Michigan to wear color block uniforms in postseason

Dylan Burkhardt
on

Michigan will wear these color block style Adidas uniforms in the Big Ten Tournament and potentially in any other postseason play.

B-x2IorVEAEEF3q

UCLA, Kansas, Louisville, Wisconsin and other Adidas sponsored are also expected to wear similar uniforms in the postseason and the full line of Adidas jerseys can be seen below.

B-x2dteVEAInDzL B-x2duvVEAAn7j_
  • A2MIKE

    Dear Jim Hackett,

    Please dump Adidas ASAP! Great job with Harbaugh, that is all!

    • Alo

      Thinking the same exact thing. It’s like they don’t even put any thought into the uniforms. Go Nike or Under Armour to get something cool.

      • Mattski

        This is so tiresome; all the companies pump out mountains of stuff. They all hire the same designers, see them go back and forth, steal one another’s designs and fabrics, sue one another for it. The critical piece is having an AD that keeps really hideous stuff off of the players’ backs. Worshiping one company or another like it’s your religion. . . for sheep.

        I like these unis; they do a turn on the classic look without bastardizing it. Just think the shoes are lame.

        • Alo

          Don’t 100% agree with that. I’m talking purely on a look basis, not necessarily getting into the fabrics and all that. When I think uniforms that are different or intriguing I think Nike and Under Armour (more thinking football right now). Maryland, Oregon (their title game uni’s sucked but regular season are awesome), Ohio State (Title game). Those were pretty awesome uniforms. Addida’s tends to just play it really safe. Low risk, low reward. There’s a reason Under Armour just passed Adidas as a company, it’s because they are putting out a better looking product.

          • Mattski

            Not criticizing you. But there’s a herdlike quality to this Adidas hatred that is not supported by objective reasoning. They DO all turn out thousands of products; open up a soccer catalog, for example, and tell me that the Nike stuff is somehow “better.” A lot, all sides, is very ugly.

            There was, of course, a reason that UM dumped Nike, and it had to do with the activism of UM students. I doubt there’s much difference in their factories or economic practices, but that would tend to prove my point.

          • Alo

            Woops meant to post here.

            Non taken. Soccer is kind of an oddball sport for uniforms since I can’t really think of anyone that stands out. Basketball is right on the threshold with football putting out the best stuff. Your also forgetting about the big picture though which is money. These companies get selected based on how much they are willing to pay, and they are willing to pay a certain amount based on how much they can make back. I don’t believe Nike even submitted a bid for Michigan basically selling high (Michigan football program going downhill) and Addida’s bought high. So I don’t know about UM dumping Nike, sounds like it was the reverse

        • Alo

          Non taken. Soccer is kind of an oddball sport for uniforms since I can’t really think of anyone that stands out. Basketball is right on the threshold with football putting out the best stuff. Your also forgetting about the big picture though which is money. These companies get selected based on how much they are willing to pay, and they are willing to pay a certain amount based on how much they can make back. I don’t believe Nike even submitted a bid for Michigan basically selling high (Michigan football program going downhill) and Addida’s bought high. So I don’t know about UM dumping Nike, sounds like it was the reverse

  • All the elements are there for a good jersey, but Adidas has still managed to make it ugly. Remove the color blocking and make the stripes more consistent and you’ve got a pretty nice uniform.

  • Corperryale

    This is offensive to me.

    This is how I imagine the great minds at Adidas Headquarters in Germany come up with this stuff: “Hey, let’s just change things up in a random and incoherent manner and then force the same ugly look on all our of partner schools so the fans and their kids — who already own 20 different permutations of the same garment — will drop even more hard-earned money on our shockingly garish nylon garbage.”

    Although yes, the little wolverine logo is kinda cool. (I am in the pro-mascot minority.)

  • I feel like these will probably look better on than in a photo. I hated the camo photos a couple years ago, but what Michigan ended up wearing looked pretty good.

    People love to kick and scream about Adidas, but you realize that Under Armour and Nike are releasing just as many alternate uniforms right?

    • Corperryale

      You may be right about the photography being partly to blame. The Block M on the blue shorts looks crude but it could be the lighting. At least we don’t have sleeves like Louisville — I hope our contract with Adidas requires immediate termination upon the mere suggestion of sleeves.

      I am OK with alternates that scream “alternate” but not ones that mess with the classic uniform in subtly disagreeable ways.

    • bobohle

      I agree. Some of the complaints of Adidas are probably brand name biased. Michigan is contracted with Adidas so making a Brand Name switch may be complicated anyway.

    • JVS

      Nike and UA do alternates, but they aren’t 1% as ridiculous looking as
      what Adidas offers up. These shorts and the Big Sean jersey are the two
      worst basketball offerings from Adidas. Admittedly, I loved the yellow-yellow mustard jerseys from 2013-14. Second issue which i find even
      more shocking is that they make the jersey for the guy who isnt even
      playing in March (much like last year where they made a McGary instead
      of B1G player of the year Nik Stauskas). Couple this with the fact that
      you don’t have the option to buy even a swingman quality version of
      anything they make and the whole thing is just poor from a buyers
      perspective. If they remedied these things I could live with them.

      Contract is up for renewal or cancellation in July to take effect for July 2016. Guess which side of the discussion I’m on

  • Best part of these uniforms is the inclusion of this vintage Wolverine logo. Common in the 1930-50s, and is still used on the hockey team’s practice jerseys. Also worn by the football team in 1962 vs. Michigan State:

  • Andy

    Dylan, were kicking and screaming about Adidas for a reason. Their product is cheap and the designs suck (not to mention the basketball recruiting disadvantage it puts us in). I would gladly take my chances on an alternative Nike rendition.

  • ChipperFliet

    These are awful. Almost hope they don’t make the post season so they don’t have to wear these
    disgusting things. I hated the “camo” look too. The camo looked good with some teams, but not the Maize n Blue. I vote for the throw back jerseys they wore against Minn. this year!

    • They will wear these in the Big Ten Tournament.

    • Corperryale

      Th 1960s Cazzie-era throwbacks they wore against PSU (?) last year were even better.

      How about a Fab Five throwback in 90s baggy satin. They’d never do it — might remind people that a couple final four banners are missing from Crisler.

      • bobohle

        They were 1989 not Cazzie era throwbacks.

        • Corperryale

          In Feb 2013 they wore 1968 uniforms vs PSU. Part of the Crisler re-dedication. Technically post Cazzie but still.

  • bobohle

    High School athletes according to surveys love any new fangled uniform styles. If that helps in recruiting,why not? Remember we are trying to eliminate the perception of arrogance.

  • robpollard

    All of these, except IU, look like swim trunks. Not a good look for b-ball.

    • Corperryale

      Yeah, why wasn’t IU forced to have the ugly stripe? I guess a school has leverage after all – it just has to use it!

  • Chris De Sana

    Not a fan