This real money site caters to all players, with reviews on mobile games you can play, including slots, blackjack, and roulette.

Actual quote from Nike exec Todd Van Horne: ‘It will look like blur on the field’

Screen shot 2010-12-14 at 1.07.32 PM.png

And he apparently meant that in a good way.

So that’s the new Nikegon uniform, just unveiled today, for the BCS title game. I have a very short take up over on, and I’ll have a much fuller ESPN assessment tomorrow. For now, I’ll say this much: This is a rare time when I’m glad a team isn’t using full-length socks. — Paul

163 comments to Actual quote from Nike exec Todd Van Horne: ‘It will look like blur on the field’

  • Shep | December 14, 2010 at 1:30 pm |

    I started scrolling down, said to myself, “That’s not too bad.” Then I reached mid-calf. It’s nice to know Digger Phelps is now consulting for Nike.

  • Peter | December 14, 2010 at 1:32 pm |

    Paul, saw a photo of the Boise State ersey (posted by Desmond Howard). Anything different from their normal jersey (other than the combat helmet)?

  • Peter | December 14, 2010 at 1:37 pm |

    Let’s all take a moment and be thankful that Oregon didn’t come out in monochrome highlighter.

  • Roger Faso | December 14, 2010 at 1:39 pm |

    What does the helmet stripe say?

  • ScottyM | December 14, 2010 at 1:46 pm |

    Hello, Nikegon?

    Yes, it’s 1986 here. And we want our florescent shoelaces back!

    Bush. League.

  • Jeff S. | December 14, 2010 at 1:51 pm |

    Hmm, haven’t we seen that sleeve idea somewhere before?

  • billso | December 14, 2010 at 1:57 pm |

    Yeah, we’ve seen that sleeve number idea before.

  • BrianC | December 14, 2010 at 1:57 pm |

    I feel my vision blurring already…

  • ed | December 14, 2010 at 1:59 pm |

    tv numbers on the sleeves…interesting

    • Jim Vilk | December 14, 2010 at 2:08 pm |

      More interesting if they weren’t in Bellotti Bold…

  • Andy | December 14, 2010 at 2:00 pm |

    I wonder if those sleeves and collar treatment will be the new look for next season’s teams. Remember the stitching on the shoulders the first season?

  • DMoon | December 14, 2010 at 2:01 pm |

    I thought the Oregon State uni looked great because of the sleeves. Should have known it wasn’t a Nike idea.

    Oregon’s unis and Boise State’s field are the ugliest things in College FB.

    • Jim Vilk | December 14, 2010 at 2:08 pm |

      Oregon’s unis and Boise State’s unis are the ugliest things in college FB.

      Boise’s field is cool. They just need to wear orange when they play on it.

  • Christopher | December 14, 2010 at 2:02 pm |

    Reason #4,509 I hate college football. So few schools have any sense of tradition. Would an MLB team ever come up with new uniforms for the World Series? Not just new uniforms- but a completely new color scheme?!

    The idiots in the NCAA bitch about a playoff system undermining decades of tradition? There’s no “tradition” in college football if you let Oregon get away with a stunt like this.

    • Jim Vilk | December 14, 2010 at 2:15 pm |

      Well, now, I’d say the number of schools who still firmly embrace tradition far outweigh the Oregons of college football. And while I tend to lean towards classical in my uniform tastes, there’s room for some schools to play around with their look.

      Yes, I just stuck up for Oregon…sort of. I don’t have a problem with some of their concepts, just the execution of them.

    • Carlos Fenny | December 14, 2010 at 2:21 pm |

      Well…Yes, there WERE cases where a baseball team DID come up with a new uniform for the World Series. For an example, how about the 1907 Cubs (I know there are others, but this was the 1st example that I could find)

    • Peter the duck | December 14, 2010 at 2:58 pm |

      Sorry Chris, but as far as I’m concerned, THIS IS OUR TRADITION. Doing new and interesting things with our uniforms is what we do. Yeah, sure our uniforms from the 90’s and earlier were great, but our team sucked then.

      I would much rather have a ridiculous-looking team in the “National Championship Game” than a great-looking team sitting at home right now. And hate on Nike all you want, but the fact of the matter is that we would not be where we are today without them.

      • pflava | December 14, 2010 at 3:39 pm |

        “I would much rather have a ridiculous-looking team in the “National Championship Game” than a great-looking team sitting at home right now.”

        Does it have to be either/or? Because Auburn has a great looking team in the National Championship Game.

        • M.Princip | December 14, 2010 at 4:02 pm |

          “Does it have to be either/or? Because Auburn has a great looking team in the National Championship Game.”

          Hear, hear!

        • Peter the duck | December 14, 2010 at 9:04 pm |

          Glad to see Auburn’s getting a good return on their investment then, Scam Newton was worth every penny.

      • Christopher | December 14, 2010 at 6:06 pm |

        Mr. Duck: All good, I can accept that to a point. But what really bothers me is straying from a color scheme. Especially at a school where the colors are so important.

        Its very grating to all my design sensibilities to one day see Oregon decide neon yellow and grey are their colors.

        • Peter the duck | December 14, 2010 at 9:08 pm |

          Perfectly acceptable. And I’m not saying I don’t enjoy classic looking uniforms, quite the contrary. My favorite ducks look of the past ten years was the 1998 throwbacks they wore last year against California. And I’m not saying it has to be an either/or, but I strongly believe that without the unique visual identity Nike has crafted for us, we would not be in the position we are in today.

  • Mike from Queens | December 14, 2010 at 2:07 pm |

    This is incredible. I think I hate the white belt the most.

  • CoatieCale | December 14, 2010 at 2:09 pm |

    One of the commentators in Oregon’s last game made the comment that the “Carbon” uniform (paraphrasing) “didn’t make much sense because it didn’t feature any school colors and they just looked like the 60’s Oakland Raiders.” Perhaps the move was motivated by the ire of Al Davis or the the dead pan review on national TV. but this looks like Rapheal Nadal/ Andre Agassi, the new TRON, Lance Armstrong’s bike, and The Tin Man had a baby! They’re all on Nike contacts right?

    • Peter the duck | December 14, 2010 at 3:00 pm |

      If you’ve ever been to Eugene during football season, that color gray makes perfect sense… I’m looking out my window right now and everything I can see is gray.

  • Ricko | December 14, 2010 at 2:13 pm |

    Could be a soccer team. The Oregon Limeys.

    Maybe Nike’s all excited about the new TRON. Y’know, that glow-in-the-dark clothing’s gonna become cool?

    Or perhaps Nike’s just too damn close to Seattle and they’re been infected with that Puget Sound Lime Disease.

    Interesting use of the comp sleees, I’ll give them that.

    All in all, another fetching ensemble from the Nike Jack McFarland School of Design.


  • Chris | December 14, 2010 at 2:17 pm |

    You people are nuts. The socks and kicks are the best part. Fresh. The rest of the uniform is whatever. Please wear black pants.

  • Jason L. | December 14, 2010 at 2:19 pm |

    Is the “O” on the helmet in relief? The pics at the ESPN article seem to look like it’s actually a thick, beveled letter (similar to the Cubs’ helmet applique) rather than a thin decal.

    • Brian | December 14, 2010 at 3:03 pm |

      It’s be like the Cubs helmet for awhile now. On Monday Paul had something in the ticket about it I believe.

      • Jason L. | December 14, 2010 at 3:20 pm |

        Cool, must have missed that particular item, and I don’t watch enough football to have noticed it prior. Carry on, then. :)

  • adam | December 14, 2010 at 2:24 pm |

    it looks like they stepped in a bucket of highlighter ink. yuck

  • Rob L | December 14, 2010 at 2:25 pm |

    I hope this doesn’t give the Mets any ideas!!!!

    • RS Rogers | December 14, 2010 at 2:36 pm |

      Fortunately, black doesn’t have a neon shade. In MLB, it’s Toronto that I’d be worried about getting ideas from this.

  • Rob S | December 14, 2010 at 2:32 pm |

    Didn’t Nike learn anything from Ohio State players getting flagged for making that stupid-ass gesture to show off their stupid-ass gloves? Obviously not.

    Y’know… it’s kinda missing something… I can’t put my finger on it, but… maybe… a little green, maybe?

    • LI Phil | December 14, 2010 at 2:44 pm |

      since when do we expect oregon to wear school colors?

      im surprised there is that much lightning

    • LI Phil | December 14, 2010 at 2:54 pm |

      oh and…while not quote the “O” … oregon players have been making that gesture or something similar for a decade

      • Rob S | December 14, 2010 at 7:46 pm |

        That just makes me think of this.

  • SWC Susan "aka Tex" | December 14, 2010 at 2:41 pm |

    Uber-hideous… I guess the ducks stepped in white paint, shouldn’t their webbed feet be all yellow? At least the Douchebags are kind of listening to us – the tv number undersleeves totally came from Uni Watch!

    What is most disturbing however, is the fact the black pants photo does not even include any Oregon marking… only Nike. Douchebags!

    • Peter the duck | December 14, 2010 at 3:08 pm |

      Wow, someone’s bitter. Douchebags? Hardly. You know it’s just a uniform, right? I don’t think Nike would be allowed to force a team to wear something they wouldn’t want to wear… If you were to do a quick straw poll of the players, the coaches, and the students, I’ll bet you’d find that a vast majority of them think they’re awesome. This student is included.

      • Gentleman Agitator | December 14, 2010 at 8:16 pm |

        You do not know much about marketing contracts do you? Nike has done more damage to sports uniforms than anyone. And about their slave labor to make the stuff. Well, we won’t talk about that here.

        • Peter the duck | December 14, 2010 at 9:00 pm |

          Obviously you don’t know much about marketing either. The Nike uniforms are all about marketing. Nike has transformed the university of Oregon from a no-name school in some podunk town to a national powerhouse with an extremely unique identity. That identity is what makes us so marketable, particularly towards new recruits. Players want to come to oregon because they know they can win, they can play in some of the finest facilities in all of college football, and they will be dressed in cutting-edge uniforms. And we have Nike to thank for all of those things.

        • DJ | December 15, 2010 at 8:30 am |

          Players want to come to oregon because they know they can win, they can play in some of the finest facilities in all of college football, and they will be dressed in cutting-edge uniforms.

          You know, people in the 1970s thought polyester leisure suits were “cutting edge.”

  • Paul Lukas | December 14, 2010 at 2:44 pm |

    Closer looks at the helmet, shoes, and gloves:

    • Rob S | December 14, 2010 at 8:05 pm |

      … “WTD”? What The Deuce?!?

      • Rob S | December 14, 2010 at 8:08 pm |

        I’m sure someone who’s familiar with the program will explain the initials. Just seems odd, the helmet stripe having text in it like that.

        • Peter the duck | December 14, 2010 at 8:54 pm |

          it means “win the day”

  • Stephen King | December 14, 2010 at 2:52 pm |

    This is not what I was expecting. When I heard “new uniforms,” I pictured something wildly different from the rest of the season. This is basically a detail tweak of the existing Oregon uniform set, which makes all kinds of sense.

    The helmet is the same, the jerseys is a slight tweak on their existing carbon-trimmed white jerseys (the outline on the numbering is yellow instead of green) and they have new socks. When they wore white and carbon before people complained about the lack of team colors; they’ve brought in a team color.

    So what if they have yellow socks? I prefer them to the leotard socks worn by, say, Baltimore last night. Odd looking? Perhaps, but not the worst I’ve ever seen.

    My verdict is that this is not bad. Oregon’s thing is to have a different uniform every week, and doing something like this was about the only way they could do that this season.

  • Bernard | December 14, 2010 at 2:53 pm |

    Ack. I’m on record as a fan of (most of) Oregon’s uniform combinations, but this… I cannot abide.

  • EMD | December 14, 2010 at 3:03 pm |

    This is one of the least egregious crimes committed by Nike in the name of Oregon football. It’s pretty basic and the highlighter socks/laces are at least akin to the school colors. I’d love to see a forest green carbon-style helmet.

  • Paul Lukas | December 14, 2010 at 3:03 pm |

    Those of you who watch Oregon every week, please tell me: Is the yellow trim more neon/highlighter-y that usual:

    Or is that just the lighting conditions?

    Looks much more fluorescent to me, even the “O” on the helmet…

    • Stephen King | December 14, 2010 at 3:06 pm |

      I strongly, strongly suspect it is just lighting conditions (I’ve seen two different versions of the full-body picture with wildly different interpretations of the color) but it is impossible to tell in photographs.

    • LI Phil | December 14, 2010 at 3:06 pm |

      i don’t think they *changed* the lightning, but it does appear more phosphorescent, if that’s possible

    • Bernard | December 14, 2010 at 3:42 pm |

      Certainly appears to me to be more neon/have more green in it.

    • M.Princip | December 14, 2010 at 4:31 pm |

      Here’s the carbon/gray version that the Ducks will be sporting next season.

      Not too shabby.

      • LI Phil | December 14, 2010 at 4:38 pm |


        of course, jim vilk wouldn’t wear that

        • Jim Vilk | December 14, 2010 at 7:19 pm |

          If there were two articles of clothing left in the entire world…that and a Buckeyes jersey…I’d wear that.

          /and yet OSU made the Top 5 twice, so there’s your impartiality, people

  • EMD | December 14, 2010 at 3:03 pm |

    Will the Ducks be penalized for flashing their Autzen O’s?

  • M. Sullivan | December 14, 2010 at 3:10 pm |

    Wow. Nike does it again. TCU’s Rose Bowl uniform is the same as the Amateur Accord from earlier this season but now with nearly NO team color. All black, red and “frog skin”. Yeah that’s it Nike find a team who finally gets into the spotlight and change their uniform so nobody recognizes them.

    • LI Phil | December 14, 2010 at 3:16 pm |

      i am the lizard king…i can do anything

      but wait…

      The entire uniform was designed to be as light and durable as possible to give players more speed and flexibility on the field. Some features include chainmail woven mesh vents in the pants and jerseys, added padding sewn into the uniform and stretchable numbers.

      it is different

      the new costume will make them bigger, faster, stronger…dare we say…invincible?

      • Jim Vilk | December 14, 2010 at 3:19 pm |

        See, now if that stuff they mentioned really makes a difference, wouldn’t it be outlawed the way those new basketball shoes are?

    • Jim Vilk | December 14, 2010 at 3:16 pm |

      At least the socks are purple…

      Aw, crap. I’m still rooting for them in the Rose Bowl, but I was hoping they’d wear purple and frog skin, not black.

    • Peter the duck | December 14, 2010 at 3:20 pm |

      In our case though, we were NOT in the spotlight but Nike brought us there. I would say that a lot of our success and our national recognition is due to Uncle Phil. So he could dress us in all highlighter yellow as far as I’m concerned. If you had told me 10 years ago that Oregon would be undefeated and playing for a national title in 2010, I’d have thought you were nuts.

      Thank You Uncle Phil!

    • pflava | December 14, 2010 at 4:08 pm |

      Man, TCU just doesn’t learn. They pulled this stunt in last year’s Fiesta Bowl and got spanked, and now they’re going to visually tarnish the nearly always beautiful Rose Bowl. As much as I’d love to see a great underdog story, those uniforms make me want Wisconsin to kick their ass.

      Same goes for Auburn hopefully beating the Ducks.

    • SWC Susan "aka Tex" | December 14, 2010 at 4:41 pm |

      Why does the lack of team colors still surprise anyone??? It is about selling a brand id – it has nothing to do with the school OR ITS COLORS! Douchebags, douchebags, douchebags!

      And to Peter the Duck, of course the players love it – Nike has been ingrained into their psyche (not cool if it’s not Nike)… weak and pathetic!

      • Terry D. | December 14, 2010 at 7:42 pm |

        @Susan: I understand what you’re saying, but (and I don’t mean this in a rude, snarky way) you can’t just automatically (sp?) assume that ALL people under the age of 25 (usually male) like every single solitary thing that Nike puts out.

        I’m a 19 year-old male, and I’m a big Nike fan. I’ll even go as far as to say that I only use their compression shorts as underwear (O.K., a little TOO personal). That being said, Nike has been known to drop the ball sometimes.

        Take for example, Florida’s new uniforms for their bowl game.

        Two things Nike messed up on:

        1) They should’ve used a white compression shirt and sublimated the stripes onto the sleeves of said shirt, like the did with Oregon State.

        2) They should’ve use either a blue or an orange belt for the pants (baseball bias).

        But other than that, it’s a great, classy uniform. Not a perfect uniform, but an overall great uniform, nontheless.

        Nike has the potential to be a company loved by Uni Watchers worldwide. They’re just in a phase of uber-superhero, self-congratulatory, gung-ho awkwardness, if that makes any sense. Kinda like the homely, nerdy girl on the honor roll in middle school that becomes the bombshell prom queen in high school. Just give Nike time to mature.

  • Peter the duck | December 14, 2010 at 3:16 pm |

    I’m glad that our team draws attention for its controversial unis and rather than a controversial quarterback. I hope we stomp Scam Newton and wipe that smug grin off his face.

    GO DUCKS!!!! Win The Day.

    • Dootie Bubble | December 14, 2010 at 4:04 pm |

      I figured all that yellow was to highlight how much better the SEC team is. It’s nice to see folks in Eugene getting all hopeful and excited about something though. Reminds me a little of Texas last year, Oklahoma the year before that, and Ohio State for the two years before that.

  • M.Princip | December 14, 2010 at 3:31 pm |

    They should be penalized by Olvia Newton John’s "Let’s Get Physical", for even thinking about wearing those faaccchhing ridiculous day glo socks. I’m sure there will be a majority vote by the team to simply wear the alternate black set for the lower half. Man, all they had to do was wear the matte green pants, green wings, and this would have been a slick getup.

  • DenverGregg | December 14, 2010 at 3:31 pm |

    Likes: the duck wings, incorporation of the compression sleeves into the bigger design, the restraint shown on pants design and the plainness of the seams rather than making them contrast the jersey.

    Dislikes: absence of the school’s principal color, clownish shoes.

    Meh: Belotti bold numbers, carbon helmet.

    Too soon to tell: socks.

    • M.Princip | December 14, 2010 at 3:44 pm |

      Yea, I like the Tron sleeves, with the neon lightning stroked numbers. That, I can say, is quite slick.

  • War Damn Eagle | December 14, 2010 at 3:53 pm |

    Fancy new uniforms don’t score touchdowns.

    Cam Newton does.

    • LI Phil | December 14, 2010 at 4:00 pm |

      oh jonathon…

      i think you’re going to see both teams score lots of touchdowns…lots and lots of em

      be glad underarmour hasn’t (yet) found a way to ruin your beautiful uni set

      last team to score wins the game…kind of like mattel electronics football

    • Chris Holder | December 14, 2010 at 4:07 pm |

      Does he get paid a bonus per touchdown?

      • Terry D. | December 14, 2010 at 7:48 pm |


      • DJ | December 15, 2010 at 8:15 am |

        Perhaps his daddy does, being the savvy negotiator he is…

  • Mike V | December 14, 2010 at 3:56 pm |

    Even with the socks and laces…not as bad as I thought it would turn out. It’s like getting shot in the foot, yeah it’s bad, but could have been a whole lot worse.

  • Matt Williams | December 14, 2010 at 4:02 pm |

    Oregon has been setting a fantastic case example for my “ugly uniform theory.”
    From the games I have watched over the past few years, if I team winds up wearing a special uniform that is hideous then they usually win. Probably something subconscious about not wanting to look bad AND lose at the same time. Much like the Air Force win over Navy this year.
    Now, if the standard uniform is ugly then that negates the theory since they are used to looking bad already.
    Oregon has managed one terrible uniform after another this year which has to factor into their undefeated season.
    I can only hope that Auburn proves me wrong in January.

  • Jeff Hunter | December 14, 2010 at 4:04 pm |

    I didn’t know that Garanimals made football uniforms…..

  • dilbert719 | December 14, 2010 at 4:16 pm |

    “It will look like blur on the field.”

    No, Nike Todd. It will look like a different four letter word entirely.

  • Corey | December 14, 2010 at 4:38 pm |

    Is that an alternate black set or just NFL players showing off the new Nike shoe?

  • Joe | December 14, 2010 at 4:39 pm |

    Ok that’s it, I’m considering dropping this blog whatsoever. I’ll admit that Oregon has some crazy ideas, but all it ever seems like anymore is beating a dead horse. Ok, I get it, people don’t like Oregon. But the “Nikegon” nickname is the last straw. Thanks Paul for giving my school the middle finger.

    • Paul Lukas | December 14, 2010 at 4:44 pm |

      What exactly — EXACTLY — is offensive about it?

      It’s a simple shorthand indicating that Nike and Oregon are closely identified with each other, which is something they’ve both worked very hard to achieve. I don’t mean it negatively (or positively). It simply indicates the strong overlap — perceived and actual — between the two organizations.

      What’s wrong with that? Please be specific.

      • Joe | December 14, 2010 at 5:02 pm |

        Because it’s the constant jabbing, Mr. Lukas. Over and over again, it’s like Oregon gets trotted out to get beaten on again.

        Yes, the uniforms haven’t been the most spectacular or traditional, and I’m even one of the ones that tend to shrug a bit when the defense “but the atheletes wearing it like it” gets used.

        I’m not even defending Nike, just the fact that all of that ever seems to override things that we do. We’ve already got to deal with the “University of Nike” pokes as if we’ve signed over our entire university to Nike, which is one think that “Nikegon” seems to make even more obvious, that we don’t have an identity, just a corporation name.

        I do appreciate you’ve actually gone against some of your fellow writers with the new court designs for Matthew Knight Arena, but “Nikegon”…

        Maybe I’m being oversensitive, but I guess sometimes it just gets too much.

        • Paul Lukas | December 14, 2010 at 5:16 pm |

          1) I am on record as being in favor of the current uni set, right from the moment it was unveiled:

          2) As you appear to be aware, I also came out in favor of the new court design.

          3) If Oregon “gets trotted out to get beaten on” (a flimsy presmise, methinks, but let’s accept it for the sake of this argument), it’s because they’ve gone out of their way to be transgressive, to push the boundaries, to play the “Look at me!” card again and again. And you know what happens when you do that? Some people will dig it, yes, but other people aren’t gonna like it. If you can’t stand the heat, etc. Live with it.

          4) If it seems like you “don’t have an identity, just a corporation name,” well gee, I wonder why that might be. You can’t get into bed with someone, make a big fuss over it, and then complain when people notice, y’know? I’m sure there are plenty of people at Oregon (and Nike) who *like* the cozy relationship. And that’s fine.

          If you’re saying that the perception doesn’t fit the reality, well, that may be true — you’d know better than I would, since you go to school there. But people in both organizations sure have worked hard to foster that perception, wouldn’tcha say? Maybe you should be directing your ire toward them, not toward people like me.

          I realize there’s no “Reply” option on this comment, but you can keep the discussion going if you like by replying to your own last comment.

        • Joe | December 14, 2010 at 5:49 pm |

          This isn’t even really over ragging on the uniforms, because I’d prefer if we went back to the Joey Harrington-era unis myself. (Although I’m sure there’s a faction that would still disdain them for the swoosh on them.) And sadly, as it’s been said in the past, our only tradition (hopefully that’s changing with our recent success) is in pushing the boundaries with stupid uniforms, so that’s fine as well.

          But I guess it’s all based on the fourth point.

          Nike doesn’t tell Oregon how to play football, they don’t tell them which books to buy or force the students to all have swooshes on every piece of clothing they own, and we haven’t built Nike Hall anywhere. All they provide is the uniforms and other pieces of equipment.

          And even in the case of Bill Moos being pressured out, that was actually all on Phil Knight the person/booster, because he felt that through him the Ducks were abandoning their track heritage. Phil has done a few things bad in the past (the withholding funds when students protested Nike’s habits is one glaring example) but he’s also provided a lot of needed money at a time when the state is cutting funding left and right for higher education.

          As I have said, perhaps this all stemmed from oversensitivity and a fired off message that was done off the heat of frustration. I’ll even go so far as to say I’m completely biased in favor of Oregon for obvious reasons. I’m not even saying “Hey stop making fun of them!” You’re right, in that if someone presents themselves, there’s always going to be a target.

          In the end, perhaps this is just school pride talking.

        • Gentleman Agitator | December 14, 2010 at 8:40 pm |

          Ok. Orenike it is then. As Paul points out, the university has worked hard to make the connection. The readers here are just calling it like they see it. You should bring complaints to your athletic department at Oregon. The uniform is just a day glow symbol the corporate sell out of college sports. The University of Oregon just likes to announce it loudly and proudly.

        • Peter the duck | December 14, 2010 at 9:16 pm |

          Oregon hasn’t sold out to anybody. Every school has boosters. Our biggest booster just happens to be the founder of Nike. Without Phil Knight’s support, we would just be another Oregon State, as in, a school out in the middle of nowhere that very few people give two shits about. Using your logic, has the university of Maryland “sold out” to Under Armour?

        • Oakville Celery Root (alias Endive) | December 14, 2010 at 10:12 pm |

          At the end of the day – while most of uniforms Nikegon come out with are somewhat goofy – and worthy of this one and done status they are fated to have – they are fun and it does raise the profile of a subject matter near and dear to the readers of this site. Saying that I yearn for the simple green and gold – of Oregon’s uniform – of say 20 years ago

    • SWC Susan "aka Tex" | December 14, 2010 at 4:46 pm |

      It’s soooooooo not about Oregon. It’s the bullying by Nike we dislike.

      • Andy | December 14, 2010 at 5:38 pm |

        I don’t have a horse in this race, but in general I do sort of feel like some of the nicknames for certain teams, programs, companies and logos get old and seem sort of arrogant from an outsider’s perspective.

        • Paul Lukas | December 14, 2010 at 5:58 pm |

          More arrogant than nonsense marketing newspeak like Pro Combat, “carbon fiber,” and “steel”?


      • Joe | December 14, 2010 at 6:52 pm |

        And to that I’d say no, I don’t think that for you it’s just about Nike, considering several times you’ve called Oregon and Oregon players “douchebags”.

        • Paul Lukas | December 14, 2010 at 6:56 pm |

          Nope. Not once. I do use that term when referring to Nike and other corporate entities. Never once when referring to an athlete.

        • Joe | December 14, 2010 at 8:03 pm |

          No Mr. Lukas, that wasn’t directed to you at all, it was a reply to SWC Susan, it just had the bad call to come under your comment. I apologize if you thought I was referring to you.

        • SWC Susan "aka Tex" | December 15, 2010 at 1:22 pm |

          For the record:

          I wasn’t calling Oregon douchebags, I was calling Nike douchebags. I have even done so directly to their face in response to their Championship Game Uni tease tweet.

          And honestly… I hate the SEC and their overrated rep. But, I am pulling for Auburn because I don’t believe Oregon belongs in the game. Sorry, my opinion, and just that. The BCS and pretty much all of college football is corrupt and geared only towards making money. I am appalled by it and sick of it! It’s not the Chick-fil-a Bowl… it is the fucking Peach Bowl, damnit! And this is the sport I love…

        • Joe | December 15, 2010 at 2:22 pm |

          So who DOES belong then, Susan? Or should I just guess that from your name that it should just be Texas vs Oklahoma every single year?

      • Peter the duck | December 14, 2010 at 9:21 pm |

        Susan, you are SOOO out of your element on this one. Nike is NOT bullying Oregon in any way, shape, or form. The fact of the matter is that Phil Knight has given hundreds of MILLIONS of dollars to the University of Oregon. What do you want us to do, say no thank you?

        • Gentleman Agitator | December 15, 2010 at 9:08 am |

          It is fine that an alum donates money. I think in this case though people see it as more business relationship than mere donation by loyal alum. Nike gets something for its check. When you ask me about Maryland and Under Armour…I do not know the story there, but I imagine it is similar to deals schools make all over the country. And it makes my point even clearer. Because it is not just about Oregon or Maryland, but collegiate sports, most of all football and basketball. It has become one vast money making machine losing all pretense of amateur athletics, no matter how hard the NCAA wants to polish it.

    • ScottyM | December 15, 2010 at 8:10 am |

      There’s an old saying, “If the shoe fits…”

      It’s just in this case it should read, “If the florescent shoe fits…”

      You have no argument, sir. University of Oregon = Nike corporate pawn.

      For good AND bad. Many schools would do the same and sell their souls to be in the Nikegon position.

  • Dootie Bubble | December 14, 2010 at 4:43 pm |

    Florida’s uniforms look the same as they have all season. It must just be a pro-combat rendition of their white uniform unless there is some small change I can’t pick up in the photo.

    • LI Phil | December 14, 2010 at 5:09 pm |

      here’s a hi res of the gators

    • Paul Lukas | December 14, 2010 at 5:33 pm |

      Gator logo on the hip is new, no?

      • LI Phil | December 14, 2010 at 5:39 pm |

        no — it wasn’t on florida’s original toy combat uni, but it’s on the left hip of the regular pants

        • Paul Lukas | December 14, 2010 at 5:55 pm |

          Ah, only on the LEFT hip. That’s what threw me off….

          Glad one of us is paying attention.

    • LI Phil | December 14, 2010 at 5:36 pm |

      that link appears to be farked now

      i’ll host it myself just in case

      • Jim Vilk | December 14, 2010 at 7:24 pm |

        Better than last year…

    • Peter | December 14, 2010 at 10:10 pm |

      The difference on the Florida uniform isn’t in the design, it’s in the template, from what I can tell. It sure looks like they are using the same fabric cut seen on the Pro Combat uniforms(and teams with new uniforms such as Arkansas, Michigan State, etc). Florida’s regular uniforms are in an older template, no?

  • KB | December 14, 2010 at 4:46 pm |

    Theory on the yellow socks: I think they yellow feet may be (a) an effort to give the team the appearance of duck feet, or; (b) perhaps meant to mimic the rubber yellow boots so may Oregonians (and fishermen) wear up in the Pacific Northwest; (c) both?.

    Here is some background on UO/Ducks/Webfoots:

    This is just a theory.

  • Paul | December 14, 2010 at 5:19 pm |

    What I love about the Ducks is that instead of putting the player’s uni number on the helemt, like Alabama, they proudly post each players GPA.


  • M.Princip | December 14, 2010 at 5:24 pm |

    Paul, relax, it wasn’t that funny the first time. Reference my orange joke, just above, for pure comedy gold.

    • LI Phil | December 14, 2010 at 5:32 pm |


      c’mon now…mike — you know i lovingly refer to them as the university of zero — and after you, powers and the students, im probably the biggest duck fan around…in fact, i think i watched more ducks games this year than giants games…

      what’s a little ribbing before the big game — which, check me if im wrong, alabama isn’t in this year…and auburn is

      • Paul Lukas | December 14, 2010 at 5:34 pm |

        It’s days like this that I’m glad I went to a school that doesn’t have a football team…

        • M.Princip | December 14, 2010 at 5:43 pm |

          Did you have a baseball team?

        • Akron Graduate | December 14, 2010 at 9:17 pm |

          Yeah, Paul, I know what you mean…

        • Adam | December 14, 2010 at 9:37 pm |

          I just glad my alma mater hasn’t received the Nike “Pro Combat” treatment. Only good thing about mediocrity.

      • Terry D. | December 14, 2010 at 8:18 pm |

        As a ‘Bama, LSU, and UCLA fan, I have one thing to say to Auburn and their “War Eagle”:

        Let’s go Oregon

  • Oregonbobby | December 14, 2010 at 6:28 pm |

    Typical. I’ve seen better looking stuff inside a baby’s diaper.
    Kelly green and Yellow! I fear I will have to wait until Uncle Phil dies to see U of 0 return to tradition.

  • =bg= | December 14, 2010 at 6:55 pm |

    You know, it doesn’t bother me. It’s Oregon, after all.

  • Paul | December 14, 2010 at 6:56 pm |

    Does anyone realize how unsufferable Nike (registered trademark)Knights fans will be if they win the damn game? Here’s hoping that Auburn will put Oregon fans in their place as second class citizens in the great Northwest. Bow Down.

    • LarryB | December 14, 2010 at 7:17 pm |

      Have you not noticed how insufferable SEC fans are?

      Go Ducks

      • Jim Vilk | December 14, 2010 at 8:31 pm |

        Have you not noticed how insufferable the other team’s fans are?

        (except you, Larry – you’ve been cool even when we’ve been on opposite sides of the fence)

        • LarryB | December 14, 2010 at 9:34 pm |

          Thanks Jim

  • Ricko | December 14, 2010 at 7:16 pm |

    Vikings-Bears at TCF Monday night.
    CBS affiliate reporting Dome will not be ready.
    400 workers now clearing TCF of 4 and 5 foot snowdrifts, turning water back on, reopening concession stands, etc.
    Vikings will pay for whole thing.


    • Ricko | December 14, 2010 at 7:19 pm |


      Missing last week’s game estimated to have cost metro area $9+ million in room rentals, shopping, bar and dinner tabs, etc.

      Not to mention Vikings the cost of refunds and of footing the bill for TCF. Nice, Top 50 All-Time Vikings scheduled to be there, too.


    • Ricko | December 14, 2010 at 7:30 pm |

      Long range weather forecast:
      Partly cloudy, maybe high teens at game time.
      Short range:
      2 to 4 more inches of snow starting tomorrow afternoon.

      Only Viking QB better than “questionable”?: Joe Webb.

      Leslie Frazier today said he’s hopeful Favre’s shoulder and hand will have healed enough to play.

      This whole thing is so odd, on just about every level.

      Especially considering Monday night could well be the final Viking game for the likes of Favre, TJack and Sidney Rice. Just odd, odd, odd.


      • Ricko | December 14, 2010 at 7:31 pm |

        Also Monday is anniversary, to the day, of last Viking outdoor home game in 1981.

        Remember it well. Was there. Vikings lost to Chiefs, 10-6.


    • Oakville Endive | December 14, 2010 at 8:42 pm |

      Cool – if it is outdoors , my guess (although impossible to tell) the television ratings just went up.

      Between the sleeve that I believe Ricko first proposed, the Seahawks actually making an April Fools joe become reality, and Paul’s overall recognition factor on the subject matter , I’m starting to think this site has a quiet influence – now if that can only be channelled to get the hell rid of those god-awful Buffalo Bills uni, this site will have arrived.

  • MB | December 14, 2010 at 7:17 pm |

    Please tell me again when Oregon changed their school colors to gray. Gray for gray’s sake?

    • NickV | December 14, 2010 at 8:12 pm |

      As ridiculous as it is for Oregon to go with a full-blown commitment to uniforms NOT of the school’s colors, but of the UNI COMPANY’s colors (Nike uses that Silver/Carbon/Gray mess on a number of other Nike teams’ unis …) What is even more ridiculous is that the uni simply is nothing special, nothing revolutionary, and simply nothing good.

      Easy improvements would have been to use White sleeved undershirts to match the jerseys, similar to Oregon State’s two weeks back. The Ducks’ contrasting sleeve colors will look like crap where every different player will have different sleeve lengths and styles, with the Black undershirts poking out every which way. It will be an ugly parade of inconsistent mismatched Chris Hovan sleeves – just wait and see.

      Another easy inprovement would be to use the Carbon pants worn against OSU two weeks back. Those pants would be a better contrast to an Auburn outfit that will surely also be wearing White Pants. Also, the Carbon pants would actually work better with the neon Yellow socks and strings.

      Alas, Nike did a whole lotta work to bring us a “special” Oregon uni two notches DOWN from what they wore all year. Given that Oregon is Nike’s flagship experimentee, it’s “pet project”, and the owner’s alma mater, you would expect that finally having Oregon play for the championship would bring out the best in Nike and whatever talent exists over there. You would expect that the uni would not look like they allowed an intern to spend five minutes to decide and commit to the bowl game uni, which is sadly what this looks like.

      What coulda/shoulda been something special and good turned into a half bowl of cold potato soup. Yuk!

      • M.Princip | December 14, 2010 at 8:43 pm |

        Well said Nick! Although, I think they need to ditch the solid neon yellow sock concept altogether.

  • Ricko | December 14, 2010 at 7:48 pm |

    No more Hunter (The Punter) Smith for the Redskins.

    Yeah, HE was their problem.


  • interlockingtc | December 14, 2010 at 8:16 pm |

    In the context of Oregon/nike’s movement to redefine the way a college football team presents itself week in and week out regardless of tradition and common sense, this uniform looks pretty good.

  • Rob S | December 14, 2010 at 8:29 pm |

    Oregon and the Nike thing, the arrogance of SEC fan, the whole Cam Newton mess…

    … hey, there are a couple of good hockey matchups that night! Bruins-Penguins, Red Wings-Avalanche… too bad both Pittsburgh and Colorado are wearing their thirds the preceding Saturday.

  • M.Princip | December 14, 2010 at 8:38 pm |

    Ok, here we go. I could live with this; revision1. You still get the neon motion blur Van Horne was referring to, however, a lot less 80s day glo leg warmer, and more old school football meets Tron.

    • DenverGregg | December 15, 2010 at 7:38 am |

      Darned nice. Change the compression sleeves to green (and require them down to the elbow on everyone) and it’s a very good – and very 2010 Ducks – look.

  • SoCalDrew | December 14, 2010 at 9:01 pm |


  • Ben W | December 14, 2010 at 9:17 pm |

    Brilliant revision. Amazing what an impact a few changes below the knees can do to an entire ensemble.

  • Sprint45 | December 14, 2010 at 9:25 pm |

    My new favorite socks in football.

    • Jim Vilk | December 14, 2010 at 9:28 pm |

      I’d wear those.

  • Mike Engle | December 14, 2010 at 9:28 pm |

    Likely echoing a previous comment, but I’ll say it again…
    Really small white shirt, long white shorts, tennis ball-colored shoes = Rafa Nadal, fresh from Wimbledon, found some pads and is ready to play football.

  • Oakville Celery Root (alias Endive) | December 14, 2010 at 9:47 pm |

    With Minnesota Vikings playing an outdoor homegame for the first time in a generation, they better wear their throw-backs – petition the league if they have to , even better wear long sleeve jerseys for the occaision.

    Based on the Weather Network web-site – the high that day is lower than the average low for that day of the year – it’s going to be frosty.

    • Mike Engle | December 14, 2010 at 9:50 pm |

      If the (now moved to) outdoor game were to have been the 50th year alumni-recognition day anyway, I’m sure throwbacks have already been planned. That being said, I can’t remember if they’ve been used twice already.

    • Jim Vilk | December 14, 2010 at 9:54 pm |

      much much much much better:

      • LI Phil | December 14, 2010 at 9:59 pm |


        what did you want…the full neon?

        • Jim Vilk | December 14, 2010 at 10:02 pm |


          Either way, there’s enough contrast there for a color vs. color game.

        • LI Phil | December 14, 2010 at 10:16 pm |

          you’re nucking futs mothersunbowlker

        • Jim Vilk | December 14, 2010 at 10:23 pm |

          Well, I meant in the ’02 template. But…

          If they came out in these, I might overlook the Bellotti and give them a Top 5 ranking.

          (as if you could see the font with all that neon – now THAT is a blur on the field)

        • concealed78 | December 14, 2010 at 10:26 pm |


          That looks like if Mountain Dew had a football team.

  • Pat | December 14, 2010 at 9:56 pm |

    First off love that you’re calling him “Scam Newton”, which brings me to the football reasons why we “the Ducks” will win. They are a one man team. Cam Newton has had to singlehandedly pull Auburn out of the crapper several times this year. Oregon on the other hand has pretty much dominated everyone(except Cal and their fake injuries). Auburn has played in the SEC all year but dare I say they haven’t seen a “team” this good all year. Ultimately Chip Kelly is going to win it for Oregon, his scheme is pure genius. You don’t realize how fast Oregon is everywhere on the field until you see them in person. They will turn it into a track meet and beat Auburn. On a Uni note, I actually think it’ll be a pretty good looking game.

  • LI Phil | December 14, 2010 at 10:33 pm |

    ok ok

    here’s really what jim wants…

    i call it…

    the mothermaacobowlvilker

    • Jim Vilk | December 14, 2010 at 10:36 pm |

      If there are no butt stripes…you betcha!

    • Jim Vilk | December 14, 2010 at 11:19 pm |

      If only you could fix TCU’s Toy Combat uni…

      …which brings me to this question: why wear black when the school’s web site is asking fans to “purple out” for the Rose Bowl?

      • LI Phil | December 15, 2010 at 12:16 am |

        jeebus jim…posting that shit is a surefire way to get banned

        here…enjoy florida with some blue gator pants

        • Jim Vilk | December 15, 2010 at 1:45 am |

          Oooo, that would match up well against Penn State. Nice work, buddy.

  • Kimberly | December 14, 2010 at 10:43 pm |

    Those are some “FUGLY” UNIFORMS! I think that OREGON should keep one uniform design. COLOR for HOME games, and WHITES for on the road, like every other football team that I know of on the face of the planet like in High School, College, Arena Football and finally the NFL. With all these different uniforms I am starting to wonder if Oregon is actually CLOWN COLLEGE with all of these TRULY HIDEOUS Designs they keep coming up with. NIKE pick one design and stick with it already. Possibly a uniform that looks something like the Green Bay Packers since Oregon’s colors are Green and Yellow. In my humble opinion I think a clean traditional look is so much more CLASSY then these TRASHY looking things they are thinking of wearing in the BCS Game. AUBURN, Notre Dame, USC, Ohio State, University Of Michigan, and most of all Penn State have very understated, yet recognizable uniforms which I find to be a bit of a comfort in a way. Soon as you look at the television you know instantly who is playing who, due to the traditional uniform or in U of M’s case the DISTINCT Traditional Winged Helmet. I think with OREGON it’s time to pick one CLEAN CLASSY uniform design and stick with it instead of these NASTY CLOWN COSTUMES you keep parading out the tunnel on every game day! After all who is AUBURN going to play in the BCS Game??? The OREGON DUCKS, or the DAFFY DUCKS with Yellow Feet and all. Looks to me with these “FUGLY” uniforms, like the AUBURN TIGERS are going to be playing the DAFFY DUCKS! ;-)

    • The Jeff | December 14, 2010 at 11:13 pm |

      You’re telling me that an all-white uniform with no striping isn’t “clean”?

      They’re just as distinct in their mixing of uniforms as Michigan is with winged helmet. Hell, their font alone is distinctive enough that you know it’s Oregon playing, regardless of what colors they happen to be wearing that day.

    • DJ | December 15, 2010 at 8:22 am |

      Soon as you look at the television you know instantly who is playing who, due to the traditional uniform or in U of M’s case the DISTINCT Traditional Winged Helmet.

      Which Fritz Crisler took with him from Princeton to Ann Arbor. And which the University of Delaware also uses.

  • Pierre | December 15, 2010 at 8:28 am |

    Did LSU wear purple helmets in the 1968 Sugar Bowl?

    Absolutely, positively NOT…! I played on the LSU freshman team that year and I was at the game against Wyoming