Couple things on Adidas deal

[DTP]

Twenty years ago, Miami was Nike's flagship. As the years passed, Miami got put on the back burner in terms of payments, design and hype. The Nike gear just got crappier as the years went on.

Adidas picks up the apparel contract and immediately throws a boatload of money at Miami. The first batch of jerseys was pretty bad but they've actually made improvements to Miami's gear as opposed to just trotting out horrible color combinations to try to squeeze a couple extra dollars from fans.

One company gives a crap about Miami while the other clearly had pushed Miami to the bottom of their list.

 

[edge3241]

Adidas's stock has more than doubled since their partnership with the Canes. Just saying....

 

[Bunker Mentality]

From this ugly ****

View attachment 48425



To this

View attachment 48426


I'd say one company doesn't understand the brand but you have the wrong company

Read the thread, chiefy. These unis were done at Richt's behest, which included moving the logo from on top of the school and city name.





And, how about from this


View attachment 48437View attachment 48439View attachment 48440View attachment 48441View attachment 48443




To this ugly ****


View attachment 48438


View attachment 48433View attachment 48434View attachment 48435View attachment 48436View attachment 48442

The 1st year sucked no doubt but Adidas is a company who apparently cares about the brand because the next year they fixed everything. They are awesome and best we have had in 15+ years. Nike was giving us ugly **** for over a decade

I'm not sure why you are highlighting those Nike uniforms. Those were dog**** for the most part.

Richt made them fix the unis and that's my point. You all should give them credit for responsiveness, yes, but Adidas need(ed) a lot of interdiction when Nike had better creative intuition going with an off-retro look.

This is to say nothing about my support for one over the other because I don't come to the defense of brands like that unless I own stock. It's not that serious for me and I think the new unis look great, FWIW.

What's happening here are the easily-triggered feeble-minded stans of on the site are looking for anything to be buthurt and b**ch about, because that's just what they do.

I'm highlighting the unis you call dog**** (1) in reply, and (2)for the sake of showing the Adidas work was worse than dog****, because there's not a fan on this site (including you) who would choose Adidas year 1 gear over the last Nike unis.

CMR had nothing to do with the uniform change. Last year, he confirmed the uniform change was already decided previously. He also said he was a big fan of the uniforms. Try again.... better yet, take this L and move on.

Not how I remembered it. I'm sure a change in the unis were planned because they had no choice but to go back to the drawing board after that epic fail. It's my understanding that Richt gave direction about the retro look he wanted for the unis and of course I'm sure he approved it, but post a link to verify what you say i'll take the L on it. Coming out the gates with that tacky look showed poor judgment, regardless.

 

[Hurracanes]

Read the thread, chiefy. These unis were done at Richt's behest, which included moving the logo from on top of the school and city name.





And, how about from this


View attachment 48437View attachment 48439View attachment 48440View attachment 48441View attachment 48443




To this ugly ****


View attachment 48438


View attachment 48433View attachment 48434View attachment 48435View attachment 48436View attachment 48442

The 1st year sucked no doubt but Adidas is a company who apparently cares about the brand because the next year they fixed everything. They are awesome and best we have had in 15+ years. Nike was giving us ugly **** for over a decade

I'm not sure why you are highlighting those Nike uniforms. Those were dog**** for the most part.

Richt made them fix the unis and that's my point. You all should give them credit for responsiveness, yes, but Adidas need(ed) a lot of interdiction when Nike had better creative intuition going with an off-retro look.

This is to say nothing about my support for one over the other because I don't come to the defense of brands like that unless I own stock. It's not that serious for me and I think the new unis look great, FWIW.

What's happening here are the easily-triggered feeble-minded stans of on the site are looking for anything to be buthurt and b**ch about, because that's just what they do.

I'm highlighting the unis you call dog**** (1) in reply, and (2)for the sake of showing the Adidas work was worse than dog****, because there's not a fan on this site (including you) who would choose Adidas year 1 gear over the last Nike unis.

CMR had nothing to do with the uniform change. Last year, he confirmed the uniform change was already decided previously. He also said he was a big fan of the uniforms. Try again.... better yet, take this L and move on.

Not how I remembered it. I'm sure a change in the unis were planned because they had no choice but to go back to the drawing board after that epic fail. It's my understanding that Richt gave direction about the retro look he wanted for the unis and of course I'm sure he approved it, but post a link to verify what you say i'll take the L on it. Coming out the gates with that tacky look showed poor judgment, regardless.

Here is your L. Fast Forward to 8:15. Ironic, Nike went back to the drawing board every 3-4 years but that's ok because it was Nike....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaPU-3259kg

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Read the thread, chiefy. These unis were done at Richt's behest, which included moving the logo from on top of the school and city name.





And, how about from this


View attachment 48437View attachment 48439View attachment 48440View attachment 48441View attachment 48443




To this ugly ****


View attachment 48438


View attachment 48433View attachment 48434View attachment 48435View attachment 48436View attachment 48442

The 1st year sucked no doubt but Adidas is a company who apparently cares about the brand because the next year they fixed everything. They are awesome and best we have had in 15+ years. Nike was giving us ugly **** for over a decade

I'm not sure why you are highlighting those Nike uniforms. Those were dog**** for the most part.

Richt made them fix the unis and that's my point. You all should give them credit for responsiveness, yes, but Adidas need(ed) a lot of interdiction when Nike had better creative intuition going with an off-retro look.

This is to say nothing about my support for one over the other because I don't come to the defense of brands like that unless I own stock. It's not that serious for me and I think the new unis look great, FWIW.

What's happening here are the easily-triggered feeble-minded stans of on the site are looking for anything to be buthurt and b**ch about, because that's just what they do.

I'm highlighting the unis you call dog**** (1) in reply, and (2)for the sake of showing the Adidas work was worse than dog****, because there's not a fan on this site (including you) who would choose Adidas year 1 gear over the last Nike unis.

CMR had nothing to do with the uniform change. Last year, he confirmed the uniform change was already decided previously. He also said he was a big fan of the uniforms. Try again.... better yet, take this L and move on.

Not how I remembered it. I'm sure a change in the unis were planned because they had no choice but to go back to the drawing board after that epic fail. It's my understanding that Richt gave direction about the retro look he wanted for the unis and of course I'm sure he approved it, but post a link to verify what you say i'll take the L on it. Coming out the gates with that tacky look showed poor judgment, regardless.

Stop being an absolute douchebag.

adidas changed the font on the player names AFTER ONE GAME. Yeah, it was too late to change the whole jersey, but stop being a cvnt and admit that Nike kept tacky jersey designs FOR YEARS.

And the colors. My god, man, the colors. Nike NEVER could get that ****e right. What's up with that? Color-blindness?

 

[Bunker Mentality]

The 1st year sucked no doubt but Adidas is a company who apparently cares about the brand because the next year they fixed everything. They are awesome and best we have had in 15+ years. Nike was giving us ugly **** for over a decade

I'm not sure why you are highlighting those Nike uniforms. Those were dog**** for the most part.

Richt made them fix the unis and that's my point. You all should give them credit for responsiveness, yes, but Adidas need(ed) a lot of interdiction when Nike had better creative intuition going with an off-retro look.

This is to say nothing about my support for one over the other because I don't come to the defense of brands like that unless I own stock. It's not that serious for me and I think the new unis look great, FWIW.

What's happening here are the easily-triggered feeble-minded stans of on the site are looking for anything to be buthurt and b**ch about, because that's just what they do.

I'm highlighting the unis you call dog**** (1) in reply, and (2)for the sake of showing the Adidas work was worse than dog****, because there's not a fan on this site (including you) who would choose Adidas year 1 gear over the last Nike unis.

CMR had nothing to do with the uniform change. Last year, he confirmed the uniform change was already decided previously. He also said he was a big fan of the uniforms. Try again.... better yet, take this L and move on.

Not how I remembered it. I'm sure a change in the unis were planned because they had no choice but to go back to the drawing board after that epic fail. It's my understanding that Richt gave direction about the retro look he wanted for the unis and of course I'm sure he approved it, but post a link to verify what you say i'll take the L on it. Coming out the gates with that tacky look showed poor judgment, regardless.

Here is your L. Fast Forward to 8:15. Ironic, Nike went back to the drawing board every 3-4 years but that's ok because it was Nike....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaPU-3259kg

a lot of smiling there, but fair enough.

 

[ChosenOne]

Adidas = More money so I'm okay with it. They couldn't have came at a better time now that Shalalalala isn't here to spend it on her hospital program and we can recreate the swagger we lost after Nike got complacent.

 

[Hurracanes]

Richt made them fix the unis and that's my point. You all should give them credit for responsiveness, yes, but Adidas need(ed) a lot of interdiction when Nike had better creative intuition going with an off-retro look.

This is to say nothing about my support for one over the other because I don't come to the defense of brands like that unless I own stock. It's not that serious for me and I think the new unis look great, FWIW.

What's happening here are the easily-triggered feeble-minded stans of on the site are looking for anything to be buthurt and b**ch about, because that's just what they do.

I'm highlighting the unis you call dog**** (1) in reply, and (2)for the sake of showing the Adidas work was worse than dog****, because there's not a fan on this site (including you) who would choose Adidas year 1 gear over the last Nike unis.

CMR had nothing to do with the uniform change. Last year, he confirmed the uniform change was already decided previously. He also said he was a big fan of the uniforms. Try again.... better yet, take this L and move on.

Not how I remembered it. I'm sure a change in the unis were planned because they had no choice but to go back to the drawing board after that epic fail. It's my understanding that Richt gave direction about the retro look he wanted for the unis and of course I'm sure he approved it, but post a link to verify what you say i'll take the L on it. Coming out the gates with that tacky look showed poor judgment, regardless.

Here is your L. Fast Forward to 8:15. Ironic, Nike went back to the drawing board every 3-4 years but that's ok because it was Nike....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaPU-3259kg

a lot of smiling there, but fair enough.

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