OT: Hawaii new jerseys

by **expony18** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:42 am

http://honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs ... BREAKING02

by **smu diamond m** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:46 am

lol. UNT wasn't mentioned at all. Deserving of their second-rate status under UA.

by **smupony94** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:50 am

smu diamond m wrote:lol. UNT wasn't mentioned at all. Deserving of their second-rate status under UA.

I am sure Adidas will promote us heavily too

by **jr97124** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:36 pm

Man you guys are BIG dreamers. :lol:

by **expony18** » Wed Feb 27, 2008 8:16 am

smupony94 wrote:
smu diamond m wrote:lol. UNT wasn't mentioned at all. Deserving of their second-rate status under UA.

I am sure Adidas will promote us heavily too

for everyone that is excited about the switch from nike to Adidas so that we will have a more "classic" look with out random stripes and things, just take a look at this:

by **FWMustangGirl** » Wed Feb 27, 2008 9:00 am

expony18 wrote:
smupony94 wrote:
smu diamond m wrote:lol. UNT wasn't mentioned at all. Deserving of their second-rate status under UA.

I am sure Adidas will promote us heavily too
for everyone that is excited about the switch from nike to Adidas so that we will have a more "classic" look with out random stripes and things, just take a look at this:

Yeah, but I thought we had already determined that aggies don't count?

by **expony18** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:14 pm

well they didnt wait until the summer...

by **Otto** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:31 pm

It takes a lot more than a shift in the manufacturer to make anything Aggie-related look good.

by **Top 25** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:34 pm

It doesn't get much worse than that.

Can you imagine seeing them line up against the Ducks?

by **couch 'em** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:16 pm

I'm holding back all negative uniform comments until I see what ours is changing to!

by **RGV Pony** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:21 pm

I like their helmets they already had. The new ones suck.

by **Bergermeister** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 9:44 am

Adidas does not dictate the uniform. SMU (June Jones) will spec it - Adidas just follows directions. Adidas may offer suggestions/concept design, but we are not obligated to accept anything they put up. Hawai'i should have stuck with their 12-0 uniforms and hope for carryover.

by **FWMustangGirl** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:49 am

couch 'em wrote:I'm holding back all negative uniform comments until I see what ours is changing to!

Not me. I'll come out and say I really don't like the tricked up unis, and then I'll pray that ours have a traditional look to them. I won't like the goofy unis any better if we win up with something in that vein, so why hold back the comments?

by **couch 'em** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:54 am

FWMustangGirl wrote: so why hold back the comments?

Karma. Just like how you never say that you'll win a game for sure, etc.

by **Dr Death** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 12:04 pm

FWMustangGirl wrote:Not me. I'll come out and say I really don't like the tricked up unis, and then I'll pray that ours have a traditional look to them. I won't like the goofy unis any better if we win up with something in that vein, so why hold back the comments?

Exactly! The ironic thing is those new Hawaii uni's are made by Under Armour... which they should really live up to their name and keep their crap product UNDER the uniform, instead of being the uniform.

My poor Warriors... we lose the Sugar Bowl, lose a lot of great players to the NFL/life after college, lose our coach... now we have to dress in these ugly, hideous uniforms...

OT: Hawaii new jerseys

OT: Hawaii new jerseys

Who is online