Started By
Message

re: Auburn's new football pants for 2011

Posted on 8/18/11 at 4:30 pm to
Posted by AUtigR24
Happy Hour
Member since Apr 2011
19869 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 4:30 pm to
Please tell me that isn't real
Posted by piggidyphish
Birmingham
Member since Jul 2009
18880 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 4:31 pm to
quote:

Please tell me that isn't real


Oh it's real and it's fabulous

Minus the fabulous.
Posted by I Bleed Garnet
Cullman, AL
Member since Jul 2011
54846 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 4:31 pm to
I have to agree. It's the same way here. Ya they make cool golf shirts but they Generally Suck at making uniforms.

Auburn of course won't change a thing but UA has to come in and change one little thing to make it seem like they are right there with Nike in the Uniform Making business. Watch them try to pass this shite as some state of the art spandex pant system where they use less fabric and it provides greater mobility or some shite.

Stop with it ya'll will never catch up to Nike.

I wish we were Nike.
Posted by McKeezy
Jacksonville, FL
Member since Aug 2010
3941 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 4:35 pm to
quote:

Watch them try to pass this shite as some state of the art spandex pant system where they use less fabric and it provides greater mobility or some shite

Almost lol. theres a seem that goes where the stripe cut is and mobitily blah blah speed blah

quote:

I wish we were Nike.

Same.
Posted by Chadaristic
Member since Jan 2011
40898 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 4:43 pm to
Posted by DCTiger29
Washington, DC
Member since Jan 2011
325 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 4:45 pm to
Put me in the 'dont like it' camp.

I do like being an underarmor school though.
Posted by TheCheshireHog
Cashew Chicken Country
Member since Oct 2010
41245 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 4:46 pm to
Man and I was just saying the other day that Auburn had the one uniform that Under Armor couldn't find a way to frick up.
Posted by piggidyphish
Birmingham
Member since Jul 2009
18880 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 4:47 pm to
am i missing the big change? I'ts just the tip fo the stripe right. Also i've nver been a fan of names on the back of jerseys so if they want to make those even smaller i'm game.
Posted by bbap
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Feb 2006
96519 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 4:53 pm to
That's a pretty big change. And looks terrible.
Posted by TTsTowel
RIP Bow9den/Coastie
Member since Feb 2010
92253 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 4:54 pm to
Dude, no it isn't. I don't like it, but it isn't very noticeable.
Posted by DeoreDX
Member since Oct 2010
4155 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 4:55 pm to
The stripe was a functional change more so than an aesthetic one. The old stripes you had 3 layers of material overlapping in an area that needs to bend. In the past more expensive uniforms had what is called an angle cut at the knee to try to eliminage this "bunching" of material and help with knee flexibility. By cutting the stripe the way they did you eliminate the bunching of material and you can take the thinner flexible lycra material past the bend on the knee which helps stabilize the knee pad over the knee more so than what a standard angle cut will give. It doesn't look as good but it's infinitly more comfortable than the old design and you get improved knee flexibility as well as knee pad stability.

War Eagle on the arse looks dumb though.
This post was edited on 8/18/11 at 4:56 pm
Posted by bbap
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Feb 2006
96519 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 5:03 pm to
It's not noticeable that the stripe tapers to a point? I disagree. Very Texas techish.
Posted by Cabby
Baba Booey Land
Member since Jan 2005
5764 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 5:11 pm to
quote:

Did y'all seriously give yourselves tramp stamps???



I think the classic look is better.

Posted by Lee County Tiger
I Haz Sources
Member since Oct 2009
33357 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 5:17 pm to
quote:

I wish we were Nike.




frick Nike.


Also, you forgot about the War Eagle and the 2 Stars on the jersey
Posted by beatbammer
Member since Sep 2010
38477 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 5:21 pm to
As long as they don't mangle the helmet and the jersey and as long as the change is almost cosmetic, no big deal.

But any fundamental changes and I will personally kick Jay Jacobs and Jay Gogues gimlet asses.
Posted by I Bleed Garnet
Cullman, AL
Member since Jul 2011
54846 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 5:25 pm to
What is this Soccer?

NIKE > UA

Except the Coaches Polos, UA makes them much better actually.

UA Sucks at making Basketball Uniforms though.
Posted by piggidyphish
Birmingham
Member since Jul 2009
18880 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 5:26 pm to
quote:

That's a pretty big change. And looks terrible


Going to go out on a limb here and suggest that we have different defintions of the word "big"
Posted by Lee County Tiger
I Haz Sources
Member since Oct 2009
33357 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 5:26 pm to
quote:

NIKE > UA




I disagree. Nike apparel is made cheaper than UA apparel and doesn't last as long, plus it's made by 5 year olds in some sweatshop. Another reason I don't like them.
Posted by beatbammer
Member since Sep 2010
38477 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 5:29 pm to
quote:

frick Nike.
Posted by Lee County Tiger
I Haz Sources
Member since Oct 2009
33357 posts
Posted on 8/18/11 at 5:30 pm to
I also forgot, Nike tends to create a singular template and use it for multiple schools, thus losing any individuality that your uniform had.


UA does this as well, but no where near as bad as Nike does.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on X and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter