Fermaninator says get your Adidas Cane gear

Adidas will have the team wearing uniforms that don't even have the school colors

facebook_32fed9f0691dd4e24ce4_BKCM2011-12BE_v_Marquette_0826.jpg

Didn't know smoke was a school color

Smoke is different. It's a neutral color, and neutral colored unis are made for schools all the time. The point I'm trying to make is that Adidas made those uniforms above for Louisville and the color is some orange/pink hybrid that isn't even remotely close to the red they use for their uniforms.

It's not that big of a deal to me if Miami goes with Adidas, I just don't want them making unis like those Louisville ones where the team ends up wearing neon orange and neon green unis looking more suited for a rave, than a football game.

do the schools not have any say in this? i have no idea how it works, but i would imagine UM has the final say and stamp of approval. so if adidas comes up with crap designs and colors that arent ours, couldnt we just say no and specify the colors have to be right?

that's the thing w/ switching to a new company...yes, UM can say no, but you're putting Adidas behind the eight ball in creating something quick...you go through a growing pain in sizes, comfort, materials, and designs for about 2-3 years b/c they don't have a handle on your likes. While a long time partner, like Nike...well they are already working on designs well before and if you don't like, they have an option A, B, C, D, E, F and G already lined up...plus, they already know your vision. That pretty much happens everytime a school switches endorses, though.

and are all those things worth 3 million per year? in my opinion, as long as adidas comes out with a decent design thats cool and not too crazy, this is a positive. $3 mil a year extra, when everyone complains about how little money we have, is a big deal. i think people are blowing this whole thing way out of proportion. i just hope we dont become their oregon or maryland and have us wearing ugly crazy unis all the time.

and as for your plan a, b, c, d, e, f, etc....theres no way in **** adidas wont have a plan a, b, c, d, e, particularly because they have no history with us. you think they will risk just having 1 design for us, and if we dont like it, be caught with their pants down after spending major money to have us be one of their flagship brands? i think it all comes down to UM being involved and making sure they dont make us into oregon or maryland. in my opinion, a modern touch on the 00-03 style unis would be great. i know people like the 80's/early 90's look, thats fine with me too. but our uniforms this year i thought were hideous...so why not try adidas, especially when theyre giving us $3 mil on top of nikes offer
 
Advertisement
Adidas will have the team wearing uniforms that don't even have the school colors

facebook_32fed9f0691dd4e24ce4_BKCM2011-12BE_v_Marquette_0826.jpg

Didn't know smoke was a school color

Smoke is different. It's a neutral color, and neutral colored unis are made for schools all the time. The point I'm trying to make is that Adidas made those uniforms above for Louisville and the color is some orange/pink hybrid that isn't even remotely close to the red they use for their uniforms.

It's not that big of a deal to me if Miami goes with Adidas, I just don't want them making unis like those Louisville ones where the team ends up wearing neon orange and neon green unis looking more suited for a rave, than a football game.


Louisville players loved this jersey combo.
 
Adidas will have the team wearing uniforms that don't even have the school colors

facebook_32fed9f0691dd4e24ce4_BKCM2011-12BE_v_Marquette_0826.jpg

Didn't know smoke was a school color

Smoke is different. It's a neutral color, and neutral colored unis are made for schools all the time. The point I'm trying to make is that Adidas made those uniforms above for Louisville and the color is some orange/pink hybrid that isn't even remotely close to the red they use for their uniforms.

It's not that big of a deal to me if Miami goes with Adidas, I just don't want them making unis like those Louisville ones where the team ends up wearing neon orange and neon green unis looking more suited for a rave, than a football game.


Louisville players loved this jersey combo.

And I'm sure a ton of our players liked the new uniforms too, but it seems that a good portion of the fans here don't like them at all. That's another point I was trying to get at, if you hate our current unis, just imagine what Adidas could do if they go the "Louisville" route.
 
The problem with the uniforms this season wasn't the uniforms at all. It was the helmets. Rid the helmets and fan response is totally different.
 
I don't trust this administration in making long-term deals. They give out extensions to lame-duck coaches like candy. They should wait until the new president comes in... Knowing this administration, we'll probably put the extra 3 million from Adidas in woman's water polo.
 
The problem with the uniforms this season wasn't the uniforms at all. It was the helmets. Rid the helmets and fan response is totally different.

I liked the uniforms this year and I'm a traditionalist when it comes to the Miami jerseys.

I realize the players/recruits/young people like the supped up unis better then the traditional style that most the older fans prefer. If the players like him that is good enough for me. These were far better then the last 2 sets that we rolled out.
 
The switch of a brand doesn't really matter to me as long as adidas doesn't go overboard with it or stay to plain with it. Will it effect recruiting? Maybe a few guys, but if we win players are going to come regardless. They make some nice stuff and getting $3 million extra is huge especially if it all goes back into athletics but with our BOT and AD i doubt it will.

My other concern, mainly for football, is that that $3 million doesn't all go to football, it's divided among all sports so the benefits wont be noticed as much as you would think. It will help if it all goes to athletics no doubt though.
 
The problem with the uniforms this season wasn't the uniforms at all. It was the helmets. Rid the helmets and fan response is totally different.

Yeah the helmets and non traditional color combos (like the FAMU combo) are what killed them. I mean they still aren't my favorite thing I've ever seen but traditional combos and helmets would go a long way.

FYI everyone. According to some, Adidas plans to use us as their Oregon, but with some of the traditional stuff, whatever that means. So I kind of lol at all of the people who use Nikes latest Miami uniforms as an argument against Nike.
 
The problem with the uniforms this season wasn't the uniforms at all. It was the helmets. Rid the helmets and fan response is totally different.

I agree. Take away those other helmets and leave just the one traditional U helmet and it wouldn't have been so bad. The green wasn't so bad but that orange helmet was horrible. And IVe never been a fan of the pajama look. Color shirt/white pants or white shirt/colored pants please. All white is ok though. Can Adidas do this? I honestly have no idea. Nike kept trying to spice something up that didn't need spicing up. Sometimes less is more.
 
Advertisement
The switch of a brand doesn't really matter to me as long as adidas doesn't go overboard with it or stay to plain with it. Will it effect recruiting? Maybe a few guys, but if we win players are going to come regardless. They make some nice stuff and getting $3 million extra is huge especially if it all goes back into athletics but with our BOT and AD i doubt it will.

My other concern, mainly for football, is that that $3 million doesn't all go to football, it's divided among all sports so the benefits wont be noticed as much as you would think. It will help if it all goes to athletics no doubt though.

This comment was my original argument in the first place. First Nike is thee no. 1 sports brand...associated w/ such brings clout regardless of what some think. Second, it COULD possibly hurt recruiting w/ such a switch as Nike is thee true big boy in football. Third, taken in consideration points 1 and 2, making the switch better put our athletics dept in a better situation (in particular football). If it doesn't, then why risk points 1 and 2 for more money if the money is not aiding our athletic dept?? I'll be damned to see something other than the top brand sponsor our school AND that extra money went to more non-athletic facilities and our football program and it's facilities remain sh!!ty??
 
The switch of a brand doesn't really matter to me as long as adidas doesn't go overboard with it or stay to plain with it. Will it effect recruiting? Maybe a few guys, but if we win players are going to come regardless. They make some nice stuff and getting $3 million extra is huge especially if it all goes back into athletics but with our BOT and AD i doubt it will.

My other concern, mainly for football, is that that $3 million doesn't all go to football, it's divided among all sports so the benefits wont be noticed as much as you would think. It will help if it all goes to athletics no doubt though.

This comment was my original argument in the first place. First Nike is thee no. 1 sports brand...associated w/ such brings clout regardless of what some think. Second, it COULD possibly hurt recruiting w/ such a switch as Nike is thee true big boy in football. Third, taken in consideration points 1 and 2, making the switch better put our athletics dept in a better situation (in particular football). If it doesn't, then why risk points 1 and 2 for more money if the money is not aiding our athletic dept?? I'll be damned to see something other than the top brand sponsor our school AND that extra money went to more non-athletic facilities and our football program and it's facilities remain sh!!ty??

Exactly.
 
The switch of a brand doesn't really matter to me as long as adidas doesn't go overboard with it or stay to plain with it. Will it effect recruiting? Maybe a few guys, but if we win players are going to come regardless. They make some nice stuff and getting $3 million extra is huge especially if it all goes back into athletics but with our BOT and AD i doubt it will.

My other concern, mainly for football, is that that $3 million doesn't all go to football, it's divided among all sports so the benefits wont be noticed as much as you would think. It will help if it all goes to athletics no doubt though.

This comment was my original argument in the first place. First Nike is thee no. 1 sports brand...associated w/ such brings clout regardless of what some think. Second, it COULD possibly hurt recruiting w/ such a switch as Nike is thee true big boy in football. Third, taken in consideration points 1 and 2, making the switch better put our athletics dept in a better situation (in particular football). If it doesn't, then why risk points 1 and 2 for more money if the money is not aiding our athletic dept?? I'll be damned to see something other than the top brand sponsor our school AND that extra money went to more non-athletic facilities and our football program and it's facilities remain sh!!ty??

Exactly.

Like it's so black and white, but all these folks are trying to put different spins on it. Who cares if we get an extra $3m if it's not going to help our football program?? Why potentially hurt jersey sales, recruiting by making this switch if it doesn't benefit our football team??? If they (the admin) were to say, 'hey guys, look, we're thinking about making this switch to gain more money for the football team so we can actuallytake a step in the 21st century' then sign me up...we could be sponsored by rockport for all the **** i care...but the fact is, this deal is for them, and them only.

This admin has shown nothing but greed, at any cost, w/o the football team being the benefactor (see Nevin Shapiro). We pay coaches like its still 1995 making it a less than attractive job regardless of where we are situated; and then when it comes to doing the right thing by buying out a mistake (Al Golden) and starting anew for the betterment of the team, we make cloud excuses, this is really golden's first year excuses, oh, the defense has improved greatly excuses, blah, blah, blah...when the real is they don't want to give up that buy out money.

Where's all that donor money? Where's all that ticket sale money? Let's be real, the U is all about football. Yeah b-ball is coming up, but we've been known for football and in some regards, baseball; yet, our football team has been hurting the most. B-ball team, who was irrelevant at the time, gets a new arena, but we still playing out of no-life stadium? The football team has been treated as a pawn and money cow, and this Adidas deal for "more money" is nothing more than a pawn to garnish more money for the admin and not the football program and that's why I'm ****ed about this news. F a brand, let's be real...this deal won't help no body but this funky ***, lazy ***, incompetent *** admin.
 
Advertisement
I hate Nike with a passion. Their products are so overhyped and overpriced it's ridiculous. I used to be a "Nike guy" but eventually I wised up. They're a marketing machine, nothing more.
 
Why train in these

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1418958915.506367.webp

When you can look like a character from the movie Avatar and train in these

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1418958945.888583.webp
 
Back
Top