PonyFans.com

NickSMU17 wrote:

DanFreibergerForHeisman wrote:

ponyfan84 wrote:I would love to see SMU get sponsored by Underarmour...click clack

Under Armour is too urban of a brand for a school like SMU.

Isn't this the exact reason we need them...

Or something similarly buzz-worthy? Yes.

Waiting for SMU to announce it has struck an exlclusive deal with Under Oohs for all under garments.

adidas has been working on their new techfit uniforms
http://multivu.prnewswire.com/mnr/adidas/46598/

Let's see Auburn is the National Champion and wore UA. I heard one radio guy saying today that Cam Newton had UA logos in 17 places on his uniform last night. Nike teams look like pimps. UA is cool. I've always liked Reebok which the Redskins wear.

expony18 wrote:adidas has been working on their new techfit uniforms
http://multivu.prnewswire.com/mnr/adidas/46598/

It's so blindingly shiny I can barely see it...

expony18 wrote:adidas has been working on their new techfit uniforms
http://multivu.prnewswire.com/mnr/adidas/46598/

You might want to resize that photo down just a tiny bit.

expony18 wrote:adidas has been working on their new techfit uniforms
http://multivu.prnewswire.com/mnr/adidas/46598/

ΦΦΚΑ

Techfit is about the fit. Not the overall look.

Nike has the best designers in the business! They're the Apple of football uniforms.

UA , Reebok, Adidas,etc. Are fighting for 2nd place.

We need to sign with Nike when the Adidas contract expires.

RE Tycoon and some others are putting the cart before the Frog.

The reason TCU gets the combat uniforms and the big push from Nike is because TCU is GOOD. Not simply because they're a Nike school.

Nike hasn't given TCU a higher profile than SMU, TCU was already better because the Froggies won a bunch of damn games. TCU is hot right now, and Nike is hoping to profit by jumping on the bandwagon.

There are a lot of Nike schools who don't get special treatment. If you're not a perennial Top 25 program you're not going to get special treatment from Nike, adidas, Reebok, Under Armour or any large manufacturer.

We have been a Nike school in the past and we were just another customer to them. Nike never did a thing to promote SMU or enhance SMU's image. You couldn't find SMU-Nike gear anywhere unless you were on the team.

We don't need to go with Nike just because it's Nike. That's called being a sheep. We need to go with whichever manufacturer makes the most sense for SMU.

When we finally reach a level of consistent on-field success like TCU has, Nike will be begging us to sign with them. Until then, we don't need to beg Nike.

Longtime wrote:RE Tycoon and some others are putting the cart before the Frog.

The reason TCU gets the combat uniforms and the big push from Nike is because TCU is GOOD. Not simply because they're a Nike school.

Pretty sure I said the same thing in my first post. I said we wouldn't have a combat uni. I do think we would be on display in this little high school experience zone because we were local and Nike would like to capitalize on JJ's name.

As I stated numerous times, I don't care if it is Nike or BK freaking Knights, I just want SMU to associate itself with innovative and respected companies so we are at least in position to capitalize on similar opportunities in the future if they present themselves.

I can't stress enough, this isn't just about the ugly [deleted] uniforms, its about taking an active role in positioning SMU to be involved in future trends. That is not currently happening at SMU, our athletic department is about as modern and cutting edge as Moody Coliseum. We are the opposite of cutting edge. When HD technology was prevalent, we got swindled into buying a $1 million lite-brite scoreboard for Moody which shows a lack of foresight and awareness of general athletic venue trends on behalf of the athletic administration.

What year does the Adidas contract run through?