact that the SI college preview cover features 5 red/white teams from their top 10? What’s even odder is that it doesn’t appear that SI mentions this anywhere. I was expecting a “Red Wave” title or something like that. It’s very unlikely that they just happened to pick players from Alabama (#1), Oklahoma (#2), Stanford (#4), South Carolina (#7), and Nebraska (#9). It’s a really confusing cover to look at, with the helmet-less uniforms being so similar. Seems like a team photo at first glance.

  • DW95MVP | August 23, 2011 at 10:07 pm |

    Has anyone noticed Vance Worley wearing some older Nike model cleats?

    http://d.yimg.com/a/...

    made popular by Kenny Lofton…

  • Jim Vilk | August 23, 2011 at 11:37 pm |

    At the rate things are going, the 5&1 lists may have to be renamed the 1&5…

    • Mike Engle | August 24, 2011 at 12:27 am |

      Phil just got a quotation for Saturday’s column.

  • Clint W | August 24, 2011 at 12:39 am |

    The new Cy-Hawk trophy for the winner of the Iowa-Iowa State football game, mentioned in Monday’s ticker, has already been scrapped.

  • Submarine Horn | August 24, 2011 at 2:23 am |

    As a Maryland alumnus, it hurts to see the script Terps helmet go. I’m not a fan of all the modern changes being made. Now, I’m probably being biased here, but I feel that these unis will slowly grow on people (guess that depends on how old you are). I could just be in denial.

    Paul posted a picture of one of the worst color schemes and bailed on even posting or commenting on the other color schemes. Not interested? It’s still a football uniform that’s going to be worn on Saturdays. Since when did a uniform analyst become so pretentious? The white helmet, red top, and white pants don’t look that bad. And the black helmet, white top, and black pants are decent too.

    Ok, I get it.. they’re ugly and I’m not disagreeing here. Matter of fact, I’m sure everyone agrees with you, Paul. But, for a site that breaks down uniforms, at least break down something… state representation, perhaps? How many other schools incorporate this much of their state into their uniforms?

    Corporate masturbation session? Interesting. if UA corporately masturbates, then Nike must be participating in serious corporate orgies. UA’s still a young company on the rise trying to compete with Nike, and at the end of the day it’s still a business. So, calm down. Did everyone immediately think the first Air Jordan’s were stunning when first released? No, they were controversial because MJ continued to wear them, which led to its popularity. Nike wouldn’t have wanted it any other way.

    By the way, funny you mention corporately masturbation for someone who’s an extension of ESPN. Fun fact for you, ESPN wanted Dan Patrick to gain weight so that he could say he lost weight in those NutriSystem ads. Real reason why he quit ESPN. Is that why you’re thin?

  • Fred | August 24, 2011 at 7:53 am |

    [strikethrough]hello[/strikethrough]

  • Nick | August 24, 2011 at 8:03 am |

    “An apostrophe is the difference between a business that knows its shit and a business that knows it’s shit.”

  • Tom | August 25, 2011 at 5:33 pm |

    The Giants wear the same pants at home and on the road. Always Gray. There was nothing special about what they wore on Monday.