I think what we see in this fan base is a case of traditionalist vs. modernist. The crazy part of this program’s history is that we’re more Oregon, as far as uniform alternatives, vs. a PSU, OSU, UofM, Bama, ND, SC, etc.
Look at our history of unis since the 1920’s: from color scheme, patterns, etc., they’ve changed **** near every 6-10 yrs. The attachment to the idea that Miami has a “traditional look” is based upon the 80’s & is strictly nostalgia. The 80’s redefined this school from Suntan U to “The U.” Therefore, that’s our iconic look.
Imo, Nike did a great job in modernizing our look going into the shadowed numbers era of the late 90’s (one that the NFL also used), to the iconic early 2000 jerseys. Introducing that “U” on the collar became a mainstay & a pattern that most universities use til this day.
I personally didn’t have a problem w/ the “bra strap” jersey, especially the fan version. The aesthetics were tight & solid. I had a huge problem w/ the first pro combat version, although it was literally designed after our trademark of “speed.” Like, the entire pro combat line came off of us (I posted an article about it).
My issues w/ Adidas is their aesthetics are not tight, at all. I like that they’ve gone to our 80’s look, but I can literally tell what teams r sponsored by Nike, UA vs. Adidas just based upon aesthetics. When Ole Miss played Miss St in the egg bowl, it was obvious who had a Nike jersey vs. Adidas b/c Miss St have the same **** issues.
Adidas is the #2 sportswear company in the world, & there’s no reason for our jerseys to be falling off the shoulder pads, the U stretched out, names on the name plates crooked & different fonts; that’s until u realize Adidas is #2 based upon European sports. They’ve struggled mightily w/ American Sports & its athletes.
